Ayers may be doing some sort of riff on this. Recall, however, that Ayers and Obama were contemporaries in the NYC orbit of Columbia and the Bank Street School when Obama was completing his BA and Ayers was getting his MA and then on to further degrees and teaching at Columbia. It strikes me as entirely reasonable that a lefty terrorist rock star like Weatherman Ayers and a committed Marxist like Obama would not have crossed paths.

My personal hunch is that Ayers, possibly with help of Cloward or Piven or Edward Said, decided to groom the “clean, well-spoken” black man to be a Movement front man. While both claim no prior association prior to the Annenberg challenge, when Ayers picks Obama to dole out the cash, I suspect their ties go back further. I don’t find it hard to believe that Ayers shaped “Dreams” from Obama’s notes and his own predilictions. Once it hit, it became important to maintain the fiction of Obama authorship as that was his only known accomplishment.

I’d like to see “Dreams” run through the same process that identified the author of “Primary Colors”, but I understand the owner of that software will not allow it.

Ayers, BTW, does have some conflicts with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. He preferred one of his proteges for the post.

We already know that the publisher’s representatives did think that Barack Obama’s editorship of the Harvard Law Review was a very big deal. This is established fact—and not mere opinion. Once again, they pursued Obama and gave him an advance reportedly of at least $80,000. Giving a ghostwriter perhaps $20-30,000 extra for roughly four to six weeks work is well within reason. The irony is that you are accusing me of conspiracy thinking when actually it is somewhat the norm within the publishing industry. This is done all the time. I am not advancing a far fetch theory, but offering the most logical scenario. The odds, statistically speaking, are that I am right. You are the one embracing a theory that is highly untenable.

As for you CW, I think you’re right. Your “evidence” is mostly intuitive, and implicit rather than explicit. And I’ve told you repeatedly that I’m a conservative: I just think attaching ourselves to silly conspiracy theories that have no meaning is counterproductive. Oh, and by the way, you’re wrong…there’s no way that it can be *proven* that Obama wrote his own book. As a result, either you’ll be proven right, or you won’t…but if the latter occurs, you’ll be able to say it hasn’t happened *yet*. And the “conservative echo chamber” was a reference to things we conservatives get accused of…doesn’t mean you can’t be guilty of it, while I’m still a conservative. The two things aren’t mutually exclusive.

I’ve given my reasons in detail. That you can’t comprehend them just shows who is the one here who is impervious to logic.

I’ve given several examples of what would provide evidence (not proof, evidence–there is a difference) that Obama has the appropriate skills to write Dreams, and you’ve ignored each and every one. If and when you are able to provide the evidence I requested (and those posts are still above, you can go back and re-read them), then we can continue the discussion like reasonable adults.

As for my blog, I’ve put the URL in the appropriate field every time I have commented here. If you’re just now noticing it, well, that sort of proves that you’re really not that observant, doesn’t it?

And your comment about “conservative echo chambers” just confirms that you’re a dyed-in-the-wool Obamacrat.

All of the above evidence indicates to me that you’re not a reasonable debater, therefore, I’m going to cease wasting my time and bandwidth attempting to prove to you that 2+2=4. Someday the truth will come out and one of us will have egg on his face… look me up (if you can) and we’ll discuss it then.

And now, as I suggested above, you can go back to Daily KOS and claim you “won” the argument.

But Obama was someone of consequence! He was the first Afro-American Harvard Law Review editor. This alone made him a good bet for a publisher. And there is something else we know: Obama was aggressively pursued and offered a lot of money. This is solidly established.

“First, if a ghostwriter were hired to “rewrite” a book, that technically wouldn’t be called ghostwriting. It would be “punching up” the book or editing it.”

Nonsense. It is called co-authorship! We are no longer discussing a mere editing process. This is especially true when the main author is being credited with the ability to write great prose. If we go along with your line of thinking—then John F. Kennedy was the author of Profiles in Courage and not Ted Sorenson.

One last thing: assume, for a minute, that my assertion is correct. Obama wrote his own book, and didn’t have a ghostwriter, and hadn’t written anything significant prior to it. How would he prove it? It’s very difficult to prove a negative assertion (that he didn’t have a ghostwriter). This is the functional equivalent, or close, of Rush Limbaugh recently being asked to prove he didn’t praise L.H.Oswald or say slavery built the south. Without an assertion of who the ghostwriter was, and when this occurred, it’s impossible to deny the allegation.

David Thomsen: I’ve never written a book. Perhaps you have, I don’t know. However I have been around the writing profession for a while, and paid some attention to it. First, if a ghostwriter were hired to “rewrite” a book, that technically wouldn’t be called ghostwriting. It would be “punching up” the book or editing it. Ghostwriters do the actual writing of the book, typically after interviewing the person who’s “writing” the memoir. Often they use tapes and various other methods to transcribe the subject’s thoughts, then compose them on paper or in a computer. Second, if you think publishers spend that kind of money on ghostwriting when they have no idea how well a book will do, well then maybe you’re right. I seriously doubt it though. Even back then, publishers were on the ropes economically, and teetering on the edge. I keep saying that at the time Obama wasn’t anyone of any consequence…why would they bother?

Oh, and I see you, CW, invited Thomsen to join you. I guess you do run one of those conservative echo chambers the left is always complaining about. Only have people who agree with you write for you? Hmmmm….

More spin, no evidence.

Both Mr. Thomson and I have given valid reasons for our skepticism, yet you’ve provided absolutely no proof for your stand. As for name on the cover, whose name do you think goes on every single ghostwritten book? It sure ain’t the ghostwriter, except in the rare (perhaps unheard of) case where the ghostwriter becomes publicly known and everyone agrees to put his/her name on the cover.

Give it up. You’re convincing no one here.

Mr. Thomsen: I like your style. If you’d like to write for a small blog, follow the link in my username and use the contact form to drop me a line.

I am indeed saying exactly that. Employing Occam’s Razor would definitely lead one to this conclusion. The odds are on my side of the argument. You are representing a position that is statistically unlikely. We rarely, if ever, find examples of someone writing a book of such quality—who also does not have numerous examples of other works of differing lengths.

A ghostwriter would almost certainly sign a confidentiality agreement. This individual could probably rewrite the entire book in roughly four weeks. Their fee might be in the range of $20,000—which is a good hunk of money in my little corner of the world. It is a reasonable added expense for a project already committed to minimally an $80,000 investment.