Filling in the blanks: Obama the closet Muslim?
A Pew Research poll finds that a growing number of Americans think Obama is a closet Muslim. The figure is now 18%, up from 11% in March of 2009, while the number who believe he’s a Christian has dropped from 48% to the present 34%, and 43% say they don’t know what religion he practices. What’s more, these numbers reflect a poll taken before his remarks on the 9/11 mosque controversy; my guess is that the trend has only increased since then.
And what do I think? I’m with that 43% who don’t know. I would add that I not only don’t know what religion he practices, I don’t know if he practices one—and if he does, I don’t know whether it is for show or because he believes in the tenets of that religion.
And I believe that the whole controversy is a subset of the question: who is Obama, what is he? Is he a socialist or a capitalist? Is he even an American at all, as birthers ask?
One might just as well say he’s a space alien and leave it at that. There is no other president about whom we’ve asked similar questions, because in some essential way we’ve known who they are/were. We didn’t and still don’t really know Obama, although we’re getting there, we’re getting there.
The relevance of the speculation about Obama’s true religious beliefs is that it is a subset of the speculation on his inner core and how that is expressed in his behavior as president. What are his true wishes for, and allegiance to, this country? His actions make a great many people doubt that he has the usual conventional dedication to its history and its best interests at heart, a speculation that—despite all the arguments about the wisdom of previous presidents, and disagreements with their policies—has not been seriously leveled at his predecessors.
It is leveled at Obama, however. And it’s sticking and growing because of a combination of three things about him that are unique in presidential history:
(1) His previous track record in public life was relatively short.
(2) He has kept many of the other salient facts of his life hidden, and the press has allowed him to do so.
(3) He campaigned as one thing and has governed as another—and this is not true just of a detail or two, but of his basic political stance, including how liberal or middle-of-the-road he is.
Before Obama was president, the gaps only meant something to those who sensed something wrong or who disagreed with his political persuasion. Now that he has a track record and has behaved in a way that seems to ignore both the wishes of the American public and the country’s best interests, more people have learned to distrust him; he has earned it. And now some of the unique facts of his history, (ignored by many people during the campaign) take on added significance—his childhood years in Indonesia, for example—and they lend themselves to the Muslim theory.
Nature abhors a vacuum, and blank screens were made to be filled in. Before Obama was president, he benefited from that blankness because most people were inclined to fill in his blanks with positive characteristics: smart, calm, competent. Now that his track record is so abysmal, and so at odds with his campaign persona, they are more inclined to fill in the screen with attributes that explain why he has not done right by this country.
There are Muslims who do serve this country well—for example, in the armed forces. But many of our conflicts around the globe are with Muslim countries, and of course our jihadist terrorist enemies are Muslims whose allegiance to, and interpretation of, that religion is one of the main things that drives them. The idea that Obama is a Muslim is not what explains his poor behavior as president, it is his poor behavior as president that explains the idea that Obama owes his true allegiance to someone or something else—whether it be Islam, or socialism, or communism, or internationalism, or statism, or all of the above, or any other ism that seems to fit a growing fact situation that puzzles so many Americans.
[ADDENDUM: The Anchoress has some sobering musings on what the 9/11 mosque controversy says about America.]
[ADDENDUM II: Ace reports on a tape that purports to show the 9/11 mosque Iman being not so moderate.]
It was said that this past Christmas, there wouldn’t have been any celebration at the White House if it hadn’t been for the former White House social secretaries.
Obama is an agnostic. It’s what his mother taught him.
That whole Trinity Church thing was merely to get a sense of the “Black Experience” and gain some “street cred” .. nothing more.
Bush went to church periodically. So did Clinton, carrying his Bible.
Is there any record of President Obama going to church, temple or any kind of place of worship that wasn’t an “official function” or “campaign event” ?
Obama is a chameleon with sympathies that no doubt reflect his childhood experiences. He laid it all out in “Dreams of My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope”. Apples do not fall far from the tree and pigs do not fly.
neoneocon,
You wrote “. . .the idea that Obama owes his true allegiance to someone or something else.. . .”
Obama grew up surrounded especially by Muslims and political/social liberals (what an paradoxical combination). Perhaps he has affinities for those groups, but no true allegience to anyone or anything else not even his own family. If so, that wold explain why it’s easy for him to throw anyone, including his grandmother under the bus; they are just circumstances of his past that have outlived their usefulness.
Obama doesn’t operate in a vacuum.
You have to take his retinue into account.
He be gone someday. His retinue will remain among us.
Much unpleasant work to be done.
Neo, another superbly articulated statement. I suspect much of Obama’s remaining popularity comes in part from the difficulty many have in realizing that for the first time a marginal personality was elected president.
Psychobabble aside I wonder what it will take for the remaining 45% to realize that O is a real nut? Gosh, it took me a year to cross from the fool to the knave category.
He claims Christianity for the “Drop the radical pose to achieve the radical ends” theory. A technique taken straight out of the playbook of sociopaths like Ted Bundy.
I suspect that Obama feels a certain affinity for Allah: He is all powerful; he doesn’t necessarily follow laws of nature; he demands that everyone submit. But I don’t think Obama has it in him himself to submit, much less be coherent.
You are right that Wright is not a Christian and what he teaches is not Christianity. I’s Black Liberation Theology which is Marxism for Black Grievance Hucksters. So O’s only traditional religious exposure was to Islam. I don’t think he is a religious person, but I think he has a sentimental attachment to Islam the way many Americans have a sentimental attachment to Christianity at Christmastime.
OK, this is going to be artfldgr-style long, but you’ve really opened a can of worms here neo.
If Clinton was a regular attendee at any place of worship, I’ve not heard of it. Not saying he wasn’t, just saying I’ve never heard about it before.
However, you didn’t have to know Clinton’s religious beliefs (if any) to get an idea of where he was trying to take the country.
His political inclinations and past history – both personal and public – were not huge secrets and were matters of public record.
He was understandable, fathomable – even if you didn’t agree with him.
In spite of his shortcomings, I also tend to think he would not actually allow this country to be destroyed.
For instance, even though he took money from China as political contributions (highly illegal I believe, though never pursued or prosecuted), he still sent in an aircraft carrier battle group to confront China when it rattled it’s saber over Taiwan.
Obummer, on the other hand, has been quite the blank sheet of paper for a while now.
During the elections, people filled in that blank sheet of paper with what they wanted him to be.
Never mind that on the campaign trail there were numerous hints that all was not going to be well with this cipher as president – people believe what they choose to believe.
He didn’t even get the number of states right!
But who cared, he wasn’t the evil Bush!?!
Now, we are in the position of having one entire branch of the government being led by someone of whom the vast majority of his life – and most especially the most formative portions and influences of his life – are questions that have been left blank.
It appears a lot of effort has gone into keeping it that way – which does nothing but raise further concerns from a people becoming more and more skeptical of the man.
The lamestream media certainly haven’t been the sleuth reporters they like to think of themselves as on this particular topic.
Any inquiry, even the mildest, into his early life are subject to shrill accusations of “birther”!
Unfortunately for the question posed, that’s the very stage of life we are interested in regarding the question of his religious views.
With Clinton, we learned of his father and how that influenced him the rest of his life. We found out how much influence his mother had on him and why.
We learned far more about his personal *affairs* than I am sure most of us would ever want to know.
With Obambi, we’re not even sure where the hell he went to school during his childhood!
The people are left in limbo trying to figure out which way he will go on any given decision, and a lot of that uncertainty is due to the very blankness of his personal history.
Is his name Barry Soetoro – as he was known earlier in life, or is it Barack Obama?
When did he change his name? Where are the records?
If his name was actually Barack Obama, why call himself something else earlier in life?
Was he born in Kenya – as claimed by his grandmother and other relatives, or was he born in Hawaii? If he was born in Hawaii, why not release his full birth documentation and put the matter to rest?
Was he a “constitutional scholar” while in academia, or simply a guest lecturer punching his ticket on the way up the political ladder?
Where are the college records of his achievements?
Where are the childhood friends he had growing up?
Where are the family relations he had closest to him growing up?
Where are the former girlfriends?
If he was in the Indonesian school, as some have suggested, he would have had to be considered a citizen of that nation – and would have been a practicing moslem – because that’s what they required apparently.
Was he actually a student at that school? If so, was he simply going through the motions to fit in until his mother took him elsewhere? What kind of influence did it have on him, if indeed he attended there?
Is this the real story?
We all have cousins and siblings and such that know us growing up, that were we to attain high public office would be trotted out and interviewed at some point for their recollections of our childhood, and questioned about what influenced us most growing up.
Remember Billy Carter?
No such similar figure exists from Obama’s past.
Because we have such a void, and because this kind of knowledge is so important to understanding a person’s inclinations, we are left to speculate on what is hidden in his past by judging his actions in the present.
We really have nothing else to go on.
So, whether it’s ignorance or by design on his part, we question it when Obonga bows to muslim leaders or comes out publicly on the side of imams attempting to build a monument to their religious views within sight of where the Twin Towers stood years ago.
Politics hates a void as much as nature does, and the people form opinions based upon the only information they have – which will be based upon what he is doing in the present.
Right now, they’re skeptical.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – as an intellectual exercise try to predict how Obama will conduct himself IF he really is a moslem.
What little I know about black liberation theology is that it is more about preaching black seperatism, even black supremacy, than Christian values. It teaches how blacks have been oppressed and exploited. It strikes me as a perversion of Christianity, if not a cult.
So where does that leave us? Obama’s father was a muslim. His mother was an aetheist/agnostic. His step-father was muslim. His eight half-brothers are/were muslim. While he lived in Indonesia he declared on the school registration form that his faith was muslim. He has been known as Barack Obama and Barry Soetorro, two identifiably muslim names.
My guess is his wife made him convert (in name only) when they got married. I haven’t heard any moving stories where he was divinely inspired to accept Christ as his savior and convert to Christianity. It’s just hard to conclude he’s a practicing Christian with what little we know about him rather than what he says. We all know he’s basically a pathological liar, so I really don’t know why anyone would believe him about this.
Excellent posts, Scottie. And very cogent, considering the length.
My best guess is that Obama doesn’t have a religious bone in his body. That said, if a person’s father and step father were Catholic, if he spent his early childhood in a Catholic country, if he registered for a Catholic school as a Catholic, and if he attended a Catholic school until age 10, most people would say he is a Catholic or used to be a Catholic. Thus, I’m comfortable saying that Obama used to be a Muslim, at a minimum.
Obama is clearly sympathetic towards Islam. Not sympathetic as in “he supports freedom of religion” but sympathetic as in he admires it.
He may or not be a Muslim. He may or may not be a Christian. He shows no signs, in my opinion, of being a Christian, however.
Ultimately, I believe that even if he isn’t a Muslim, it doesn’t really matter. From his actions he might as well be.
And here’s a fundamental problem I have with Islam. They are specifically enjoined by their scriptures to be dishonest and duplicitous in serving the ends of their religion which is nothing short of world conquest by any means possible. Therefore, by definition, you cannot trust any Muslim nor anyone who supports them. This is not to impugn the character of the millions of peaceful Muslims who just want to live their lives and take care of their families…. it’s BUILT IN to the religion!
Therefore, the only reasonable strategy is to assume that he’s not only Muslim but is actively hostile to the United States and its interests. First off, it’s not hard to believe, and second off, if he truly is, then it explains an awful lot about him. And third, if he really isn’t, then he’s even worse because he’s just that bad of a President, which unfortunately, is also believeable.
I consider him a progressive aetheist whose belief is in govt.
@Scott: From what I’ve seen and understand about Black Liberation Theology, it has much more in common with Islam than Christianity, period.
The Muslim question comes from today’s Drudge headline, which is a link to Time magazine. Time blithely says, in effect, that of course Obama is a Christian (citing nothing) and proceeds to vilify the (stupid) Americans who believe he is Muslim, the stupid Americans, like me, who hold the Mormon Church in higher esteem than Islam, the stupid Americans who blah blah blah. Time has nothing nearly as substantive as Scottie’s post above.
It’s enough to make Henry Luce puke from the Great Beyond. And no saint, he.
To become Christian, one must have received a Baptismal sacrament, either involuntarily as an infant (hence the term “Cradle Catholic”) or voluntarily as a consenting adult. Note that among Christian religions, Baptism in one faith tradition is valid in all faith traditions.
To go further, if a Baptist wishes to become Catholic, another Baptism is not required. The sacrament administered in the Baptist faith is accepted as valid in the Catholic faith.
If one is converting from Judaism, a form of Baptism is administered by any Christian faith…same would be true of atheism, Islam, Buddhism, or any other recognized religion. Thus one becomes formally and forever (theologically speaking) Christian.
So if BHO is – or became – a Christian, somewhere there is a certificate stating that (I assume as an adult) he voluntarily converted and received this sacrament.
Just another conveniently disappearing piece of paper…how familiar.
After taking the precautionary anti-emetic, I checked the NYT. It also claims BHO is of course a Christian, and practices his spirituality in secret because going to church would be too disruptive.
I take that to mean he thinks the congregants would be over-fawning.
I love how all you people keep saying “clearly this” and “clearly that” about Obama without even one shred of evidence. You start with your prejudice, ignore all facts that disagree with it, and make up facts to support it. I don’t care if you like Obama or not, or support his policies or not, but when you out-and-out lie, you’re doing the devil’s work.
GIVE ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT HE IS A MUSLIM. JUST ONE. You don’t have any? Interesting. Just because you believe it’s true, doesn’t make it true. That’s what 2 year olds do.
As another example, Ronald Reagan went to church a lot less than Bill Clinton. This is a matter of public record. You’re entitled to your own interpretations of the facts, but you’re not entitled to your own facts. That’s God’s rule, not mine.
When you feel that hatred that makes you turn off your brain and start making things up instead, you’re doing the work of Satan, not the work of God. That’s basically what this whole blog and comment thread is: a glorification of the father of lies. For shame.
Angry Geometer,
You wrote the word ‘clearly’ 100% more than it has appeared in this thread. Before you, it was only written once. Those are weak grounds for a harangue.
AG:
As far as I know, there are no formal records – as in Baptism – see above – to become Islamic/Muslim. Again, as I understand, a public or semi-public pronouncement – for adults – is required. So the analogy for Cradle Catholic fits here (Cradle Muslim?!?).
However, if later converted into Christianity, a piece of paper is somewhere. Even Baptized infants have their piece of paper somewhere.
So where is HBO’s piece of paper? I can accept that he might have been born into Islam, but if he now claims Christianity he should know when and where he received Baptism…without which, he’s formally not a Christian, period, end of statement.
HBO is being very foolish NOT to release paper trails in matter of religion and education. Not doing so merely invites comments: releasing same would shoot down (permanently these so-called rumors).
That degree of foolishness or stupidity does not give one confidence in either his intelligence or integrity.
Not good if you’re President…
Wow, Angry Geometer. just wow! I, by the way, and with the use whatever is useful and discard when necessary camp because it’s all about Barry first, last, and forever.
Great article, neo. There is a video all over the web today and available on youtube-unless it’s been scratched- “Is Obama a Saudi Plant’? I don’t know if he is or not, but it would certainly help partially explain his affinity with Islam and why he is-birther theories aside- a person who Dorothy Rabinowitz of the WSJ calls, “The Alien In The White House” Whatever his religion, or lack therof-although I really doubt he is Christian- he dislikes America.
A.G said: GIVE ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT HE IS A MUSLIM. JUST ONE. You don’t have any? Interesting. Just because you believe it’s true, doesn’t make it true. That’s what 2 year olds do.
-Muslim father and step father.
-Muslim name.
-Registered as Muslim for Muslim school.
-Attended Muslim school.
-spent early childhood in Muslim country.
I count five.
Also, add in his comment about “My Muslim faith” to George Stephanapolous.
Black liberation theology has more in common with islam than anything else. Ever notice how both are easily offended which leads to bullying and threats? Ever notice how percieved wrongs of hundreds of years ago still seethe in both? Ever notice they both have scapegoat groups and but for their existence they wouldn’t lead such pissed off lives? Ever notice they both hate jews?
I always though that he hitched his wagon to Rev. Wright’s star to assist in clawing his way up through Chicago ward politics. More than anything else, the guy is stellar at expediency. Wright seems to have spent his entire “ministry” preaching black liberation theology and little else. Still, it gave Obama an edge among black voters, gave him a place to get married, etc. When the “church” wasn’t needed anymore (or more accurately, became a liability) he cut it loose.
Since arriving in Washington, he and his wife have shown no indication that attending a place of worship is a priority for his family. You’d think that, for a family that purports to be Christian and includes two young children, it would be a priority. It’s clearly not or it would have happened already. And no, praying with the staff on the very occasional trips to Camp David doesn’t count as evidence.
As to whether or not he’s actually Muslim, don’t know and don’t really care. I do find it odd that he has skipped every national prayer breakfast but still finds time to celebrate Ramadan in the White House.I also read (although it’s probably unsubstantiated gossip) that Michelle was mainly interested in visiting historic sites related to Islam in southern Spain. If true, that’s odd also.
My main problem with Obama’s professed Christianity is that it seems to be one more lie aimed at crafting his public persona.
He and his wife are utter lightweights, with absolutely no core character whatsoever.
Mr Frank,
I doubt that Obama’s youthful experience with Islam led to any deep commitment. It was probably very useful in establishing creds with the intellectual set he hung around with, in the same way that hooking up with Wright’s church bought him creds with the black activists. His only core belief is that America is wrong and only he can fix it.
Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”…
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/opinion/06kristof.html
Some differences are irreconcilable.
Prepare.
Angry Geometer,
Go to YouTube and type into the search box the following:
Obama: “My Muslim Faith”
I can’t wait to see you spin that!
What’s hilarious is watching the reporter/sycophant quickly jump to correct him as soon as it popped out of his mouth.
As for your buddy quickly seconding your viewpoint….hmmmm, somebody going by the name “Dick Hunter” who is fixated on other people’s assholes…..
I’m sure there’s a joke in there somewhere….
Ah hell, both of you are jokes!
AG and Dick:
The wheels are coming off the bus, guys.
You got played.
Time for a (long overdue) reality check.
Well done, Scottie. One of the more peculiar aspects of the Obama life story(TM) is the absence of friends. No buddies, no girlfriends, no classmates, no teachers, no ministers, no commissars, no handlers, nothing. Zip. Was he in Witness Protection? If not, where the hell are they? And why have the MSM stoutly refused to look into this? Party orders? Sarah Palin breaks wind and a dozen reporters can tell you what she’d had to eat (pardon the crudity), but no one is interested in Barry Soetoro’s earlier life? How does that even happen? Are they under that kind of operational control?
Obama is a cipher, an animatronic figure, an empty vessel filled by dark forces (*cough*Soros*cough*) for their own nefarious ends. He himself is, in my wholly uninformed layman’s opinion, hopelessly damaged psychologically by his bizarre upbringing (and possibly also by the family history of mental problems, especially on the maternal side). He makes Nixon look well-adjusted (although I suspect Nixon’s problems arose from decades of vitriolic attack from leftists consequent to the Alger Hiss affair).
TIME and the NYT assert Obama is a Christian? JournoList is still functioning under new management, I see.
Didn’t bother his fundraising efforts in LA recently. He was happy to be disruptive as all hell then.
He seems to suffer from episodic bouts of modesty that prevent him from releasing law school transcripts (doesn’t want to make the other students feel inferior, perhaps?) or attending church (parishoners would be confused in whom to worship, probably). But then the bout passes, and he can babble about being the One we’ve been waiting for, and making the seas recede. You know, the way people so often do.
PS: Am I the only one wondering if “Dick Hunter” is Vaughan Walker’s screen name?
Obama is what George Soros wants him to be at any given moment.
Obama worships at the Church of Obama – and Soros fills up the church collection plate.
Occam’s Beard,
You bring up an interesting point.
Nixon basically went into full melt down mode towards the end, and I seem to recall hearing in the past how he became emotionally and/or mentally unstable towards the end right before resigning.
Now, Nixon actually commissioned into the US Navy in 1942 even though he could have dodged it on religious grounds (but of course religion isn’t important, just ask any leftie!), and this would have been at the time the Japanese were walking all over the Pacific.
This and subsequent challenges he overcame politically indicate a person with a reasonably strong spirit and determination.
Doesn’t make him a good person – just have to admit he had a bit of toughness in him.
I have plenty of things I think he was completely wrong on, and the comparison here is strictly related to how well Nixon and Obama perform under stressful conditions.
If things go as badly for Obama as I’m thinking they might, how well will he weather it, or will we forget all about Tricky Dicky (another dick!?!?) and start cracking jokes about how badly Obama melted down towards the end?
Is Obama anywhere near as tough as Nixon was?
If you turn Obama over, there is a barcode there along with the text:
“Made in China”
I don’t think he’s a “secret” anything. He’s just your typical “world citizen” type – we have plenty of them in Europe, particularly on the continent, where putting your own country first got such a bad rap in ’39-45. They’re just a little less common in the US, where patriotism still tends to be held as more of an asset.
He’s not a “secret Muslim”. He just has a particular affinity for, and deference to their views. Along with all the other categories of those people he considers “the oppressed”; blacks, homosexuals, Hispanics, women, the poor (except for the “bitter clingers”, of course) and so on.
Anyone who looked at his voting record as senator would have seen he was extremely liberal. And all politicians (well, nearly all) tack to the center during election campaigns. He just had a bit further to move than most people – but also a largely compliant press to help him out and iron out the discrepancies.
Really I don’t understand why people find him so difficult to understand. OK, if you just got your information through the mainstream press and had never heard of him prior to the campaign, fair enough. But I’d expect anyone vaguely interested in politics and who knew a few details of his story (and I’d assume that’s nearly everyone on this board) to understand where he was coming from.
Really, I’m mystified why you’re mystified 😉
From the NY Times, May 12, 2008:
As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant… His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).
With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered – as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy – but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)
So at one time the NYT did know what was going on but has since decided to hide the truth. Makes one think!
There are other things in his background:
http://www.opinion-maker.org/2010/08/why-obama-is-subjected-to-blackmails/
He’s a Mooslime:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/opinion/12luttwak.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print
Scottie,
I’ve wondered the same thing: how will Obama cope if/when he meets serious adversity? He strikes me as emotionally brittle and thin-skinned, and has already bleated about press coverage that any other President would have killed for. If he does the full train wreck, and starts getting roughed up as a consequence, it’s hard to imagine him rolling with the punches. I rate his tolerance for criticism at about 50-75 milliBush.
My views on Nixon have changed in recent years. Nixon always claimed that the press was out to get him, and in retrospect, it’s clear that he was right; he wasn’t just being paranoid. His involvement with Watergate was minimal and apparently after the fact. (Nixon was probably too shrewd to bother with bugging McGovern HQ; it was obvious McGovern was going to get hammered in any case.) As for unofficial “plumbers” looking for the source of leaks, which set the whole thing in motion, I can see why he wouldn’t use government agencies, since after all that’s where the leaks were coming from: they’d be investigating themselves. I suspect that lots of Presidents had done the same or worse, but got a skip from the press.
I further suspect that the relentless pursuit of Watergate by the NYT and WaPo was payback for Nixon’s taking out Alger Hiss. Whitaker Chambers’s Witness makes clear that Hiss would have skated had it not been for Nixon, who was the person most responsible for nailing Hiss. Both the NYT and WaPo vigorously defended Hiss, and excoriated Chambers mercilessly, accusing him (IIRC) of being a liar, a drunk, a homosexual, a lunatic,
and a counter-revolutionary running dog of the capitalist ruling class(oops). Why so passionate? Why such a concerted attack? Nowadays, in the JournoList/ VENONA/ Mitrokhin archive era, it’s not hard to guess.And as we now know, from the VENONA decrypts, Hiss was as guilty as sin all along.
Occam ol buddy, it would actually be fun to watch him go into full blown meltdown mode, complete with whimpering fetal position posture – except he’s supposed to be, like, ya know, leader of the free world and all…..
If he doesn’t go into meltdown mode, it means he’s continuing his “change” of the nation – in which case we’re in continuous danger as to the damage he can inflict in the time he has left.
If he does go into full meltdown mode, we’re still in danger on the world stage as he won’t even be providing the limited leadership he IS capable of in a very dangerous world.
I note taxpayers aren’t on this list.
You’re focusing on his previous actions. We’re talking about divining his motivations , so as to predict his future actions. Is he a hard-left idealogue? Is he a Muslim sympathizer? Is he a puppet? Is he simply an opportunist? Any of these, singly or in combination, could explain his actions to date.
For example, what would be Obama’s response to the following foreign policy scenarios:
1. Syria attacks Israel.
2. Venezuela attacks Colombia, and/or goes hard-left.
3. Pakistan attacks India.
4. North Korea attacks South Korea.
5. Cuba teeters on the brink of collapse after Castro’s demise.
6. Russia starts flirting with communism again and/or threatening Europe.
7. Demonstrators look to topple the Iranian theocracy. Iranian Communists begin doing the Mossadegh shuffle again.
In each case, a Muslim sympathizer would react differently from a hard-left idealogue differently from an opportunist, with a puppet being a free kick (depending on the views of the puppeteer).
That’s why we’re trying to figure him out.
All we knew of Nixon came from the propaganda of the MSM.No internet was available to read the other side.If I hadn’t read “Witness”, I never would have questioned why the press was after him. Alot of us are rethinking Nixon.
Democrats extreme 🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFwsWN0XkQM&feature=player_embedded
I think as things get worse for Obama – he will simply take longer vacations and play more golf, since campaigning is pretty much out at this point for him.
Look at how much time he spends on vacation now.
He doesn’t hold press conferences – he just makes speeches.
The question is, who will be running the country?
Looks like the Republicans will be trying to undo the mess next year – and Obama’s role will be simply to bitch and complain about them, with Obama being a 100% lame duck President on vacation 90% of the time.
Occam’s Beard
My prediction that in all of the scenarios you pointed out, ∅ilbama would do nothing. The US should not act in the world because of previous sins. Too much nuance. etc.
I note taxpayers aren’t on this list.
Taxpayers only make “the list” if you’re a libertarian. And I’m pretty certain no one has ever accused Obama of being THAT.
My thoughts exactly.
He will vote “present” and punt – leaving it to the U.N. to make any tough decisions.
Barry can’t miss his tee time.
Now watch this drive!
“billm99uk Says:
August 19th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
I don’t think he’s a “secret” anything. He’s just your typical “world citizen” type – we have plenty of them in Europe, particularly on the continent, where putting your own country first got such a bad rap in ‘39-45. They’re just a little less common in the US, where patriotism still tends to be held as more of an asset.”
In other words he is a normal everyday lib dem. ‘)
Does anyone else find it ironic that the democrats are defending religious freedom? If they would do the same for Christians & Jews it would be a little easier to think they were being consistent. But since they don’t, their defense for religious freedom for Islam rings hollow.
The US should not act in the world because of previous sins.
But once again, why would he think this? What does he consider our sins to be, and why? We’re looking for the premise from which all of his deductions follow.
And Obama is not uniformly diffident and hands off. Look at his weighing in on the Skip Gates fiasco (a good time if there ever were one to practice keeping your mouth shut, but he jumped in with both funky size 12s, and made a fool out of himself). The issue struck a chord with him, clearly. Why?
Re golf, I think it’s a mistake to consider this a pastime. I suspect it’s more in the nature of a displacement activity.
ghost707
“Looks like the Republicans will be trying to undo the mess next year – and Obama’s role will be simply to bitch and complain about them, with Obama being a 100% lame duck President on vacation 90% of the time.”
———
The challenge for the Republicans – as well as Tea Partiers and pretty much everyone else trying to derail this trip to disaster Obama is taking us on – is going to be this scenario.
Let’s assume that the Republicans take control of Congress as a result of the November 2010 elections.
Let’s go farther and even assume that the Republicans take over both the Senate as well as House of Representatives with filibuster proof majorities.
Yes, I know this is fantasizing, but bear with me.
At the very least, you end up with a gridlocked government that can’t pass any new laws.
Great news!
If the government is not in up to it’s eyeballs meddling, the economy will start improving – especially if by some miracle we ditch the damn health care bill foisted on us this year.
Again, great news!
Here’s the rub though:
How do we keep Obama from taking credit for an improving economy, and how do we keep the majority informed enough that the turnaround in the economy is the result of conservative principles being implemented rather than Obama’s policies being rescinded?
He will, after all, claim that his policies turned things around but people didn’t give it enough time in 2010.
I can actually envision the political right making big gains in November 2010, only to see Obama manage to get re-elected in 2012 on the strength of ignorant voters.
We gotta keep in mind that we are not fighting a single battle (November 2010 elections), but rather fighting a war for the minds and hearts of the people, not only for the 2012 elections but on into the future.
Occam’s Beard:
I vote for campus radical: hard left ideologue cum multiculti gee ain’t we cool compared to those bozos in the ‘burbs. Reasons his parents and childhood ( his mother: multi culti); his Marxist orientation at Oxy 1) from Dreams: “seek out Marxists etc”, 2) what John Drew said about meeting him at Oxy; such associates as Bill Ayers.
I don’t rule out puppet.There are too many strange coincidences, such as Michelle’s connection with Bernadine Dohrn before she even met the future POTUS. Or Valerie Jarrett’s former father-in-law working w Frank Marshall Davis in Chicago.
Scottie,
Yes, I have been thinking about a repeat of the ’94 – ’96 scenario.
Obama will not be able to pass amnesty – although he might try a Presidential mandate, however, that will most certainly fail.
Amnesty would have been his ace in the hole for re-election.
Obama is becoming more toxic than any president in history right now. So there is that.
And Obama is certainly no Reagan.
I am hoping most Americans remember the utter cluelessness of Obama concerning just about everything that came over his desk these past 19 months.
The electorate need to be reminded of this by the Republicans every day until 2012.
The Republicans are going to have to do some serious work in the coming months, because our whole financial situation is extremely perilous.
Large chunks of the federal government are going to have to be eliminated just to survive.
To be honest, I think no matter what happens, Obama will not be re-elected.
In each case, a Muslim sympathizer would react differently from a hard-left ideologue differently from an opportunist, with a puppet being a free kick (depending on the views of the puppeteer).
Maybe, but you’re never going to know that until you find an issue where each type would react differently. Rather like black women and the OJ case – after that we knew the “black” part was more important than the “women” part.
And I think Obama is complicated enough that he can’t simply be put in a single box – he has elements of them all (except possibly puppet). Personally I would have gone for a combination of ideologue/opportunist (he is a politician, after all) but that doesn’t really account for, say, his rather lame handling of the mosque case…
ghost707,
“Large chunks of the federal government are going to have to be eliminated just to survive.”
Sounds like a good start to me!
It would be prudent for the Republican leadership to have a nice list of departments, bureaucracies, programs, and very recent entitlement programs to start cutting as soon as they get power.
I mean slash and burn, and as soon as they take office too.
After all, the opposition is going to squeal like a gutted pig anyway, so may as well get the unpleasantness over as quickly as possible, and then spend the next 2 years rebuilding the country from the rubble that is the 2008-2010 era.
Oh, and the first RINO that starts squealing about crossing the damn aisle, bipartisanship, and referring to his “friends” in the other party, needs to be run over by his colleagues in a rather blatant fashion!
Yeah, I’m talking about McCain…..
I will add in again that his statements and actions are consistent with his belief that he is a Kwisatz Haderach (Dune reference) able to be two places at once and a bridge between them. He is both black and white, American and international, Christian and Muslim, victim and elite, socialist and capitalist – the list may be endless. He has adopted this as his persona, and his mission. He has adopted grandiosity as a way out of these dilemmas.
We can certainly see the convenience of this, as one can choose from whatever set of rules is more convenient at any given moment. But take a moment and put yourself in that place: to belong nowhere because one belongs everywhere; to have no allegiances because one has all allegiances. He describes the struggle and psychic cost of this in his autobiographies.
And such an uncertainty does extract a tremendous price. Were he not president, and merely some lost soul bouncing from job to job and place to place, he would be pitiable. Such huge imbalances do distort the personality. We add up bits of evidence in hopes of arriving at an answer because at root, we cannot intuit what he is. His personality is not qute consonant with what we expect a human being to be. There are missing pieces – soft rock that pulls away under pressure, bright organs that turn out to be holograms.
We used the phrase “empty suit” often during the campaign, but seem to have dropped it now, thinking that we know more. While that phrase is not entirely apt, the concept needs to be revived, as something of it is crucial. Chillingly, this descriptor is not entirely metaphor. There are lacunae.
Peter Sellers, in response to Kermit’s question about which personality was the real Peter, stated “There is no real me. I had it surgically removed.” Funny, but poignant, because we knew there was some truth to it. There is more truth to it with Obama. We should fear, because though he is not a committed socialist, he can become one at any time as it suits him, and then dropped for the next speech. A predictable socialist could be more easily countered. He is a chameleon, as above, with the important difference that it is his inside that changes, not his outside.
Though there may have been points of conscious decision for him to arrive at this state, I don’t think it is conscious anymore.
Maybe, but you’re never going to know that until you find an issue where each type would react differently.
Yes, but that’s rather the point. Obama’s had to commit on so few issues – and on exactly zero contentious ones – in his hothouse political career that we have no idea how we would/will react when one comes along on which he cannot vote “present.” He’s never taken a stand on anything.
And I think Obama is complicated enough that he can’t simply be put in a single box – he has elements of them all (except possibly puppet).
Why do you exclude puppet? It’s my front-running scenario. If Andy Stern in his biweekly meetings isn’t relaying instructions, he and Obama must be on the down low.
My scenario: he’s a dorm room Marxist, selected as a Red diaper baby back in the day, groomed in a Red farm system that burnished his resume by checking off boxes, and installed as President by them. He’s got some lingering affection for Islam, by virtue of his childhood, but his first loyalty, such as it is, is to the Party apparatchiks who made him everything he is today.
And I do mean everything. They not only buried all of his records deeper than whale crap, they even found a spouse for him.
Can’t fault the Party for the quality of its service. First rate.
Am I the only one who imagines that when Obama blurted out “corpse-man” not one but twice that some comrades must have been doing a palm-to-face, then looking at each other and shaking their heads?
Why do you exclude puppet?
Not excluding it, that’s why I say possibly. Just pointing out we’ve pretty good evidence that he’s at least 1% of all the other types you mention but there still exists the possibility that he’s 0% puppet and is messing things up all on his lonesome.
Myself? Personally I decided a long time ago that the the world is divided into two types of people; “cock up” theorists and conspiracy theorists and I’m a cock up theorist so I wouldn’t expect there to be someone pulling the strings. But that’s just based on my personal experiences.
∅bama followers slap forehead 🙂
Bill, I understand, and generally fully subscribe to the “cock up” perspective and deprecate the conspiracy one. I am the ultimate skeptic regarding conspiracy theories, and by no means a conspiracy nut.
But in this case, the data force me reluctantly to conclude that conspiracy is the simplest explanation for the observations.
Put it this way: have you ever known – or even heard of – anyone with the kind of luck Obama’s had? Seriously. He’s had more lucky breaks and odd coincidences than all of the people I’ve ever known in my life, put together.
For one example, just look at Ayers. For several years Obama and Ayers are in the same university, working on the same political initiative, living a few blocks away from each other…but didn’t know each other? Wouldn’t you think Ayers would be something of a celebrity? Just how many terrorist bombers did they have at Columbia then? (“Dozens! Who could keep track? Hardly worth mentioning another one.”) (By way of contrast, in college I knew Angela Davis, as did every sentient being on campus — and we didn’t even move in the same circles.)
Then Obama for reasons best known to himself ups stakes and moves to Ayers’s hometown, where he once again lives a few blocks away, where four years out of law school he is tapped to dish out $50 million from an Annenberg Challenge grant written by …Ayers, whose wife, Bernadine Dohrn — another terrorist – introduces him to his lovely bride-to-be, who babysits for the Obamas, and in whose home he launched his political career.
Doesn’t that seem like an awful lot of odd coincidences?
Personal anecdote: a fellow passenger on a plane turned out to be an astrophysicist from Berkeley, where I received my Ph.D. On hearing of my academic career, he asked if I knew X, from a university where I had taught. I replied that indeed I did, in fact I used to date her when I was there. Then he asked if I knew Y, from the university where I was teaching at the time. I replied again that indeed I did, in fact he was my tennis partner.
A third passenger on hearing this was astonished by the coincidence. Actually, it wasn’t as big of a coincidence as it seemed. The upper reaches of academia comprise relatively few souls, who generally know everyone in their field around the world, and from committee assignments, etc. usually know many colleagues in related disciplines (e.g., physical scientists) at their university. Moreover, these same people tend to move between the same universities (just as I had), thereby further multiplying the web of connections. For two academic scientists to know some of the same people was no more surprising than to find out that, say, Derek Jeter knew Alex Rodriguez in the minors.
But that’s my point: our knowing a number of the same people wasn’t really much of a coincidence at all. Now apply that reasoning to Obama and Ayers, who don’t just know some of the same people, but keep bumping into each other. Coincidence? No sale.
In his own words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY
We all spend too much time writing beautifully articulate words i/o of preparing for the practicalities of the hand-to-hands confrontations soon to come …
Prepare.
I’m late to this thread and haven’t read everything, so I apologize If I’m rehashing points that have already been covered.
I think Obama is a transnational progressive, or ‘tranzi’, who regards himself as a citizen of the world rather than an American. So the question of his place of birth is largely irrelevant to him, although it shouldn’t be to those of us who care about the Constitution. The fact that he was able to become President with that issue being seriously in question is appalling. (But I digress.)
He feels no allegiance whatsoever to America. Between his foreign childhood, his radical mother, and his constant exposure to an endless succession of Marxists and Communists through adolescence and college, he regards white Westerners and Americans in particular as the oppressor class, and ‘people of color’ and ‘non-Westerners’ as the oppressed. It is absolutely ingrained in his belief system. Naturally, Muslims fall into the category of people oppressed by the West, so he feels affinity for them.
So he may or may not be a closet Muslim. Because of his leftism, I doubt that he takes religion very seriously. But he clearly sympathizes with Islam’s ‘struggle’ against Western ‘oppression’.
He is without a doubt the most un-American and anti-American president in history. He truly hates this country as it is, and sees himself as an avenging angel who will punish the oppressors (that’s you and me) and set things right.
Well, I don’t know. I’m with The Anchoress, and John Podhoretz had some similar, but less penetrating, thoughts today in the NY Post: http://tinyurl.com/2wb3xyl. I am completely over the whole “sacred ground” and “hallowed site” routine about Ground Zero, for it is neither. It is instead a battlefield of our defeat, preserved as such. I cringe every year on September 11th when all people can think to do is haul themselves down to lower Manhattan, read out a list of names, and clang on a bell. It’s a maudlin exercise, and worth neither the effort nor the attention squandered on it. Even talk of a memorial turns my stomach. We’ve gotten to where we build memorials to our own defeats at every opportunity, and never think to gather up our gumption and turn them into victories–for which we undoubtedly have the capability of doing in every way that matters, excepting will. We should have rebuilt something–hell, nearly anything would have done, as long as it was tall and striking–right away, and during the process we should have been naming, and fighting, our enemies. Instead we wring our hands and moan about tragedy and healing. I remember when the movie Flight 93 was released–in 2006, for crying out loud, 5 years after the attack–and people left New York theaters in droves, whining that it was “too soon, too soon!” These are not the ways of a Great Nation, and it suggests that while we once may have been such, we are no longer. The Anchoress is correct in saying that, if we had risen to the initial challenge with anything resembling courage and integrity, the stupid mosque now proposed wouldn’t matter.
That’s what I say.
Incidentally, lest I be misread, it’s not that I think there’s neither time nor place for monuments and memorials–there is. But it’s later. It’s after we fight, and after we win. Then. And only then.
betsybounds Says:
August 19th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
Exactly. The traditional sequence was win the war first, then build the memorial. And the memorial should inspire pride and patriotism, not conciliation with the enemy.
I’ve also read the Anchoress’ post, and I agree. If something–anything–had already been built at Ground Zero, the mosque two blocks away wouldn’t be an issue.
Stone cold atheist like his mother. Anyone who could say with a straight face that Jeremiah Wright led him to Christ obviously has a deep and abiding contempt not only for religion but for the intelligence of his fellow Americans. (Considering that this empty suit huckster got elected, that last belief might not be entirely unwarranted.)
Obama making fun of the Koran. The sheeple loves it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnmS_vULPxw
I told my sister that Obama worshipped the ‘God of Fortresses’ – a reference to Daniel’s end-time King, the Christian Antichrist.
She shot right back, “he’s too stupid to be the anti-Christ”.
She’s right.
Just mentioning, OB, that you make a strong case there. Might convince me.
“We’ve gotten to where we build memorials to our own defeats at every opportunity,”
It reminds me of when I was in high school (graduated in 1993 so it’s not like this was just yesterday either). One of the “thugs” died – I do not recall from what but it wasn’t a murder (but that was by the grace of God, he would have been lucky to live into his 30’s). We had almost and entire semester (half the school year – two semesters in a year) having therapy sessions for the whole freaking school. Kids that he had terrorized, literally, were bawling their eyes out for *months* while a therapist – in the guise of healing – talked about mortality and was quite depressing.
I also spent a large number of years in college (5 different majors over 7 years) and it was always amusing watching the incoming Freshman look for the guidance councilors and how they coped with no one giving a flip. It saddened me to see that couple of years finding the crap that went on in high school bleeding into the university system – by my experience with graduating students now it is fully there.
Large cities can have that type of process continue their whole lives, for the most part. They have a support structure to do so. Even then reality takes a bite from time to time and *then* you have decades spanning community therapy sessions. Rural areas – while ironically having a tighter knit community tend towards having strong individuals. They can’t afford to stand around and feel sorry for themselves that long.
In the long run the major cities can’t either – see California for when it starts to collapse on itself. Europe is going that way hard too. In coaching athletes – especially ones that are primarily mental (I’m certified in both Archery and Shotgun) – you *have* to totally focus on positive thoughts. It can be *really* tough to get kids today to do so, they have been conditioned to dwell on negatives so much that if they ever truly internalize what I try and teach you can see a truly life changing event occur.
Thanks, AVI. I was just delineating my own thought processes re Ayers.
But consider that all of Obama’s life is shot through with similarly weird happenstances. To name some:
Going to Occidental and Columbia, two pricey private schools, when his grandparents had to scrape to send him to Punahou (which God knows isn’t cheap).
Getting into Harvard Law School (on an academic track record that apparently won’t bear public scrutiny).
Becoming editor/president of the law review (but not publishing so much as a shopping list).
Graduating magna cum laude (on another track record that won’t bear public scrutiny).
Being Lawrence Tribe’s latter day assertion that he was Tribe’s “best student at HLS ever” but no contemporaneous evidence, in particular no prestigious Federal (Supreme Court?) clerkship, which Tribe, had he held that opinion at the time, could have swung with a phone call; instead, off to the trenches as an associate in Chicago.
Getting a lucrative book contract thrown at him, having to return the advance when he couldn’t produce, and then getting a second one (must be a first in publishing history), buying a house he couldn’t afford on a subprime mortgage until book royalties provided a deus ex machina solution (almost as if he knew they’d be coming).
Playing at lawyer for a few years but his client list is top secret.
Running for office and having his opponents mysteriously cheap-shotted, so he runs effectively unopposed.
Keeping his head down in the state legislature by voting “present” on contentious issues, while his name is put on popular legislation he had nothing to do with.
Giving some lectures as an adjunct professor (an academic “Kentucky colonel”) so he can be billed as a professor (sans publications, the first professor in history who hasn’t lost his publication virginity).
Seriously, does any of this ring at all true? Any of it? An odd thing or two in his life, fair enough. But this many? His entire life is odd. It stinks. He cast no shadows, left no footprints. All we’re missing is people from his past telling us he’s the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful person they’ve ever known in their lives.
From his book I got the impression he is an atheist turned believer in the same way Peter Hitchens is. He is intelligent enough to know that faith is irrational, but he sees the positive effect it can have on community, and the comfort and fulfillment it can give to people. He also claims to have gotten comfort from it himself. Both him and Peter Kitchens lose me here, as I don’t know how you go from seeing the positive in something, to believing something without any convincing evidence or any kind of religious experience. But I do think that many millions of people who call themselves believers share this position.
As he came to religion as a conscious choice, I think he knows that religion is what people make it. Islam is a religion in an earlier stage of development than Christianity and is all the worse for that. The best thing he and any government can do is try to push Islam to evolve faster into a more accepting, modern religion. I don’t believe demonizing it helps with this goal, so I would recommend he publicly support the lower Manhattan mosque, whilst strongly condemning the more medieval aspects of Islam around the globe. I was rather disappointed when he backtracked on that the other day, but certainly understand, given the demented media over here.
strcpy,
I know what you mean about the therapy mentality. When I was in my early 20s, I went through a crisis because my life wasn’t fitting into any of the standard plans and I wasn’t finding my job very fulfilling. I went to a mental health clinic (these were just starting to pop up at the time) for some counselling. After a rather short intake interview, I was told that I didn’t seem to need any meds right away and to schedule a new appointment. I was appalled. They seemed to offer a choice between drugs and blather, so I decided I would have to get through it myself. I did. Something of that rural/small town intergenerational experience of coping with crisis must have influenced me.
I remember after the tsunami seeing all these TV reports of grief counsellors heading off to offer ther services to people whose language, culture, and rituals they were ignorant of. As if these people didn’t have wise elders who knew something of grief and tragedy and also knew that you had to start rebuilding the house and planting the crops. It’s not the same as the Woody Allen model.
Mike W. says:
“I consider him a progressive aetheist whose belief is in govt.”
I consider Obama a deceitful thug. Questions about his religion strike me as irrelevant, given that his leftist world view would make him an anti-American regardless of what religion he practiced.
Simon,
Your theory doesn’t quite fit with his clingers description of people in the rust belt. If he sees utility in religion, it seems to work only for the unenlightened, which of course exempts himself and his SF donors.
Occams,
I agree that his CV stinks to high heaven, but it’s uclear to me how much of this was planned by Ayers types and how much was Obama manipulating his way up the ladder. My guess is a bit of both. Obama is a master at playing the white guilt card. He’s so articulate and he reads Niebuhr–so different from Sharpton and those other slightly vulgar blacks. And did I mention he eats arugula?
Two items that can also be included in your list are Michelle with her her connections to Jesse Jackson and the Daley machine and the gerrymandering of his Illinois senate district to get in with the moneyed Chicago crowd.
Re: “(on an academic track record that apparently won’t bear public scrutiny).”
Did you know that Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar, never released his grades. Nor did Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, both members of Phi Betta Kappa.
No president has ever released detailed transcripts of his grades, though a few have released grade point averages. Obama didn’t have to because everyone knew that his grades would be better than John McCain’s. But, in the next election, if Obama’s opponent does release her or his grades, Obama probably will too.
Granite: Teddy Roosevelt and Wilson didn’t release grades because back then it was neither expected nor demanded. In recent years it is—the “demanded” part, anyway. Both Bush’s and Kerry’s transcripts were released (or perhaps “revealed” is the better word) by the press (not just their GPA’s, but their subjects and grades). Bush’s were revealed in the New Yorker in 1999, and Kerry’s were published as part of his Navy records obtained by the Boston Globe in 2005, after the election (he had refused to release them during the campaign). Kerry’s grades at Yale surprised most people by being very similar to Bush’s at Yale, but a tiny bit worse.
McCain didn’t release his transcript but made it clear he was a poor student, which was already well known (as well as his very low class ranking, which was also known). We really know all we need to know about McCain’s student days.
Obama is different; he trades on his stellar academic reputation and yet still won’t release his transcripts on even his GPA, which is odd in light of his supposed brilliance. We do know (because Columbia, his undergrad alma mater, told us) that he graduated without honors. Makes one wonder how he got into Harvard Law, then.
The most important point about all this, though, is that not only did Obama not release his grades, but the MSM did not obtain and publish them, as they did for Bush and ultimately (after the election) for Kerry. That seems to have been part of the more general protectiveness of the press towards Obama, especially during the campaign, which is one of the reasons why he was elected.
And I will make a prediction here and now: if Obama runs again in 2012, and his opponent releases academic transcripts, Obama will not. I believe his college undergrad record is mediocre, and it would be too deeply ego-threatening for him to let the public know that. Unlike Bush or McCain, of whom no one expected good grades, an excellent academic record is one of the supposed truisms about Obama, and was part of his huge appeal to the liberal intelligentsia, to whom such things matter greatly.
Granite
Take a look atDubya’s transcript.
We have grades, not just “grade point averages,” for Presidential candidates Gore and Kerry.
Gringo: see my comment above yours.
Granite,
Interesting, I didn’t know that Bill Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson had been professors in academia with a proven track record and paper trail that justified their qualifications for that position.
Regarding any tit-for-tat, I believe John McCain release all of his birth records – but Obama didn’t.
I do have an interesting thought regarding the whole Marxist and Islam thing.
I mean, Marxism is generally intolerant of religion. Look at how the old USSR treated any religion within it’s *spheres of influence* during it’s existence.
On the other hand, the old Soviet Union was the primary sponsor and supplier of military aid to most of the middle east for decades.
Military aid that went directly to regimes who based a lot of their identity and public policies upon religion.
Isn’t that a huge part of the whole Arab world support for Palestinians who were fighting the big bad Israelis, as well as the basis for the repeated wars the Arabs have initiated with the express intent of destroying Israel and *pushing them into the sea*?
So, a Marxist/socialist/communist/leftist being more tolerant of Islamic beliefs than they are generally towards any other religion is not really outside of the norm.
Looks like good ol’ American affirmative action in action to me 😉
My point is that is the RIGHT of a president not to reveal his grades. I also repeat that Clinton, whose grades must have been excellent, did not reveal his grades. It was, as you say, not common for candidates at the time of Teddy or WW to reveal their grades. Still, it is interesting that these three, with excellent grades, did not reveal them while we have the GPAs of candidates who did not do very well.
Obama did not get honors at Columbia. One reason is that you had to be there for the full four years, and he was only there for two. However, that does not show that he had good grades. Getting into Harvard Law School would indicate that his grades were good enough for that institution, even if they may have been somewhat eager to get Black students.
His getting a Magna Cum Laude at Harvard Law indicates something too.
In any case, even if his grades had been less than stellar, they would have been better than McCain’s, which was all that mattered in that election.
Going back to Bush, his transcript and Kerry’s were not released by him, and that was my point. The fact that the MSM was able to get these grades does not mean that they are also able to do so in the case of Obama. Columbia is not Yale.
Granite,
“In any case, even if his grades had been less than stellar, they would have been better than McCain’s, which was all that mattered in that election.”
If that had been the case, then why has Obummer spent years now – literally – running against President Bush?
Perhaps Obummer’s grades were lower than Bush’s, which would undermine that whole *smart intellectual* angle he’s been painted as?
There is zero possibility a 49 year old man can say corpse-man twice and have even average intelligence. We don’t need his grades. We have 2 years of listening to this fraud of a man.
Ya know, actually, I’ve been thinking about this unsubstantiated assertion that Obummer had better grades than McCain.
I have already made the point that Obummer may have had worse grades than Bush, focusing on that angle rather than McCain because Bush is who Obummer was running against – even though Bush was not running for office.
But I gotta say Granite has got me to thinking.
What if Obummer actually had grades that were in line with McCain’s – or lower????
Could this explain his steadfast refusal to release them?
Should such a situation come to light, it would be quite hilarious to see his sycophants spin THAT as it would completely undermine this whole *intelligence* angle they’ve played up for about 3 years now!
Just for fun…
I have a copy of the Harvard Alumni Directory published in 1986 for the 350th Anniversary of the founding of Harvard. The two volume set contains:
John Adams – AB 1755
John Quincy Adams – AB 1787
Teddy Roosevelt – AB 1880 & Phi Beta Kappa
T S Eliot – AB 1910, AM 1911
John F Kennedy – AB 1940
FDR – AB 1904, President Harvard Crimson 1903
BUT…
“Obama, Barack H. Alego Kogelo Nyangoma PO, Siaya, Nyanza, Kenya – AM 65”
WTF??
I’m in there under my real name…with accurate data. But according to this, we should have overlapped. Is this an ancestor?
Re: “I believe John McCain release all of his birth records – but Obama didn’t.”
Obama has shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii. He showed it and posted it online. He showed copies to both Politifact and Factcheck. The Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii, and it is the only birth document that Hawaii has sent out since 2001. It no longer sends copies of the original out to ANYONE, not even to people born before 2001.
In 2007, Obama asked for a copy of his birth certificate, and Hawaii sent him the Certification–the same document it sends to everyone–and Obama posted it and showed it. The one thing different about Obama and just an ordinary birth certificate from Hawaii is that the officials in Hawaii have twice confirmed the facts on the birth certificate, that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. Most recently, the governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, a Republican, has also said that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Re: “Obama, Barack H. Alego Kogelo Nyangoma PO, Siaya, Nyanza, Kenya – AM 65″
WTF??
I’m in there under my real name…with accurate data. But according to this, we should have overlapped. Is this an ancestor?
Answer; Yes, it is Obama’s father. He received a degree in economics. Obama himself might not be listed because he graduated from Harvard Law, which is a separate school.
And we know, beyond doubt, that public officials in Liberaland never lie, never distort; never, never, never. Right, “Granite”?
I believe GWB released his Yale transcript. ‘Twas John effing Kerry that didn’t. But his was a part of his USN file, so was found with FOIA. And his grades were lower than W the dummie’s, confounding Liberal beliefs.
Do stop, Granite.
Granite,
“Obama has shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii. He showed it and posted it online. He showed copies to both Politifact and Factcheck. The Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii, and it is the only birth document that Hawaii has sent out since 2001.”
Proves nothing.
Here is what Hawaiian law actually states regarding how one can obtain a Hawaiian birth certificate – even if the child in question was not actually born in Hawaii.
” [§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.
(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol06_ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0008.HTM
Please note the very first sentence: “Certificates for children born out of State.”
More interesting to me than Obama’s grades would be the courses he took. Bush’s transcript show the basic liberal arts curriculum of the time, and his choice of geology as his science probably means this was the freshman level default course for students untalented in math and hard science. (I would bet there were two Intro to Geology courses–one for majors and one for everyone else.) No surprises there. But by the time Obama attended college, there were probably more electives and “…studies” would have been available. Lots of people slide through college. Course selection says more about the direction of a person’s thinking.
That’s very interesting Charlie. I have always suspected that one of the primary reasons that his various college records have always been kept top secret is the liklihood that he had all kinds of “creative” financing arrangements (in addition to the fact that he probably had less stellar grades than would be consistent with his much-vaunted brilliance).
Maybe with a Kenya home address he was considered an “international student”, with the aid, assistance and admissions criteria that might go along with that.
At any rate, as you say….WTF?
Hmm,
So, what happens if he is determined to have taken advantage of foreign student aid – yet at the same time he is now claiming he was a US citizen?
Was he lying then, or is he lying now?
Oh well, move along folks, nothing to see here…..
There was a definite snarl, and meanness in Obama’s “No regrets” answer to the question about him wading into the mosque controversy. This was not to me a good omen about things to come. He’s frayed at the edges and is going to get more reactive and show less patience and cool as we move forward. I don’t know what he’ll do if the Repubs win in Novemeber, but if Dems maintain control I am certain it will be Katy bar the door hell on wheels ramming things down our throats.
Obama prays to a different god than most Americans. So do Pelosi, Reid and most Democrats. Their giod is alien and strange. He is severe and intolerant. He is demanding and agressive and….more things not good.
The image that rings true to me is when Moses came down from the mountain to find Israel worshipping a golden calf. There was a battle and struggle right there on the spot. Sides were called and chosen. Now traditional America is on one side, and the children of a fiercer god are on the other. It’s going to get really bad unless we can stop this train in November.
It seems fairly certain that whatever else he may be, Obama is a thoroughly brainwashed member of the Cult of the State. That cult is a big tent that includes many sub-cults to which Obama may or may not also belong; but it’s the Cult of the State that counts.
If Islam is a religion of tollerance and peace, why is Obama so fearful of being mistaken for a muslim and sending out his PR guys to assure eveyone that he is a christian, bitter and clinging to his gun just like everybody else!
Nature abhors a vacuum, and blank screens were made to be filled in.
I think “blank screens” can be a dangerous thing. They can be something to hide behind but then after awhile the screen begins to be filled in by the beholder. In Obama’s case, despite the MSM’s frantic efforts to the contrary, it is being filled in by Obama’s crackpot Progressive-sourced policies on the economy, foreign policy and domestic issues.
Previous politicians have tended to use their cultivated images(the opposite of “blank screens”) as a shield against potentially unpopular policy decisions and maneuverings. Lincoln’s ‘simple-but-honest-backwoods-born-in-a-log-cabin’ image comes to mind.
The political elite of his time ridiculed Lincoln based on this image. What these sophisticates did not realize is that behind that image was a shrewd intellect and calculating political mind that used their underestimation to his advantage. In this game of Civil War era political chess Lincoln was able to checkmate his opponents before they were able to grasp the fact that they were playing against a chess master.
Obama gave up his shield for a nebulous, abstract ‘hope and change’ image during the campaign that worked very well to get him elected but that said nothing about Obama the person. Obama was elected as a savior but the mundane task of governing cannot be accomplished by vague inspirational slogans and refried Progressive boilerplate.
Note: In Oxford, Rhodes scholars are considered rah-rah backslapper (or jock) intellectual featherweights from the colonies. To point to a Rhodes scholarship as evidence of intellect strikes people in Oxford as laughable as someone here saying, “He must be bright. He got in on affirmative action.” That’s not to say they’re necessarily stupid, but rather that the Rhodes scholarship in and of itself does not constitute evidence of intellect.
Relevant factoid: Kris Kristofferson was a Rhode scholar. QED.
Obama was obliged to do so because he and his supporters were pushing the meme that he was so bright. He isn’t. He’s actually quite a dull fellow, and poorly educated to boot. Never mind the “Niebuhr” business, which he was obviously told to say. Consider this: how many college-bound high school students would stumble over the word “corpsman,” not once but twice? (So it was not a slip of the tongue.) The word obviously lay outside his working vocabulary. How many such students think Austrians speak Austrian?
In each case, none. Zero. Zip. The man is a dolt.
I don’t expect every candidate to release his transcript. In general, I don’t much care about academic performance. But if the candidate and/or his supporters make an issue of his great intellect, then I want evidence of such. In the total absence of any discernible accomplishment, academic performance was the sole remaining basis on which Obama could buttress his implicit assertion of intellectual prowess. That he declined to do so compels us to make an adverse inference.
McCain was notoriously a rebel. Coming from a distinguished line of naval officers, and attending the Naval Academy, rebellion took an academic turn. Any inferences regarding his intellectual abilities are confounded by that psychological backdrop.
Not a chance in hell. No way.
Re: “Here is what Hawaiian law actually states regarding how one can obtain a Hawaiian birth certificate – even if the child in question was not actually born in Hawaii.”
Yes. But there is no law, and in fact Hawaii law forbids Hawaii to issue a birth document of any kind that indicates that a person was born in Hawaii if there was no proof that the child was born in Hawaii. Obama’s birth certificate, the official Certification of Live Birth, says on it that he was born in Hawaii, and that fact is what was confirmed twice by the officials in Hawaii.
As to them lying. People do lie, but rarely in things that they can be caught in and penalized for lying about. In this case we have four Hawaii officials, the original clerk who looked into the file, the heads of the DOH and the Department of Vital Records, all of whom looked into the file, and we have the governor of Hawaii, who may or may not have looked into the file but who believes her officials. ALL four of them say that the document in the file says that Obama was born in Hawaii.
There were two confirmations. The first was before the election in November 2008. If a member of a Republican governor’s administration had lied and said that a Democrat was eligible before the election and it was found out that that was a lie, you can imagine the consequences.
In the first of the two confirmations the officials said that there was an original birth certificate in the file. In 1961 when Obama was born it was not allowed to enter a non-Hawaii birth certificate into Hawaii birth certificate files, so the document in Obama’s file must be from Hawaii. in the second confirmation, the officials said that the document in the files VERIFIES that Obama was born in Hawaii, so not only is there a Hawaii birth certificate in the files but it says on it that Obama was born in Hawaii.
In addition to the official birth certificate and the confirmations, there is this witness, who recalls being told of Obama’s birth in Hawaii and writing home about it at the time (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170432/posts).
Also, Obama’s Kenyan grandmother never said that he was born in Kenya. She said repeatedly in the taped interview that he was born in Hawaii, where his father was studying. And, she said in another interview that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
Re: “Certificates for children born out of State.”
Let me make it short and clear. (1) Obama was born there were no certificates for children born out of state. The only births that were registered were births IN Hawaii. Obama’s birth was registered.
(2) Hawaii did not then and does not now allow a birth certificate or a birth document of any kind to be issued that indicates that the person was born in Hawaii unless there was proof that the child was born in Hawaii. Yes, it now issues certificates to persons born out of the state, but those certificates are not allowed to say “born in Hawaii’ on it.
(3) Obama’s birth certificate says ‘born in Hawaii” on it, and that is what has been confirmed by the officials and the governor of Hawaii.
That should read ‘WHEN Obama was born…”
My 11-year old laughed at “corpse-man.” ‘Nuff said.
Re Rhodes Scholars being or not being intellects: it depends. Senator Bill Bradley, the former basketball star, had a Verbal SAT of 485, which is not exactly genius level. There was a Rhodes Scholar who graduated from my high school.He was very bright, Merit Finalist bright.
http://www.slate.com/id/73787
Working my way down the thread, I see my man Scottie has brought up a point I intended to make, namely the impact of a poor academic record. Without all of that “brilliant” nonsense, Obama would have nothing. Zero. Suppose he was, as I suspect, a C+/B- student, tops, and/or took lots of gut courses. His supporters would then be laughingstocks.
Note that all Democrats get a tailwind on intellect from the Red-infested press, going right back to Adlai Stevenson. They invariably frame every Democrat as a genius, every Republican as a dolt, without exception. They do this presumably as a way to appeal to the cognitively challenged to dispel their well-founded fears that they’re benighted by choosing the Dem, and thereby “prove” that they’re smart too. (“I’m smart! I can do things!” — Fredo).
Note also that the MSM portrayed Bush as a moron, while Gore and Kerry were brilliant. Now we have all three transcripts, we see Bush was the valedictorian of the sorry trio. Gore’s case was especially egregious: he flunked out of law and divinity school. But he’s a genius, don’t you know?
Re: “Obama was obliged to do so because he and his supporters were pushing the meme that he was so bright. He isn’t. He’s actually quite a dull fellow, and poorly educated to boot.’
Perhaps, but that is a decision the voters will make in 2012. If they think that his opponent is smarter than Obama or will do a better job than Obama, they will of course vote for the opponent and not for Obama.
My point is still that Obama does not have to release his grades and that not showing them does not mean anything because most presidents did not show them. And has been noted earlier Bush’s and Kerry’s grades were released, but not by them.
Someone has said that he doubts that Obama will release his grades even if his opponent does. I doubt that is opponent will release her or his grades.
Shouldn’t this read “misunderestimate?” /g
Exactly. Rhodes scholarships constitute no evidence either way.
I’ve sat on graduate admissions committees. He was black, had a pulse, and could fog a mirror. He was a shoo-in.
In grad school I lived in a house with several law students from Boalt Hall, Berkeley’s law school, which I had to walk past to go to the lab. One day students were demonstrating outside Boalt Hall, and I asked my housemates why. It turned out that Boalt Hall was trying to kick out one of its black students after he’d failed seven courses in a row. Ultimately, IIRC, Boalt backed down.
There’s your calibration.
Now, in this light, consider the “magna” business and Obama’s refusal to release his law school transcripts. On its face, graduating magna means you did pretty well, which inevitably should be reflected in your academic record.
Yet on this one matter, the man who says he’s the one we’ve been waiting for, the man who says he’s going to make the seas recede, the man who says a light will shine down from Heaven telling you to vote for him, the man who tells his Party that all will be well because they’ve got him, this man suffers a sudden attack of modesty and becomes a blushing ingenue.
Regarding Gore,
When he appeared on the Tonight show back around 11/2009, he tried explaining to the audience that the interior of the earth was several million degrees.
It was the equivalent of stating 2+2=5.
That was pretty much the end for Al. The jig was up.
“”He was black, had a pulse, and could fog a mirror.””
LOL…Yep. And next we’ll hear about how oppressive and harmful sitting at the front of the bus has been on blacks. Which actually may have some validity when considering the totality of one Barak Obama.
A few telling bits and pieces:
Apparently, during the campaign, the MSM didn’t bother to send any reporters to Indonesia to check out Obama’s childhood there, but some enterprising bloggers from Australia/new Zealand did go there, to dig around, look for his school records, and to find and talk to some of Obama’s old schoolmates and friends. They found the records, and the records showed that Obama–then named Barry Soetoro–had been registered with his grade schools as an Indonesian citizen and as a Muslim, and his schoolmates remembered that he took the mandatory training in the Qur’an for Muslims (classes Obama talked about attending in his autobiography, “Dreams From My Father”), and that he also took extra classes in the recitation of the Qur’an in Arabic (mangaji) that only the more pious Muslim students bothered to take and that, moreover, they sometimes saw him going to the Mosque with his step-father Lolo Soetoro (http://www.danielpipes.org/5354/confirmed-barack-obama-practiced-islam) .
If you check around the Internet you will also come across information about a Black Nationalist turned Muslim, Khalid al-Mansur (aka Don Warden), who was a financial advisor to one of the world’s wealthiest Muslims, Saudi Arabian Prince Al-Waleed bin Tilal, and the fact that that he had been trying to collect letters of recommendation to Harvard Law for Obama, and also to raise tuition money for him (http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/18361).
Then, of course, there was Obama’s telling, insufficiently reported Freudian slip, in which he told interviewer George Stephanopoulos during the campaign that his opponents were making too much of “My Muslim Religion,” at which point Stephanopoulos quickly jumped in to save Obama and said, “Of course, you mean “My Christian religion.” I ask you who, if he is a Christian and not really a Muslim, blurts out “My Muslim religion” when talking about his religion.
Then there are Obama’s paternal relatives, all but one of whom are Muslims, his half brother Obongo (Roy) being a Luo tribe activist and a particularly militant Muslim, who says that the black man “must liberate himself from the poisoning influences of European culture” (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c0e_1239753974). During the campaign the Obama campaign website and quite a few MSM sources even tried to say that Obama’s paternal grandmother was a Christian (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-03-05-obama-kin_N.htm )
but later the New York Times quoted her as saying that she had always been a Muslim and was “strong in her Muslim faith” (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html?ex=1335585600&en=f901477fd875c685&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
).
By the way, up until a few months ago Obama’s paternal grandmother and one of Obama’s half sisters was proudly telling the press that they were present in a Mombassa, Kenya hospital were they witnessed Obama’s birth and then, mysteriously, they shut up and disappeared from the news. Now why do you suppose that was? And would you mistake the fact that you were present at his birth, and, if you were present, where your grandson was born?
Thinking of Obama’s family reminded me of how little the press has printed on Obama’s immediate family–his mother Stanly, his grandfather, “Gramps,” and his “typical white person” grandmother Madelyn, aka “Toots”–it has all been soft focus and superficial, and it is also curious that while you do see some mention of Obama’s paternal family and they have even visited the White House, you never hear any mention of, nor do you ever see relatives from his mother’s side of the family.
Finally, there was sitting Illinois Senator Obama and Michelle’s trip to Kenya–on our nickel–during which he interfered in the internal affairs of Kenya and drew a diplomatic protest in response, when he spent several days in Kenya campaigning for his fellow Luo tribesman and “cousin,” the Muslim, Jailbird (Odinga served several years in a Kenyan jail for his involvement in an unsuccessful 1982 attempted coup against the Kenyan government of President Moi) and East German educated Communist Raila Odinga–who some have titled the “Butcher of Kenya” for the violence and killings of Kikuyu tribesmen and Christians that mobs of his machete wielding supporters–mostly from his and Obama’s Muslim Luo tribe–have been responsible for.
Based on statements and original documents signed by the leaders of the Muslim community in Kenya and by Odinga–documents released to the press by the leaders of that Muslim community in Kenya after Odinga denied he had signed any such agreement with them–Odinga signed an agreement with the leaders of Kenya’s minority (10%) Muslim community saying that, if they delivered the Muslim vote to Odinga and Odinga won the presidency, he would curtail Christian worship, and would start to impose Shari’a law in 90% Christian Kenya. Odinga lost his bid for the Presidency in Kenya, but his supporters caused such violence and chaos in protest that he was given the post of Premier to stop the killings and violence. The U. S. press hardly even reported any of this, but other sources did (see http://africanpress.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/senator-barack-obama-in-kenya-obama-and-odinga-the-true-story/ and here http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/kenyas_killing_fields/ and here http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=77508 and see video of Obama campaigning in Kenya for Odinga here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6eVVVKFHu0 ) And according to the Atlas shrugs story above, it appears that Obama has used the machinery of the U.S. government to press for the recent adoption of a Soviet style constitution by Kenya (see more reporting on this issue here http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5417/53/ and here, http://allafrica.com/stories/201007221066.html ).
.
Re: Is Obama a closet Muslim? Expect to see the first family going to/coming from church within the next few weeks – maybe even while on vacation. Last time I remember they were in church – Easter.
/Art Bell mode on
Woodrow Wilson was a professor at and President of Princeton. Me-chelle Antwonette went to Princeton. Coincidence?
/Art Bell mode off
I’m gonna start giving “Granite” a pass. A flyover.
Granite: “someone” didn’t say it; I said it (in my reply to you above).
And I also said that (a) Obama didn’t even release his GPA; (b) more importantly and unusually, the press didn’t pursue it or get the grades itself and expose them, which it did for previous candidates Bush and Kerry (although they did it to Kerry after the election rather than before); and (c) it matters especially for Obama because he, unlike Bush or McCain, is the one trading on his supposed academic brilliance. Wouldn’t you think he’d be eager to release them if they were really good?
Also, you now say you don’t think an opponent in 2012 will release his/her grades. Perhaps yes, perhaps no. But you were the one who said that if the opponent did release his/her grades, Obama would most likely release his. My point (in my comment above) was not whether some opponent would do so; it was whether, if the opponent did so, then Obama would reciprocate and release his, too. I said above, and I repeat here: my prediction is that he will not release them voluntarily even if an opponent did so.
Obama might release his law school grades some day, on the other hand. I say that because there’s evidence he graduated with honors from law school, so it stands to reason his grades there were pretty good. But not his undergrad grades. As far as getting into HLS goes, if you are of the favored ethnic persuasion, if your recommendations are good (positive, plus from the right people), if you present yourself well, if your LSATs are good, and if your grades show an upwards trajectory (if, for example, Obama did much better senior year than the previous years), you can get in there.
Occam’s Beard and Steve H: I respectfully disagree about the meaning of the mispronunciation of “corpsman.”
People who get most of their learning from books might indeed mispronounce it. That’s not because they haven’t heard the correct pronunciation of “corps”—they have. But “corpsman” is a less commonly-spoken word, and in very bookish people, the written word can override the spoken in their minds.
That particular incident shows a marked lack of real-world experience and a predominance of book learning, and an unfamiliarity with military things, on the part of Obama. That’s all, IMHO.
neo, I’d previously considered your point about his possibly only having read the word and not heard it pronounced. That’s a possibility, being consistent with the data, and certainly the most charitable construction one can place on the matter, but frankly I discount its likelihood.
First, I would submit that “corpsman” is not such an arcane word. One need only watch virtually movie with battle scenes in it to hear it pronounced correctly, and then to connect the pronounciation with the spelling.
Second, contrast this with Obama’s “liberating Auschwitz” gaffe. He’s obviously pig-ignorant about WWII history, or he’d have known that Auschwitz was in Poland and by agreement with the USSR we didn’t go east of the Elbe River in Germany. Clearly his knowledge of the subject, such as it is, was derived from pop culture and not from books. He evinces no signs whatever of book learning, certainly on this subject.
So he’s deficient in book learning on some subjects (at least), yet excessively bookish on others? Nah. Simpler explanation: he’s a dullard who mispronounced an unfamiliar word someone else loaded onto the teleprompter, and off the teleprompter extemporaneously blurted out some ahistorical nonsense in an effort to curry favor with his audience.
Note that this conjecture also comports well with his narrowly circumscribed vocabulary. Who the hell gropes for the word “inhaler” and comes up with “breathalyzer?”
Occam’s Beard: I did not for one moment mean to imply that Obama had read many books on military matters or even on history. I think the evidence is that he’s profoundly ignorant of both.
I was referring merely to his general lack of real life experience vs. learning from books or from reading. Because of that, when the word “corpsman” appeared in his speech, he would tend to read it the way it’s written rather than the way it’s pronounced, even if he had heard the latter once or twice, and was familiar with the pronunciation of the root word “corps” (which most people are).
Oh, and confession: I have read a lot of books about history and even about military matters, and even watched many old WWII movies in my youth. And I have a sneaking suspicion that I might have mispronounced “corpsman”—at least, before the incident with Obama. I won’t do it now!
Interesting factoid: Woodrow Wilson was also the President who segregated the armed forces. Useful to remember this when Dems gush about Truman desegregating them; he was merely undoing the damage wrought by his fellow Democrat a few decades earlier. So, no points, Dems.
It’s difficult to convey how ridiculous that sounded to anyone with any grasp of science. The surface of the sun is less than 10,000 K (Kelvin, not K for “thousand”). (Maybe the sun got a bailout from the Dems.) Anyone familiar with photography or Photoshop knows about color temperature (the apparent color of light emitted by an object at that temperature), and that daylight is about 6000 K.
I don’t expect politicians necessarily to know this sort of thing, but Gore’s been on about the issue for years now. Is it too much expect someone holding himself as knoweldgeable on a subject to read a comic book or two on it?
You poor thing, there’s a ni**er in the white house, you want your country back! How sad.
neo, fair enough! /g
Context is everything. If William F. Buckley, Jr. had mispronounced a word, certainly he would have deserved a skip. The evidence of his intellectual erudition is/was manifest. Obama is not in that class. Ignorance/stupidity are still in play as explanations in his case.
As an aside, years ago I received a corporate memo that for some reason made reference to “polo bears.”
I still chuckle at that one. Near homophones lay in wait for the indolent reader, waiting to pounce…
Yup yup, oversmot, that’s some penetrating criticism there. You’re another in the apparently endless series of Obama defenders who don’t have the intellectual firepower to argue the subject actually under discussion, must fall back on the racism smear as their only weapon, and think they’ve really scored points — when all they’ve done is proven that they can’t think very well.
And yes, this is yet another one who’s not just revealing a limited intellect but also showing how much he or she loves to use the n-word. I believe we had another one a couple of weeks ago who managed to pack half a dozen n-words into one little blog comment. Ovresmot’s got some serious catching up to do.
It is beyond me why these people continue to imagine that playing the race card proves anything bad about anyone — other than themselves.
Mrs Whatsit: yes, the left loves that word so very much that if they can’t find it on the right they’ll supply it themselves.
Occam’s Beard: and just to complete the picture, Truman never finished college (although it was for financial reasons; he was very smart and I seem to recall he had a good record during his years in school before he had to drop out).
neo, yep. Truman had served with distinction in WWI, too.
Academic qualifications are neither here nor there, but if you’re going to run on yours, the least you should do is…uh…disclose them.
All Hands:
I just came back from Harvard Alumni web site. I searched for you know who:
The Listing:
“Mr. Barack H. Obama
HLS (Harvard Law School) 1991 – Doctor of Laws
Last Updated: 5/18/2010”
No mention of a magna cum laude…there throw “cum laude” around like confetti lately, but magna and summa (I once knew a undergrad summa: very impressive guy) were mucho rare.
Have at it…
Pingback:When Is a Muslim Not a Muslim? - Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com
Well you made the New York Times, prepare for many more of the likes of ovresmot…
I’m going to share a personal observation that gets back to the original topic. 🙂
“My Muslim faith”. As has already been noted, Obama uttered that phrase in an interview, to be corrected quickly by the oh-so-helpful George Stephanopoulos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVn59TC2QqM
I have been Catholic for most of my life. But I was a Methodist until I was 17.
Here’s the thing: I simply cannot imagine the words “my Methodist faith” coming out of my mouth. Not in any circumstance: not if I were exhausted beyond belief, drunk out of my mind, or deleriously feverish. Those words simply would not come out of my mouth, simply because I haven’t been a Methodist for a long time.
I doubt very much that Obama has any real allegiance to any religion. But if he has any real sympathy for any religion, I think it’s Islam.
The punditry seems bewildered that so many people think Obama is a Moslem. The pundits seem to think that only numbskulls could think so. But I think they are continuing to overlook what they have always overlooked but that more and more ordinary people are no longer able to overlook: what Obama says often has no connection whatever to what Obama does, not merely in the sense that he’s an easy and casual liar, but that what he does indicates who is much better than what he says indicates who he is. (This is obvious to most of us here, but believe me, to a lot of people, that would be a stunning revelation.)
Neo, we really need a “preview” function here. 🙁
Good God, have we sunk that low?
Still, I suppose we need to start at the bottom, and work our way up to the National Enquirer, which is apparently one of the few media outlets that actually does investigative journalism even on Democrats, and probably has no JournoList members.
ELC: I have tried all the preview functions that people say are compatible with WordPress, and for some reason they cause major glitches here. I’ve tried and tried to find one that functions properly on my blog, because I’d much prefer to have one, but I’ve given up for now. Apologies.
anna: well, it’s a blog of the NY Times, not the Times itself. I seem to recall they’ve cited me once or twice before, and there hasn’t been a remarkable uptick in the troll traffic here.
Actually, the 9/11 mosque issue has caused an increase in trolls already. There are certain topics they fasten on, and that’s one. So much opportunity to cry “bigotry!”
James Taranto on the topic:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703579804575441583997053248.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion
neo, haha I have heard that before, that the NYT does not generate that much traffic. I read small dead animals (the blog) and apparently a mention by them gets people 5x the traffic of the NYT (so says one blogger). Although traffic from the NYT will probably generate more of the ovresmot type than a mention by SDA.
Speaking of the mosque and James Taranto, further down in that piece he shows this Politico article:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41238.html
Admittedly I did not read it very carefully but it might explain why the project does not appear in the NYC land development database – it was never entered.
Furthermore, knowing what I know about land development and local governments, I find it hard to believe that a project that size can be built with no government approvals – nothing can be built with no government approvals, not even a backyard deck. At the bare minimum they will need fire marshal and building/plumbing permits, not to mention occupancy permits, ADA access permits, traffic permits, etc. Something is not quite right with Politico’s research.
Ace has a scoop which could change things concerning the mosque story:
http://minx.cc/?post=304874
Quoted from a “Washington Times” Editorial today, here is what the Obama camp said in 2007 about rumors that Obama was a Muslim:
“…Rumors of Mr. Obama’s purported Muslim identity spread in January of 2007 and were tied to Hillary Rodham Clinton operatives, who denied responsibility. The Obama camp responded that:
“Barack Obama is not and has never been a Muslim. Obama never prayed in a mosque. He has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim and is a committed Christian who attends [The Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s] United Church of Christ.”
That seemed definitive.”
However, as we now know, each and every one of these seemingly definitive assertions by the Obama camp about Obama was a lie. First, because according to Muslim law Obama, as the son of a Muslim, was born a Muslim; next, because Obama was observed by his schoolmates in Indonesia going to the Mosque to worship with his Muslim step-father Lolo Soetoro when he lived with him in Indonesia; and finally, because Obama was registered as a Muslim in the Indonesian school system, and therefore received mandatory instruction in Islam and the Qur’an and, in fact, his schoolmates noted that Obama even took special after school classes in reciting the Qur’an in Arabic, known as (mangaji).
I might also note the fact that I have seen the assertion on the Web that the Rev. Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright had formerly been a Muslim himself.
Thanks for trying, Neo.
It comes down to this: our entire present government is composed of individuals whom I would not allow into my home. They’re no better than Hollywood scum. I don’t mean to be cruel, but it’s true.
Occam–“Hollywood scum” does seem to about sum it up.
Well I go enjoy life for a few hours and see I missed out on some fun.
Granite,
“But there is no law, and in fact Hawaii law forbids Hawaii to issue a birth document of any kind that indicates that a person was born in Hawaii if there was no proof that the child was born in Hawaii.”
You say there is no law – yet I copied and pasted from official Hawaiian sources as well as provided the link to those sources that specifically indicated a birth certificate could be provided by Hawaii even if the kid wasn’t actually born in Hawaii.
As to any assertions that the officials lied in order to have the Obama officially listed as of Hawaiian birth – that is not actually necessary. All that was necessary was for his mother to lie.
Oh, a left wing radical lying? I’m sure that would never happen….
And a shout out to Occam and Neo – your subsequent comments in this conversation have been most entertaining!
Re: “Up until a few months ago Obama’s paternal grandmother and one of Obama’s half sisters was proudly telling the press that they were present in a Mombassa, Kenya hospital were they witnessed Obama’s birth and then, mysteriously, they shut up and disappeared from the news. ‘
Obama’s Kenyan grandmother never said that he was born in Kenya. NEVER. The claim that she said that he was born in Kenya was manufactured by birthers.
The transcript of the complete tape recorded interview shows that she said that Obama was born in Hawaii when asked “Where was he born?” And she said that repeatedly. In another interview, she said that the first that her family had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
No Kenyan relative of Obama has said that he was born in Kenya. His Kenyan uncle said that the first time that Obama visited Kenya was in the 1980s.
If a person were born in Kenya, she or he would need a US travel document to get to the USA. That would be either a US visa on a foreign passport or the change to his mother’s US passport to include him. One or the other would have had to have been applied for at a US Consulate in Kenya and granted before the child would be allowed to enter the USA.
If such a document existed, it would be easy to find because the records of the application for the visa or for the change to the mother’s passport would still be in the files of the US State Department, filed under applications for visas and applications for changes to passports in Kenya in 1961. The Republicans were in charge of the US State Department until January 2009. No such document has been found. No such document exists.
Obamas was not born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii, as his official birth certificate from Hawaii shows, and the facts on it were repeatedly confirmed by the officials in Hawaii. Obama has already posted a copy of the official birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth, which is the only birth document that Hawaii has been sending out since 2001. Hawaii no longer sends out copies of the original birth certificate, only of the official birth certificate: The Certification of Live Birth.
Re: “a birth certificate could be provided by Hawaii even if the kid wasn’t actually born in Hawaii.”
Yes a birth certificate. But NOT a birth certificate saying “born in Hawaii” on it. That is not allowed. Obama’s says “born in Hawaii” on it, and that fact was confirmed twice by the officials in Hawaii and most recently by the governor of Hawaii.
Do you grasp the difference between a Hawaiian birth certificate that does not say ‘born in Hawaii” on it and one that says “born in Hawaii” on it? The law is clear that if a birth certificate is to be issued to someone who was born outside of Hawaii, the document must state the place on it. So, a Hawaiian birth certificate can be issued for someone who was born in New Jersey, but the certificate says ‘born in New Jersey.”
However, when Obama was born, not even this was available. Hawaii did not register the birth of anyone born outside of Hawaii. Obama’s birth was registered in Hawaii.
Re: “All that was necessary was for his mother to lie.”
No, she couldn’t just walk into the offices of the Department of Health and say “I have delivered a child in Hawaii” and get a birth certificate saying ‘born in Hawaii.’ Hawaii required proof, such as the statement of the doctor who delivered the child or the taxi driver or someone else who was at the delivery.
Moreover, we know that the officials say that the original document in the files verifies that Obama was born in Hawaii. They would not say that if there was any question, such as a statement that she had given birth and there were no witnesses. The governor of Hawaii, a Republican, has even listed the name of the hospital, Kapiolani.
And there is this witness, who recalls being told of Obama’s birth in 1961 by a doctor at Kapiolani and writing home about it (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170432/posts0.
Here is a link to a whole bunch of videos dealing with what Obama’s step grandmother said about his being born in Kenya and her witnessing the event (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlFc4wCpvSo).
Granite,
As I’ve pointed out already, there IS a method and law in place in Hawaii that provides for birth certificates for children not actually born in Hawaii.
I provided the quote from the state of Hawaii’s own website AND provided the link, completely contradicting your unsubstantiated claims to the contrary.
To continue to claim it isn’t so is simply silly at this point.
Regarding the validity of the information on Obongo’s birth certificate, as I mentioned before, all that needed to happen was for Obumbo’s mother to lie to the officials.
At that point, unless it were proven otherwise, any later officials will simply reference the documentation they were given.
Kind of like a child born to a woman who was married, but the child was actually the result of an illicit affair – under the law the man is *legally* still considered the father of that child.
The problem you have to deal with, in arguing that Obummer was born in Hawaii, is that there is evidence and information – also noted by others already – that seems to indicate he was born in Kenya.
It would be very easy to diffuse this problem – and Obongo could do it in a heartbeat.
All he would have to do is simply work with the Hawaiian officials to release his full birth information – information that would indicate the hospital he was born in, the doctor who was present, etc.
Strangely, he’s actually fought the release of such documents.
That raises a lot of suspicions in the minds of a lot of people.
It may be there is simply something unsavory that would be revealed and that he actually was born in Hawaii as claimed.
Unfortunately for Obumbler, he’s taken the path of obfuscating things.
This has only caused more suspicion in the general population about this as well as any number of other supposed facts regarding him, and I predict this suspicion of him will continue to grow and touch on even the most minor of details about his life and his beliefs.
It is a situation he’s created himself – deal with it.
Actually, looking back over Obama’s landmine strewn back trail–the mounds of earth covering these landmines were and are still plainly visible, if one cares to look–the one item that, it seems to me, strains belief the most, the one item that is the most hard to overcome or to explain away, is what was Obama’s admittedly faithful attendance over a period of 20 years at the Rev. Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC). A TUCC whose preaching and theology is noxious, racist, anti-White, anti-Semitic, Marxist, Black Liberation Theology*–TUCC where Obama listed to sermon after fiery sermon by the Rev. Wright denouncing Whites, Jews and America, Wright’s grievance mongering, telling the congregation that Blacks were victims in and of America, telling his congregation not to embrace America and “the middle class white value system,” and things like conspiracy theories about the CIA steering drugs and prostitution and crime into the Black community, and creating an AIDS that was deliberately targeted at Blacks–all to destroy that Black community, and praise for Muslims and the Palestinians; TUCC which even printed a Hamas manifesto in the TUCC church bulletin. Sermons, I might add, that the Rev. Wright and TUCC must have thought really showed off their band of Christianity, because TUCC chose to highlight them via the “Best of” DVD of the Rev. Wright’s sermons that TUCC used to sell, a DVD which led to Wright’s downfall.
Yet, Obama initially claimed that despite potentially hearing over a thousand Sunday sermons that were delivered over those 20 years, and despite a Sunday church bulletin that reflected that theology, and those sermons, and that TUCC viewpoint–not a two or four page church bulletin, but a church bulletin that was so crammed full of information and articles that over the years it approached Time magazine in size–Obama was “not aware” of these controversial things, he neither heard nor read any of this–none of it, and despite faithful attendance, listening to 20 years of sermons, Obama knew nothing about the central teachings of the Rev. Wright and TUCC, despite the fact, too, that until Wright’s sermons showed up on Youtube, Obama had given many interviews in which he proudly identified the Rev. Wright as his “close personal friend of many years,” his “mentor,” and his “spiritual” and even “political advisor.”
Once Wright’s sermons surfaced during the campaign around March 13th, and as the heat started to intensify, Obama allowed as how, early in his campaign he might have “become aware” of some things he disagreed with in Wright’s sermons and that he disapproved of them (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-502443_162-3958988-502443.html), but still Obama, in his big “Speech on Race” on March 18th, said, “I can no more disown the Rev. Wright than I can disown the black community” (http://constitutioncenter.org/amoreperfectunion/) and then, as the heat got even more intense, Obama–“very regretfully,” I am sure–denounced Wright, and threw the Rev. Wright “under the bus” in a speech on April 29th (see http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=58954).
*Some quotes from the writings of the Rev. Professor, Dr. James Cone, who largely developed and promoted Black Liberation Theology, and is now a faculty member at the Union Theological Seminary in NYC:
“Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” [1]
“1. See William R Jones, “Divine Racism: The Unacknowledged Threshold Issue for Black Theology”, in African-American Religious Thought: An Anthology, ed Cornel West and Eddie Glaube (Westminster John Knox Press).” (Published in 2004)
And, from James Cone’s own, “Black Theology and Black Power,” 1997, Orbis, p.150:
“For white people, God’s reconciliation in Jesus Christ means that God has made black people a beautiful people; and if they are going to be in relationship with God, they must enter by means of their black brothers, who are a manifestation of God’s presence on earth. The assumption that one can know God without knowing blackness is the basic heresy of the white churches. They want God without blackness, Christ without obedience, love without death. What they fail to realize is that in America, God’s revelation on earth has always been black, red, or some other shocking shade, but never white. Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers. To speak of Satan and his powers becomes not just a way of speaking but a fact of reality. When we can see a people who are controlled by an ideology of whiteness, then we know what reconciliation must mean. The coming of Christ means a denial of what we thought we were. It means destroying the white devil in us. Reconciliation to God means that white people are prepared to deny themselves (whiteness), take up the cross (blackness) and follow Christ (black ghetto).”
P.S.–If you want to dig deeper, here is an analysis of the content and some quotes from what in 2005 became TUCC’s stand alone church publication, “The Trumpeter,” overseen by the Rev. Wright and his two daughters, which awarded Louis Farrakhan its “Empowerment Award” as featured in its November/December 2007 double issue (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2013938/posts).
Here are many other very disturbing quotes from the good Rev. Cone (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2315) and here is Obama and Wright and Cone on video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plRkc7_a4EM)
So, the question is, what do you get when you have a President who has been very heavily influenced by Islam and Marxism, has also been steeped in 20 years of Black Liberation Theology, and who pretty quickly worked his way up through the ranks in the extraordinarily corrupt political world of Chicago politics?
You get what we got.
> who is Obama, what is he?
The one answer an increasing majority of Americans can all agree on is:
An Incompetent BuFu
Re: “As I’ve pointed out already, there IS a method and law in place in Hawaii that provides for birth certificates for children not actually born in Hawaii. ”
But as I have pointed out, that method does not allow for the birth certificate to say that the person was born in Hawaii when she or he was born somewhere else.
Yes, they could get a Hawaii birth certificate, but that birth certificate would not state on it that they were born in Hawaii because of course they weren’t.
It would read something like this: “Hawaii birth certificate…Place of Birth: New Jersey.”
The rule is that the document cannot lie about the place of birth. Hawaii did not then and does not now allow a birth document of any kind to be issued stating that a person was born in Hawaii unless there was proof that the child was born in Hawaii. Obama’s birth certificate says that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, and that is the fact that the officials in Hawaii have confirmed twice.
Re: “Here is a link to a whole bunch of videos dealing with what Obama’s step grandmother said about his being born in Kenya and her witnessing the event (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlFc4wCpvSo).’
The transcript of the complete grandmother interview shows that she replied Hawaii when asked where Obama was born. Unless the taped interview, not a video, runs for about nine minutes, it was cut. the tape of the interview is usually cut after the translator says that she said “Yes” to the question was she present when Obama was born. BUT WE DO NOT KNOW THE WORDING OF THE QUESTION IN THE AFRICAN LANGUAGE. She said “Yes,’ but what was she really asked? Realizing that, the interviewer asked the simple question, “Where was he born,” and she replied “America, Hawaii.’ That is the part that is usually cut.
Videos that show that she said “a son of this village” do not, of course, mean that he was actually born in the village. Moreover, there is another interview, a newspaper interview, in which the grandmother says that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
Granite,
As pointed out before – and contrary to your own original assertions – Hawaii did and does allow for children not actually born in Hawaii to obtain birth certificates.
That was the claim – that is the fact. I even quoted and linked to the relevant documents and website from the state of Hawaii.
It gives me something of a giggle to see you shifting your position ever so discreetly on that matter….without of course admitting you were wrong.
As for claiming Obumbler was born in Hawaii on his birth documents, I’ve already pointed out how easy it was for his mother to simply lie if that was not actually the case.
It would be interesting to see if there were documentation placing her out of the country during that one-year time frame.
As another has pointed out, there is audio of Obambi’s grandmother saying he was born in Kenya. You can go on about how the tape was out of context or whatever, it doesn’t really matter.
She apparently admitted it in the tape.
If she had been mistaken in what she understood the question to have been, then what you have is a situation where a misunderstanding is adding fuel to the suspicions of a sizable percentage of the population.
It is a misunderstanding that, interestingly enough, it’s easy for Obamboozler to straighten out – yet he has actively resisted that option since the election campaign of 2008.
So, if you are correct and the tape is being misrepresented, why does he not take positive actions to resolve once and for all this supposed controversy rather than allow for roughly 1/4 of the population to continue to believe that a non-qualified individual is currently sitting in the oval office?
You go to great lengths to attack the suggestions he was not born in Hawaii – yet have not spent one second exploring why the great Obumbler has not moved himself to resolve this contentious issue.
Isn’t your curiousity even the least bit aroused by this situation, or are you so tied up and personally invested in defending your dear leader at all costs that you won’t even ask yourself a simple question?
Talk about being blinded…..
You said: “As pointed out before – and contrary to your own original assertions – Hawaii did and does allow for children not actually born in Hawaii to obtain birth certificates.’
First, in 1961 when Obama was born, Hawaii did not allow the registration in Hawaii of someone born outside of Hawaii. If someone came in with a birth certificate from some other state or country and asked that the child be registered in Hawaii, Hawaii would NOT do it. It only registered people who were born in Hawaii.
Second, Hawaii did not then and does not now allow a birth document to be issued that says on it that the person was born in Hawaii. YES, it now (starting in 1982) allows Hawaii birth certificates for people born outside of Hawaii. But when the person was born outside of Hawaii, the document must list the real place of birth. The result would be like this; “Hawaii birth certificate, place of birth: Ohio.”
Obama’s says that his place of birth was in Hawaii, and that is the fact that the officials in Hawaii have confirmed twice.
Obama has resolved the contentious issue in the obvious way. He has posted the official birth certificate of his state, the Certification of Live Birth, and the officials in Hawaii–IN A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION–have twice said that the facts on the document are accurate. To say that this is false is like repeating: “Two and two may not really add up to four.”
Re Obama’s mother could easily beat the system. Not true. The officials in Hawaii required proof of the location of birth, meaning witnesses. Without a witness, a statement by the mother would be tagged as simply a statement by the mother. If she had insisted that she had given birth at home, alone, without a doctor or a midwife present, they would have put that down in the files–that the birth was not witnessed. So, when the officials looked into the file and determined that there was a document that verified that Obama was born in Hawaii, the document COULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN UNWITNESSED BIRTH. It was a birth in Hawaii with witnesses, and as the governor of Hawaii and this witness both agree, it was a birth in Kapiolani Hospital (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170432/posts).
Re: “As another has pointed out, there is audio of Obambi’s grandmother saying he was born in Kenya. You can go on about how the tape was out of context or whatever, it doesn’t really matter.”
Answer. No the Kenyan grandmother never said that Obama was born in Kenya. Listen to the complete tape. You will need to find a version online that runs about nine minutes. The ones that run about five minutes were deliberately shortened to cut off the answer to the question “where was he born?” The answer to that question was “America, Hawaii.” Why do some versions cut that off? Not because they want to tell the truth.
What occurs before the five minute mark is her answer “Yes” to a question in English that was ‘Was she present when Obama was born?” She answered yes to that, but what was the question she heard in the African language?
Is the African language that she heard so vague so as for the translation of “present’ meaning simply alive? Or could it have meant was she present in Kenya when he was born in Hawaii? Note that the question was not was she present WHERE he was born, but only was she present WHEN he was born, which is already somewhat ambiguous. So, the answer to the question “Where was he born?” was critical.
And that is the part that is cut off in many versions of the tape. But the full tape and the transript of it clearly show that she said that Obama was born in Hawaii, where his father was studying. And, in another interview, the same grandmother said that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
Also, a person born in Kenya requires a US travel document to get to the USA, a US travel document such as a visa. No such document has been found for Obama, and surely one would have been since the Republicans were in control of the State Department until January 2009.
Perhaps characteristically, you’ve missed the point: regardless of whether Obama is a de jure American citizen, beyond any question whatsover he is not one de facto.
My own 11 year-old (the age at which Obama came to the US) is legally entitled to dual citizenship, but is a straight-up American, and will die one. (Hopefully not for many, many years.)
Consider this rhetorical question: are there any circumstances, any whatever, under which any real American would babble about 57 states? No matter how addled, drunk, drugged, stunned, tired, frazzled,confused, or distracted, no American would ever get that wrong. Ever.
QED.
Granite,
In Dreams From My Father, Obambastic describes how he found copies of local Hawaiian newspaper clippings about his Kenyan father.
He states: “I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school.”
The book was first published in 1995.
The “birth certificate” his supporters wave around all over the internet is a laser printed copy from 2001.
So genius – if Obambi had his original birth certificate – why in hell did he need to go back to Hawaii to purchase a replacement?
Occam’s Beard,
I have concluded poor Granite is a waste of time.
As you point out – he’s completely missing the point.
Re: “If Obambi had his original birth certificate – why in hell did he need to go back to Hawaii to purchase a replacement?”
Because, like many people (including me), he lost the original birth certificate. Thousands of people lose their original birth certificates, particularly when they are doing a lot of traveling.
Sure, he had the original at one time. But he did not have it in 2007 when he needed it, so he asked Hawaii for it, and they sent him the Certification.
Hmmm, I don’t believe I recall hearing that he had simply “lost” it….are you perhaps assuming something here?
For the record, at 45 years old (to be 46 next week) I still have mine. It’s one of those documents that most people realize is, ya know, kind of important.
Especially for a world traveler such as Obungo, what with his need for documentation all the time at such an early stage in life…
Re: The 57 states. It was a joke. A joke, and you are too dense to see that Obama was joking.
Granite,
“Re: The 57 states. It was a joke. A joke, and you are too dense to see that Obama was joking.”
If it was a joke then why did they try to backpeddle off of it and explain it away as fatigue? Hell, even snopes had to admit he’d made a mistake – and for them that’s quite a stretch.
Personally, I don’t think he’s familiar enough with US history to know such a simple fact – but he certainly can recite a muslim prayer I understand….
Hmmm, was the reference to “my muslim faith” a similar attempt at humor?
Granite: density, they name is granite.
Even Snopes admits it was an error rather than a joke, and here they try to explain the reason Obama made it.
If you look at the video of the original slip-up, there is no hint of a joke:
Scottie: however, I must defend Obama on the “my Muslim faith” remark. If you look at the context, he was just addressing rumors. The quote was, “”You’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.”
His phrase is the same as if I were discussing the false accusations against me of racism, and I were to say, “So-and-so has never talked about my racism.” Would that mean I was conceding that I was racist? Of course not. Nor was Obama conceding (or slipping up and admitting) that he was a Muslim.
So the quote is not a smoking gun.
neo,
I find the moment when the little darlings realize their dear leader has feet of clay to be so very enjoyable.
😀
neo,
“His phrase is the same as if I were discussing the false accusations against me of racism, and I were to say, “So-and-so has never talked about my racism.” Would that mean I was conceding that I was racist? Of course not. Nor was Obama conceding (or slipping up and admitting) that he was a Muslim.”
I think I understand the point you are trying to make, but I respectfully disagree.
The reason I disagree is that Stephanopoulos corrected him on his “Christian faith” at the time and Obama quickly shifted and accepted the correction without any effort at presenting an alternative explanation for his words.
He acted as if he had simply misspoken.
Furthermore, the phase “my muslim faith” was part of a longer statement he was attempting to make, and you can see from the transcript that he had continued on with another sentence immediately afterwards, which is when Stephanopoulos interjected the correction.
It was clear from how Stephanopoulos reacted that he did not expect Obama to correct himself and was practically falling over himself to help Obama out of his latest verbal gaffe.
I’m going to give Stephanopoulos credit for knowing better what Obama was going to say than you or I would, from looking at the tape.
The reason I would say this is because I’m sure they had more time to chat and become acquainted prior to the interview, giving Stephanopoulos more insight into how Obama typically spoke and answered questions.
Had he been going down the path you suggest, I do suspect Stephanopoulos would have helped pave the way for him in the interview to clarify that point.
Obama’s answer itself is a bit tangled up, but in the end he’s actually saying the McCain campaign was not questioning his religious beliefs.
That being the case, it would be a bit odd for him to take the approach you suggested.
The transcript:
STEPHANOPOULOS: You mention your Christian faith. Yesterday you took off after the Republicans for suggesting you have Muslim connections. Just a few minutes ago, Rick Davis, John McCain’s campaign manager, said they’ve never done that. This is a false and cynical attempt to play victim.
OBAMA: You know what? I mean, these guys love to throw a rock and hide their hand. The…
STEPHANOPOULOS: The McCain campaign has never suggested you have Muslim connections.
OBAMA: No, no, no. But the – I don’t think that when you look at what is being promulgated on Fox News, let’s say, and Republican commentators who are closely allied to these folks—
STEPHANOPOULOS: But John McCain said that’s wrong.
OBAMA: Now, well, look. Listen. You and I both know that the minute that Governor Palin was forced to talk about her daughter, I immediately said that’s off limits. And—
STEPHANOPOULOS: But John McCain said the same thing about questioning your faith.
OBAMA: And what was the first thing the McCain?s campaign went out and did? They said, look, these liberal blogs that support Obama are out there attacking Governor Palin.
Let’s not play games. What I was suggesting – you’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith. And you’re absolutely right that that has not come—
STEPHANOPOULOS: Christian faith.
OBAMA: – my Christian faith. Well, what I’m saying is that he hasn’t suggested—
STEPHANOPOULOS: Has connections, right.
OBAMA: – that I’m a Muslim. And I think that his campaign’s upper echelons have not, either.
Scottie: I disagree.
If you look at the transcript, you’ll see that Obama is focusing on his message in that passage. He doesn’t realize the “my Muslim faith” comment will go viral (that’s his true error); he hears Stephanopoulos correct him and he just repeats after him something like “yeah, yeah whatever; but what I’m really trying to say is that McCain hasn’t suggested I’m a Muslim.”
And that was what he really was trying to say, IMHO. And believe me, I’m no apologist for Obama. But I think people read way too much into this particular exchange.
neo,
LOL…believe me, I would never suggest you were an apologist for Obama.
The interview could very well have been a simple slip of the tongue, not denying that.
But I am afraid I disagree and don’t buy into the idea he was doing any self-referencing – even allowing for the possibility of it being just a method of debate or whatever – in order to make a larger point.
I think there were things bouncing around in his head and he misspoke.
Now whether he misspoke because he was trying too hard to make the point he wasn’t muslim, or if it was because in his heart he still sees himself as a muslim….well, that’s what has so many people scratching their heads.
Re: “I recall hearing that he had simply “lost” it….are you perhaps assuming something here?’
Answer: When people ask for copies of their birth certificates and their families had had original copies of their birth certificate, the reason in virtually all cases is because they lost or cannot lay their hands on the original. That is one of the major reasons states maintain birth certificate files, so that people who have lost their originals can get birth certificates.
Re: “For the record, at 45 years old (to be 46 next week) I still have mine. It’s one of those documents that most people realize is, ya know, kind of important.”
Answer: Well bully for you. I’m one of the people who lost my original, although I also knew that it was important. Still, no great harm, I got a copy from my state. It was a short-form birth certificate, not a photocopy of the original, but it worked fine.
Granite,
“Answer: When people ask for copies of their birth certificates and their families had had original copies of their birth certificate, the reason in virtually all cases is because they lost or cannot lay their hands on the original. That is one of the major reasons states maintain birth certificate files, so that people who have lost their originals can get birth certificates.”
In other words, you chose a long winded way of saying you had no back up for claiming Obamboozler had lost his – if in fact he ever had it to begin with – but couldn’t bring yourself to admit it.
You are kidding, of course. A person asks for a copy of his birth certificate even though he has a copy of his birth certificate. Sure. How likely is that to happen?
You may be thinking that IF there was a significant difference between the long-form birth certificate and the short-form birth certificate, then he would pick the one that was to his advantage.
However, I have looked at samples of each and the only significant difference is that the long form shows the hospital and the doctor and the short-form doesn’t. There is nothing about religion, nor does the long form go into details on parents or anything else.
Another major difference, of course, is that the long-form birth certificate is no longer the official birth certificate. The short-form Certification is the official birth certificate.
In any case, we know that Obama asked Hawaii for a copy of his birth certificate in 2007, almost certainly because he lost or could not lay his hands on the original. And we know that Hawaii sent him the Certification, and we know that the Certification shows that he was born in Hawaii and that the officials in Hawaii have said repeatedly that the original did too. Hawaii does not send out copies of the original anymore, so that is why it sent the Certification to Obama. And Hawaii has given no indication of changing its rules on this, so that is all that it is likely to send. BUT, if it did change its rules, the original would say just what the Certification says, that Obama was born in Hawaii, as the officials and the governor, and this witness (http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece) all have said.