Obama, The Alleged Constitutional Law Professor

The left fawns over Barack Obama. He, according to them, is the smartest prez ever, worldly, experienced, and a new kind of politician. He was, you know, a Constitutional Law Professor and he knows that document. We need to listen to King Hussein because he will bring us back to the Constitution.

Obama spoke to commemorate the Supreme Court’s flawed decision in Roe v Wade, the decision that gave us federally recognized abortions and removed the decision on whether to allow them or not from the states. The decision violated the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution which states that anything not in the Constitution (or prohibited by it) belongs to the states or to the people.

If you search the Constitution you will not find anything about abortion. There is nothing in there that allows the federal government to decide on abortions. Therefore, the issue belongs to the states or to the people.

But the SCOTUS decided on it anyway and we have been stuck with a flawed decision ever since.

Obama said that the 39th anniversary of Roe is a chance to recognize the “fundamental constitutional right to abortion.” There is no fundamental Constitutional right to an abortion because it is not enumerated in the document. Allowing an abortion or not is something that should have been left to the states but that would overshadow Obama’s murderous position on the subject.

Obama also said that abortions allow our daughters the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams. Really now? Murdering your unborn child gives you this? I guess it should come as no surprise since Obama thinks pregnancy is a punishment.

What amazes me is that the alleged expert on the Constitution is all too happy to run around touting a nonexistent right while he completely opposes a right that is clearly enumerated in the Constitution.

Barack Obama opposes gun ownership. He is a big proponent of gun control and he was even involved in a scheme to gin up phony gun problems in order to push for tougher gun laws (Fast and Furious). Obama does not believe that gun ownership is an individual right even though the SCOTUS has affirmed that which is written in the Constitution. Obama covertly works to impose tougher gun laws in violation of the Constitution.

The Constitution is a document of convenience for liberals and Obama is no exception.

Interestingly, Obama made this claim:

“As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters.” [emphasis mine] CNSNEWS

How come that broader principle does not extend to not having to buy health insurance if you do not want it? That is a choice, that is a private issue and yet Obama is not on the side of allowing us to decide for ourselves. He will force this on us. Why is it that Obama favors gun control and wants to remove the private matter of whether to own a firearm?

Obama and his liberal/progressive/Socialist party have no problem getting involved in our private family matters each and every day. We have an intrusive government and Obama is fine with that. He has no problem being involved in private matters, just not abortion.

Obama thinks that pregnancy is a burden on women and that abortion allows our daughter to have the same opportunities as our sons.

Don’t you wish his mother had felt that way?

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

11 Responses to “Obama, The Alleged Constitutional Law Professor”

  1. Adam says:

    You use the term “alleged” as if the fact that Obama taught constitutional law is in question. It’s not. Now, whether he knew what he was talking about is another question. I just find your title a bit misleading given the facts.

    • Big Dog says:

      He used the title but that is not the title he had at the university. Some of his colleagues said he was not a Constitutional law professor. he was listed as a lecturer. And, he is the one who said he was a Constitutional law professor so unlike George Bush he [Obama] respects the Constitution.

      As if teaching it means he respects it and if you don’t teach it you don’t respect it. Given that he violates it regularly I imagine that his teaching it (as a lecturer) does not ensure respect.

  2. Adam says:

    His offical title was certainly lecturer and later senior lecturer. He taught classes mostly about race and law as it relates to the Constitution. But there is no such title as “constitutional law professor” anyway. He was a professor who taught law classes on the US Constitution.

    It’s sad that at every step of the way Obama’s life is questioned by you. You question his birth. You question his childhood. You question his college years. You question his job as a professor. So much irrational doubt aimed at a person who has lived a fairly straight forward and well documented life.

    • Big Dog says:

      He is the one who said he was a Constitutional law professor. He could have said he taught the Constitution. Some there say he was not a professor. Once again you have trouble with the English language. He claimed to be something that you say did not exist and I am the wrong one? I say it this way, you say there is no such title and he claimed that title which means that the word alleged is a correct one. He alleged to be something that you claim does not exist.

      As for an open life? It will be open and well documented when we can see his college records. When we can see his actual birth certificate. You see, where he was nborn is not really an issue, he admitted his father was not a US citizen and therefore he is not natural born.

      Regardless, I have led a much more open life but am required to show many of these documents when I deal with the government. Since he works for me and not the other way around (he governs with the consent of the people) then it is not too much to ask that he show all the records he has locked away.

      What are you all afraid of?

      • Adam says:

        You’re missing the point. It is correct for Obama to call himself a “Constitutional law professor” despite his official title being lecturer simply because he was a professor who taught constitutional law. Does he in fact refer to himself as that or does his biography simply state he taught constitutional law? I’d be interested to know where he refers to himself in that way.

        What are we afraid of? Mainly that no document he presents will be taken seriously by your side. He’s released multiple copies of his birth certificate which you’ve all made up reasons not to believe in. It’s not standard for presidents to release their college transcripts so why do you keep asking? If he released them you’d just say they were fake anyway. As for Obama’s natural born status…he is, you know he is. Repeating birther lies can’t change that. One more court case by birther morons won’t change that.

        • Big Dog says:

          Well, he said it at a fundraiser. Of course, he was never a professor, according to the school though the students might have called him that.

          I imagine you are unfamiliar with the definition of natural born which is the child of two citizen parents. This was defined in the happersett decision and it was part of the Senate statement that Obama agreed to when debating McCain. Natural born is different than native born which would be a child born to non citizens or born to one citizen or (as misinterpreted under the 14th Amendment) born to illegal aliens here in the US. Natural born is spelled out only for president and it means being born to two citizen parents as defined by which the framers were familiar and spelled out in Minor vs Hapersett:

          The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents [BD: note it says parents, in the plural] who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

          One parent who is a foreigner means one cannot be natural born. As for the birth certificate, too many document experts have declared it to be a phony. The school records would be useful because they would show if he was attending as a foregin student. Would that not answer the question?

          As for the issue of standard for candidates to release college transcripts. Here was one guy who did.

          Here is something to read:

          Since JFK every US President has been transparent about their school records and in most cases, their medical records as well (JFK kept many of his issues with pain medications secret.) Even Presidential candidates release this information. John Kerry did it (to some degree) and John McCain did it, even though they never made it to the White House. George W. Bush gave full disclosure, and still, CBS tried to make up records about his military service. Dan Rather got busted on that one.

          Point being, it is not as unusual as you seem to think. And it was Hillary who uncovered the law professor stuff…

  3. Adam says:

    The source you cite suggests Obama was a professor who taught constitutional law. The point is that was not his official title. A college professor who has taught constitutional law cannot call himself a constitutional law professor just because that’s not his official title? Why not?

    As for Minor vs Hapersett, did you notice you’re making it argue something it actually isn’t arguing? You stopped reading apparently right after your quote:

    Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts.

    It’s saying there is no doubt that two parents makes a natural born, it’s not saying with no doubt that without that he is not natural born.

    As for college records, I can neither confirm nor deny what the known liars at Big Journalism are saying. Perhaps you can since you’re so certain? It’s my understanding Bush’s records were leaked, not fully disclosed by himself.

    • Big Dog says:

      This is the only SCOTUS case where it is mentioned and you will notice that it indicates that some folks argue one thing that is in question but that the first case has never been in question. It also indicates that the natural born definition is from natural law which the Founders were familiar with. This is the definition, so that no one leading this country would ever have allegiance to another country.

      The source suggests Obama was a professor. I suggest he is a Socialist. You suggest he is the messiah. The only thing we can deal with is reality and in that case he was no such thing. In any event, since there is a question, alleged is appropriate.

      • Ferd Berfel says:

        In 0ne respect you are correct, Adam; after all the deception, evasion and out-right lies that surround Obama, we, the right side, the correct side, the rational side, the critical side, the American side, will NEVER EVER take anything Obama or his sycophants say at face value.

        That wouldn’t be rational at all.
        Obama is a congenital liar and we will never believe him. You lay in his bed and mouth the lies you want to believe but that doesn’t make it true. Just shows what bed you slut in.

      • Adam says:

        “The source suggests Obama was a professor. I suggest he is a Socialist. You suggest he is the messiah. The only thing we can deal with is reality and in that case he was no such thing. In any event, since there is a question, alleged is appropriate.”

        I have never suggested Obama is the messiah. Don’t joke. Your side is bitter is all. You don’t like that Obama is an exceptional public speaker and that his campaign motivated millions more voters than John McCain could. So you make up jokes about teleprompters, suggest we think he’s our messiah, etc. Sad. You simply wish you had a president again that motivated the base and could motivate with his words.

        Alleged isn’t correct, you’re just nitpicking again as usual. You have plenty of things to critique the president on but instead you stick to things like saying his birth certificate was fake and that he isn’t eligible any way. He was a professor who taught constitutional law but he better not call himself a professor of constitutional law! He’s not so great without his speech notes! Aha! Don’t you see how sad your side has become? You’re everything you hated about liberals and how we treated Bush. I’ve come to expect both sides to act deranged, but that’s no excuse.

        • Big Dog says:

          You are funny. There is no nitpicking and real law professors and Constitutional experts say he is not eligible. This is why we have courts to decide. Real experts say the BC was phony, that is why we have originals.

          As far as a teleprompter, we have all heard him when he is not on one and he sounds like a moron. He is a great orator so long as he is reading the words.

          Yes Adam, he inspired you and many other Socialists to vote for him and his plan to ruin the country. Why don’t you blame the rich some more and demand that they pay even more money so they can care for the 50% who are overburdened with no federal taxes.

          Morons all.