White House spokesman Josh Earnest discussing the Hobby Lobby decision:<\/p>\n
We disagree and the constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with that conclusion from the Supreme Court. And that’s why we–primarily, because he is concerned about the impact it could have on the health of those women.”<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The implication here is that Obama believes his legal knowledge of the constitution trumps the United States Supreme court.\u00a0 \u00a0He disagrees with the Supreme Court, so they must have got it wrong.<\/p>\n There is no hard evidence that Obama is remotely qualified to be a constitutional lawyer. He will not produce a copy of his Harvard Law School transcript so we cannot confirm that he had any significant academic training with regard to the constitution.\u00a0 There is no evidence that Barack Obama ever helped work on a case that was submitted to the Supreme Court and he certainly never argued a case before the Supreme Court.\u00a0 Constitutional attorneys typically spend a year clerking for a Circuit Court Judge and then another year clerking for a Supreme Court Justice. \u00a0Obama didn’t clerk for anyone. \u00a0 It is very difficult to argue that one is a constitutional attorney without such experience.<\/p>\n Obama\u2019s only experience was as a Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.\u00a0 This would be the equivalent of someone claiming to be a medical doctor, although they had never actually practiced medicine, because they had delivered lectures on the subject.<\/p>\n We really shouldn\u2019t be surprised.\u00a0 Obama considered himself to be qualified for the most difficult executive position in the world even though he had no prior executive experience.\u00a0 He considered himself to be qualified to be Commander in Chief although he had no military experience and wasn\u2019t even a boy scout.\u00a0 The real mystery is not that Obama feels he is qualified, the mystery is why so many people bought it.<\/p>\n TDM<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" White House spokesman Josh Earnest discussing the Hobby Lobby decision: We disagree and the constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with that conclusion from the Supreme Court. And that’s why we–primarily, because he is concerned about the impact it … Continue reading