I’ve been speculating a bit about just what lies behind Andrew Schlafly’s animosity towards President Obama. Seeing as it goes way beyond simple party politics, I can only surmise it has to do with their time together on the Harvard Law Review and more specifically around the time that Obama became HLR President.
I’m pretty convinced that Andy ran for HLR president against Obama and it all stems from his resentment at being beaten by an “affirmative action appointment”. I’ve been in touch with both the Boston Globe and the HLR, trying to get some clarity on who the 18 other candiates were, and although the replies were promising, nothing definite has come to light. However, you need to remember that there were 19 candidates out of something like 60 editors, so that already gives Andy a 1-in-3 chance of running. Add to that his own sense of self-importance (remember this is a man who has already run for Congress and then created his own personal fiefdom and echo-chamber at Conservapedia) and the chances are pretty good that he was in the running.
You need to remember that back then, the HLR was split between the percieved liberals and conservatives, with Obama acting as moderator between the two factions – something that given Andy’s abrasive personality, he would be unable to do.
However, I was still missing that little spark, or shred of evidence that would link Andy to the election. Until I came across a biography of Obama, called “Yes We Can” by Garen Thomas. There on page 131, he discusses the HLR election and makes an interesting comment. “The conservatives, realising their canditades had no chance of winning the election, instructed their members to vote for Obama, in opposition to David Goldberg.”
Suddenly, a lot of things start to make sense. Andy is basically told by his own caucus that he hasn’t got a snowball’s chance in hell of winning, who then go on to withdraw their support in favour of the jumped up little charity case. That must have really hurt, especially when Andy sits down to review his life and realises that whilst Obama is US President and (somewhat bizarrely) a Nobel Prize Winner, Andy is teaching kids in a church basement and is still (at the ripe old age of 48) being referred to as “the son of Phyllis Schlafly.” No wonder he’s a jealous little boy.
We couldn't make this up... 
I’ve found this information browsing through many articles on the web.
There were 80 (19 candidates, 61 editors) people in total – which gives Schlafly a one in four chance to be one of the candidates.
However, we may never know who the other candidates are, besides David Goldberg. An article by Obama himself (http://www.hlrecord.org/2.4475/record-retrospective-obama-on-affirmative-action-1.577511) reads:
[i]”The Selection Committee first identifies the group of candidates… …Once final selections are made, all writing competition material is destroyed.”[/i]
If this is true and says what I think it says, then maybe the only way of finding out is asking Andy himself.
Thanks for the info Norse! I had a feeling the actual election info wouldn’t be available after all this time, despite what the Globe guys said. Sadly, you and I both know what the chances are of Andy actually answering that question are.
Chances of Andy answering that question – negative 8.
Good job Psy. Whenever we wonder how long Andy will keep up Conservapedia we have to remember that he was probably this stubborn his whole life and as such will keep it up as long as physically possible.
Conservapedia is the only place where Andy can voice his batshit insane opinions without being shouted down / laughed at… thanks to his special brand of conservative censorship. He’ll keep it going for as long as possible – remember even conservatives who challenge him are only liberals in disguise. I think it’ll take mummy to say something before he does stop.