Posted on 01/18/2012 6:31:50 AM PST by LBG11
The question came from Ed Henry of Fox News.
“Now, I don’t know how many years – maybe you do – George Romney released of his college transcripts, but Republicans like to complain the president has not released his college transcripts. What is the stated reason for that?” he asked.
“I’d refer you to the campaign. I mean, I think,” Carney started.
“Is it a question you could take,” Henry said.
“Sure. I think we’ve answered this a bunch. I think that the tradition of releasing income tax records for presidential candidates, for serious potential nominees and nominees of the two parties is well established. It’s not a law, but it’s well established. And it’s one that this president abided by when he was a candidate as senator. It’s one that numerous Republicans and Democrats have abided by, and we just think it’s a good idea,” Carney said...
Among the other documents not released by Obama are his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
He released a “Certification of Live Birth” during his 2008 campaign, stating it was the only document available to confirm his story of his birth in Hawaii. Then in 2011 he released an image of a Hawaii “Certificate of Live Birth” saying that confirmed his Hawaii birth.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
They must be fantastic grades; because all we hear is how phenominally smart he is, how much more intelligent he is than the ‘normal’ person ....
Gee, I wonder why they are suppressing them? < /s>
Even if Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama had been birthed in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House Obama is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
It’s like this guy appeared out of nowhere one day and took over the whole shooting match. No real past. Just manufacture BS to appease the masses.
P F AA
[Pass Fail, Affirmative Action]
Wouldn’t Harvard Law Review articles be a matter of Public Record?
As far as I can see, Obama’s only qualification for president is that he went to college.
So why shouldn’t we see his college records?
Absolute, irrefutable proof that the MSM are SCUM, Obama's servile, complaisant, undistinguished media -- Obama SCUM.
The Obama SCUM have demanded that Romney release his records -- and at the same time scream "racist nut-case birther" at anyone asking for similar documents from Obama -- and IMO similar means documents from which one can judge fairly a person.
Thus work, financial records from Romney and work, academic records from Obama.
Throw in a demand for Romney's academic records also, fine! Romney has nothing to hide unlike the affirmative action dimwit Americans were tricked into electing president.
sounds like that guy but the guy I was thinking had all of what you said but he wrote a book and that is what the MSM ran on
“I mean, I think”
As press secretary you think he would know who to refer members of the press to...
Assuming he wrote any.
I would think if he received funding as a foreign exchange student through a government program like the Fulbright Scholarship, that would be public information as well.
Yep!
Totally an AA recipient.
Obama’s unguarded, off teleprompter remarks, as well as the steep drop in the compositional quality of ‘his’ non-ghost-written second book, exposes his ignorance and middling intellect.
I believe he didn’t write any Harvard Review articles. For nobama the title of his position was changed FROM “Editor of” to “President of...” Something fishy there...I’m just askin...?
Not just that, Elena Kagan in her previous position as Supervising Editor of the Harvard Law Review would certainly be able to provide cover for this embellishment. If so, a SCOTUS appointment would be the appropriate quid pro quo.
He admitted that it was a growing (burgeoning) problem back then. I guess that the expectation was that everybody would be scared off of the issue through intimidation and insinuation (they're whack jobs), whereas the simple truth would have been a far more effective means of dealing with the issue.
Did the administration "hope" that the problem, and those addressing it, would just go away so that Mr. Dunham didn't have to prove anything before the next election either? Another 'cake walk' was obviously expected.
I would guess that such hope isn't alive any longer.
The Harvard Law Review website only has issues dating back to 2006 and then you can purchase reprints of issues from before that date.
This was all I could find (through google) in terms of an article actually written by him:
“Like most second-year law students on the Harvard Law Review, Senator Obama wrote an unsigned student case comment that summarized a recent decision by a state or lower federal court. The piece analyzed a case in which a mother was sued by her child for injuries caused by the mother’s negligent driving during her pregnancy. Senator Obama concluded that, in such cases, the Illinois Supreme Court was correct not to allow lawsuits by children against their mothers,” said Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt in an email. “He wrote that the best way to protect the health of fetuses was to provide prenatal education and health care to pregnant women - issues he remains committed to today and which he has worked to advance as a legislator and in this campaign.” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12705_Page2.html
Does a real photo, and not a painting, exist of Obama’s fifth grade teacher? I did image search using several search engines on Pal Eldridge, OBAMA’S 5th Grade and all I come with is a painting of him.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/early_obama_letter_confirms_inability_to_write.html
August 29, 2011
Early Obama Letter Confirms Inability to Write
By Jack Cashill
On November 16, 1990, Barack Obama, then president of the Harvard Law Review, published a letter in the Harvard Law Record, an independent Harvard Law School newspaper, championing affirmative action.
Although a paragraph from this letter was excerpted in David Remnick’s biography of Obama, The Bridge, I had not seen the letter in its entirety before this week. Not surprisingly, it confirms everything I know about Barack Obama, the writer and thinker.
Obama was prompted to write by an earlier letter from a Mr. Jim Chen that criticized Harvard Law Review’s affirmative action policies. Specifically, Chen had argued that affirmative action stigmatized its presumed beneficiaries.
The response is classic Obama: patronizing, dishonest, syntactically muddled, and grammatically challenged. In the very first sentence Obama leads with his signature failing, one on full display in his earlier published work: his inability to make subject and predicate agree.
“Since the merits of the Law Review’s selection policy has been the subject of commentary for the last three issues,” wrote Obama, “I’d like to take the time to clarify exactly how our selection process works.”
If Obama were as smart as a fifth-grader, he would know, of course, that “merits ... have.” Were there such a thing as a literary Darwin Award, Obama could have won it on this on one sentence alone. He had vindicated Chen in his first ten words.
Although the letter is fewer than a thousand words long, Obama repeats the subject-predicate error at least two more times. In one sentence, he seemingly cannot make up his mind as to which verb option is correct so he tries both: “Approximately half of this first batch is chosen ... the other half are selected ... “
Another distinctive Obama flaw is to allow a string of words to float in space. Please note the unanchored phrase in italics at the end of this sentence:
“No editors on the Review will ever know whether any given editor was selected on the basis of grades, writing competition, or affirmative action, and no editors who were selected with affirmative action in mind.” Huh?
The next lengthy sentence highlights a few superficial style flaws and a much deeper flaw in Obama’s political philosophy.
I would therefore agree with the suggestion that in the future, our concern in this area is most appropriately directed at any employer who would even insinuate that someone with Mr. Chen’s extraordinary record of academic success might be somehow unqualified for work in a corporate law firm, or that such success might be somehow undeserved.
Obama would finish his acclaimed memoir, Dreams from My Father, about four years later. Prior to Dreams, and for the nine years following, everything Obama wrote was, like the above sentence, an uninspired assemblage of words with a nearly random application of commas and tenses.
Unaided, Obama tends to the awkward, passive, and verbose. The phrase “our concern in this area is most appropriately directed at any employer” would more profitably read, “we should focus on the employer.” “Concern” is simply the wrong word.
Scarier than Obama’s style, however, is his thinking. A neophyte race-hustler after his three years in Chicago, Obama is keen to browbeat those who would “even insinuate” that affirmative action rewards the undeserving, results in inappropriate job placements, or stigmatizes its presumed beneficiaries.
In the case of Michelle Obama, affirmative action did all three. The partners at Sidley Austin learned this the hard way. In 1988, they hired her out of Harvard Law under the impression that the degree meant something. It did not. By 1991, Michelle was working in the public sector as an assistant to the mayor. By 1993, she had given up her law license.
Had the partners investigated Michelle’s background, they would have foreseen the disaster to come. Sympathetic biographer Liza Mundy writes, “Michelle frequently deplores the modern reliance on test scores, describing herself as a person who did not test well.”
She did not write well, either. Mundy charitably describes her senior thesis at Princeton as “dense and turgid.” The less charitable Christopher Hitchens observes, “To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.”
Michelle had to have been as anxious at Harvard Law as Bart Simpson was at Genius School. Almost assuredly, the gap between her writing and that of her highly talented colleagues marked her as an affirmative action admission, and the profs finessed her through.
In a similar vein, Barack Obama was named an editor of the Harvard Law Review. Although his description of the Law Review’s selection process defies easy comprehension, apparently, after the best candidates are chosen, there remains “a pool of qualified candidates whose grades or writing competition scores do not significantly differ.” These sound like the kids at Lake Woebegone, all above average. Out of this pool, Obama continues, “the Selection Committee may take race or physical handicap into account.”
To his credit, Obama concedes that he “may have benefited from the Law Review’s affirmative action policy.” This did not strike him as unusual as he “undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action programs during my academic career.”
On the basis of his being elected president of Law Review — a popularity contest — Obama was awarded a six-figure contract to write a book. To this point, he had not shown a hint of promise as a writer, but Simon & Schuster, like Sidley Austin, took the Harvard credential seriously. It should not have. For three years Obama floundered as badly as Michelle had at Sidley Austin. Simon & Schuster finally pulled the contract.
Then Obama found his muse — right in the neighborhood, as it turns out! And promptly, without further ado, the awkward, passive, ungrammatical Obama, a man who had not written one inspired sentence in his whole life, published what Time Magazine called “the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician.”
To question the nature of that production, I have learned, is to risk the abuse promised to Mr. Chen’s theoretical employer. After all, who would challenge Obama’s obvious talent — or that of any affirmative action beneficiary — but those blinded by what Obama calls “deep-rooted ignorance and bias”?
What else could it be?
They would be if he ever wrote one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.