Obama and the Constitution

Posted by Jack

“I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.” Barrack Hussein Obama.    Obama took the Presidential Oath, swearing to “.. preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” but has:
■Used Executive Privilege in regards to Fast & Furious gun running scandal. When Government misconduct is the concern Executive privilege is negated.
■23 Executive Orders on gun control – infringement of the 2nd Amendment
■2 more Executive Orders added on gun control – infringement of the 2nd Amendment
■Executive Order bypassing Congress on immigration – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; Article II Section 3
■Issued directive instructing ICE to NOT enforce immigration laws in certain cases. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
■NDAA – Section 1021. Due process Rights negated. Violation of 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments.
■Executive Order 13603 NDRP – Government can seize anything
■Executive Order 13524 – Gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI.
■Executive Order 13636 Infrastructure Cybersecurity – Bypassing Congress Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress
■Signed into law the establishment of NO Free Speech zones H.R. 347 – noncompliance is a felony. Violation of 1st Amendment.
■Attempt to tax political contributions – 1st Amendment
■DOMA Law – Obama directed DOJ to ignore the Constitution and separation of powers and not enforce the law. ” he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
■Dodd-Frank – Due process and separation of powers. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau writing and interpreting law. Article. I. Section. 1
■Drone strikes on American Citizens – 5th Amendment Due process Rights negated
■Bypassed Congress and gave EPA power to advance Cap-n-Trade
■Attempt for Graphic tobacco warnings (under appeal) – 1st Amendment
■Four Exec. appointments – Senate was NOT in recess (Court has ruled unconstitutional yet the appointees still remain)
■Appointing agency czars without the “advice and consent of the Senate.” Violation of Article II, Section 2
■Obama took Chairmanship of UN Security Council – Violation of Section 9.
■ACA (Obamacare) mandate – SCOTUS rewrote legislation and made it a tax because there is no Constitutional authority for Congress to force Americans to engage in commerce. SCOTUS has no authority to Legislate or lay taxes. Article I Section 1 & 8.
■Contraceptive, abortifacients mandate violation of First Ammendment
■Healthcare waivers – No president has dispensing powers
■Refuses to acknowledge state’s 10th Amendment rights to nullify Obamacare
■Going after states (AZ lawsuit) for upholding Federal law (immigration) -10th Amendment.
■Chrysler Bailout -TARP – violated creditors rights and bankruptcy law, as well as Takings and Due Process Clauses – 5th Amendment (G.W. Bush also illegally used TARP funds for bailouts)
■The Independent Payment Advisory Board (appointees by the president). Any decisions by IPAB will instantly become law starting in 2014 – Separation of Powers, Article 1 Section 1.
■Congress did not approve Obama’s war in Libya. Article I, Section 8, First illegal war U.S. has engaged in. Impeachable under Article II, Section 4; War Powers Act – Article II Section 3.
■Obama falsely claims UN can usurp Congressional war powers.
■Obama has acted outside the constitutional power given him – this in itself is unconstitutional.
■With the approval of Obama, the NSA and the FBI are tapping directly into the servers of 9 internet companies to gain access to emails, video/audio, photos, documents, etc. This program is code named PRISM. NSA also collecting data on all phone calls in U.S. – Violation of 4th Amendment.
■Plans to sign U.N. Firearms treaty – 2nd Amendment.
■The Senate/Obama immigration bill (approved by both) raises revenue – Section 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
■Obama altered law – (A president has no authority to alter law) Delayed upholding the Employer Mandate Law (ACA) until 2015 – Individual Mandate will be enforced. A President does not have that authority – Article. I. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States; The president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” -Article II, Section 3; Equal Protection Clause -14th Amendment.
■Obama altered law – ACA Medicare cuts delayed until 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama altered law – Enforcement of eligibility requirements for ACA delayed until 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama wavered ACA Income Verification Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama altered law – Delayed ACA caps on out of pocket expenses until 2015. (when implemented premiums will skyrocket) Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama ignored judicial order to fulfill legal obligation regarding Yucca Mountain waste. Article II, Section 3
■Waived Federal provision that prevents U.S. From arming terrorist groups – Article I. Section 1; Impeachable under Article III, Section 3.
■Obama shelves part of the ACA Law for Insurers, extending the life of non-qualifying (according to ACA) plans until Jan. 1, 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3. Violation of the Take Care Clause, Separation of Powers.

A Constitutional law professor (even their students) should know better. The TRUTH is Obama was not a Constitutional law professor, and clearly he has not respected or protected the Constitution. Obama has broken his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Article II, Section 1.

Note: Executive Orders by the president were not designed for, nor do they give a president the authority to use as, a means to override or alter legislation or any other Constitutional violation.

Q: Was Barack Obama really a constitutional law professor?

A: His formal title was “senior lecturer,” but the University of Chicago Law School says he “served as a professor” and was “regarded as” a professor.

FULL QUESTION

When I was in law school, I addressed all of my course instructors as “professors,” regardless of their rank or formal position in the school academic hierarchy (tenured professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, lecturer, etc.). Was Obama exaggerating or factually wrong in referring to himself as a “constitutional law professor” at the University of Chicago Law School even though his official title was lecturer?

FULL ANSWER

Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, has regularly referred to himself as “a constitutional law professor,” most famously at a March 30, 2007, fundraiser when he said, “I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.” A spokesman for the Republican National Committee immediately took exception to Obama’s remarks, pointing out that Obama’s title at the University of Chicago was “senior lecturer” and not “professor.”

Recently, Hillary Clinton’s campaign has picked up on this charge. In a March 27 conference call with reporters, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer claimed:

Singer (March 27): Sen. Obama has often referred to himself as “a constitutional law professor” out on the campaign trail. He never held any such title. And I think anyone, if you ask anyone in academia the distinction between a professor who has tenure and an instructor that does not, you’ll find that there is … you’ll get quite an emotional response.

The campaign also sent out an e-mail quoting an Aug. 8, 2004, column in the Chicago Sun-Times that criticized Obama for calling himself a professor when, in fact, the University of Chicago faculty page listed him as “a senior lecturer (now on leave).” The Sun-Times said, “In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter.” The Clinton campaign added that the difference between senior lecturers and professors is that “professors have tenure while lecturers do not.”

We agree that details matter, and also that the formal title of “professor” is not lightly given by academic institutions. However, on this matter the University of Chicago Law School itself is not standing on formality, and is siding with Obama.

Due to numerous press inquiries on the matter, the school released a carefully worded statement saying that for his 12 years there he was considered to be “a professor.”

UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as “Senior Lecturer.” From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Obama and the Constitution

  1. Peggy says:

    The only ones who know Obama is not a joke is Obama and his remaining progressive followers.

    Just read there are eleven doctors running for Congress to get ObamaCare repealed. We all need to support them.

    If you haven’t seen Trey Gowdy eviscerate Obama’s understanding and adherence to the Constitution watch this video.

    http://www.ijreview.com/2013/12/99516-watch-trey-gowdys-explosive-question-obama-vaporize-stammering-witness/

    And two really good David Horowitz videos who takes us on a trip to our past, gives an overview on where we are today and ends with an optimistic view of our future.

    David Horowitz on “The Real Goal of ObamaCare” — on The Glazov Gang:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/jamie-glazov/david-horowitz-on-the-black-book-of-the-american-left-on-the-glazov-gang/

  2. dewey says:

    Clearly how government works is a mystery, Clearly if the ACA was Unconstitutional the Bought Out SCOTUS would not have said it was constitutional.

    LOL Tke that stuf to Congress and get a lesson on excutive orders and how many GW used.

    Now speaking of the Constitution here is a direct Quote by Scalia that all by itself says he could care less about the Constitution.

    The First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Justice Scalia went as far as to say that, “You can raise it [the First Amendment], but we don’t have to listen to it.”

    Now Scotus can decide a case and give the argument but to so the following and say they do not have to listen is disgusting

    LOL you guys are being led by the nose al la Koch lol ya think they would have brought all that up in congress if it mattered!

    Funny how Tea party peeps who go to Koch Classes to learn the constutuion come up with this stuff with no full understanding of how it all works and all the laws.

    LOL tea party peeps are the smartest people in the world and all the lawyers in DC are dumb

    get over it we like the ACA and do not believe that the only people who use money with no labor involved to make money should run the world.

    We like democracy and Dictatorship lost the last election

  3. Tina says:

    Dewey…what a shame…you started out so well.

  4. Pie Guevara says:

    Wow Jack. That is one heckuva list. The corruption of the executive is breathtaking. No wonder Mark Levin has been on board for impeachment.

    Levin —
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44unvBFs41I
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9IrpWqReuY

    Turley: Obama’s “Become The Very Danger The Constitution Was Designed To Avoid”

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/12/04/turley_obamas_become_the_very_danger_the_constitution_was_designed_to_avoid.html

    Re#1 Peggy: Great stuff. Thanks!

  5. Tina says:

    Readers can view a complete list of George W. Bush’s executive orders at GWB White House. Every order can be read by simply clicking on a link.

    I’ve excerpted a portion of EO #21 that suggests Bush opened opportunities for competitive bid through executive order:
    GWB-White House

    …By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 471 et seq., and in order to (1) promote and ensure open competi-tion on Federal and federally funded or assisted construction projects; (2) maintain Government neutrality towards Government contractors= labor relations on Federal and federally funded or assisted construction projects; (3) reduce construction costs to the Federal Government and to the taxpayers; (4) expand job opportunities, especially for small and disadvantaged businesses; and (5) prevent discrimination against Government contractors or their employees based upon labor affiliation or lack thereof; thereby promoting the economical, nondiscriminatory, and efficient administration and completion of Federal and federally funded or assisted construction projects, it is hereby ordered…

  6. Tina says:

    Over at Real Clear Politics Constitutional Professor Jonathan Turley, Democrat and Obama supporter, said in testimony before Congress, “Obama’s “Become The Very Danger The Constitution Was Designed To Avoid”.

    Opps…sorry for the redundancy. As I went to post comments I noticed Pie had already posted this.

  7. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #2 (Dewey’s latest screed):

    Evidently Dewey does not understand the difference between executive orders and executive orders that break the law and violate the constitution.

    Following Dewey’s usual highly contorted logic: Since GW Bush issued executive orders that renders Obama a pass to flout the constitution with illegal actions, be they executive orders or refusal to uphold law.

    Interesting thesis, no? Does Dewey’s sort of reasoning makes you want to vomit? Dewey is a paradigm of progressive cogitation to say the least.

  8. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: #7 Tina:

    Great minds think alike, sister. 😉

  9. Dewey says:

    Dewey understand more than ya think

    take your case to a constitutional lawyer and watch the case fail!

    Look tea party wants to end social security and is working on it. So just say it and let the people vote GW did and he lost that vote

  10. Tina says:

    Dewey: “take your case to a constitutional lawyer and watch the case fail!”

    There are a number of Constitutional lawyers and scholars that agree with us.

    “tea party wants to end social security ”

    That is blatantly false. The proposals made would secure the old failing system with a new one that gives workers the choice to invcest some of their hard earned cash into the same type of pension plans that Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, the President and other’s in government enjoy. It would also allow them to pass whatever is left in their personal account to their children or donate it as they please.

    An article at Freedomworks addresses the issue and highlights three Texas counties that adopted such a plan for their employees. the results would please any retiree:

    compare the plight of government workers in Detroit, Chicago and Stockton to those employees in three counties in Texas, who opted out of Social Security by creating personal retirement accounts. [Read: Three Texas Counties Opted Out of Social Security]. In 30 years, the county workers in these three counties will retire with more money and better death and disability supplemental benefits than the public employees of Stockton, Detroit and Chicago.

    Most importantly, the government workers of Galveston, Matagorda and Brazoria Counties own their retirement, and immoral, corrupt governance will not reduce or take away their nest eggs. These Texas counties chose private accounts and used professional money managers competing for the opportunity to invest their money. As a result, the employees are guaranteed a minimum rate of return.

    Merrill Mathews in the Wall Street journal cites the better returns provided by professional money managers:

    Those who retire under the Texas counties’ Alternate Plan do much better than those on Social Security. According to First Financial’s calculations, based on 40 years of contributions:

    • A lower-middle income worker making about $26,000 at retirement would get about $1,007 a month under Social Security, but $1,826 under the Alternate Plan.

    • A middle-income worker making $51,200 would get about $1,540 monthly from Social Security, but $3,600 from the banking model.

    • And a high-income worker who maxed out on his Social Security contribution every year would receive about $2,500 a month from Social Security versus $5,000 to $6,000 a month from the Alternate Plan.

    As Galveston County Judge Mark Henry says, “The plan works great. Anyone who spends a few minutes understanding the plan becomes a huge proponent.” Judge Henry says that out of 1,350 county employees, only five have chosen not to participate.

    GW lost that battle because of the lies and distortions the left make to keep power and control in Washington DC.

    Also from the linked page a reminder:

    Own Your Retirement
    By Ted Abram on August 11, 2013

    Personal Freedom and Prosperity 102: Acquiring and Possessing Property

    That all Men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent natural Right…; among which are the Enjoyment of Life and Liberty, with the Means of acquiring and possessing Property, and pursuing and obtaining Happiness and Safety. —Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)

    Indispensable to personal freedom is the liberty for each person to choose how to allocate and invest their time, labor and money as well as to own the gains made by these investments.

    It’s a great article with a number of interesting links. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the idea of growing a personal nest egg.

  11. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #10 Dewey “Dewey understand more than ya think”

    Dewey’s imitation of Jimmy in “The Jimmy” Seinfeld episode is a scream.

    Dewey understand he is is a dope like Jimmy.

  12. J. Soden says:

    By his actions, Obumble obviously slept through his class on the Constitution
    And any students taking a Constitution class from him would’ve been able to catch up on their sleep time, too.

Comments are closed.