Obama and college

[patrickaa317]

Interesting read:

Link

[BigBallinStalin]

This what be extremely exciting:

Romney should call a press conference and issue a challenge in front of the nation. He should agree to release more of his tax returns, only if Obama unseals his college records. Simple and straight-forward. Mitt should ask “What could possibly be so embarrassing in your college records from 29 years ago that you are afraid to let America’s voters see? If it’s THAT bad, maybe it’s something the voters ought to see.” Suddenly the tables are turned. Now Obama is on the defensive.


My bet is that Obama will never unseal his records because they contain information that could destroy his chances for re-election. Once this challenge is made public, my prediction is you’ll never hear about Mitt’s tax returns ever again.

Finished reading it. He asks good questions toward the end, and his guess is pretty good.

[notyou2]

Sounds to me like the opposition is getting desperate and creating fluff.

[Woodruff]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

[patrickaa317]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

Wouldn't the best situation for them both become more transparent? Or do you think the college transcripts should be off the table?

[BigBallinStalin]

@woodruff

He should pose this ultimatum and force the Obama Team to completely reshift their strategy.

It's like breaking Obama's bonus while taking a new bonus. Make Obama sweat, I say. (which might consolidate his vote among the gays).

[Woodruff]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

Wouldn't the best situation for them both become more transparent? Or do you think the college transcripts should be off the table?

Best? Of course. I didn't think we were talking about an ideal situation. I thought we were talking about what would be the best action for Romney to take.

It's conclusive that Obama isn't a transparent candidate, so Romney should use that to his advantage instead of just being "Obama #2".

[patrickaa317]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

Wouldn't the best situation for them both become more transparent? Or do you think the college transcripts should be off the table?

Best? Of course. I didn't think we were talking about an ideal situation. I thought we were talking about what would be the best action for Romney to take.

It's conclusive that Obama isn't a transparent candidate, so Romney should use that to his advantage instead of just being "Obama #2".

Fair enough, I could see that strategy, while doing so, he would have to make that a campaign slogan and be sure to point it out to the average voter.

[kentington]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

Wouldn't the best situation for them both become more transparent? Or do you think the college transcripts should be off the table?

Best? Of course. I didn't think we were talking about an ideal situation. I thought we were talking about what would be the best action for Romney to take.

It's conclusive that Obama isn't a transparent candidate, so Romney should use that to his advantage instead of just being "Obama #2".

Well, he already is Obama #2. People don't appreciate transparency as much as duels. Especially if Romney thinks he can come out ahead. It would just be really embarrassing if there was nothing untoward in his College records.

[Woodruff]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

Wouldn't the best situation for them both become more transparent? Or do you think the college transcripts should be off the table?

Best? Of course. I didn't think we were talking about an ideal situation. I thought we were talking about what would be the best action for Romney to take.

It's conclusive that Obama isn't a transparent candidate, so Romney should use that to his advantage instead of just being "Obama #2".

Fair enough, I could see that strategy, while doing so, he would have to make that a campaign slogan and be sure to point it out to the average voter.

Without question.

[Woodruff]

Interesting read:

Link

I think it would be better if Romney would just release his taxes and then come off as the more transparent candidate. I know...weird concept and all.

Wouldn't the best situation for them both become more transparent? Or do you think the college transcripts should be off the table?

Best? Of course. I didn't think we were talking about an ideal situation. I thought we were talking about what would be the best action for Romney to take.

It's conclusive that Obama isn't a transparent candidate, so Romney should use that to his advantage instead of just being "Obama #2".

Well, he already is Obama #2. People don't appreciate transparency as much as duels. Especially if Romney thinks he can come out ahead. It would just be really embarrassing if there was nothing untoward in his College records.

Heh...the old "I've been WAITING for this moment!" <evil menacing laugh while opening college transcripts>

[Army of GOD]

I don't get why people care about either. They both suck ass.

[Phatscotty]

Zimmerman's Academic Records Released

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2 ... ence-dump/

I guess Zimmerman did not think to SEAL his records ahead of time. Perhaps Zimmerman could have used some advice from Obama on how to cover up his past...

Barack Obama: The ghost of Columbia University
Wayne Allyn Root was also a college classmate of Barack Obama at Columbia University (Class of '83)


Of course, some of those who repeat college records are not a big deal hypocritically reverses for a Tea Party candidate when they want their college records....of course!

Christine O'Donnell's academic record is once again coming under scrutiny.

The Washington Post reported yesterday that the Delaware Republican Senate candidate misleadingly claims she attended the University of Oxford. On top of that, further reports surfaced revealing that O'Donnell's claims that she attended Claremont Graduate University are incorrect.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

[Woodruff]

Of course, some of those who repeat college records are not a big deal hypocritically reverses for a Tea Party candidate when they want their college records....of course!

Almost as hypocritically as you view the situation. Almost.

[Haggis_McMutton]

Note to self.

If ever considering to run for office, create a false skeleton in closet, guide opposing smear campaign to focus on the bait then reveal it's a fake 3 weeks before election.

[PLAYER57832]

Interesting read:

Link

"interesting" is one word. Interesting? Yeah, if you are interested in how easy it is to convince people there is something "suspicious" when there really is not!

Are you not fully aware that this old "if they had nothing to hide, they would tell..." is one of the oldest and most dangerous tactics used by folks trying to attack an opposition. There is a reason why "innocent until proven guilty" is one of the founding principles of our nation, even written right into our constitution. The fact is that most people have something to hide... but not things that matter.

Looking at Woodruff's image, I am reminded of a Star Trek Next Generation episode where an investigator comes on the ship to look for spies. Picard kept refusing to answer questions, on principle. A younger ensign was also questioned, also refused. It turned out he did rather have something to hide -- his mother had been raped by Romulens, he was therefore not fully Vulcan. He had done absolutely nothing wrong, but prejudice against such was strong, even in the Star Trek Universe, so he had good reason to hide this fact. Being that it was Star Trek, Picard managed to shift things back onto the oppressor and to get the ensign's record fully cleared.

I copied the full article, mostly because these links seem to get lost over time. However, I am not posting it in this particular post. (I will afterward, seperately) What I noted was 2 points. First, this is the same guy that has tried repeatedly to claim that Obama just did not attend the University. His major argument is "I did not see the guy.. folks I know did not see the guy". Well, my brother and I attended the same university for a year, lived less than 5 blocks from each other. You know how often I ever saw him either on campus or around town? Only 2 times, when he came to borrow my car -- and when I knocked on his door to ask for the keys back. (and that was the first I knew of where he lived) We were not antagonistic, we just ran in different circles. The reason I bring this up is that if I HAD seen my brother, I would remember it. I saw plenty of people I did not know, would not remember... even people I know for a fact I did see repeatedly, I don't necessarily remember. There are plenty of people even in my own major who I just never saw. I know this, in part, because I met a few of them outside of school, later...and we only realized we had attended the same school together when we began talking about our various schools and majors.

Beyond that, he jumps to a LOT of pretty broad accusations and assumptions. He claims that the only reason Obama might hide his records is low grades. THEN he leaps to the gross assumption that therefore the only way he could have gotten into an Ivy league school, and gotten a scholarship to boot, was that he was a foreign student. In other words, he is essentially trying to claim that Obama somehow living in another country as a child meant that he had to be a citizen of that country.. and that his mother had to then make sure Obama got back his citizenship (I mean... really???). This is just plain idiotic. I myself went to school overseas, and it very much did help me get scholarships and entry into school..but not because I was a foreign national, simply because I had diverse experience. Schools, colleges LIKE that. They understand there is a great value in having folks of diverse backgrounds in their school (this is being challenged on some fronts, but only partially and was absolutely not questioned when Obama would have gone to school)

So, what do we really have?

We have an idiot talking to folks he assumes are also either just naive/unknowledgeable and also unwilling to bother to question. If we are talking about someone outside the US,then I can understand that.. why should you be an expert in US politics? (though, of course, many foreigners do have more expertise than many US citizens ). If we are talking about US nationals, though... use your brain!!!!!

[PLAYER57832]

I am President Obama’s classmate at Columbia University, Class of ’83.

Funny he cites this, though one of his major claims is to try and insinuate that Obama was not actually there...

I am also one of the most accurate Las Vegas oddsmakers and prognosticators. Accurate enough that I was awarded my own star on the Las Vegas Walk of Stars.

He is good at winning bets (setting the odds is basically that, just on the winning side, not the betting/losing side), so that makes him an expert on college records and Obama? Or, better yet.. as he says below, laying odds is supposed to make him trustworthy? LOL

And I smell something rotten in Denmark. Obama has a big skeleton in his closet. It’s his college records. Call it “gut instinct” but my gut is almost always right. Obama has a secret hidden at Columbia- and it’s a bad one that threatens to bring down his presidency. Gut instinct is how I’ve made my living for 29 years since graduating Columbia.

And, of course this is his completely unbiased and objective opinion

Obama and his infamous strategist David Axelrod understand how to play political hardball, the best it’s ever been played. Team Obama has decided to distract America’s voters by condemning Mitt Romney for not releasing enough years of his tax returns. It’s the perfect cover. Obama knows the best defense is a bold offense. Just keep attacking Mitt and blaming him for secrecy and evasion, while accusing him of having a scandal that doesn’t exist. Then ask followers like Senator Harry Reid to chase the lead. The U.S. Senate Majority Leader appears to now be making up stories out of thin air, about tax returns he knows nothing about. It’s a cynical, brilliant, and vicious strategy. Make Romney defend, so he can’t attack the real Obama scandal.

OH, I see, so Romney's not releasing tax returns that he is actually legally supposed to release is just "covering up"... but this guys attack to get Obama to release records that he is in no way obligated to release.. and then leaping to only the most aggregious of possible reasons why these records would not be released (intitially the claim was that Obama did not attend... though several people quickly came forward remembering Obama's attendance, not to mention providing some proof of that), THAT is perfectly legitimate?

This is classic Axelrod. Obama has won several elections in his career by slandering his opponents and leaking sealed documents. Not only do these insinuations and leaks ruin the credibility and reputation of Obama’s opponents, they keep them on the defensive and off Obama’s trail of sealed documents.

By attacking Romney’s tax records, Obama’s socialist cabal creates a problem that doesn’t exist. Is the U.S. Senate Majority Leader making up stories out of thin air? You decide. But the reason for this baseless attack is clear- make Romney defend, so not only is he “off message” but it helps the media ignore the real Obama scandal.

My answer for Romney? Call Obama’s bluff.

The above speaks for itself, well it ought to anyway. Notice the utter lack of evidence? Notice how the entire thing is pure insinuation?

Romney should call a press conference and issue a challenge in front of the nation. He should agree to release more of his tax returns, only if Obama unseals his college records. Simple and straight-forward. Mitt should ask “What could possibly be so embarrassing in your college records from 29 years ago that you are afraid to let America’s voters see? If it’s THAT bad, maybe it’s something the voters ought to see.” Suddenly the tables are turned. Now Obama is on the defensive.

And why on Earth would the two be related in any way? Romney IS supposed to release his tax returns. Obama does not have to release his college records. Even claiming that the 2 are related is a pile of something that does not smell very nice.

My bet is that Obama will never unseal his records because they contain information that could destroy his chances for re-election. Once this challenge is made public, my prediction is you’ll never hear about Mitt’s tax returns ever again.

LOL

Easy bet.. there is no reason for Obama to release his records, but notice how he then goes on to basically claim this is "proof" of Obama's guilt? That is a pretty nasty piece of work, alright. But not Obama's.

Why are the college records, of a 51-year-old President of the United States, so important to keep secret?

Wrong question. Why should they be released? What relevance?

I think I know the answer.

So do I... and I think my answer is a LOT More realistic than yours.

If anyone should have questions about Obama’s record at Columbia University, it’s me.

And why does that give him any right at all to question the records?

We both graduated (according to Obama) Columbia University, Class of ’83. We were both (according to Obama) Pre-Law and Political Science majors. And I thought I knew most everyone at Columbia. I certainly thought I’d heard of all of my fellow Political Science majors. But not Obama (or as he was known then- Barry Soetoro). I never met him. Never saw him. Never even heard of him. And none of the classmates that I knew at Columbia have ever met him, saw him, or heard of him.

HERE it is!!! The real accusation, the real thrust of this guy's "debate". Obama never attended the University, is a liar.. and unless he releases his records, that "fact" is "proven." Exactly how the most viscious and evil accusers operate. He claims to be trustworthy? I have a nice bridge he can buy, too....

But don’t take my word for it. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2008 that Fox News randomly called 400 of our Columbia classmates and never found one who had ever met Obama.

Went to factcheck for this one.
From FACTCHECK
FULL QUESTION


Can you check this out and see if it is true?

Thank you!

I have always wondered why NO ONE ever came forward from Obama’s past saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc. NO ONE, not one person has ever come forward from his past. VERY VERY STRANGE.
This should really be a cause for great concern.
⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full text ⬏
LINK: http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/o ... -columbia/

To those who voted for him, YOU HAVE ELECTED THE BIGGEST UNQUALIFIED FRAUD that America has ever known!
This is very interesting stuff. Sort of adds credence to the idea of The Manchurian Candidate thing having happened here! Stephanopoulos of ABC news said the same thing during the 08′ campaign. He too was a classmate of BO’s at Columbia class of 1984. He said he never had one class with him.
Was he there?
While he is such a great orator, why doesn’t anyone in Obama’s collegeclass remember him? Maybe he never attended class! Maybe he never attended Columbia ? He won’t allow Colombia to release his records either. Suspicious isn’t it???
NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA !!!!!!!
Looking for evidence of Obama’s past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.
Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don’t know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me. I don’t have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia . Ever! Nobody recalls him. I’m not exaggerating, I’m not kidding.
Root adds that he was also, like Obama, "Class of ’83 political science, pre-law" and says, "You don’t get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him.

See above, this guy is flat out lying... but attempts to hide it amongst "perfectly innocent" "questions". Classic sleeze of the utmost, is what this is!
OH, yeah.. here are the REAL articles, the ones that say pretty much the exact opposite of what this guy claims:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ... -roommate/

(note.. it includes pictures)

Here is another: http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct/jan ... mni_corner

At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was.

He was little known until he got close to winning the presidency.

The guy who writes the class notes, who’s kind of the, as we say in New York , the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange?

It’s very strange. "Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia , provide schoolrecords, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia .

No, what's really strange is that people still believe this claim!

FULL ANSWER

We’re not sure why, but this false claim has been forwarded widely in recent days, judging by the number of queries we’ve received.

Barack Obama was a transfer student from California’s Occidental College when he came to Columbia University in 1981 as a 20-year-old junior. More than 20,000 students currently attend Columbia. The enrollment in the early ’80s might have been lower, but not everybody would have met or remembered Obama. And it’s absolutely untrue that "not one person has ever come forward" from his years there, or that he is "the man who wasn’t there."

Columbia University proudly claims Obama as a 1983 graduate. The university magazine Columbia College Today profiled him as far back as 2005, after he was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Last year, the New York Times wrote about Phil Boerner, who roomed with the future president during his first year at Columbia. The article included excerpts from the Columbia student directory, showing Obama living during his junior year at 142 West 109th Street near Columbia’s campus in New York City, and during his senior year at 339 East 94th Street. Boerner recalled that Obama sometimes wrapped himself in a sleeping bag to keep warm in the chilly apartment they shared, and that some nights he would cook chicken curry for dinner.

In an article published in Columbia College Today, Boerner also wrote:

Boerner: I remember often eating breakfast with Barack at Tom’s Restaurant on Broadway. Occasionally we went to The West End for beers. We enjoyed exploring museums such as the Guggenheim, the Met and the American Museum of Natural History, and browsing in bookstores such as the Strand and the Barnes & Noble opposite Columbia. We both liked taking long walks down Broadway on a Sunday afternoon, and listening to the silence of Central Park after a big snow. I also remember jogging the loop around Central Park with Barack.

Obama even published an article in a school magazine called the Sundial. A reporter for the conservative Human Events magazine recently called it "a wholesale endorsement of all sorts of leftist claptrap fashionable at the time." The full article is available on the Web site of Politico.com. It was published in the issue dated March 10, 1983.

The e-mail incorrectly claims that ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos was a classmate of Obama. They were both students at Columbia for about one academic year, but Stephanopoulos was a year ahead. Obama received his degree in 1983, while Stephanopoulos received his a year earlier, according to a university press release. Neither of them were "class of 1984," as the message incorrectly claims.

The message recycles — and exaggerates to the point of falsification — some attacks that were raised in the heat of the 2008 presidential campaign. The claim that Fox News could not find any classmates who remembered Obama, for example, was published in a Sept. 11, 2008, Wall Street Journal editorial, which attacked then-candidate Obama for not releasing more information about his two years at the university. The message also makes much of Wayne Allyn Root’s statement in an interview that he didn’t know anybody who remembered Obama at Columbia. That appeared Sept. 5, 2008, in Reason magazine. What the message fails to mention is that Root was at the time a candidate for vice president on the Libertarian ticket. Root was stating that "[a] vote for Obama is four years of Karl Marx," but even Root stopped short of claiming that Obama was not actually a student at Columbia.

–Brooks Jackson



Update, Feb. 23: After we published this item, we received an e-mail from a woman who says she knew Obama when he was at Columbia. You can read her recollection of playing soccer with Obama on campus in our FactCheck Mailbag.

Correction, March 16: We originally used a quote from Phil Boerner, Obama’s roommate at Columbia, that referred to their time together at Occidental College. We have changed that quote to another of Boerner’s recollections about their time at Columbia.



Now all of this mystery could be easily and instantly dismissed if Obama released his Columbia transcripts to the media. But even after serving as President for 3 1/2 years he refuses to unseal his college records. Shouldn’t the media be as relentless in pursuit of Obama’s records as Romney’s? Shouldn’t they be digging into Obama’s past–beyond what he has written about himself–with the same boundless enthusiasm as Mitt’s?

The first question I’d ask is, if you had great grades, why would you seal your records? So let’s assume Obama got poor grades. Why not release the records? He’s president of the free world, for gosh sakes. He’s commander-in-chief of the U.S. military. Who’d care about some poor grades from three decades ago, right? So then what’s the problem? Doesn’t that make the media suspicious? Something doesn’t add up.

Secondly, if he had poor grades at Occidental, how did he get admitted to an Ivy League university in the first place? And if his grades at Columbia were awful, how’d he ever get into Harvard Law School? So again those grades must have been great, right? So why spend millions to keep them sealed?

Third, how did Obama pay for all these fancy schools without coming from a wealthy background? If he had student loans or scholarships, would he not have to maintain good grades?

I can only think of one answer that would explain this mystery.

Here’s my gut belief: Obama got a leg up by being admitted to both Occidental and Columbia as a foreign exchange student. He was raised as a young boy in Indonesia. But did his mother ever change him back to a U.S. citizen? When he returned to live with his grandparents in Hawaii or as he neared college-age preparing to apply to schools, did he ever change his citizenship back? I’m betting not.

If you could unseal Obama’s Columbia University records I believe you’d find that:

A) He rarely ever attended class.

B) His grades were not those typical of what we understand it takes to get into Harvard Law School.

C) He attended Columbia as a foreign exchange student.

D) He paid little for either undergraduate college or Harvard Law School because of foreign aid and scholarships given to a poor foreign students like this kid Barry Soetoro from Indonesia.

If you think I’m “fishing” then prove me wrong. Open up your records Mr. President. What are you afraid of?

If it’s okay for U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to go on a fishing expedition about Romney’s taxes (even though he knows absolutely nothing about them nor will release his own), then I think I can do the same thing. But as Obama’s Columbia Class of ’83 classmate, at least I have more standing to make educated guesses.

It’s time for Mitt to go on the attack and call Obama’s bluff.[/quote]
link: http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/o ... -columbia/

[BigBallinStalin]

Interesting read:

Link

Beyond that, he jumps to a LOT of pretty broad accusations and assumptions. He claims that the only reason Obama might hide his records is low grades. THEN he leaps to the gross assumption that therefore the only way he could have gotten into an Ivy league school, and gotten a scholarship to boot, was that he was a foreign student. In other words, he is essentially trying to claim that Obama somehow living in another country as a child meant that he had to be a citizen of that country.. and that his mother had to then make sure Obama got back his citizenship (I mean... really???). This is just plain idiotic. I myself went to school overseas, and it very much did help me get scholarships and entry into school..but not because I was a foreign national, simply because I had diverse experience. Schools, colleges LIKE that. They understand there is a great value in having folks of diverse backgrounds in their school (this is being challenged on some fronts, but only partially and was absolutely not questioned when Obama would have gone to school)

When you read something, you really need to tone down your ability to shove words into people's mouths.

I do agree that his "he might not have even gone to X" lacks much evidence, but he still makes some great points which you're interpreted incorrectly and failed to address in a logical manner, as I will explain.

he first question I’d ask is, if you had great grades, why would you seal your records? So let’s assume Obama got poor grades. Why not release the records? He’s president of the free world, for gosh sakes. He’s commander-in-chief of the U.S. military. Who’d care about some poor grades from three decades ago, right? So then what’s the problem? Doesn’t that make the media suspicious? Something doesn’t add up.

Secondly, if he had poor grades at Occidental, how did he get admitted to an Ivy League university in the first place? And if his grades at Columbia were awful, how’d he ever get into Harvard Law School? So again those grades must have been great, right? So why spend millions to keep them sealed?

Third, how did Obama pay for all these fancy schools without coming from a wealthy background? If he had student loans or scholarships, would he not have to maintain good grades?

I can only think of one answer that would explain this mystery.

Here’s my gut belief: Obama got a leg up by being admitted to both Occidental and Columbia as a foreign exchange student. He was raised as a young boy in Indonesia. But did his mother ever change him back to a U.S. citizen? When he returned to live with his grandparents in Hawaii or as he neared college-age preparing to apply to schools, did he ever change his citizenship back? I’m betting not.

He's not claiming "that the only reason Obama might hide his records is low grades." If you reread the above, you'd see why. I can't be expected to do your homework for you, but I might have to.


The following is also false: "THEN he leaps to the gross assumption that therefore the only way he could have gotten into an Ivy league school, and gotten a scholarship to boot, was that he was a foreign student."


He's saying that having poor grades wouldn't really matter--regarding the need to cover-up. And if you had great grades, then there's definitely no need to cover them up. Besides, you'd need great grades to get into all those schools, so why the cover-up? (which is a legitimate question, which you unreasonably scoffed at without thinking about critically).

He asks "Third, how did Obama pay for all these fancy schools without coming from a wealthy background? If he had student loans or scholarships, would he not have to maintain good grades?"

He's not assuming that's the only way. He explicitly states that he's guessing. If you have NOTHING to offer in the contrary, then your opinion doesn't mean much--especially since you've completely misinterpreted his article. What's interesting is that his "gut belief" provides a reasonable explanation for a cover-up. If you would like to be constructive, you'd have to argue that his conclusion can't be true, or you'd have to state other reasons as to why Obama is allegedly spending millions to cover-up his past.

For example, here's an alternative explanation. Obama was a US citizen at that time and received loans/subsidies in this manner, and it's likely to be true that his skin color gave him a competitive advantage. However, why take the time and resources to cover that up--if it's true? I can't think of any good reason except "Obama don't wanna cuz it's his personal information!," but seriously, the president should be forced to be transparent if he wants to be the Executive. Furthermore, if that's his reasoning, then the question remains, "why is it too personal? A college transcript for a public office? Get real."

The author's other explanation makes the most sense: Obama doesn't want to be transparent because his history will be used against him--as it was for Bush (with his C grades and party times). But Bush relented, and it wasn't that bad. Obama has not, and has allegedly spent millions to maintain his secrecy. That signals something worth asking about.

[patrickaa317]

Went to factcheck for this one.

I didn't read your post because of using factcheck for verification. Can you find a different site to base your answers on? (Also different than snopes.com)

Do you see a possible conflict of interest here?....

[BigBallinStalin]

Went to factcheck for this one.

I didn't read your post because of using factcheck for verification. Can you find a different site to base your answers on? (Also different than snopes.com)

Do you see a possible conflict of interest here?....

Good to know.

[Woodruff]

Went to factcheck for this one.

I didn't read your post because of using factcheck for verification. Can you find a different site to base your answers on? (Also different than snopes.com)

Do you see a possible conflict of interest here?....

Ok, I can see a potential conflict of interest there for factcheck.org, if it's true. I can't seem to find verification of this on factcheck's site, but I realize I'm probably just not looking in the right place. Can you give me a link to it or point me in the right direction, please?

Also, why snopes.com also?

[patrickaa317]

Went to factcheck for this one.

I didn't read your post because of using factcheck for verification. Can you find a different site to base your answers on? (Also different than snopes.com)

Do you see a possible conflict of interest here?....

Ok, I can see a potential conflict of interest there for factcheck.org, if it's true. I can't seem to find verification of this on factcheck's site, but I realize I'm probably just not looking in the right place. Can you give me a link to it or point me in the right direction, please?

Also, why snopes.com also?

I don't think you should expect to see verification of that on factcheck's site as they would be admitting their is potential conflict of interest and not appear to be an unbiased source, thus ruining their credibility on every issue.

I've heard some questionable things on snopes and while they are probably part of a conspiracy theory, I haven't spent any time researching or validating information, I'd rather err on the side of caution and have a different source confirm. Not too much to ask in today's world, is it?

[PLAYER57832]

[
I don't think you should expect to see verification of that on factcheck's site as they would be admitting their is potential conflict of interest and not appear to be an unbiased source, thus ruining their credibility on every issue.

I've heard some questionable things on snopes and while they are probably part of a conspiracy theory, I haven't spent any time researching or validating information, I'd rather err on the side of caution and have a different source confirm. Not too much to ask in today's world, is it?

Obama is NOT running factcheck. The whole "problem" here is that factcheck and snopes challegne idiocy put forward by many. They do that for those on all sides, but for some reason the right seems more prone to take offense.

Sounds a lot like the saying "thou doth protesteth too much".

[Woodruff]

Went to factcheck for this one.

I didn't read your post because of using factcheck for verification. Can you find a different site to base your answers on? (Also different than snopes.com)

Do you see a possible conflict of interest here?....

Ok, I can see a potential conflict of interest there for factcheck.org, if it's true. I can't seem to find verification of this on factcheck's site, but I realize I'm probably just not looking in the right place. Can you give me a link to it or point me in the right direction, please?

Also, why snopes.com also?

I don't think you should expect to see verification of that on factcheck's site as they would be admitting their is potential conflict of interest and not appear to be an unbiased source, thus ruining their credibility on every issue.

I just presumed that was where you pulled it. As I asked previously, then can you give me a link to your source for this, please?

I've heard some questionable things on snopes and while they are probably part of a conspiracy theory, I haven't spent any time researching or validating information, I'd rather err on the side of caution and have a different source confirm. Not too much to ask in today's world, is it?

It seems then that you're simply "doubting all factcheckers" to me. Are there any sources of this nature you do consider reliably credible?

[patrickaa317]

[
I don't think you should expect to see verification of that on factcheck's site as they would be admitting their is potential conflict of interest and not appear to be an unbiased source, thus ruining their credibility on every issue.

I've heard some questionable things on snopes and while they are probably part of a conspiracy theory, I haven't spent any time researching or validating information, I'd rather err on the side of caution and have a different source confirm. Not too much to ask in today's world, is it?

Obama is NOT running factcheck. The whole "problem" here is that factcheck and snopes challegne idiocy put forward by many. They do that for those on all sides, but for some reason the right seems more prone to take offense.

Sounds a lot like the saying "thou doth protesteth too much".

No shit that Obama is not running factcheck himself but it doesn't mean that the people who are running the site aren't completely fair and unbiased.

If the author of the editorial is far out there, you should be able to find another source to debunk it all, right? Or do you solely rely on everything factcheck says without verifying their work?

Reminds me of someone who was watching some documentary once and when the information was questioned, they said "Oh that's the great part of this documentary, they do ALL of the research for you! They have all kinds of charts and graphs explaining it." You aren't that person too, are you Player?