Posted on 10/13/2017 7:11:54 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Fox News headline sums up the issue at hand: "No Obama documents in Obama library? Historians puzzled by Chicago center plans."
The article continues, "The Obama Foundation is taking an unconventional approach to the presidential center and library being planned in Chicago. It's opting to host a digital archive of President Barack Obama's records, but not keep his hard-copy manuscripts and letters and other documents onsite."
The Chicago Tribune broke the story that, to this point, has attracted no major media attention. Its headline raises much the same question Fox News did: "Without archives on site, how will Obama Center benefit area students, scholars?"
The Tribune tries to answer that question but succeeds only in pacifying Obama fanboys. There is no good answer, but there is an answer, and it is this: Obama is not a literary genius. In fact, Obama is not a particularly good writer. His reputation would wither if researchers were allowed access to original documents.
To this day, Obama supporters in the media refuse to accept what is obvious to anyone who has looked carefully at his literary track record. (Sorry, but I have vowed never to use the word "oeuvre" except as a punch line).
Earlier in 2017, when the question of Obama's gazillion-dollar presidential memoirs first surfaced, the publishing community showed just how much its studied ignorance affected its judgment.
"Mr. Obama's writing ability could make his memoir not only profitable in its first years but perhaps for decades to come," Gardiner Harris observed matter-of-factly in a September 2016 piece in the New York Times. Harris speculated, in fact, that Obama's newest effort would be a book for the ages, not unlike the memoir of Ulysses S. Grant, which continues to sell.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Why have any documents ???
the ones who will visit cant read anyway...
Perfect
I’d love to hear the authors explanation of the difference between records and manuscripts. Its almost impossible to believe that copies of speeches, whether hard copy or digitalized won’t be there.
It's much to late for the left to wake up. He has sure fooled them.
Unfortunately they allowed him to do huge damage to this great nation.
Clint Eastwood told US all we needed to know about obama.
Empty chair >> Empty library.
Well, we never had any documents before he was elected, so this comes as no surprise.
Maybe they’ll include his college transcript...
Now that's a statue I would support being torn down.
The physical documents will be elsewhere. But there will be digital access. Otherwise what kind of library would it be?
_______
The Tribune tries to answer that question but succeeds only in pacifying Obama fanboys. There is no good answer, but there is an answer, and it is this: Obama is not a literary genius. In fact, Obama is not a particularly good writer. His reputation would wither if researchers were allowed access to original documents.
Sorry to say it but Jack Cashill is an idiot. If he said the documents won't be there so that Obama could redact them and change the digital copies reflect what he wants them to say rather than what's on the originals, that would be one thing.
But no, he has to go with his whole "literary" theme. The great mass of documents in any presidential library have no literary value whatsoever. That's not why they are there. They are workaday documents preserved for their historical importance. Many -- maybe most -- of them weren't even written by presidents.
ROFL!!! Yes, I'm sure it will be on the level of Shakespeare. LOL!
That way, they can be revised as needed.
“Maybe theyll include his college transcript...”
Sealed by his FIRST EO?!
And then the dog ate it.
U. LieBarry.
The “No Doc Baby Doc?”
About mid-way thru the article, everytime I would start reading one of these excerpts to hubby, he would look at me like, "is this grounds for divorce". The writing was awful. I remember stopping midway in something and saying exactly that --- this is horrible writing.
Meanwhile, the media kept telling me what a great writer he was! Just like they would tell us what a great orator he is -- until we realized that without a teleprompter, the guy was a dufus.
Obama’s and Clinton’s people probably destroyed most the interesting documents,anyhow.
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.