Don't know but U.S. News & World Report ranks University of Chicago Law the 5th best law schools in the country and Obama was a professor there a long time http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Chicago_Law_School The University of Chicago Law School was founded in 1902 as the graduate school of law at the University of Chicago and is among the most prestigious and selective law schools in the world. The U.S. News & World Report currently ranks it fifth among U.S. law schools, and it is noted particularly for its influence on the economic analysis of law.
The University of Chicago Law School is one of the best and most selective in the country. Most lawyers would rank it with Harvard and Yale in terms of prestige. That makes their continued employment of an underachiever like Obama very curious. I guarantee you there is not another professor there who has not published multiple pieces of scholary work in the best legal journals. Obama has never published even one scholarly article, which is astounding. His employment was obviously a political decision dictated from above, probably by the same chicago insiders club of big shot lawyers, CEOs and pols who got Bill Ayers off scot-free because police "mishandled" evidence. And got Ayers and his terrorist wife cushy university jobs.
He voted against the bill. He can spin it any way he wants, but he voted against a bill making it illegal to kill babies. Notice how he changed the issue by rephrasing it as people saying he wanted to kill babies. He wasn't in favor of killing babies, he just wanted to protect people who did. This is the guy who voted "present" on every other controversial issue. Bottom line, when forced to choose between abortionists and babies, he chose the former. As for his sanctimonious bleating about it being offensive, he is the same guy who accused Paul Ryan of wanting to kill old people because of changes in Medicare reimbursement.
I do not think I could ever vote for trump. But to say that his statements prove he knows nothing of RvW or that he answered incorrectly is wrong. It is possible he knew exactly what he was saying. He asked a question and rhetorical or not all it really implies is that he does not agree that abortion is a privacy issue.
Did you actually watch the interview? She didn't ask him about Roe v Wade or abortion. She asked him if he believes in a right to privacy. That was her lead in question to speak about pro-life. It wasn't like they had been talking about abortion for 10 minutes and she asked about privacy. He rightly then acknowledges the obvious disconnect between the two issues that most logical people see, and then restates his stance. Seriously, this is the best argument the liberals can put together against him? Reminds me of conservatives who jump on Biden for a minor stumble on the pronunciation of a somewhat difficult foreign name, calling it a major gaffe. This stuff if ridiculous.
A funny thread. AK Forty Seven (now Tony Stark) claiming Trump would get skewered if he ran, and Gabfly (now Frederick Foresight) chiming in. Ah, the halls of ET records is always good for a giggle.