If, like me, you struggle to imagine what could possibly be even WORSE than a Hillary Clinton presidency, we may have just hit upon it. As if a Hillary presidency wouldn’t be devastating enough, she’s just revealed whom she might appoint to the Supreme Court as president.Pause for a moment and think of the worst possible choice you can think of.
Did anyone say President Barack Obama?H/T Washington Times:
At a campaign event in Iowa Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton told the crowd the next president may have to appoint up to three Supreme Court justices. When one attendee mentioned Mr. Obama as a contender, she seemed excited by the recommendation.“Wow, what a great idea. No one has ever suggested that to me, I love that, wow,” Mrs. Clinton said. “He may have a few other things to do, but I tell you, that’s a great idea.
“I mean, he’s brilliant, he can set forth an argument and he was a law professor,” she added. “So he’s got all the credentials, but we would have to get a Democratic Senate to get him confirmed.”
Putting aside the Queen’s reasons for gushing about this as she did — pandering both to the voter and to Obama, who could wield influence in her fate over the email investigation — the thought of Obama as a Supreme Court justice is pretty horrific.Of course, Hillary’s claim that President Obama was a law professor is a stretch, to say the least. As we reported previously (H/T Karin McQuillan at the American Thinker):
Obama was never a professor; he was a lecturer. He did not have the qualifications to be a professor. Obama never published a single law paper. He was hired by the University of Chicago when they learned he had been given a book contract on race and law directly after graduating from Harvard. There was no book – just the contract, which he later reneged on. This is not the normal level of accomplishment for a University of Chicago professor or even lecturer.
And we already know how much President Obama cares about the constitution, given his actions during the past seven years, despite his claims to be a constitutional scholar.Both his background as a law school lecturer — where he focused on three subjects only: race, rights and gender — and his tenure as president have given us a pretty good idea of the filter he would use as a Supreme Court justice.
And imagine this: we’d have him for LIFE.
As Hillary points out, however, we’d need a Democrat Senate to confirm him — which reminds us of the importance of not only reclaiming the White House, but keeping our eye on Congress as well.
[Note: This article was written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor]