Obama Campaign Makes Case for Releasing His College Transcripts
As the Obama campaign continues its attacks on Romney's tenure at
Bain Capital and his tax returns, it has argued that the focus is
justified because Romney made his business background his "calling card"
for his presidential run. They argue, not unreasonably, that Romney's
use of his business experience as the centerpiece of his candidacy
warrants close scrutiny of that experience. Okay, but what about what
was, in 2008, Obama's main "calling card", his successful academic
career? Doesn't that warrant similar vetting?
During the 08 campaign, Obama and his supporters touted his
editorship of the Harvard Law Review and his position as a
"constitutional law professor" at University of Chicago as significant
achievements. His academic rise through Occidental, Columbia, and
Harvard Law School were prima facie evidence of his brilliance.
No other modern candidate for President has used his academic
achievements as his chief "calling card" for the Presidency. And yet,
while many candidates have released or had leaked their academic
transcripts, we have almost no information on Obama's. It was damn near
the sum-total of his "qualifications" to be President, and we know
nothing about it.
Mind you, I really don't care about his grades. Even if, as some
suspect, Obama benefited from some institutional nudges to get into
these elite schools, he graduated from them. I'm sure he was a decent
enough student. No, I'm more interested in what courses he
took. What disciplines did he study? Which ideas was he exposed to? This
is especially important in Obama's case, because we have almost no
other information about who he is or what makes him tick. Sure, we have
his memoirs, but those are unreliable, because we know he painted
"composites" of people and events. Knowing the courses he took would
fill in much needed information about his worldview.
This came into even starker relief last week. Speaking in Virginia,
Obama asserted both that success was a question of luck and that a
person's success was usually due to someone else, generally the
government. "If you've got a business. You didn't build that. Somebody
else made that happen." Obama's line betrays a belief unlike anything
held by the overwhelming majority of Americans. It shows a profound
disdain for individual achievement and a warm embrace of collective
action in all things. Where in the world did that idea come from?
Its a far more important question than how much money Romney made or
what his exact rate of tax was. Absolutely, Romney's exact tenure at
Bain should be scrutinized. He has, after all, made his business
experience his "calling card." But, Obama made his academic career one
of his signature "calling cards." We have a right to know what's on that
card.
The Obama campaign has made a compelling case for the release of his
college transcripts. Someone should follow up on their advice.
Read More: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/18...
















President Obama's college transcripts are irrelevant. He did not EVER say "vote for me because I went to Harvard". He asked people to vote for him because of the ideas he had, the programs he wanted to implement, the direction he wanted this country to move in, and more people agreed with his vision than disagreed with it. And now as he runs for re-election he STILL is not saying "vote for me because I went to Harvard", he is saying "this is what we've accomplished and this is what we want to accomplish in the next four years."
By contrast, Romney's entire campaign is based on "vote for me because I'm a successful businessman." So, when he refuses to make public the details of how he became a "successful businessman", refuses to explain how he can be considered pro-America when all of his wealth is in tax avoiding offshore accounts, and especially when it becomes known that he blatantly lied about his involvement with Bain Capitals pioneering efforts in outsourcing American jobs, his financial history is all the more relevant. He is not saying "vote for me because of the plans I have" because he HAS no plans. The closest thing to an ec...
President Obama's college transcripts are irrelevant. He did not EVER say "vote for me because I went to Harvard". He asked people to vote for him because of the ideas he had, the programs he wanted to implement, the direction he wanted this country to move in, and more people agreed with his vision than disagreed with it. And now as he runs for re-election he STILL is not saying "vote for me because I went to Harvard", he is saying "this is what we've accomplished and this is what we want to accomplish in the next four years."
By contrast, Romney's entire campaign is based on "vote for me because I'm a successful businessman." So, when he refuses to make public the details of how he became a "successful businessman", refuses to explain how he can be considered pro-America when all of his wealth is in tax avoiding offshore accounts, and especially when it becomes known that he blatantly lied about his involvement with Bain Capitals pioneering efforts in outsourcing American jobs, his financial history is all the more relevant. He is not saying "vote for me because of the plans I have" because he HAS no plans. The closest thing to an economic plan he has is "let's do what failed for Bush, failed for Reagan and failed for Hoover".
This ongoing nonsense about President Obama's college transcripts (and by the way, Mitt Romney hasn't released his college transcripts either) is merely another attempt to distract the public from the growing evidence that Mitt Romney is either not "successful" as he claimed or he became "successful" by destroying the lives of thousands of working Americans.
And PS, continuing to completely distort what the President said about how people become successful would have made Andrew Breitbart proud. Thank God he's dead.
http://www.sodahead.com/unite...
And it still is patently obvious that not one of you America Haters have a clue as to what Saul Alinsky actually wrote anyway. You probably don't even realize that the title "Rules for Radicals" was sarcastic.