Skip to comments.Did Maraniss Commit Fraud to Protect Obama?
Posted on 06/23/2012 6:18:03 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
I was sitting out at lunch the other day reading David Maraniss's new book, Barack Obama: The Story, when I came across a passage that gave me pause. Maraniss excerpted the passage from an article, "Breaking the War Mentality," that Obama had written in 1983 for a Columbia University publication called the Sundial. What caught my attention was that the passage in question read better than I remembered.
I returned to my office after lunch, checked a digitized copy of the article, and then double-checked a PDF of the original print edition. I was right. The passage had been edited to fix one of Obama's signature errors, his chronic failure to get nouns and verbs to agree.
Here is how the offending sentence appears in the Maraniss book: "But the states of war -- the sounds and chill, the dead bodies -- are remote and far removed." (Italics mine.)
Here is how the sentence appears in the original text: "But the taste of war -- the sounds and chill, the dead bodies -- are remote and far removed." The sentence, of course, should read, "the taste ... is." This is one of an appalling five sentences in Obama's 1,800-word essay in which the noun and verb do not agree.
Let me explain why this matters. Obama wrote this article in the same school year he sent long-distance girlfriend Alex McNear a series of quasi-love letters, one of which was prominently excerpted in a Maraniss piece in the May issue of Vanity Fair.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Isn’t the xubject the whole list? (Taste, chill, dead bodies.)
I’s a lousy sentence, but I tig the subjjeand predcate agree.
The guy isn't an intellectual or literary genius. The truth about the empty-suit, fraud in the WH is gradually 'drip-dripping' out.
If there be fraud on the part of Maraniss, it is relatively insignificant compared to the fraud perpetuated by Barack Hussein Obama himself.
While there is a duty of any biographer, if he is to be taken seriously, to document to the extent possible any statements attributed to the subject, occasional lapses are to be expected, if not always accepted. In an imperfect world, we are not always afforded the opportunity to double-check every fact, but neither are we bound to accept the conclusions and determinations of others. Therein lies paranoia and conspiracy theories, as there are always multiple conjectures or alternate explanations in absence of evidence to the contrary.
The incompetent one is not that bright. A 49 year old who pronounces the word corpsman as corpse man isn’t very sharp.
Makes you wonder if he even knows what a corpsman does.
He knows, and his pronunciation is merely an expression of his disdain for the military. It's what he wishes him to be.
Obama is a deeply narcissistic personality. He reacts badly to lack of admiration.
As the election season progresses, look for him to get increasingly brittle and dangerous. If he ever gets widely booed in a public venue, look for him to have a very public psychotic break.
how about when the commie wrote “your” instead of “you’re” in a letter to some supporter. It was posted here before but I cant find it.
No, the subject is "taste." The words between the hyphens are amplifying that subject.
Two years earlier, McNear, then the editor of the Occidental literary magazine, had rejected a piece of short fiction he had submitted. In the Maraniss book, this is one of the few times the reader sees Obama truly angry. "The rejection infuriated Obama," he writes. The would-be writer reportedly told the managing editor, "You just don't get it. You're stupid."
Thank you, smokeyblue.
I wonder if the photo of Genevieve Cook and Obama with his giant photoshopped head is published in Maraniss’s book?
You are 100% keeeeerect.
Maraniss may not have had an original copy of the essay.
He might have had an edited version and only thought he had Obama’s actual words.
Although he should have paid more attention to the details in his research, such as the proving for himself that the phrase had been written that way by Obama.
If he actually gave credit to Obama for the choice of words then he was careless in his sourcing, and should have taken the time to be more familiar with his subject matter.
It seems he may have quoting examples of the early writing of Obama without concerning himself with the meaning or reason for their existance.
Whether or not he did the editing is uncertain.
After all who would think that a Harvard Law School graduate might have be limited in his ability to write proper English during his early college years?
If this is the case in the Maraniss book, how common is that occurance?
I don't know. Probably it didn't fit.
Every miniscule blot of anything and everything surrounding this Obama...person is fraudulant and smells like festering excrement in and on rotting flesh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.