Hillary - One of the Most Honest Politictians in Washington Today

[FA_Q2]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Obama administration has lost two-thirds of Supreme Court cases

No, Obama has a horrific understanding of the SCOTUS.

 

[westwall]

You're not serious....are you?

 

[Oldstyle]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Would you care to point out any teaching awards Obama won during that time...or any scholarly works that he published while he was a professor at the University of Chicago for those 12 years? Someone that you think would be suited for the Supreme Court would of course have a long list of teaching awards and scholarly works to back up the claim that he had an intricate understanding of the Constitution...right D-Lady?

 

[Oldstyle]

What would you consider Barry's best work on the Constitution? The scholarly work that makes him stand out from others?

 

[Vigilante]

The NEWEST Dinesh D'souza movie due out October 15th, it's rumored!

 

[Vigilante]

What would you consider Barry's best work on the Constitution? The scholarly work that makes him stand out from others?

 

[Oldstyle]

What would you consider Barry's best work on the Constitution? The scholarly work that makes him stand out from others?

Telling a liberal to give you Barry's most scholarly work is like sending someone into a round room and telling them to pee in the corner. It's always a good laugh!

 

[FA_Q2]

What would you consider Barry's best work on the Constitution? The scholarly work that makes him stand out from others?

The "D" printed before his name?

 

[EriktheRed]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Obama administration has lost two-thirds of Supreme Court cases

No, Obama has a horrific understanding of the SCOTUS.

Not winning cases = not understanding the Supreme Court?

 

[FA_Q2]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Obama administration has lost two-thirds of Supreme Court cases

No, Obama has a horrific understanding of the SCOTUS.

Not winning cases = not understanding the Supreme Court?

Continuing to have actions or laws he has supported and fought for declared unconstitutional does indeed show that he does not understand the constitution. I meant to type COTUS there.

 

[charwin95]

I read a lot of news except faux news, msnbc, never national enquirer or Breitfart.

I didn't ask you what you DIDN'T read, Charwin...I asked a very simple question! What are your sources for news?

Read my post #629.

Mostly CNN, Yahoo news, USA today, WS journal, Miami herald, San Diego tribune and sometimes NY Times ...... Occasionally huffington post.

So you probably read the Wall Street Journal to check on your investments...and get your news from liberal sources? If CNN is your "go to" TV then it's obvious which way you lean politically, Charwin! Huffington Post? Really?

Liberal source? CNN is far better than Faux news...... Occasionally h post meaning no more than 3x a month and I don't rely on it.

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

 

[Oldstyle]

I didn't ask you what you DIDN'T read, Charwin...I asked a very simple question! What are your sources for news?

Read my post #629.

Mostly CNN, Yahoo news, USA today, WS journal, Miami herald, San Diego tribune and sometimes NY Times ...... Occasionally huffington post.

So you probably read the Wall Street Journal to check on your investments...and get your news from liberal sources? If CNN is your "go to" TV then it's obvious which way you lean politically, Charwin! Huffington Post? Really?

Liberal source? CNN is far better than Faux news...... Occasionally h post meaning no more than 3x a month and I don't rely on it.

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

 

[Dragonlady]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Obama administration has lost two-thirds of Supreme Court cases

No, Obama has a horrific understanding of the SCOTUS.

That's not what the link said:

By Mr. Winkler’s count, the Obama administration has won 39 percent of the cases in which it has been a party in the litigation, and won 50 percent of the cases in which the government filed a “friend of the court” brief backing one side or the other.

Mr. Winkler said a good portion of the administration’s poor batting average can be traced to ideological differences between the Obama administration and the five conservative-leaning Supreme Court justices.

Sounds like that batting average is about to change.

 

[Oldstyle]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Obama administration has lost two-thirds of Supreme Court cases

No, Obama has a horrific understanding of the SCOTUS.

That's not what the link said:

By Mr. Winkler’s count, the Obama administration has won 39 percent of the cases in which it has been a party in the litigation, and won 50 percent of the cases in which the government filed a “friend of the court” brief backing one side or the other.

Mr. Winkler said a good portion of the administration’s poor batting average can be traced to ideological differences between the Obama administration and the five conservative-leaning Supreme Court justices.

Sounds like that batting average is about to change.

You're not counting your chickens before they're hatched...are you, D-Lady? Lots of time between now and the elections. Gee, think we might see some more Hillary e-mails? You know, the kind that got half of the DNC big wigs fired last week?

Nah, not like Hillary has anything to hide...right?

 

[P@triot]

Rather than voting for an unstable reality tv show joke, or an even more unstable career criminal - here is the most viable option for the 2016 election...

 

[easyt65]

They look like Jehovas Witness or Insurance Salesmen...

 

[charwin95]

Read my post #629.

Mostly CNN, Yahoo news, USA today, WS journal, Miami herald, San Diego tribune and sometimes NY Times ...... Occasionally huffington post.

So you probably read the Wall Street Journal to check on your investments...and get your news from liberal sources? If CNN is your "go to" TV then it's obvious which way you lean politically, Charwin! Huffington Post? Really?

Liberal source? CNN is far better than Faux news...... Occasionally h post meaning no more than 3x a month and I don't rely on it.

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

 

[P@triot]

Here are the devout Hitlery Clinton supporters. This is convincing evidence for why liberals destroyed public education in America. They need an ignorant electorate to get Dumbocrats elected. And if this is how dumb their most dedicated voters are - just imagine how astoundingly ignorant the typical liberal voter is...

 

[P@triot]

Here are the facts about the current economy. All of the stuff that Barack Obama and the Democrats cover up with their propaganda.

• First, “real” unemployment that considers discouraged workers has increased 0.1% to 9.7%

• African American participation rates for ages 16-19 decreased 1.5% to 27.7%

• Their Latino peers saw a 0.8% point decrease to 30.3%

• Neither groups have recovered from President Barack Obama’s “recovery;” young African American participation rates never went over 30 percent since February 2009 while the young Latinos’ is still five percentage points lower than it was at that same period

There is nothing to brag about where the jobs come from either:

• Nearly 250,000 of them are parasitical (i.e. government) while the self-employed lost 110,000 jobs.

• In the meantime there are 100,000 new part-time workers for economic reasons, mostly because of “slack work or business conditions.”

• There is also a total of 160,000 new multiple-job holders, a 0.1-percentage point increase, showing that the Obama recession is already lurking around the corner.

• It’s especially true if you are part of the demonized extractive industry (mining, oil and gas, etc.) which shed another 7,000 jobs.

Finally, one indicator that doesn’t fail to show that the economy is going in the wrong direction is duration of unemployment. The average duration is now 28.1 weeks, a 0.4 week increase and still 8 percentage points higher than it was in February 2009.

The mean duration increased 1.3 percentage points to 11.6 weeks, barely below its February 2009 level but on an upward trend since mid-2015.

These figures reflect the increase in long-term unemployment 15 weeks and over, which increased 1.2 percentage points to 41.7% of all unemployed workers. In particular, very long-term unemployment over 26 weeks increased 0.8% to 26.6%, on an upward trend for about a year.

The Obama Recession is Coming Soon

 

[Oldstyle]

So you probably read the Wall Street Journal to check on your investments...and get your news from liberal sources? If CNN is your "go to" TV then it's obvious which way you lean politically, Charwin! Huffington Post? Really?

Liberal source? CNN is far better than Faux news...... Occasionally h post meaning no more than 3x a month and I don't rely on it.

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

You're one of those "high information" liberal voters...right, Charwin? All the things going on in the world...but YOU want to read about Hugh Hefner? Dude, I hate to break this to you but Hef hasn't been in the mix in about ten years! Just saying...