Do we really need every thread that mentions the keyword 'President' to contain this kind of partisan rubbish? I don't see you calling for Reagan's, Bush's or Romney's applications.
People have many interests. Interest is not a binary term - One can be interested in varying degrees.
Perhaps he is interested in all presidents' admission records, but more interested in the current president because it is more relevant to his life than others. Just because there is relevance, does NOT imply partisanship.
By analogy I find operating system internals interesting. I am interested in how many of them do things. However I find discussions about Windows more interesting than those about multics. Not because I am a fan of windows (I am not) nor because I hate windows (I don't, it is a decent OS these days, I just prefer others), but because it is relevant to my life as a person living in the era where it is actually being used.
Note, this won't stop me from reading an interesting new article about the multics way, just that when offered a source with new (to me) insights on windows or multics, I would choose windows.
Somehow it is changed to a demand for documents from the current President in the middle of an election season.
If you are interested in all admission records, there is no reason to single out Obama... say you think all Presidents should have their admission records released.
This is more like 'look at this interesting snippet of code from CP/M' resulting in yelling about binary blobs in some modern OS. Totally irrelevant and political.
And your analogy is wrong too: It is like saying here is code from CP/M, and someone saying "how do modern OSes handle that feature?". That question is not advocacy for new OSes, it is a question of comparison between eras.
You are trying to ascribe motive and sinister desires to a neutral statement.
I am not a fan of all the political hogwash about Obama not being American etc. I have plenty of gripes with just about every president on their politics alone and he is certainly no different, so for me if I am going to complain it will not be about where he is from or speculation about his birthplace but about his Senate voting record or the fact that his healthcare bill has little to do with Healthcare for the majority of the 2,600+ pages.
But honestly there is no reason to get upset that people are asking. The entire time Bush was in office people were speculating he was a C student and wanting his transcripts, they talked about how he only got in because of being a Legacy etc.
The only real difference was that apparently it was ok to pick on Bush, just do not do it to Obama since that somehow is not fair?
When you take the highest office in the land you open yourself up to scrutiny if you or your supporters cannot handle that then simply do not run.
President Obama was one of the MOST critical people of Geroge W Bush as a sitting president, he of all people should understand people reserve the right to be critical of him as well.
They're available, as were Gore's and Kerry's (both worse that W's) and McCain's. Bill Clinton's don't seem to be, but Hillary's are.
I think that Romney's are as well.