Those of us who try to put the pieces together of who and what Barack Obama is, have found it profoundly odd that the once-president of the Harvard Law Review wrote nothing under his own name during that the time. An article out today analyzes the one known letter the student Obama wrote, and contends that Michelle Obama also had no skill with the written word. See a video below.
The letter written by Barack Obama in November 1990:
I would therefore agree with the suggestion that in the future, our concern in this area ia [sic] most appropriately directed at any employer who would even insinuate that someone with Mr. Chen’s extraordinary record of academic success might be somehow unqualified for work in a corporate law firm, or that such success might be somehow undeserved. Such attributes speak less to the merits or problems of affirmative action policies, and more to the tragically deep-rooted ignorance and bias that exists in the legal community and our society at large.
President, Harvard Law Review
Published November 16, 1990 [Source: Harvard Law Record]
Jack Cashill writing at American Thinker (read it all here):
The response is classic Obama: patronizing, dishonest, syntactically muddled, and grammatically challenged. In the very first sentence Obama leads with his signature failing, one on full display in his earlier published work: his inability to make subject and predicate agree.
“Since the merits of the Law Review’s selection policy has been the subject of commentary for the last three issues,” wrote Obama, “I’d like to take the time to clarify exactly how our selection process works.” [snip]
Although the letter is less than a thousand words long, Obama repeats the subject-predicate error at least two more times. In one sentence, he seemingly cannot make up his mind as to which verb option is correct so he tries both: “Approximately half of this first batch is chosen … the other half are selected … ”
Another distinctive Obama flaw is to allow a string of words to float in space. Please note the unanchored phrase in italics at the end of this sentence:
“No editors on the Review will ever know whether any given editor was selected on the basis of grades, writing competition, or affirmative action, and no editors who were selected with affirmative action in mind.” Huh?
Cashill says Obama was given a book contract during that time by Simon and Schuster. Nothing resembling a manuscript was produced and they pulled the contract after three years:
And promptly, without further ado, the awkward, passive, ungrammatical Obama, a man who had not written one inspired sentence in his whole life, published what Time Magazine called “the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician.”
I think this is the first time in his life that there’s not a professor around to turn his C into an A or to write the law review article for him he can’t write. He’s totally exposed and there’s nobody to make it better. I think he’s been covered for all his life. The fact that his agenda failed this year is the best thing that could have happened to this country.
The Liberal law community cried out for Obama to sue Rush for libel.
Click the American Thinker link above for commentary on Michelle’s writing skills.
Rush Limbaugh on Obama as Harvard Law Review President (video)
Posted by Maggie @ Maggie’s Notebook