Replies

Ben Shapiro of Breitbart nailed it.

Breitbart: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/16/Obama-con-law-III

Back when President Obama was lecturer Obama at the University of Chicago Law School, he gave final exams in constitutional law . . .

“This presents a question: is there a constitutional right to cloning?” . . . So here’s what we’ve learned: Obama believes that the right to privacy should encompass everything up to and including cloning; he thinks that religious morality must be struck down by courts when implemented in law, even though it is supported by thousands of years of tradition; he believes that the state has no interest in family formation; he wants the state to implement morality only when it is his morality.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/14/Obama-Con-Law-1996-I

“The question deals with a hypothetical lesbian couple that wants to have a baby. Their state prevents health providers from providing infertility treatments for unwed couples; the couple’s state-provided healthcare therefore refuses them coverage for such procedures” . . . Here’s what we learn from this answer: Obama’s an extreme legal leftist. He thinks that banning infertility treatment for unwed couples is akin to sterilizing them. He thinks that there is no connection between childbearing and childrearing and the integral value of marriage. He thinks that arguments about “tradition” are troubling. And he believes that all judges rule according to their experiences – which goes a long way toward explaining his love for Sonia Sotomayor, whose “wise Latina” experiences may shape her judicial reasoning, according to her own admission.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/15/Obama-con-law-II

“This question concerns a fictional “Mayor Dudley Duright,” the first African-American mayor of Wazoo City. The population of the city is 50 percent black and 50 percent white, and highly segregated” . . . Lecturer Obama believed deeply in Critical Race Theory – so much so that he advocated creative legal strategies to argue Critical Race Theory into law. He thought that facially neutral statutes were discriminatory thanks to the racism of the system. He even argued that the people of the states be stripped of their power to change local law, if such changes cut against narrow minority interests.