God must have loved Hillary Clinton Supporters, because he made so many of them. Today (Sunday) I picked an argument with one HRC backer -- this time about the false notion that the U.S. Constitution is a "living document." Supposed constitutional law "expert" Barack Obama believes it is. He's wrong, as he is about so many things. (Picture above is Obama consulting one of his key advisers on constitutional law.)
"Some people say the Constitution is a 'living document.' In fact, the Constitution is a a 'dead document." (Justice Antonin Scalia)
"Some people say the Constitution is a 'living document.' In fact, the Constitution is a a 'dead document." (Justice Antonin Scalia)
What Scalia meant by that statement (made on "60 Minutes") is that the Constitution is a written document, and the words in it mean what they appear to. What that means also is that Barb C., Steve Maloney, and Antonin Scalia can read the document as written and UNDERSTAND (and frankly, eventually agree on) what it means. We can consult historical dictionaries and the like to make sure certain words didn't have a different meaning in the 18th century than they do now. The problem with taking a liberal view of the Constitution is that it undermines the purpose of having such a document. If it means something different every morning when we wake up, then heaven help us. Obama takes a liberal view, where the certifiably dead document is eternally in flux."
Obama studied constitutional law at Harvard. Is he really an expert on the subject? In his adult lifetime, Obama has never written a single article on constitutional law. He hasn't even submitted a footnote. So far as we know, he's never examined or edited a piece submitted for a top law review. In fact, if he's ever made a coherent statement on the subject, I must have missed it.
That's not an impressive performance for someone who served as the first African-American "president" (not "editor" as you may have heard) of the Harvard Law Review. Would Obama, a living monument to affirmative-action, have been chosen president of that august body if he hadn't been (partly) of African-American descent? I leave that to your imagination. He proves that even a classic under-achiever can get ahead in America.
Obama studied constitutional law at Harvard. Is he really an expert on the subject? In his adult lifetime, Obama has never written a single article on constitutional law. He hasn't even submitted a footnote. So far as we know, he's never examined or edited a piece submitted for a top law review. In fact, if he's ever made a coherent statement on the subject, I must have missed it.
That's not an impressive performance for someone who served as the first African-American "president" (not "editor" as you may have heard) of the Harvard Law Review. Would Obama, a living monument to affirmative-action, have been chosen president of that august body if he hadn't been (partly) of African-American descent? I leave that to your imagination. He proves that even a classic under-achiever can get ahead in America.
No comments:
Post a Comment