Comments on: Updated info: California’s presidential ‘bundlers’

By: Truthclubber

Truthclubber — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 04:46:45 +0000

16 of the 20 comments (80%!) posted in this single thread were by the “bromance” of JohnW and Elwood — and don’t anyone dare to challenge their supremacy of ownership on “all things known” on “all topics possible” — lest their very fragile (and constantly “in need of feed”) egos get crushed.

It will only cause them to stay up even later than 12:30 am (@15 as reference) to try to reassert themselves and try to make themselves psychologically “whole”.

By: Elwood

Elwood — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 23:19:52 +0000

Good luck with that, John.

Nice attempt at spin.

By: JohnW

JohnW — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 23:12:30 +0000

Okay, college records it is.

Request denied.

Like tax returns, the privacy of college records is protected by law. Releasing them without the expressed consent of the former student is unlawful. Obama’s school records have not been “sealed.” He simply has not authorized their release. Why should he? Donald Trump would just say they were forgeries.

There is an established tradition of and rationale for presidents and presidential candidates releasing their tax returns and other financial information. There is no such established tradition or rationale for school records.

Yes, Bush’s college grades found their way into a national magazine, but not with his consent. Somebody should have gone to jail.

The current noise about college records (and even grade school records) was literally “Trumped up.”

Somebody has offered a $10,000 reward for anybody who can cough up Obama’s college records. That person should be prosecuted for attempted bribery and conspiracy to violate the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974.

By: Elwood

Elwood — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 22:09:05 +0000

John see #10

You don’t understand “college records” and some of the following comments?

You seemed to understand all right in your post #12.

By: JohnW

JohnW — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 20:31:29 +0000

Actually, I’m serious. Which records are you talking about? College records, or what?

By: Elwood

Elwood — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 19:42:17 +0000

Cute, John.

You know what I mean.

Why are you being disingenuous?

By: JohnW

JohnW — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 07:30:19 +0000

When you say “records,” perhaps you could be a bit more specific. Are you speaking of his Beatles collection? If so, I agree. He should definitely release them.

By: Publius

Publius — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 04:04:51 +0000

Re:#13

I am sure John W would agree that there is only one reason that could explain why Obama’s records are sealed.

GEORGE BUSH!!!!!! George has them in a safe somewhere in the Lone Star State.

Everything is Bush’s fault.

By: Elwood

Elwood — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 03:25:36 +0000

@ #12 John W.

Thank you for the paean to the brilliance of Obama, John.

Now would you please explain why his records are sealed?

By: JohnW

JohnW — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 02:02:58 +0000

Obama’s college records must be a real train wreck. How else to explain his selection first as a member of the Harvard Law Review and then his election as the Review’s president ? Among those classmates and fellow Review members supporting his election was Brad Berenson, who worked in the G.W. Bush White House and who is now a member of Romney’s justice advisory committee, and who to this day praises Obama’s work in that position.

Or how else to explain his appointment to the faculty as Senior Lecturer at the conservative-leaning top rated University of Chicago law school and his subsequent invitation to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position — which he declined due to his other ambitions?

Must have been affirmative action on steroids, right? I mean, how else would a black man get those positions?