Posts Tagged ‘Barry Sortoro’

If we’re so concerned about hurting the feelings of Muslims, why is Obama bragging that he killed Osama so often. That’s a fascinating question. Yeah, in fact, their campaign slogan is “GM’s Alive and Osama’s Dead,” or something like that. They’re ramming it down the throats of Islamists all over the world. In fact, in Egypt at the embassy yesterday, the protesters were all shouting, “We’re all Osamas, Obama. We’re all Osamas, Obama.” There are millions of Osamas, Obama. So we might even conclude, ladies and gentlemen, that if we’re gonna accept this notion that hurt feelings inspire terrorism, then maybe Obama is responsible for this, and ultimately maybe the blame falls to him. You think they watched the Democrat convention? You think they saw Plugs Biden up there going on and on about how Osama’s dead? This could be the Obama bounce. The media was looking for the Obama bounce, and we found it, the attack on our embassy in Cairo. The real Obama bounce.

On 9/11, in Egypt, these clowns show up, “We’re all Osamas, Obama. We’re all Osamas, Obama.” What does that mean? It means these people are ticked off. Obama’s been running around spiking the football saying Osama’s dead. That was one of the two primary reasons to reelect the guy at his own convention. Our embassy issues a statement apologizing for free speech rights of some preacher in this country and a movie maker, and it turns out that it’s Barack Obama that has ‘em all ticked off because he’s the one bragging about killing their messiah, their leader. It is a heck of a good point. Obama could be to blame for this.

Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2012/09/obama-offends-muslims-with-obl-bragging/#ixzz26Nn1pkDP

by Jack Cashill

In all the talk about David Maraniss’ new book, “Barack Obama: The Story,” the chattering classes seem to have overlooked the most significant of Maraniss’ revelations, namely that the story on which Obama based his 2008 candidacy is “received myth, not the truth.”

“My parents shared not only an improbable love,” said Obama famously in his 2004 Democratic Convention keynote, “they shared an abiding faith in the possibilities of this nation.” This concept of multicultural romance shaped his persona and his campaigns.

At the 2008 Democratic Convention in Denver, Obama leaped into the story in the very first sentence. “Four years ago,” he began, “I stood before you and told you my story – of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who weren’t well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America, their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to.”

As Maraniss concedes, these two young people shared very close to nothing. “In the college life of Barack Obama in 1961 and 1962,” writes Maraniss, “as recounted by his friends and acquaintances in Honolulu, there was no Ann; there was no baby.”

Although Maraniss talked to many of Obama Sr.’s friends, none of the credible ones ever so much as saw him with Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham.

One Obama friend, a Cambodian named Kiri Tith, knew the senior Obama “very well.” He had also met Ann through a different channel. “But he had no idea,” writes Maraniss, “that Ann knew Obama, let alone got hapai (pregnant) by him, married him, and had a son with him.”

Only Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie claims to have seen the pair together during the presumed courtship stage, but he is not close to credible.

“Maybe I’m the only one in the country,” Abercrombie told the Los Angeles Times in December 2010, “that could look you right in the eye right now and tell you, ‘I was here when that baby was born.’” This was pure lie, no other word for it.

A few days later, Abercrombie clarified to Mark Niesse of the Associated Press that he didn’t exactly see Obama’s parents with their newborn son at the hospital, but that he “remembers seeing Obama as a child with his parents at social events.” Another lie.

Maraniss should have quoted Abercrombie with the stated qualifier that he has proved unreliable on all things Obama, but he did not. Abercrombie was too important. Without Abercrombie, there is no contemporary witness to any kind of relationship. Maraniss, however, knew enough not to quote Abercrombie on his claim to having seen the baby with his parents.

Despite his Herculean digging into the dung of Obama’s life, Maraniss’ shovel comes up empty on the couple’s alleged February 1961 wedding. He footnotes his comments thusly: “Marriage facts recorded in divorce records.”

There is no doubt that both Ann Dunham and Obama claimed a wedding. It suited both their purposes, Obama to extend his visa and Dunham to legitimize her baby with a black husband.

As to the divorce, Dunham at the time was desperately trying to keep her future husband, Lolo Soetoro, in the country. The INS believed her to be married to Obama. Even if she were not married, a divorce would have been useful to clear the way for a marriage to Soetoro.

Like all other biographers of either Obama or his parents, Maraniss is totally silent on Dunham’s whereabouts from the February marriage to the August birth. He adds one detail, however, that deepens the mystery.

According to the birth certificate and the newspaper announcements, the young family lived at 6085 Kalanianole Highway where Dunham’s parents lived. Obama Sr. clarified to the INS that mother and baby lived there without him.

Maraniss definitively states that “[Dunham] and Obama and the infant never lived [at 6085 Kalanianole].” There was no room. The senior Dunhams shared the house with the Pratt family. The Pratt daughter “has no memory of the Dunhams’ daughter bringing an infant home.”

And yes, finally, an Obama biographer admits what the blogosphere has known for the last four years: “Within a month of the day Barry came home from the hospital, he and his mother were long gone from Honolulu, back on the mainland. …”

“This period, Washington State revisited,” Maraniss writes, “is missing from the memoir the son would write decades later.” In fact, as recently as Father’s Day 2012, Obama was claiming that his father left home when he was 2.

What Maraniss does not say is that he missed the Seattle hegira story himself in the 10,000-word Washington Post article he wrote on the eve of the 2008 election.

He was hardly unique. No one in the mainstream media wanted to blow the whistle on the fraudulent family fable that got Obama elected president.

The New Yorker’s David Remnick chose to overlook it in his 2010 Obama bio. The New York Times’ Janny Scott overlooked it in her 2011 bio of Obama’s mother. The Boston Globe’s Sally Jacobs overlooked it in her 2011 bio of Obama’s father, and the Times’s Jodi Kantor overlooked it in her 2012 book on the whole extended family.

Worse, conservative writer Dinesh D’Souza chose not to report the fraud in his disingenuous best-seller, “The Roots of Obama’s Rage.” As D’Souza explains, Obama was “his father’s son.” Dunham served largely as the vehicle through which the absent Obama exercised his will on the young Obama, she being “Obama Sr.’s first convert” to anti-colonialism.

D’Souza should have known this was nonsense. Conservative writer Michael Patrick Leahy had broken the Seattle story as early as 2008 in his book, “What Does Barack Believe.” It was accepted knowledge in the conservative blogosphere by 2009.

What Maraniss has laid bare, perhaps without meaning to, is a journalistic scandal of historic proportions in which, alas, he himself has played a part.

Conservative Refocus Notes:

Whoah, blood’s in the water, folks…definitely a newsworthy item as America looks at the latest Obama side show with frank disbelief.

Or maybe Ex-President Carter wishes to accelerate the increasingly wide-held notion that, compared to Obama, the Carter Presidency was a brilliant compendium of presidentially exercised pragmaticism.

Either way, Carter loves his country, which is a thing that Obama will never, ever be accused of….and you can bank on that.

ABC News

By Amy Bingham

A former U.S. president is accusing the current president of sanctioning the “widespread abuse of human rights” by authorizing drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists.

Jimmy Carter, America’s 39 th president, denounced the Obama administration for “clearly violating” 10 of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, writing in a New York Times op-ed on Monday that the “United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights.”

“Instead of making the world safer, America’s violation of international human rights abets our enemies and alienates our friends,” Carter wrote.

While the total number of attacks from unmanned aircraft, or drones, and the resulting casualties are murky, the New America Foundation estimates that in Pakistan alone 265 drone strikes have been executed since January 2009 . Those strikes have killed at least 1,488 people, at least 1,343 of them considered militants, the foundation estimates based on news reports and other sources.

In addition to the drone strikes, Carter criticized the current president for keeping the Guantanamo Bay detention center open, where prisoners “have been tortured by waterboarding more than 100 times or intimidated with semiautomatic weapons, power drills or threats to sexually assault their mothers.”

The former president blasted the government for allowing “unprecedented violations of our rights to privacy through warrantless wiretapping and government mining of our electronic communications.”

Want more off-the-cuff politics? Check out OTUS on Facebook and follow us on Twitter @OTUSNews.

He also condemned recent legislation that gives the president the power to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely, although a federal judge blocked the law from taking effect for any suspects not affiliated with the September 11 terrorist attacks.

“This law violates the right to freedom of expression and to be presumed innocent until proved guilty, two other rights enshrined in the declaration,” Carter said.

While Carter never mentioned Obama by name, he called out “our government” and “the highest authorities in Washington,” and urged “concerned citizens” to “persuade Washington to reverse course and regain moral leadership.”

The fact that Obama can stand there and lecture another country about reducing their deficit is a testament to his supreme arrogance.

Germany’s finance minister is rejecting U.S. President Barack Obama’s calls on Europe to move faster in fighting its debt crisis, telling him to get the American deficit under control instead.

Wolfgang Schaeuble told public broadcaster ZDF in an interview late Sunday that “people are always very quick at giving others advice.”

He says: “Mr. Obama should first of all take care of reducing the American deficit, which is higher than in the eurozone.”
The fact that Obama can stand there and lecture another country about reducing their deficit is a testament to his supreme arrogance.

BERLIN (AP) — Germany’s finance minister is rejecting U.S. President Barack Obama’s calls on Europe to move faster in fighting its debt crisis, telling him to get the American deficit under control instead.

Wolfgang Schaeuble told public broadcaster ZDF in an interview late Sunday that “people are always very quick at giving others advice.”

He says: “Mr. Obama should first of all take care of reducing the American deficit, which is higher than in the eurozone.”

Obama and other leaders fear an escalating crisis in Europe could drag down the world economy.

The 17-nation eurozone is struggling to overhaul its institutions and streamline its decision making to restore investors’ confidence. The bloc’s debt relative to its economic output stands at about 80 percent, while it is about 100 percent in the U.S.

By Joe Newby

Do forks present a national security threat to President Obama?

On Friday afternoon, the Secret Service confiscated forks and dinner knives at a luncheon for the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) before President Obama spoke.

About 1000 guests at the luncheon were told they needed to hand over their silverware for security reasons, Politico reported.

“It’s very important that you use your utensils as soon as possible,” NALEO board member Raquel Regalado said, hurrying the diners to finish their salads and pre-cut chicken breasts.

“As you know, we’re having another speaker and there is some Secret Service involved. So there’s a reason why there’s no knives at your table and the forks will be collected,” she added.
“And I’m not joking.”

According to Politico, the Secret Service required that all forks be rounded up before President Obama entered the room, and no dinner knives would be allowed.

Politico added:

“The Secret Service coordinates this process with staff and host committee to ensure tables are cleared of material that may be deemed hazardous prior to the arrival of the president,” Special Agent Max Milien told POLITICO. “Any implication that this was unique for this event is completely inaccurate.”

Politico noted that the President attends many events where diners have their silverware as he speaks, but Milien did not speak to that discrepancy.

“If we were talking about Mitt Romney, who spoke to the same group earlier in the week, the MSM headline probably would have been something along the lines of ‘Presumptive GOP nominee doesn’t trust Latino audience with forks,’” Doug Powers wrote at Michelle Malkin’s web site.

Warner Todd Huston wrote at Breitbart.com that New York Magazine’s Dan Amira “showed photos of the many times Obama has been in a room with “fork wielding strangers.”

“If a republican president had done the same thing, it would have been treated as prima facie evidence of racism,” he added, observing that the attendees were “elected officials and their staffs, not just the average Jose off the street.”

Politico tried to explain the discrepancy by saying that “there is plenty of silverware at large events like the White House Correspondents Dinner.”

“However,” Politico added, “those on the dais are well known to the White House and Obama does not plunge into the crowd there. After the speech Friday, Obama spent about six minutes shaking hands along a so-called ropeline in front of the crowd.”

The photos posted by Amira, however, show the President co-existing with silverware in what appears to be a fast food restaurant or a diner, not a large venue like the White House Correspondent’s Dinner.

Amira asked: “Why was it determined that Obama and forks can no longer coexist peacefully? Did the Secret Service pick up some intelligence on an unspecified fork threat to the president?”

“We have contacted them for answers, and we will report back to you as soon as possible,” he wrote.