Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: curiosity
That is why I doubt the transcript is authentic

There are two transcripts. One is a copy of the original, fill it in as you go "card", with typed entries. The other is a printout. They both have the same dates for class attendence. The "printout" doesn't distinguish between correpsondence and extension. The other one does, and shows all four courses (from Autumn '61 and Winter '62) to be "extension". The Spring '62 classes were a regular admitance.

Taking extension courses, can be explained by her poor GPA from U. Hawaii (1.8), because there is no real admission requirement. She also only transfered two course from U. HI. whereas a normally load, especially for a bright student as she was reported to be, would be more like 4 or 5 classes. IIRC, I carried 15 hours first semester freshman year, just 8 years later. That was 4 classes, but math was 5 credit hours and chemistry was 4.

I really don't see why you birthers see the move to Seattle to be so significant.

Because it conflicts with his "legend" and book. It also doesn't make a lot of sense, it would have been much cheaper to stay in Hawaii. They would have let her come back on "probation", or let her take extension courses, in spite of that terrible first semester.

183 posted on 09/02/2009 5:20:08 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato
There are two transcripts. One is a copy of the original, fill it in as you go "card", with typed entries. The other is a printout. They both have the same dates for class attendence. The "printout" doesn't distinguish between correpsondence and extension. The other one does, and shows all four courses (from Autumn '61 and Winter '62) to be "extension". The Spring '62 classes were a regular admitance.

Okay, but extension courses didn't start until Sept., so I don't see what the big deal is.

Because it conflicts with his "legend" and book.

I didn't read his book, and I don't plan to. How exactly does it conflict? And why is the conflict important?

since he wasn't old enough to remember anything from 1961, I don't see how getting a few things wrong in those early years is in any way important.

It also doesn't make a lot of sense, it would have been much cheaper to stay in Hawaii.

It makes a lot of sense if Stanley wanted to get away from her new husband due to marital difficulties. It is already in the public domain their relationship was troubled by 1962. I don't find it all that hard to believe their troubles started a year earlier. Do you?

If she wanted to leave Honolulu in order to get away from her husband, Seattle would be the most logical place for her to go, given that she had support network there.

185 posted on 09/02/2009 5:27:45 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson