I am so tired of this blog pimping bull sh!t.
There is NOTHING in the article to support the hype. No grades. No transcripts.
Just a bunch of mindless speculation.
Is it blog pimping if someone other than the blog creator/writer posted it?
Also, it was clearly a challenge for O and his minions to prove otherwise.
Why do you continue to rail against “blog pimping” on the bloggers forum? What is the matter with you?
The blog posts referred to here aren't about a quick and dirty verification of Obama's grades.
Hillbuzz has been on the Obama's grades cover up for a couple of days now. He speculates that Obama actually got D's and F's. He knows he's speculating and he is looking for possible verification.
He tends to get on on a topic and chew on it for a day or so. Often times the comments reveal some good links providing background on the topic at hand. Brainstorming like this can be an effective problem solving process, IMHO.
In this case, Hillbuzz appears to be using Jennifer Rubin's article to support his current rant, i.e., Obama talks a good game but isn't any smarter than the people he's talking down to.
Rubin thinks that Obama's claim that he has 'science and facts' on his side makes him an intellectual snob. She doesn't refer to his grades anywhere in her article, nor does the article by the person she cites, Michael Gerson.
The grades speculation is the driving force behind the current request for information at Hillbuzz. Hillbuzz is just referencing articles about Obama's actions that highlight the disconnect between Obama's perceived image and his actual competence. This behavior leads Hillbuzz to speculate that Obama's actual grades are worse than the public is led to believe.
Hillbuzz, with his tenacity, could very well dig up some verified grade information, at which point someone will happily refer to his findings.
It's like eating sausage without wanting to know about the process used to make it.