Early writing confirms Obama low intelligence: both Barrak *and* Michelle

[jficquette]

She did not write well, either. Mundy charitably describes her senior thesis at Princeton as "dense and turgid." The less charitable Christopher Hitchens observes, "To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be 'read' at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn't written in any known language."

LOL

 

[piezoe]

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

It's not the mistakes in grammar , it's the lying and befuddled quality of thinking that shows he's an AA baby.

Those may be legitimate grounds for criticism, but the tone, and incorrect nit picking of Cashill's whatever you call it, are not. They are silly.

Mr. Obama, as a matter of fact, is an exceptionally skilled communicator. If you don't agree with his policies and positions you are entitled to speak out, just as you have, but spare me, please, Mr. Cashill's nonsense.

Furthermore, Mrs. Obama is not the President. Whether she was an outstanding student or a rather poor one, is hardly relevant to political discourse. To engage in the sort of thing that is the subject of this thread speaks more to the asinine nature of some ET members than it says anything of substance about the Obamas'.

 

[377OHMS]

Quote from piezoe:

Those may be legitimate grounds for criticism, but the tone, and incorrect nit picking of Cashill's whatever you call it, are not. They are silly.

Mr. Obama, as a matter of fact, is an exceptionally skilled communicator. If you don't agree with his policies and positions you are entitled to speak out, just as you have, but spare me, please, Mr. Cashill's nonsense.

Barrack Obama and his wife both lack intelligence and the capacity for basic written expression. It is clear that both of Obama's books were ghost-written.

 

[pspr]

Quote from piezoe:

Mr. Obama, as a matter of fact, is an exceptionally skilled communicator....

Only when he has a teleprompter to read from. His ad lib speeches are worse than Biden's.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from piezoe:

ISorry to note Cashill is no English scholar himself. It is perfectly correct, in the context of Obama's letter at least, to write" "... merits ... has..."..

Cashill was actually referring to standard English, not ebonics. You are perfectly correct though, subject-verb agreement is not required in ebonics. You can listen to any NBA player to confirm that.

The unspoken irony is that the vast bulk of the drudge work done in Law Reviews consists of laborious proofreading and editing of scholarly legal writing for such errors. Obama, the presumed headof the Review, couldn't write a simple sentence. How could he possibly edit scholarly writing prodice by highy accomplished legal professors?

 

[Spike Trader]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

prodice . . . . highy

I googled these two words...... couldn't find anything..

 

[Brass]

Quote from piezoe:

...To engage in the sort of thing that is the subject of this thread speaks more to the asinine nature of some ET members than it says anything of substance about the Obamas'.

You need to recognize that these guys are lost. They know that Obama will win. And they know that Hillary Clinton may be what's in store for them in 2016. And so, they're running on fumes and false bravado. They don't even know where John Galt went, after he was last seen gargling in a public restroom at the Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Cashill was actually referring to standard English, not ebonics. You are perfectly correct though, subject-verb agreement is not required in ebonics. You can listen to any NBA player to confirm that....

+ 2

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from Spiker:

I googled these two words...... couldn't find anything..

produce highly.

WTF does that have to do with anything? Do you think there is a slight difference between an internet post knocked off during market hours and a letter to the Harvard community from the President of the Law Review?

The reason people pay so much attention to this is we have been bombarded with media propaganda that Obama (and his wife) are these highly accomplished, Harvard-educated intellectuals who are just so superior to anyone we've ever had before. And in fact, there are facts to support it: their Harvard Law degrees, Obama's claimed magna cum laude degree from HLS, his presidency of the Law Review, his books.

But then we can't ignore the other side. Obama was supposed to be some sort of professor in Constitutional Law ( a very plum and prestigious assignment at any law school) at the University of Chicago, one of the country's leading law schools. Yet he apparently never produced a page of scholarly legal writing, normally a prerequisite for such a post. In fact, at such a school, a student would have every expectation that his Con Law professor would be the author of a definitive casebook on the subject or at least be the author of leading edge law review articles. Yet Obama produced zip.

So we scrutinize one of the very rare examples of writing that he clearly produced himself, and we find it sadly lacking and certainly not what we would expect from a magna grad and president of the Review.

Why is it even relevant now? First, if Ayers actually ghosted his books, Obama lied blatantly when he minimized their relationship. What else did Ayers do for him? Maybe wire an admission to Harvard through his many radical connections the same way he, an admitted terrorist, got both himself and his terrorist wife prestigious professorships at the University of illinois and Northwestern, respectively?

Seccond, we are seeing the initial wave of a shitstorm aimed at Romney's life and work. Don't we have a right to finally get to the truth about Obama as well? Or is maintaining the media double standard for liberal minorities more important?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

produce highly.

WTF does that have to do with anything? Do you think there is a slight difference between an internet post knocked off during market hours and a letter to the Harvard community from the President of the Law Review?

The reason people pay so much attention to this is we have been bombarded with media propaganda that Obama (and his wife) are these highly accomplished, Harvard-educated intellectuals who are just so superior to anyone we've ever had before. And in fact, there are facts to support it: their Harvard Law degrees, Obama's claimed magna cum laude degree from HLS, his presidency of the Law Review, his books.

But then we can't ignore the other side. Obama was supposed to be some sort of professor in Constitutional Law ( a very plum and prestigious assignment at any law school) at the University of Chicago, one of the country's leading law schools. Yet he apparently never produced a page of scholarly legal writing, normally a prerequisite for such a post. In fact, at such a school, a student would have every expectation that his Con Law professor would be the author of a definitive casebook on the subject or at least be the author of leading edge law review articles. Yet Obama produced zip.

So we scrutinize one of the very rare examples of writing that he clearly produced himself, and we find it sadly lacking and certainly not what we would expect from a magna grad and president of the Review.

Why is it even relevant now? First, if Ayers actually ghosted his books, Obama lied blatantly when he minimized their relationship. What else did Ayers do for him? Maybe wire an admission to Harvard through his many radical connections the same way he, an admitted terrorist, got both himself and his terrorist wife prestigious professorships at the University of illinois and Northwestern, respectively?

Seccond, we are seeing the initial wave of a shitstorm aimed at Romney's life and work. Don't we have a right to finally get to the truth about Obama as well? Or is maintaining the media double standard for liberal minorities more important?

Well done!