Dreams from his Father: Obama as Petulant Anticolonialist
On the eve of the 2008 election, veteran newsman Tom Brokaw famously declared that we don’t know Barack Obama. The astonishing admission occurred during a discussion on the Charlie Rose Show, and fellow veteran newsman Charlie Rose agreed wholeheartedly with Brokaw’s admitted ignorance of the man they both wanted to see elected to the most powerful office on earth:
Shortly after the election, CNN’s Jonathan Mann wrote that Americans “are putting a lot of faith in a man they barely know.” This was true and, perhaps unintentionally, quite a powerful indictment of his employer.
The idea of Tom Brokaw, former anchor of one of the Big Three nightly newscasts and one of America’s most prolific news anchors, a man steeped in American politics for decades on end, declaring that “we don’t understand the universe” of Obama’s thinking was incredible at the time. We had by then come to know of Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his peculiar race-centric Chicago church. We had by then come to know of Obama’s relationship with William Ayers, the unrepentant 1960s radical terrorist who had openly lamented that he and his ilk hadn’t committed enough violence against America to end the Vietnam war. We had, by November 2008, already come to know of Obama’s past work with ACORN, the corrupt community organizing group, and we already knew that he planned to continue and elevate ACORN’s work as president. Those of us who paid close attention knew that in his books Obama himself had confessed to associating with the radicals and Marxists on campus during his college days. We already knew all of this, yet Brokaw, Rose, and Mann were to some extent right to say that we still didn’t really know the universe of Obama’s thinking.
Nearly 20 months into the Obama presidency, it’s finally becoming clear just how little about Obama we and the media that covered him really understood about him. Fifty-two percent of America elected a dream, but they didn’t know whose dream they were putting in the White House or what sort of personality would drive that dream.
But we’re getting closer. Victor Davis Hanson, writing here at PJM, and Dinesh D’Souza, writing in Forbes, have separately unlocked two key facets of Obama’s personality and worldview that, together, may tell us exactly who Obama is and exactly what makes him tick.
Of Birthers and Truthers, Part One
So much has been written and said about so-called “Birthers,” those people who question Barack Hussein Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen,” and so-called “Truthers,” those who question the official account of the events on September 11th, 2001, that it’s nearly impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff.
The wheat, that is, the truth, is there, somewhere buried deep beneath all the chaff, the baloney and propaganda, but unearthing that truth is no simple matter for someone who has never subscribed to either the Birther or Truther alleged conspiracies.
Let’s immediately dispel the most common slander employed against the Birthers namely that they’re racists who cooked up the whole Obama birth controversy out of their antagonism toward the first black president in America’s history.
There is no substantive proof of a racist motivation on the part of Birthers. That charge of racism has been used from the beginning of Obama’s candidacy to dismiss virtually all who speak ill of the man, his beliefs, or his policies.
It’s an excellent, if underhanded, ploy when you think about it, deftly tossing the racist card into the campaign mix whenever someone criticized Obama. Rarely tossed overtly, it was more often implicit and probably garnered a few million white votes cast by those who wanted desparately to assure themselves and others that they weren’t racists.
It’s also more than curious that the MSM fell all over itself dismissing and ridiculing Birthers with no real effort to investigate their contentions and standpoint, much like they did with interrelated rumors that Obama was really a Muslim and as they subsequently did with regard to the Tea Party Movement.
That failure alone is reason enough to give at least some credence to the Birthers.
(Incidentally, there’s no substantive proof, either, that Birthers are a disturbed product of a resurrection of Hillary Clinton’s “vast, right wing conspiracy.”)
As a non-Birther, I figured going directly to the source was the best bet toward determining just how valid a case the Birthers made for their view that Barack Hussein Obama was a poseur not constitutionally-entitled to the presidency no matter how many votes he received . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1894)
In another FAQ, their website deals with another issue: certificate vs. certification of birth: “Question: Why did Hawaii issue a Certificate of Live Birth, if he wasn’t born in Hawaii.
Answer: Hawaii did not issue Obama a Certificate of Live Birth, they issued him a Certification of Live Birth. In fact his sister Maya Soetoro-Ng, born in Indonesia, also possesses a Certification of Live Birth from Hawaii. The Hawaiian government itself states that a Certification of Live Birth is less accurate than a Certificate of Live Birth.”
Berlet. I copied the above from the article on your website. If this statement is true then it puts to rest the contention that Obama’s Certification of Live Birth is proof of his birthplace.
As an English teacher you ought to know the importance of language. The term birther is a smear which lumps those who are disinclined to buy a pig in a poke with those who believe in a completely idiotic and disproved conspiracy theory. The term birther is completely inappropriate to describe people who are simply asking for reliable documentation to support Obama’s assertion that he was born in Hawaii. Speaking for myself I want to see a Certificate of Live Birth signed by the person who delivered him.
I do not know where Barack Obama was born. I wish the media had investigated this issue before the debacle of November 2008. The media however is deliberately incompetent. They are afraid of what they might find if they investigate Obama. He has however revealed himself as something different from what they conceived him to be and in the process the media has revealed itself as exactly what I thought it to be: biased, lazy, intellectually incurious and of mediocre intelligence.
“I wish the media had investigated this issue before the debacle of November 2008. The media however is deliberately incompetent. They are afraid of what they might find if they investigate Obama. He has however revealed himself as something different from what they conceived him to be and in the process the media has revealed itself as exactly what I thought it to be: biased, lazy, intellectually incurious and of mediocre intelligence.”
State media knows the truth about Obama. It has been their mission all along to cover up his tracks and sell him to Americans as a savior for all of our ills. His left leaning agenda towards socialism and higher “isms” is also their agenda.
“The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.”
John Adams
The job of verifying any candidate for a high ranking office in the United States is the USCIS, U.S. State Dept., and/or the FBI.
If the Republican Party came out with any candidate for office with the shady background Obama has, all agencies would investigate, and the media would give it 24/7 coverage. There would be an emergency motion in the Supreme Court to suspend the candidates eligibility until it could be verified by the media, and even then their would be 24/7 screaming about eligibility.
Obama has been a blank slate, and has intentionally maintained himself as a blank slate, to make himself useful to the Democrat Party and the Communist Media of America (CMOA).
These people and organizations are the New Nazi Party and Mafia incorporated into one cohesive group.
When are the American People going to wake up and see that the Democrat Party and the CMOA are complicit in a conspiracy to rape the Treasury, and overthrow the United States Government?
The link to that birth certificate file appears dead, already.
I am not a “Burther” per se in that I make no conclusions about the unprecedented secrecy surrounding Obama’s birth, college and medical records. I do believe that if a presidential candidate – and now sitting president – expends this degree of money, effort and political capital to keep something secret, then there is something “interesting” therein.
I am a former military recruiter (long since retired). I have dealt with hundreds of birth verification documents of various types for enlistment and security clearance purposes. There are two key points re: the Obama situation. 1 – Nothing he has produced so far would constitute a legal verification of citizenship or date of birth for security clearance or enlistment purposes. The COLB we have all seen would be viewed as inadequate because it is missing a few key data points. It is legally an informal document. 2 – That would normally be no big deal because any recruiter or clearance investigator could normally get a source document or expanded verification from the state office of vital statistics. Typically this can be done the same day. If you develop a relationship with the people in the records office – often you can get long form birth certificates while you wait.
Herein lies the curious part. Obama has spent seven figures to prevent the state of Hawaii from releasing that expanded information. Obama could resolve this situation in a matter of hours if he chose to do so. He could make his critics look like idiots. Not only does he choose not to – he has spent a million bucks to prevent others from seeing the expanded data.
I have no idea why this is – but asking why is a reasonable question.
I don’t know where Barack Obama was born, and at this point in his presidency, I don’t care. What he is, above all, is an unmitigated disaster who should be removed from office in 2012 (if not sooner, given his support for Eric Holder’s criminal Department of Justice, and all the communists and lawless useful idiots he’s put into positions of power without any oversight). Until then, hopefully, we can neuter him in November.
In support of this thesis, I can add that this kind of person (as Obama seems to be), with that kind of worldview, and especially in politics, is immediately recognizable to anyone who spent some time in places like South America or Africa. It is not that everyone there shares that worldview; rather, like the American liberals, they tend to exercise more political influence than the popularity of their ideas would warrant. Also, I would even say that it is precisely this kind of thinking that has held back the development of such countries for so long.
Barack Obama is perhaps best described as the first “Third World” POTUS – recognizable if you look at figures such as Juan Peron in Argentina, or Julius Nyerere in Tanzania (who was also more obviously a socialist). Ironically, Obama does not seem to have learned the most important lesson from his Kenyan heritage: that Kenya’s relative early post-colonial success, in comparison to places like Tanzania or Ghana, was due precisely to Jomo Kenyatta’s relatively free-market approach.
The deadliest combination of worldviews was precisely the anticolonialism+socialism mix, best expressed in Asia, as in Mao, Vietnam, and the Khmer Rouge (and the Shining Path in Peru).
Ironically, the first Third World US president has appeared precisely as the anticolonialist worldview is being discredited in the Third World itself, certainly in Asia and partially in South America (as in Brazil and Chile – obviously not in Venezuela). Not in Africa, though – not yet, at least.
If my experience with the same kind of people in South America and Africa is any guide, Obama is at the same time fully sincere in his beliefs, and totally unable to reconsider them.
Ideology? Forget it. Third-world countries’ progress is inhibited by the fact that they’re inhabited by third-world peoples. Median IQ in sub-Saharan Africa = 70. Absent colonialism, they’d still be trying to perfect the wheel. Chinese in Hong Kong developed a world-beating economy without resources or even decent living space. Arabs sitting on top of oceans of oil, on their own, were still riding camels and living in tents before those infidel geologists showed up. Some peoples are more intelligent than others. Sorry, but there it is.
Very good insights, though Chile had a Laissez-faire boom economy under the direction of its “Chicago Boysm” during the Pinochet dictatorship (granted, Pinochet only took power after overthrowing the socialist Allende regime, and Chile eventually regressed back to leftism).
And one need not go to South America or Africa to find Leftists who are truly sincere and completely intractable in their beliefs. Just visit a faculty lounge at any college or university, any cocktail party on the Upper West Side of Manhattan or Georgetown, any newsroom, any Starbucks, etc.
Anti-colonialism and socialism are indeed a toxic brew. But for a better understanding of Barack Obama, add Critical Race Theory into the mix with anti-colonialism and socialism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory
Barack Obama cites Cornel West and Derrick Bell (the father of Critical Race Theory) as mentors and dear friends from his time at Harvard Law. As an adjunct instructor at the University of Chicago, Obama assigned Bell as required reading in his “Race and Law” seminar.
Critical Race Theory proposes that America is, by its very nature, structurally racist beyond reform. All whites are born racist and evil: racism is a genetic trait unique to the white man. No matter how hare a white tries, he cannot overcome his genetically ingrained racism. Thus, America’s oppression of minorities is so systemic and institutionalized that its laws — by definition — deny equality to minorities. So affording minorities equal protection under the law does nothing to end the oppression, as the laws themselves are inherently racist. Along the same lines, the U.S. Constitution — written by slave-holding white males — is inherently racist.
Elements of CRT can be detected in many of Obama’s positions and statements past and present. When Obama says that the U.S. Constitution is an inherently “negative document” that does “nothing to say what the government can do to help people,” he’s taking a toke of CRT. So too was he toking on CRT when, as an Illinois state legislator, he pushed for race-based standards of “fairness” to be applied to traffic stops and arrests made by municipal police departments. That legislation would have effectively forced police departments in Illinois to pull motorists over and make arrests in accordance with racial quotas (i.e., the percentage of minorities pulled over and/or arrested couldn’t exceed a certain percent of total pull-overs and arrests). The examples abound: would the New Black Panthers’ voter intimidation case have been dropped by Obama & Eric Holder’s Justice Department if not for the influence of CRT? Would the President have described his grandmother as a “typical white person” whose prejudices were “bred into her” if not for the CRT tenet of the genetically inherited racism of the white man?
Sorry for the typo, should read “Chicago Boys,” with regard to the University of Chicago-educated economic advisers who guided Chile’s economy during the dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet.
It is rather strange that Obama, with his ideas of government, democracy and socialism, would rise to the White House just as socialist Europe is unraveling and just as some of the very third world nations he’s trying to give some justice to, for example Vietnam, Brazil and South Africa et al, are coming around to democracy and an open economy and beginning to succeed.
While he may very well hold the views described here in Mr. Preston’s article, it seems there is one other trait we’ve discovered about Mr. Obama…. He can’t seem to readjust his mindset upon receiving new information.
We’re all watching the nations of Europe take drastic measures to save themselves from the equivalent of bankruptcy because of the same policies Mr. Obama is now preaching. And we’re all watching Brazil, South Africa and others continue to move towards democracy and an open economy and grow because they are moving away from the policies that have held them back for so many years, largely the same policies that Mr. Obama is now trying to put in place here.
I guess this makes Obama either delusional, a true ideologue who can see nothing but HIS way or the man is so arrogant that he believes he can put a socialist system in place here even though no other nation around the world who has tried, has managed to thrive under these ideas.
Yes, we definitely should have gotten to know the man, his ideas and plans before electing him. Hopefully, the American people won’t make this mistake again.
“I guess this makes Obama either delusional, a true ideologue who can see nothing but HIS way or the man is so arrogant that he believes he can put a socialist system in place here even though no other nation around the world who has tried, has managed to thrive under these ideas”
Well, all of that and something even more important. He’s stupid. Can’t think on his feet, can’t deal with conflicting information, can’t pick smart allies, can’t adapt when complex situations require new approaches, can’t explain the benefits of his approaches to people who disagree with him.
Stupid.
The first birther was a former Pa. Deputy Attorney General, and a Democrat leader.
“Anticolonialism is the stuff of Ward Churchill and Noam Chomsky, not Main Street and soccer games.”
But anticolonialism veiled as anti-capitalism and anti-Americanism does have a large following in America. The black population knew what Obama was about; they’ve wanted to stick it to white America for years; they’ve wanted to get their share of America’s spoils for years but reparations as such was not available but a black, America-hating president was the answer. And the 20% of America’s white population who are the progressive left hates America. So this anticolonialism while not mainstreet is very much a force in America.
“Obama wants to champion statism but his own actions have discredited it.”
I disagree. His approval rating is still above 40%; the MSM will continue to support him and obscure anything he does that harms his administration; black support is still 95%; the left Congress still fully supports him; Wall Street supports him; colleges and universities support him; acorn, unions, lawyers, teachers, and government workers support him. So where do you get the idea that his actions have discredited his desire for statism?
I agree.
This isn’t new. This was put forward, in an article at the American Thinker, about two years ago. You finally catching up, Newt?
Look, Bill Clinton! BOO!!
Apologies. It was just over a year ago.
Obama, the African Colonial
By L.E. Ikenga
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/obama_the_african_colonial.
Bryan – If Brokaw and Rose didn’t know too much about Obama, I think it is because they didn’t want to know. It was quite clear to me in 2008 what Obama was all about. The so-called MSM, as exemplified by Brokaw and Rose, were playing ostrich (and still are), and as the saying goes, there are none so blind as those who will not see.
I disagree that types like Rose and Brokaw didn’t want to know what Obama was about. The intellectual Left’s betrayal of America is a sin of commission not omission. Brokaw and Rose, along with all their fellow travelers, knew as much or more about Obama than you did. But whereas you’re response was horror at the prospect of Obama as president, their response was ‘What’s wrong with that?’
Obama’s attitudes were no cause for concern – they knew full well that he shared their contempt for America. For Rose, Brokaw, and others of their ilk, Obama’s anti-white anti-capitalist anti-American pedigree was just part of the thrilling package.
How come Brazil has status as a former colony but not the USA,
Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc? And BTW has anyone noticed that the Latin American darlings of the political left with large black populations have nary one representative of African heritage in their entourages – I’m talking about, Lulu, Castro and Chavez who are not anglospericals and therefore pure of heart and mind.
“As Dinesh D’Souza notes in his brilliant profile of the president in Forbes, 52% of America elected a dream…”
“52% of America” DID NOT ELECT THIS NIGHTMARE. 52% OF THOSE WHO VOTED elected this nightmare, and that constitutes something around 30% of those actually eligible to vote, but who were either too lazy to vote or too lazy to register to vote.
I’m sure most of the writers/journolists have a fer reel kollidge edumacation, while I didn’t even finish one year, so I’m a ignoramus. But for some reason, again and again and again, this nonsense is spouted. And the problem with these highly edumacated people spouting this lie is that there are still way too many people who are too lazy to think and they will believe that “52% of America” actually did elect the nightmare. IT’S NOT TRUE.
…..edumacation doesn’t solve the problem of inability or unwillingness to THINK………
Thank you Emma… the “52%” bit also infuriates me.
Official government electoral statistics I’ve found say around 69,000,000 who can vote, voted for BHO. The % of this out of approx 300,000,000 is about 22-23%. That is NOT 52% of the population… I am happily in the 77-78% who did NOT want this guy.
(I also wonder if any of those 69,000,000 were repeats, fake or dead voters, too… I’m sure NO corruption occurred anywhere to get their precious into office, eh?)
Awake.And.Engaged.
I think Obama is conflicted. He is not a conviction politician but an assemblage of different opinions that are only reconcilable in speech, not in the real world. He still looks good though so keep the head and give him a brain transplant. Or make him into a puppet.
Notice something else about Obama – besides his narcissism, his adherence to the old anti-colonialist ideas of his father, the socialism of his mother and the anti-Americanism and racism of his wife.
His emotional bond to Islam. He refuses to acknowledge Islam’s inherent commitment to violent colonialism, to militant take-overs of other peoples, to terrorism. He refuses to even use the term of ‘Islamic terrorism’. Instead, he separates terrorism from Islam and locates it strictly within Al Qaeda which he defines only as a ‘militant extremism’.
I’m still stunned that he can’t see the hypocrisy of his stance:
1) For GZMosque because of ‘freedom of religion’ but refuses to comment on its ethical or ‘sensitive’ nature.
2) Against Burning Koran…acknowledges ‘freedom of expression’ but INSISTS on commenting on its ethical or ‘sensitive’ nature.
Hmmm.
What’s the underlying similarity between these two? His support for Islam.
Gotta believe your lyin’ eyes and ears, friend. In his world, there’s no hypocrisy in his stance because these two opposites (used simultaneously) serve to meet his goals. Unfortunately, the next step beyond being “stunned” at such disconnects is usually “despair.” So just move through despair as quickly as possible and get to “mad as hell and not gonna take it any more.”
That Obama was not properly vetted prior to election, was incompetence on the part of, politicians. Think about it. Either they knew beforehand & covered up, or, they simply overlooked the issue & ignored any questions because they were wrapped up pushing for the ‘first black president.’ This despite the reality that he is half black & half white. I suppose under the liberal mindset Obama gets to choose which he wants to be known as.
Anyway….. just exactly who demanded it be done, and who vetted, John McCain?
McCain’s eligibility WAS vetted prior to the election. Born in the Panama Canal Zone, someone tried to imply that meant he was not a natural born citizen. Even though he was born to an American citizen mother and an American citizen father, who was also on active military duty at the time of birth.
So, it was determined that McCain was eligible. It was determined he was a natural born citizen.
But….. no one vetted Obama! Why? Why did no one decide to check into him, when they had already checked into McCain? Who decided to ignore Obama’s eligibility? Who directed folks to just, drop the subject?
Seems to me if he is NOT a natural born citizen, there are an awful lot of folks in the Democrat party who need to answer why they either deliberately ignored this issue or they deliberately acted to thwart any investigation into Obama’s eligibility! And, if there are a number of people involved as I suspect it would take to pull something like that off, that makes it a conspiracy. The kind that is against the law?! Not the musing on various possible facts kind.
Not only did Congress NOT vet Obama, Pelosi pointedly signed an affirmation sent to Hawaii with a statement declaring that BO was Constitutionally eligible, and she did not include the same statement in the affirmations sent to all other 49 states. Now why would she make that distinct difference? Well, Hawaii required that statement be on the affirmation for their files, while all other states did not require that language. So Pelosi obviously knew what she was doing when she put it on the affirmation that required it, and left it off of the ones that didn’t require it.
Sorry to be such a simpleton, but I am a fundy in all things, it seems. I see Barack and all liberals as simply Materialists. Now, this is where it becomes conceptualized (and liberals depart from reality) because they attempt to view Equality from a prism of Materialism. What is that? That is the question.
Reading about anti-neocolonialism makes me think of an episode from the show Northern Exposure. If you are familiar with that show, there was an episode where the natives would pelt the non-natives with tomatoes for a whole day and then had a big parade at the end of the day. The non-natives took it in stride. Mariam’s boss, Dr. Fleishman asked her why they did this. She said it was a form of pay back against the colonialists for taking over their land but then a celebration to celebrate the fact that they now have penicillin, modernity and Ben and Jerry’s ice cream. I may have botched the plot line a bit, but you get the gist. Of course colonialism came with serious abuses and greed by one nationality to the detriment in many ways of another. But it also was an attempt to a degree to bring the other nationality into the fold of civilization as it existed at the time. There were many that wanted this for the natives and to bring them out of there relatively primitive existences and practices. We have grown up as a civilization and now take much less and give much more to these “third world nations”. I believe that and I think anyone who seriously and objectively looks at how the U.S. and other Westernized countries deal with the rest of the world would also see that. No doubt there are still some abuses, but at least remedies exist. Westernized nations continue to always help and assist monetarily, through support, through NGOs, etc. Why do you never hear any of this or see at least some gratitude? Western civilization is the optimum way of life on this planet right now. It does and should want to elevate others up to that standard. It should not want to allow itself to be brought down to the non-Westernized, less optimum standards for egalitarian purposes.
We have grown up as a civilization and now take much less and give much more to these “third world nations”.
I am not even sure that, over the long run, colonialism was “profitable” for the colonists. The cost of projecting power over long distances being what it is and all.
It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if in an alternate universe where the West never colonized non-Western peoples, the West’s standard of living wouldn’t be higher than it is today. Was nothing but a huge waste of time.
In Dreams, he explicitly embraces his father’s worldview during a visit to his father’s grave in Kenya.
When you get beyond the theories and postulating, Dad was a philandering drunk who abandoned his young son at age 2 and saw him exactly once after that.
I guess the genetic blueprint got passed on anyway, with reinforcement from many influences along the way, like Frank Marshall Davis during his teenage years.
We’ve seen enough of Barack to know that no set of facts, conditions or circumstances will cause any “change” to take place between his ears.
A challenge or contradiction to any aspect of his worldview is simply explained away, in the spirit of “We will be The Ones™ to finally get redistributive socialism correct”
Barack Obama is also on course with his buddy Imam Rauf’s taqiyya, pretending to support the American Constitution and respect the American experience, offering friendship with the tongue while harboring hostility.
Taqiyya bottom line…
“smile in their faces while our hearts curse them”
Actually, reading the last couple of paragraphs of the forbes article creeped me out. This described a man who had a psychological fracture of some kind and came to terms with it over the grave of such a man as his father. It’s scary sounding, since it has all the trappings of a personal mythology (consider the writings of Joseph Campbell here). Someone with that kind of personal myth in the position of power he’s in…really, it’s kind of frightening. More so than if he’s just a run of the mill hard-left corporatist (as opposed to socialist).
How anyone could have read that in his book and been inspired instead of immediately scared to have him in power is beyond me.
“Why did no one decide to check into him, when they had already checked into McCain? Who decided to ignore Obama’s eligibility? Who directed folks to just, drop the subject?”
Georgie-Porgie Soros gets what Georgie-Porgie Soros wants, that’s why.
If you can rest on the words hate and revenge, you have arrived at the focus of what Obama is and what he feels and thinks about America. He is driven by these emotions, his whole self is motivated by them.
As to the people and the press & what they knew? Well the dummies went for the vacuous “dream” part, leftie voters had at least a reasonable idea, and the media knew damn well what this trash was, and loved it.
Brokaw’s comments about mystery are a joke and lie.
We live in an overcredentialled age of psychologists and intellectual quantification where the words “smart” and “stupid” are determined by university certifications and standardized IQ tests. Traditionally, intelligence was determined by words and action. By the traditional and reasonable standards which prevailed before the Twentieth Century, Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose are plainly stupid. Likewise the empty suit they supported for president.
After the Civil War, the Radical Republicans ran roughshod over the South with various legislative acts and with an occupation by the Union Army. This period of radical change was called the Reconstruction. It came to an end with the disputed Hayes-Tilden presidential election. Hayes won. In the bargain, the Union Army was withdrawn from the South. America, and particularly the white South, wanted an end to Reconstruction. America wanted to get back to just living a normal life.
Since the 1960s, America has undergone a second Reconstruction which included radical ideas, social engineering, and an end to legal segregation. It even had a disputed presidential election–Bush-Gore. But, America has grown tired of this second Reconstruction. America wants to get back to just living a normal life.
Electing Barack Obama was less the election of the man than the symbol. America was willing to give its imprimatur to an under-qualified candidate because America wanted to end this second Reconstruction and to just get back to living a normal life. Those non-black voters voting for Obama because he was a black man did so as a statement, “I am not a racist. I am not bigoted. I am voting for a black man to show how far the country (and I) have progressed. Now, let me get back to living my day-to-day life.”
In so voting, little did they care to know about the man’s underlying character, beliefs, and anti-colonial/anti-capitalist ideology. He presented himself as mainstream politician rather than as the radical he is. America was conned.
But, America wants to return to normalcy. This November’s elections will reiterate that point.
America’s second Reconstruction and its radicalism may finally be over. We may be able to return to a life of normalcy if we are able to halt Obama’s radical ventures and roll back some of the legislation of the past two years.
God Save Our Republic!
Wow, Harvard Yard Conservative,
I’ve never thought of it that way (and I think and read about this stuff every day). You have articulated something I have felt but have not been able to put into words.
I have often felt that America will come back to being America when time has consumed the last of the hippie generation (alas, that will mean that I’m gone too, but worth it for the sake of our country). I think that’s sort of what you’re saying.
I admire you insight and certainly hope you are right.
Libby
HYC: Very interesting hypothesis. However, as I see it, it could stand muster if there were many more non-black voters voting. As it was under 50% of voters voted in the election. And of those non-black voters, Dear Leader received only about 37% of the white vote compared to McLame’s 55%. If this was a cathartic and guilt-cleansing vote, many more white voters would have voted for him.
But to borrow on your thesis, I do think it was an ending of the Second Reconstruction. In the past 50 years our nation has done so much for Americans and the world. We’ve led the world in every category. Dear Leader and his ilk of leftist progressives who hate America wanted it to end. So they selected him on his blackness because he had a built in defense to his motives and policies being questioned.
No that election was the left finally getting what it wanted for 70 years of toiling in America’s underground. It was the confluence of them having the power-Congress, money-Soros, MSM, higher education and most federal and state government bureaucracies. Mostly the MSM. They are SO complicit in the destruction of the US that I hope someday soon we will see them held responsible.
I’ve been wondering many of the same things myself. I’m Canadian so I don’t know the details of how US elections work but, given the Constitutional requirement that Presidential candidates be natural-born Americans, isn’t it SOMEBODY’S JOB to determine if the individuals at the top of the various party tickets meet that requirement?
In other words, isn’t someone in the federal government responsible to verify that all Presidential candidates that make it to the ballot are indeed American citizens? If so, what is the job title of that individual? Who was in that job during the 2008 election? What steps did they take to ensure that the candidates were natural-born Americans? What paperwork did they file to declare that the various Presidential candidates were qualified to be President?
I’m guessing that there is a law somewhere that states who is responsible for this checking – perhaps the outgoing Attorney General or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court – and that the law states more or less precisely what documentation suffices to prove the candidate’s place of birth and citizenship. I also assume that the person who does the checking has to issue some sort of official declaration affirming that each candidate is a natural born American.
So who actually has this job in the US and where is the paperwork filed? Surely that would help set the birthers’ minds at ease. Or, if that checking was NOT done, there should be a very strong case to disallow Obama’s presidency on the grounds that he wasn’t qualified.
This raises an interesting question. What happens if a President turns out to have been unqualified but this only becomes apparent AFTER he has been elected? I’m guessing that the 25th (?) Amendment, the one that deals with succession to the Presidency in the event of the incapacity of the President, would kick in and that Biden would become the new President. (Assuming, of course, that Biden has been proven to be a natural-born American!)
As for the federal official who was supposed to verify the citizenship of the candidates, I can only hope his career would come to a swift and ignominious end.
Yes, someone in government is charged with finding out a presidential candidate’s eligibility – the Speaker – in this case Nancy Pelosi. But she didn’t bother doing it correctly and Obama got a pass. Seems the fix was in.
Is there any reasonable prospect of investigating Pelosi’s vetting of Obama’s candidacy? Surely there is some kind of formal procedure that Pelosi would have had to follow; if she took shortcuts, shouldn’t that be evident in the paper trail? Wouldn’t that open her up to some form of oversight and then discipline or even prosecution if she failed to do the job properly? Wouldn’t a failure to do the job properly leave Obama genuinely vulnerable to being ejected from office and replaced by Biden?
I’m still rather surprised that the job of vetting candidates is done by an elected politician. It seems like a conflict of interest is built right in to the process! Wouldn’t it make more sense for the job to be done by someone perceived as neutral in the political process? Perhaps the Supreme Court?
Obama was elected in hopes he would cleanse the guilt of white America. At this point in time, any black candidate would have been elected to negate the cries of the American race hustlers.
And had Obama NOT been elected, after all that had been invested in him, the riots would still be going on in every town in America.
This is not a theory; We’ve been there, and done that.
D’Souza’s theory that anti-colonialism is the primary motivation driving Obama isn’t very compelling.
I don’t doubt it’s a factor, but if that is his main motivation, he was able to hide it successfully from an ocean of fellow radicals for decades. That witches brew of freedom-haters are in the game for THEMSELVES, not to redistribute THEIR RIGHTFUL WEALTH to Africa. They might pay lip service to some idiot who has that kind of a grudge, since they love all grudges against America. But to think they would sacrifice their own greed and hatreds to even more obscure manias of another demon seed stretches the imagination. It would be like Lenin deciding that what really mattered was the well-being of the people in Tibet. Not.
It makes a lot more sense that Obama is a committed Marxist, allied with Statists everywhere, and occassionally getting a jolly by pissing in the Africa sinkhole.
Actually, Obama’s Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii. It is used by thousands of people every year. Hawaii does not now and did not in 1961 allow a birth certificate, or a birth document of any kind, to indicate birth IN Hawaii unless there was proof of birth in Hawaii. Obama’s birth certificate says on it that he was born in Hawaii, and that is the fact that has been confirmed twice by the officials in Hawaii, and most recently by the governor of Hawaii.
Obama’s sister, Maya, does not have a Certification of Live Birth. In fact, she does not have a birth certificate of any kind from Hawaii. Birther Leo Donfrion used the Hawaiian version of the Freedom of Information Act (I forget its name) to show that Obama’ sister does not even have a file in the birth certificate registry of Hawaii.
Obama does, however, and the officials in Hawaii said in their first confirmation that there is an original birth certificate in that file. So, why doesn’t he show it, you may ask? Because Hawaii does not send it out anymore. Hawaii has not sent out copies of the original birth certificate to anyone since 2001.
The document that Obama showed and that was confirmed repeatedly is completely reliable because it is the official birth certificate. (NO it was not forged. The McCain campaign looked into that and found that it was false.)
Why did he spend over a million to block the full facts around his birth? It’s pretty obvious that the answer is to stop discovery of those facts, and that they would either 1) disqualify him for office and/or 2) reveal information that would provoke citizens to want him immediately removed from that office.
But the birth stuff is just a small part of what Obama covers up. So is much of his life from childhood right up until the campaign. This is all clear by now. Except by now many powerful people are invested in continuing the coverup = massive corruption and dissing of Americans. Thus indirectly proving that ‘the elites against the people’ is as much of a distressing truth as ‘Islam against the infidel’ or anything else.
Classic example of the phenomena seen often here – Cater to the wingnuts even if you have to make things up. Cover the nonsense with the honey of lies and misleading information and you will draw the wingust lies flies to garbage. In fact we know more about Obama than George Bush because he wrote about his life growing up. But the wingnuts are afraid of a dark man with an exotic name. Thsi nonsense is entirely predictable given their fear and the lack of scruples inhose who cater to their fears
This post is so amazingly dumb that is has to be a gag. Do you really believe that we “know all about” Mr. Obama because HE wrote about HIS life while growing up? Since when did autobiography (and incredibly puerile and self-serving autobiography in this case) become an irrefutable factual document? Any competent historian will tell you that those who write their own life story invariably omit facts, change events, edit the narrative and outright lie about their past and accomplishments. Given your argument we have no choice but to take Mr. Bush’s forthcoming memoir as holy writ. Hopefully you have been to Barnes and Noble and ordered your advance copy.
Just to let you know, none of us are hiding under our beds trembling with fear of the “dark man with the exotic name.” When are you guys going to give up on tired rhetorical tropes such as that? It really isn’t helping you out.
As for fear and trembling – I guess you have not been reading the post from the wingnuts here- oops I forgot the saying about the mote in your eye. By the way, how many historian have you talked to lately? And Geln Beck does not qualify as a competnet historian – or maybe you meant Sara!
Historians. Yes. That’s the ticket. The higher authority in the back of the room who have allowed Shadow to invoke them when needed to bludgeon the rubes with knowledge.
Trustworthy people all, historians. Objective observors, second only to climate scientists in their hard-nosed pursuit of the truth.
Shadow writes a heartfelt insult intead of using her brain: “But the wingnuts are afraid of a dark man with an exotic name.”
Half of The Shadow’s charge is easily refuted by noting just a few of the best American thinkers and writers who are conservative “dark men”:
Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Walter Williams, Stanly Crouch. Yes, such wingnuts as these the Left only wishes they could brag of. There are more. The libruls have nothing to match them today.
As for Exotic names, Hussein is only an exotic name to an insular religious bigot like, well like Shadow I guess. There is nothing exotic about it.
Citing those “dark men” does nothing to refute the commenter’s argument, as they don’t have “exotic names.” The commenter specifically states that “wingnuts” are afraid of “dark men” who have “exotic names.” So of course “teabagger Christianist wingnuts” don’t fear those “dark men.” Yup, it’s “dark men” who have “exotic names” that Teabagger-Christianist-wingnut-gun-toting middle-aged white male terrorists fear … you know, “dark men” like Marco Rubio, Miguel Estrada and Alberto Gonzalez. Or like Dinesh D’Souza, Ramesh Ponnuru and Reihan Salaam.
So the commenter still pwned you bro.
But, T.S., I deallt with both of your points in my comment. I’m afraid I may have to question your literacy. You’re no T.S. Eliot, that’s for sure…bro.
The Shadow’s musings serve as slyly brilliant, but ultimately epic take-downs of the “teabagger wingnuts” — those who Markos Moulitsas refers to as the “American Taliban” — insofar as they employ irreverence toward traditional modes of spelling and prose in order to prove that the (clearly inferior) brains of “teabagger wingnuts” who are able to read and comprehend his/her/its comments (and respond in earnest without correcting them!) are so acclimated to misspelled words and third grade-level prose that they process The Shadow’s creatively misspelled words and disjointed, crack-addled, primary-grade prose in the same manner as the brains of smart people with a good educational backgrounds process and comprehend good writers and thinkers, such as Dewey, Marcuse, Chomsky, Derrida or Foucault.
Obviously, the “wingnutz” here must have gone to school west of the Alleghenys (at large public, land-grant schools in the South and Midwest, no doubt! LOL!).
Lines like “(t)hsi nonsense is entirely predictable given their fear and the lack of scruples inhose who cater to their fears … ,” and “… how many historian have you talked to lately … Geln Beck does not qualify as a competnet historian – or maybe you meant Sara!” are clever traps set up to prove that those who read, comprehend and respond to them are stoopid rihgtwing teabagger NASCAR & gun-luvin’ middle-aged white male Christian terrorist wingnutz.
Ideiet wigngnutz!!! Tehbagger morans!!! LOL!!!
U got pwn3d!!! LOLZ!!!!
Clearly, The Shadow has been studying and attempting to master (not quite there yet) the methods of greatness that propel the internet sensation known as GreatBooksForMen, who states in no uncertain terms:
“omg social media is so coooooool!!!! twitter, myspace, and facebook are all loesing money but lzozlzl that is what socialist media is desighned to d0–commodify teh indvidual and augment debt lozzlzl as mark zuckerberg gets lottsa valuations! ben bernake was time magazine’s pesron of teh year because he has creathed more debt then any man ever. and neocon charlotte allen exalted tucker max’s fiat PR lies about his height and succeth in teh pages of the weekly standard because to the noecons sectrive taphings of butthex wihtout teh girlh;s conthent like tucker publishes and profits off of = god & good lzozlzzlzlzllolzllll!!!!”
On second reading, T.S., I am questioning my own literacy, or at least my sense of humor. I’m afraid I have pwned myself.
Yeah, probably should have included one of these:
And probably should have linked to GreatBooksForMen:
http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0lYd5vGfso
So all these journalists in the media did not know what Obama (was) about? Hey, Mr Journalist. isn’t that your job, to find things out?
These people are not journalist. They are fabulists. They substitute lies for facts and then when someone else repeats the lies, they refer to those posts as facts.
Betty, that you?
Henry Reardon—Yes, you’d think that once it set out the “natural born citizen” requirement as a mechanism to filter out “foreigners,” whose understanding of, love for, and allegiance to the United States might be weak, divided, secondary, questionable, or even non-existent—our Founding Fathers would have then gone on to specify, in unambiguous language, just which government official would be responsible for checking that each and every candidate for President meets this requirement, but they didn’t. So, from what I have read, a system has apparently evolved in which each State’s top election officials, the heads of their respective political parties, and, particularly, the Chairman of the Republican and Democratic National Conventions, and Speaker of the House–which in Obama’s case was Nancy Pelosi—have a responsibility to check their candidate’s credentials, and to “certify” that each candidate meets this requirement.
There have been assertions in various places on the Web that, within minutes of each other, Speaker Pelosi’s office prepared the official certification documents to be sent to each State in two different versions, and that one form, which was only sent to the District of Columbia, had in it the usual paragraph–certified by/above Pelosi’s signature—that stated that Obama met the Constitutional requirement that he be a “natural born citizen,” but that this paragraph was absent in all the other certification forms sent to each State (see, for instance, http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=109363 or http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2337485/posts .
Moreover, there is also the issue of Obama’s deep involvement in the issue of whether or not John McCain’s was a “natural born citizen,” and the sense of the Senate resolution, S. Res. 511, introduced by Obama supporter Senator Claire McCaskel on April 10, 2008, quickly reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 24th without amendment or debate (but with attached short legal opinions on the term “natural born citizen” by two eminent legal scholars—one Liberal one Conservative, that could be cited as part of its “Legislative history”)by its Chairman, far Left Senator Leahy, and the fact that the co-sponsors of S. Res. 511 were Senators Leahy, Hillary Clinton, Obama, Coburn and Webb; S.Res. 511 was then quickly passed in the Senate by unanimous consent in April 30, 2008. All this I view as highly significant byplay that few seem to have noticed or remember, especially since Obama was usually “on the road” and in “campaign mode” during his time in the Senate, disdained routine “office work,” during his almost two years in the Senate introduced exactly one minor bill that became law. but, yet, came back to Washington and the Senate to co-sponsor and to see this bill shepherded through,
In my view Obama knew, all too well and from the very beginning of his political career, that he might have a major problem with the “natural born citizen” requirement, and to deal with this problem he has taken steps, some of which have come to light.
First, was Obama’s laying down the main “narrative” of his life in his two autobiographies, “Dreams from My Father,” and “The Audacity of Hope” which, more and more, are being discovered to be a tissue of lies, half-truths, and omissions.
Next, was the sealing of all his records—original birth certificate, school records, scholarship records, medical records, draft records, passport records–to eliminate his back trail; the U.S. MSM cooperated to great effect here by not being in the least inquisitive, portraying anyone inquiring into this area as a nut, “conspiracy theorist,” “Birther,” “Zombie,” a “Hater,” or a “Suspicious Mind,” and repeating the mantra “there is nothing to see here folks, just move along.”
Next, there is the rather odd research done in 2006 by a Chicago law firm of Kirk and Ellis–that has ties to Obama–on this Constitutional requirement and how to get around it, and the law review article based on this legal research by Kirk and Ellis lawyer Sarah P. Herlihy titled, “Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement: Globalization as the Impetus and Obstacle,” in which she argued that this requirement, called by some the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution, “decidedly un-American,” “blatantly discriminatory,” and the “Constitution’s worst provision,” was discriminatory and aught to be scrapped (http://tinyurl.com/56fvex).
Then, there was Obama unusual interest in and cosponsoring of Sen. Res. 511 in the 110th Congress, a non-binding Sense of the Senate Resolution declaring that Senator McCain was a “natural born citizen,” that, not coincidentally, got some discussion and legal opinions about this issue that might be useful to Obama into the Congressional Record, which could later be called upon as legislative history, and as evidence of how Senators viewed the natural born citizen issue.
More recently, below is a link to the second relatively recent article in a MSM outlet—today its the Chicago Tribune.com–arguing that the “natural born citizen” requirement is, in this instance, “a bit of vestigial nativism,” “An infamous slap at naturalized citizens,” “That’s not patriotism, it’s bigotry,” and “the most un-American Section of the Constitution” http://tinyurl.com/ko933z ), last week it was an article calling this requirement “archaic.”
And here is Senate majority leader Harry Read: “Let’s be clear. It’s a phony issue and does not deserve even a minute of our attention on the floor of the United States Senate,” Reid announced, giving the issue just that minute. “It’s absurd, irresponsible, baseless and the false claims of long ago have been refuted” (http://tinyurl.com/m3ve52) .
This is not at all, “much ado about nothing,” on the contrary, this is called a preemptive strike, shoring up the dikes, and building a line of defense.
Thanks for such an elaborate walk through; an excellent overview. Both references to the Kirk & Ellis lawyer and S.R. 511 were particularly interesting. I do recall that early after Obama’s big splash at the ’04 Dem convention the Weekly Standard ran a few profiles – since folks on the left were beginning to whisper about his possible presidential ambitions.
One was Andrew Ferguson’s review of DREAMS OF MY FATHER, a review that included reporting on the authors background before writing the book up until his successful run into the US Senate. It was by far the most indepth of any article I encountered until the Primary showdown with Hillary.
Two things struck me, and one dovetails with your interesting observations. One was that Obama almost immediately decided that he didn’t like being a senator at all once having climbed the mountain to get there. And how then minority leader Harry Reid saw almost imediately that the kind of back room give and take that is such a big part of the negotiations that make up legislating there really turned the young junior Senator off.
A particular nasty imbroglio commenced when Obama tried to join forces with McCain. In fact McCain really bounced him around pretty good, totally humiliating him as it was recalled at the time – this being around late ’04 – and it got pretty public. While they eventually made nice publically, the emnity clearly lingered.
I can’t stand McCain – (MY SENATOR – and greatly regret JD Hayworth’s recent loss – if only we had a better candidate with at least 10 mil to McCain’s 21) but that said, McShamnesty does deserve credit as a skilled senator in the parlamentary sense – love him or hate him he does know the senate – how it works – and he works it if you will. The guy has some genuine heft as far as having established a legacy there – even if it makes most conservatives ill.
I sincerely think SR 511 was as much about the genuine lingering dislike among these men at the time as it was about any kind of genius masterstroke of political gamesmanship – either looking to a future when he was a presidential candidate or as POTUS – & thus would face troubling questions.
It was just one example of several where Obama took the oppertunity to poke a stick in McCain’s eye. Since technically the perception of some was that the most well respected and (in the senate at least) decorated vietnam war hero might not be an american citizen in good standing because his WWII Admiral War hero father had the poor timing to get horney and concieve his son WHILE FURTHER SERVING THE COUNTRY IN THE DIPLOMATIC WAY – the end result being McCain wasn’t born on the continential US of A – AND thus the Panama Canal birth certificat was a contrivance confured upon an upper class babe born to a famous war hero. (which all fits quite nicely to the narrative Mr Preston delivers)
In toto it makes for as absurd a comparison with Obama’s background as is imaginable; really, even Kurt Vonnegut at his best couldn’t make this stuff up. AS is the irony which fate gave Obama the oppertunity to dispatch McCain in the most prized contest of all.
Don’t get me wrong. I deeply mistrust this presidents motives and politics and pray daily for conseratives to take back the house (and possible senate as well) to slow down the train wreck his presidency has unleashed on the country. I also am in complete agreement with what both D’Souza wrote and the excellent complimentary post Mr Preston’s gave us here.
STILL, THE ‘BIRTHER’ ARUGUMENT DRIVES ME CRAZY!!!! It’s all so stupid. Just stupid and….pathetic.
Yes there are many good arguments supporting it. But even if one gets some momentum to mount said ‘investigation’ the problems presented are just to monumental to imagine overcoming. I mean really folks, other than the brief period that Obama spent traveling in Africa, what is the point to saying he is the great Usurper? The fact is, like it or not, he HAS BEEN AN AMERICAN since his grandparents raised him.
What would we ajudicate should we prove no birth certificate exists?
Does one disqualify his 14 years in the Illinois Senate? Or does one have the smoking gun when he enrolled at Occidentail? Or Columbia U? Or Havard, pre or after law degree in hand? Can we deport him. Can we nullify his marriage to Michelle due to said non-citizen status? It’s all STUPID STUPID STUPID.
First of all, if the past 20 months has taught us anything it is this; THE GUY IS A FRAUD IN EVERY IMPORTANT WAY AS POTUS. Victor David Hanson has been elequently undressing this pol from chicago almost since the Tea Party burst forth; he’s no intellectual. He’s not even that smart. Conservatives didn’t resusitate the Republican party. This lame dumb ass in the White House has. To quote a smart guy whose name escapes me – from the Las Vegas Freedomfest this past year …’the federal government [under Obama] is in the process of committing suicide and I just see it as my patriotic duty to stay out of its way when doing so…’
I believe he has sequestered and hidden all his past records for rather pedestrian reasons, not some diabolical nefarious precautionary machevillian bla bla bla.
Most certainly he doesn’t want the various associations Seth and many others allude to – the long list of leftist associations that Glen Beck has been busily sticking up for public view for almost his entire presidency now (and making millions doing so). Esspeically galling is that he gets away with hiding his academic records – this from the lefts ‘intellectual’ president – after Bush was repeatedly savaged for one bad year at Yale (with his eventual MBA grades competely ignored)
But that folks is politics. It ain’t bean bag and per usual it often aint fair. The only thing that matters is to get Pelosi out of the speakership and make this guy a one term travesty.
Short of that, if you or anybody can come up with some REAL EVIDENCE of high crimes and misdomeanors – then I am all for impeaching him. Otherwise, I will devote my every daily breath to beating him at the ballot box.
You asked: “Why did he spend over a million to block the full facts around his birth? It’s pretty obvious that the answer is to stop discovery of those facts, and that they would either 1) disqualify him for office and/or 2) reveal information that would provoke citizens to want him immediately removed from that office.’
There is a simple answer. Obama has not spent a million or anything to block information from getting out. THERE WAS NEVER A LAWSUIT FOR THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OR FOR DOCUMENTS. There were two kinds of lawsuits. Most of them were to stop the election, stop the Electoral College, stop the Congress from confirming the election (which it did, unanimously), or stop the Inauguration.
The remaining lawsuits asked courts to declare that Obama was not a citizen. They did not ask the courts to ask for documents; they simply claimed that because Obama had not published his college records, Kindergarten records, etc–or because they claimed that the Certification of Live Birth is not the official birth certificate (which it is)– then Obama should be declared not to be president by the court. In our system, you have to fight all a lawsuits against you, no matter how stupid they are.
In any case, it is a myth that Obama is fighting the disclosure of his birth certificate. He has shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii, and the facts on it were confirmed by the officials in Hawaii. In fact, he is the first and only US president to have shown his birth certificate.
the Wall Street Journal commented: “The birthers have also misrepresented the law in the claims they have made about Obama’s birth certificate. In truth, Obama has proved that he is a native of Hawaii, and this proof would hold up in any legal or administrative proceeding.”
In fact, he is the first and only US president to have shown his birth certificate.
No he didn’t. Read the above postings carefully – he showed a document that certifies that the Birth Certificate exists, he has NEVER shown the original document.
Nothing more pathetic than a grown man with Daddy issues.
The Indonesian Imbecile is clearly motivated by an anachronistic idea of being anti-colonialist, but the roots of this, in my view, stem not from his father (though he tries to mimic some of the Kenyan anti-colonialist attitude, specifically) but from the fact that he is, at his heart, an Indonesian. He grew up in Indonesia with the bulk of his personality forming (ages 6 to 10, which is an extremely significant time) in a country that had just experienced a coup, having had the communist thrown out (which must have irked his comie mother, to no end) in favor of a more pro-Western thug. This is why he is so un-American in his ideas and concept of history, because he is Indonesian at his core, imbued with a healthy third world jealousy and hate of the West and the US, in particular. This was easy to tell by what he says and does. You see it in his truly odd gaffes that no American would ever make, such as “57 states”, his weird behavior of having The Precedent go to the Olympic committee for a personal sales drive, and on and on. These are just things that Amerca and Americans don’t do. But, to an Indonesian, they are normal actions and meaningless mistakes.
Unfortunately, the Indonesian Imbecile is not just an idiot with no American sensibilities. That would not be a huge problem. The Imbecile, though, has great contempt for us and our nation – as we have been treated to on an almost daily basis since he started his occupation fo the White House. The Indonesian Imbecile sees himself as the Avenging Angel of the Third World, come to wreak havoc on the US and the West. He is seeking revenge for the shame that the West, and the US specifically, heaps on the third world (in his fevered mind) through our creativity, productivity, freedom and advancement. He wants to make us pay, and pay dearly … most dearly. Sadly, fomenting chaos and destroying complex systems are easy tasks that require no great skill (just access to power) so the Indonesian Imbecile is actually being quite successful in carrying out those tasks with his 3-watt pea-brain. He’s just a political suicide bomber. But, worst of all, America, in the throes of a psychotic break from the credit crisis had asked him to do just this – to alleviate their own illusory guilt – as everyone knew that the Indonesian Imbecile disliked America and Americans from so much of what was revealed in the campaign, let alone all of the stuff that never got to see the light of day.
You got him, progressoverpeace. The Indonesian incompetent is pathologically — and headed toward psychopathologically — hesperophobic. And reserves for and directs the depths of his morbid hatreds toward Americans and to a lesser extent for and toward the ‘once-great’ British.
Dinesh D’Souza, meanwhile, misses the (former British Colony inhabiting) Anti-Colonialism Derangemant’s truly insidious feature: that its elitist sufferers, having deliberately disingenuously misrepresented that the rich countries got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America, simply replaced the imagined looters with themselves and, by systematically stripping their former colonies of their former colonial governments’ every asset and/or advantage, including universal education, for example and universally accessable health care and hospitals, set every one of them back a century, at least. On the fiftieth anniversary of their independence from Britain India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, were all corruption-riddled Cronyist basket cases in which an aggregate more than a billion people subsisted on less than a per-capita Dollar per day.
And pretty much still are — and still do.
So under the theory of anticolonialism, who gets all the goodies when we tax the American white man into oblivion? The American white man is here by virtue of the original colonists and immigrants that followed. Blacks came by virtue of slavery; they are not indigenous people. The only indigenous people who could lay a claim to the spoils of these last 400 or so years are native Americans. So how does this anticolonialist mind set operate in Obama’s mind, even subconsciously?
A “Birther” Refuter
A rapid, extended–and emphatic–refutation quickly followed the posting of my article, “Of Birthers and Truthers, Part One.”
Because of the rapidity, detailed–and forceful– response and at the risk of suggesting yet another conspiracy, one has to wonder whether the commenter, “granite,” who is otherwise unidentified, is a member of a presidential Rapid Response Team assigned to shoot down any speculation as to Barack Hussein Obama’s true birthplace and eligibility for the presidency.
Please note that in that article, I didn’t take a position on the validity of the Birthers’ claims and merely tried to show that the MSM has ignored most of their allegations.
Below is the notice of “granite’s” comment and that comment verbatim. The reader should also be aware that all the issues in the article aren’t addressed and that, of the six links provided by “granite” to substantiate his case, four are broken, (”Page not found,” etc.) Make of that what you will.
Refutations of this refuter, (which, by the way, is in fact a word unlike “refudiate”), are invited. . .
(Read “granite’s” full comment at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1896)
anticolonialism.
great concept.
we could actually use this in america. first step would be giving the feds the boot.
All we can hope for is there is a Deep Throat out there somewhere who has been investigating Obama’s background and is getting ready to hand the information over to someone like Bob Woodward.
If any prosepective Deep Throat were to offer a Bob Woodward information on Obama, the Woodward wannabe would probably shoot him for daring to attempt to harm The One. Woodward is one of ‘them’…
I’m puzzled. Why aren’t Obamas backers, the ones who know the truth about him, worried about the backlash when his background becomes known? Do they think they will be able to sit on it even after he is out of office? Or, do they have something in mind…
he may have been born in Hawaii ;-0
but he’s no American
if he was Dogcather in Bohunk North Dakota, he’d f*** THAT up
Answer:
Obamas gift to the Queen of England was an ipod full of his famous speeches.
-
-
Go ask the Queen of England if she thinks he is a subconscious anti-colonialist,
or an idiot?
-
I wonder where she stuck that ipod?
I think the bust of Churchill was accompanied by the iPod.
Drastic measures require drastic action to counter.
The criminal regime, now in Washington, can only be thrown out, if the States get together and refuse to be subjugated by this regime.
Otherwise, “We The People” are pissing into the wind.
It all came down to this: no American, no matter how tired, drugged, injured, or insane would ever have thought that there were 57 States in the Union. End of story! Of course, many of the Leftists in America are not Americans, and they wouldn’t notice such amazing, astounding, unbelievable ignorance. Matter of fact, maybe the number of States would be a good question to use as our modern-day version of ‘shibboleth’ when we get down to it.
Yes, good idea, Jaco. Our soldiers could use this as a sign and counter-sign to test for enemies on the battlefields of the world:
Sign: “Subjugated States of America”
Counter sign: “57″
I clicked on the link to Dinesh D’Souza’s article about Obama’s anti-neocolonialist roots. And I say ‘so what?’ That isn’t anything foreign to American thought. Ninty percent of American university professors agree wholeheartedly. It’s just that most of you don’t live in college towns.
In 2009 I submitted an article to a leading conservative blog in which I noted that Barrack Obama was someone I knew. This was because I am from a Third World country and Obama was nothing more than a Third World despot and as the Americans would say ” a snake oil salesman”. I went on to say that his philosophies were no more significant than that of any first year student in any socialist UIniversity whether in Nigeria or the Caribbean and that he had performed the perfect con job on America.
So said, so done.
I think Obama’s father was a self=centers, selfish, drunk. He abandoned his wife and son so HE could go to Harvard. What a giant of a man he was. I think whatever dreams he really had would would lead him to scream in his sleep.
Re: “No he didn’t. Read the above postings carefully – he showed a document that certifies that the Birth Certificate exists, he has NEVER shown the original document.”
The Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii. The original birth certificate is not issued anymore, and Hawaii does not send out copies of it even to people who were born before the Certification of Live Birth became the official birth certificate. The Certification of Live Birth is used by thousands of people every year.
The Wall Street Journal put it this way:
“The birthers have also misrepresented the law in the claims they have made about Obama’s birth certificate. In truth, Obama has proved that he is a native of Hawaii, and this proof would hold up in any legal or administrative proceeding.
In order to explain the birthers’ deception on this point, it is necessary to delve into the arcana of Hawaiian vital records. The document that Obama has released, which carries the title “certification of live birth,” confirms that the president was born in Honolulu. It is a legal birth certificate, and, as the Honolulu Star-Bulletin notes, it is the only kind of birth certificate the state of Hawaii issues.”
When Obama was born Certificates of Birth were given. I seen a photo of one from a woman born in the same year. It had the name of the physician, everything. The question that Birthers would have answered is namely: Does that original still exist for Obama, and Can we see it?
What makes this whole situation so controversial is the fact that, it seems, everyone talks past each other. I personally do not have my original birth certificate, but a COLB, …and if the hospital I was born at stopped issuing originals and I could not possibly obtain it upon request, yet people were asking to see it for whatever reason, I think I would I’d explain the situation. Easy. Is that so much to ask? If the original is gone, why not explain that instead of pretending that it does exist? Or stonewalling?
Now, let’s say that there actually is no secret at all, which very well may be. The new problem is why has there been such an effort by the Obama administration to block anyone from seeing these records, and others? Perhaps, the Obama administration, not knowing the actual extent of their own innocence from the accusations acted in a way that shows them to be, at the very least, seemingly deceptive in manner.
Personally, this has led me to believe that there is something to hide. Because, I do not think O’s administration, or anyone really, is clever enough to have strategized and foreseen the opportunity to marginalize Birthers, as is the case, by simply playing dumb (and letting their opponents go out on their own ignorant limbs). Remember, all they have to say is, The original is gone, Only this COLB exists, and If you don’t like it… that’s tough, because Obama can’t pull the original out of his butt. They would actually be justified in that.
I was “Anonymous”. As if that means anything, but I don’t want anyone to think that some birther was afraid to put up a name or something.
The Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii.The Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii.
Your comments are dishonest. Is it not the case that the law was changed after the election of Obama in order to provide him with the cover story that his Long Form Certificate is not available. As if it wouldn’t have been released at the request of the President of the United States.
It boils down to this: Hawaii didn’t require that someone actually had to submit proof that a child was born in the State in order to register his/her birth so long a close relative requested the registration shortly after birth.
Hawaii issued a Certification of Live Birth to anyone whose birth was registered in Hawaii. The issuance of such a document does not prove Obama was born in Hawaii but simply that his birth was registered there. If Obama was born there a Certificate of Live Birth would be on file and would have been produced unless Obama was trying to hide something.
OMG, why can’t people give the birth certificate thing a rest? Both my daughters were born in Hawaii, I’ve seen plenty of Hawaii CoLBs, and ain’t no way one can prove one way or the other that Obama’s is fake, real, or issued by aliens at this point. It is to his advantage to keep this one issue alive because it keeps people from asking more important questions.
The critical point is this: the spirit of the natural-born citizen rule is to keep folks who do not embrace American exceptionalism out of office. Obama is the closest thing to a foreign president we could ever have had – dual citizenship at birth, raised in Indonesia for much of his childhood, then Hawaii for the remainder (and trust me when I say Hawaii is darn near like a foreign country, certainly more foreign to most of us than Canada!), many foreign-national family members, and a large part of his adult life spent in other countries. He is more truly a citizen of the world than of the United States, and his behavior reflects that. Instead of bellyaching about the CoLB, we should be learning from this and vowing to never, ever elect another person in his mold to office in America anywhere ever again. There are no do-overs, but future rules can be amended and game play can be changed.
Pssssst! Here’s a rumor. The Founders were anti-colonialists! Pass it on.
Sure, Dwhite, tell that to the Indians!
Yes, that is the other side, for sure, and I realized that right after I posted. They no longer wanted to be colonists for the Mother England, but they sure as hell did want to make this land, their land/our land. Can the whole colonial discussion be qualified by differences between those who came to settle, and those who came to return to the mother country with their fortunes; to some degree, the difference between (most of) the English in North America and (many of) the Spanish in Meso-America southward? The French in Canada are somewhat of a wild card.
In that context, to be “anti-colonial” means exactly what?
It is all of one piece with inviting Angela Davis (yes THAT Angela Davis) to the White House as an honored guest.
He could have invited Sully Sullenberger, but I guess he thought Davis would be more “interesting.” We elected a leftist tyro who never did much of anything and everything he has accomplished is tainted with how he got there: from the Texas and Iowa caucuses to his refusal to release his certain to be be mediocre transcripts from Occidental and Columbia to say nothing of WHO paid his tuition, Obama failed Quality Control and we have him for two more years.
Re this statement: “Your comments are dishonest. Is it not the case that the law was changed after the election of Obama in order to provide him with the cover story that his Long Form Certificate is not available. As if it wouldn’t have been released at the request of the President of the United States. ‘
Answering your question. ” Is it not the case that the law was changed after the election of Obama in order to provide him with the cover story that his Long Form Certificate is not available.”
The answer is NO. The Certification of Live Birth became the official birth certificate in 2001, and the original has not been sent out since then.
Re the allegation that Obama could get the original if he wanted. If he did, he would be getting something that other people in Hawaii cannot get. There would be a great cry from people: “He is getting something he is not entitled to. He is influencing the government of Hawaii to do something that it does not do for other people.” So, MAYBE he could get it, but at the expense of appearing to be, and in fact actually, getting something that other people cannot get.
And, Hawaii MIGHT NOT do it even if Obama asked. They would be giving something that other people cannot get, which would be unfair, and they would be doing it for a Democrat (the Republicans are in power), and they would be doing it unnecessarily because the Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate, accepted as proof of birth in the USA by the US State Department and the branches of the military.
And it is completely unnecessary because the two officials in Hawaii have twice confirmed the fact on the birth certificate that Obama was born in Hawaii, and so has the governor, and there is a witness, and his Kenyan grandmother never said that he was born in Kenya. She said repeatedly that he was born in Hawaii, and in another interview, she said that the first that she had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
And what would the original show? No details about race or religion or the marital status of the parents. The only thing that the long form shows that the short form does not is the name of the hospital (which is Kapiolani, as the governor and the witness both confirm) and the name of the doctor and the registrar at the time. These things may be interesting, but they do not affect the fact that he was born in Hawaii.
Hawaii does not now and did not in 1961 allow a birth document of any kind to be issued that says on it that the person was born in Hawaii, unless there was proof that the person was born in Hawaii. Obama’s says on it that he was born in Hawaii, and that is the fact that the officials in Hawaii have confirmed repeatedly.
Re: “Hawaii issued a Certification of Live Birth to anyone whose birth was registered in Hawaii.”
Answer. Hawaii did not issue a Certification or a Certificate or anything to do with birth that said on it that the person was born in Hawaii unless there was proof that the person was born in Hawaii.
Re: “The question that Birthers would have answered is namely: Does that original still exist for Obama, and Can we see it? ‘
Answer. Yes it is on file. That was stated in the first confirmation. No, you cannot see it. Hawaii does not send it out anymore.
Re: “The issuance of such a document does not prove Obama was born in Hawaii but simply that his birth was registered there.”
Answer: When Obama was born in 1961 no one born anywhere else than Hawaii was allowed to be registered in the Hawaiian birth certificate file. NO birth certificates from outside of Hawaii were accepted. If you came with a BC from Kenya or New Jersey, the officials would simply send you away. Obama was registered in Hawaii in 1961, so the original is a Hawaiian birth certificate. Also, the original birth certificate says on it “born in Honolulu, Oahu, Etc,” because that is what the officials have confirmed (four of them, the original clerk, the two top officials who confirmed the clerk’s entry, and the governor.)
Re: “If Obama was born there a Certificate of Live Birth would be on file and would have been produced unless Obama was trying to hide something.”
Answer: The Certificate of Live Birth IS on file. That is what the officials said in their first confirmation, that there is an original Hawaiian birth certificate in the file. But Hawaii does not send it out anymore. That is HAWAII’S decision, not Obama’s. And there is nothing on the original that is any different from the short-form except for the name of the hospital, the doctor and the registrar.
Re: “Hawaii didn’t require that someone actually had to submit proof that a child was born in the State in order to register his/her birth so long a close relative requested the registration shortly after birth. ‘
Answer: You are wrong. Hawaii required that there be proof that the child was born in Hawaii. If she or he was born in a hospital, the filling out of the hospital form with the names of the doctors was sufficient proof. If born outside of a hospital, Hawaii required witnesses in order to issue a document that said “born in Hawaii” on it. Obama’s says “born in Hawaii,” and that is the fact that the officials and the governor and the witness and the Kenyan grandmother all have confirmed.
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 she had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter from Hawaii.
lozozlzozllozlozlzlz!!!!!!!!
lzozlzolzlzlzlzl neoconbutthexotpioa!!!
why r all u neocns ha8ing on obama when allyou contheratives socalled “conthervatives” never ote russell kirk nor edmund burke but instead sig the braises and lies of the neocon buthex heroes tucker max lzozlzzlzlzlzozozzozz
greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2010/06/07/how-da-university-works-feminism-debt-debauchery-divorce-desecration-machinearmy-lzozlzlzlzlzl/
While rushing to find a reason that will subsidize his feeling of Obama’s racism, Glenn Beck and other racist have led themselves down the winding path of anti-colonialism. The latest argument from these racist who feel the need to analyze what they now call “unheard of policies” is that Obama is being led under the guidance of his father, Barack Sr. The senior Obama has unlocked what they believe is the key to national health care, cap and trade, bailing out the auto and financial industry as well as tax cuts for the middle class. Glenn has of course walked back the ignorant statement but not before filling the gap with something equally ignorant, anti-colonialism. But this argument isn’t just being given by white guys like Glenn, a writer named Dinesh D’Souza, who is selling a book, has also found this link that explains the last two years of Obama’s presidency. Dinesh has been given these white credentials to speak on anti-colonialism because he is saying what they want to hear about it. Dinesh claims that Obama is being led by the invisible hand of his ghostly father who, like the founding fathers of America, where anti-colonialist. Glenn and Dinesh were deep in discussion about the title of Obama’s best selling book Dreams From My Fathers when Glenn stopped Dinesh in mid sentence to make the case that the book wasn’t titled Dreams of my Father, but Dreams From My Father. Don’t you see it is what Obama got from his father that has made him president of the United States? Instead of going to Wall St. and making a six figure salary after graduating from Harvard as the head of the Harvard Law Review, Obama Jr. became a community organizer in order to one day carry out the dreams that his father would’ve if he were president. The argument was convincing and I delved deep into my mind to see if other presidents have carried out the dreams of their father. I thought long and hard before I seen a clear vision of the last president and the dreams of his father. George W. Bush Sr. George Bush Sr. wanted to invade Iraq and topple Saddam so that dream became the defining achievement of his son George W. Bush Jr. It was all so clear because Dinesh and Glenn had given me the tools to connect father and son, motive and action to the murder of Saddam Hussein. How could I have not seen this before I thought? I had been driving to work for 10 minutes and my mind was suddenly blown by Glenn Beck and Dinesh telling me that the writings of Barack Sr. from the 60′s have dictated how the son who was raised by a family from Kansas governs the United States of America.
That’s an all around well written blog post!
Tremendous blog post!!!
This post couldn’t be more on the money.