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.
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.