That's your defense of your accusation that Obama became president of the Harvard Law Review because of affirmative action?

Can you substantiate your claim that the Harvard Law Review president used to be the person with the highest GPA, and that was changed to allow for more minority involvement?

All I can find is that the editors have been electing the president since 1902.

According to their own website:

"The next, and more or less final, stage in the organization of the Review was the incorporation of the Harvard Law Review Association in 1902. Under the charter of this corporation, there are two officers, the President and the Treasurer; the President is elected by the members of the Editorial Board, and the President appoints the Treasurer. ...This organization has now continued for eighty-five years; it seems to have stood the test of time."

Do you have evidence to back up what you are saying?

"He got the Harvard law review gig through affirmitive action..."

Steve? Can you substantiate that?

Steve's not responding here, so I'll move along the conversation:

quote:

Originally posted by faux-Westside Steve:
So Obama never got a gig through affirmative action

How did he get into lefty Harvard law?

and that makes him "qualified"

That's it

WSS

How was that?

That's not bad.

Alo, I want to see if you know the answer to this joke/question:

How do you get to Harvard Business from Harvard Law?

Nope.

Across the bridge and 10,000 miles to the right.

(Works in reverse, too.)

"The law review president's election is a fussy affair, part intellectual debate, part frat house ritual. Obama was one of 19 candidates. As the 61 editors not running for the job debated the merits of the candidates behind closed doors on a Sunday morning in late February, the hopefuls cooked them breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Every few hours, the editors winnowed the list further, until just after midnight, when only Obama and a 24-year-old Harvard graduate named David Goldberg remained contenders.

At about 12:30 a.m., the editors called Obama into the room, told him he had won, and broke into applause."

I've been looking on and off all day. Talked to a friend who was an editor at the Review. Can't seem to figure out where Steve is getting this.

Lawrence Tribe said Obama was "the best student I ever had" at Harvard Law. He also graduated magna cum laude, and I'm told it's designed so almost nobody graduated summa - sometimes one in a entire class achieved that honor, other times none at all.

Otherwise known as an "empty suit."

Okay, the best student a Harvard Law professor ever had, the editor of the Harvard Review, and magna cum laude.

Let's quit calling him "smart." He's obviously brilliant.

Obama helped Tribe write The Curvature of Constitutional Space: What Lawyers Can Learn from Modern Physics.

The guy's clearly a moron.

And I guess he also taught law at U-Chicago.

Okay, okay. Maybe I was wrong about the whole empty suit thing. But you have to agree that his wife is a racist, anti-American bitch ho.

Every time I see Michelle Obama, she reminds me of our neighbors in Kansas City, a white male doctor and a black female doctor. Met in med school... at Northwestern.

Yeah, she seemed like a hardcore militant who uses words like "whitey," too. I got the sense that she was as unfamiliar and distrustful of Caucasians as M.C. Michelle.

I guess one black person seems pretty much like the rest to some whiteys.

Still waiting Steve...

Saw Obama's Fathers Day speech at an all black school of some type. He was "talking gheto" and shit.

How do you mean?

I was reading some of the posts on this thread and I had a question. What specifically defines an "empty suit"?

Steve, you claimed unequivocally that "He got the Harvard law review gig through affirmitive action..."

I see no evidence of that. You certainly haven't provided anyway.

Now your "evidence" is that there was "a firestorm over racial preference at Harvard around that time. So he probably got a boost from color." That's not evidence. That's not support. That's a poorly-reasoned theory, similar to "Steve was at the bar where the fight took place, so he was probably the guy who punched the girl."

You're obviously backtracking, and still have yet to provide an ounce of evidence to back your first claim, or even this one.

Then you're asking me to prove it isn't true?? Are you trying to play right into Dennis' parody of you? When is the self-awareness going to kick in?

And where is your evidence to back up the idea that "He got the Harvard law review gig through affirmitive action"?

Either provide some, or retract it.