THIS YEAR'S OFFICIAL DNC POSTER
"Voters, Obama is baptized in the fire of faith."
"Obama's been saved. Thank you, Jesus."
"Voters, let's hear an Alleluia and an Amen."
Posted on 02/07/2011 2:34:41 AM PST by Scanian
At the National Prayer Breakfast on February 3, President Obama threw a knuckleball down the middle, and the media whiffed.
Most simply took Obama at his word that as a young man in Chicago, he "came to know Jesus Christ for myself and embrace him as my lord and savior" and that as president, he asks "the Lord" every day to make him "an instrument of his will."
In a moment, I will address the sheer gamesmanship of this theological flutter to the center, but first, a word on the most revealing part of the sermonette. This revelation was missed by everyone in the media except the ever-observant morning radio host at 630 KHOW in Denver, Peter Boyles, who shared it with me.
Said Obama at one point in what seemed like a throwaway line, "My father, who I barely knew -- I only met once for a month in my entire life -- was said to be a non-believer throughout his life." Although he avoided specifics, Obama was referring to the Christmas of 1971, when Barack Obama, Sr. visited the extended Dunham family, including the ten-year-old Barry Obama, in Hawaii.
The president and his writers choose their words carefully for an occasion as public as the Prayer Breakfast. Obama could have safely left the relationship at "barely knew," and no one would have taken notice. Instead, he said he "met" his father, and then only once -- a locution that makes no sense for a boy who had allegedly lived more than two years with the man.
What Boyles believes -- and I think he's right -- is that Team Obama is preparing the media for a shift in the official Obama saga. To this point, the core of the Obama origins story has been...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
His followers are truly disciples, and the party line can change without impunity. The American people are truly the latest version of the followers of the Pied Piper.
Jack Cashill is a major Obama exposer. Always worth reading
I really hope Obama changes his story. Not because I believe he will give us the real one, but just to further show America how desperate he is to hide his past. Nothing proves someone to be a liar more than a person changing their story.
When asked by a woman named Doris, while at an advanced battery technology manufacturer, whether it was a “wise decision to add more taxes to us with the health care” (package) 0blahblah spent the next 17 minutes rambling from topic to topic. You just have to ask him about something he cares about and he won't shut up.
I don’t know what he is talking about. We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.
Obama 2.0 teeing up the story his COLB is his original, long form BC because his showed up in 1971 to testify in Court he was Obama’s paternal parent.
Like a foundling, the Court heard testimony and ordered a vital record to be created stating Barack Obama Sr. was the father, Stanley Ann Dunham is the mother of Barack Hussein Obama II. The witness testimony was heard in Court. Consequently, no witness attestion (doctor’s signature or hospital administrator signature) is necessary for the COLB to be valid.
Obama is effectively telling the press and the people the first 10 years of this life are void.
“My father, who I barely knew — I only met once for a month in my entire life — was said to be a non-believer throughout his life.”
Maybe it’s a quibble, but it seems like the latter portion of this claim is equally “revisionist.” His father was raised Muslim, as Obama himself has conceded in earlier interviews:
“My father was almost entirely absent from my childhood, having been divorced from my mother when I was 2 years old; in any event, although my father had been raised a Muslim, by the time he met my mother he was a confirmed atheist, thinking religion to be so much superstition.”
Obama, Barack (16 October 2006). “My spiritual journey”. Time. http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1546579,00.html. Retrieved 5 March 2008.
Yeah, Cashill has been exposing Obama longer than Beck has.
Obama’s “saga” is really just a case of making it up as he goes along.
That crap may have worked in ‘08 but it is becoming a huge joke and more widely known than the WH thinks, I believe.
THIS YEAR'S OFFICIAL DNC POSTER
"Voters, Obama is baptized in the fire of faith."
"Obama's been saved. Thank you, Jesus."
"Voters, let's hear an Alleluia and an Amen."
By their fruits you shall know them.
Very interesting theory, but:
a) Obama Senior already had “officially” been declared Obama’s father in the January 1964 divorce decree.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18130289/Obama-1964-Divorce-Papers-13-Pages-Missing-Pg-11
In light of this “official” recognition, why would further testimony by Senior be required to established this fact?
b) If Obama never had a BC prior to age 10, how did he travel to Indonesia? Are passport rules really so loose that a mom can haul around a pre-schooler on her passport simply on her say-so that she was that child’s mother, without a shred of documentation about who that baby really is? If so, what’s to stop an army of illegal immigrants from bringing kids not their own into this country, dumping them in Hispanic (or Muslim or Asian) communities and going back for more?
Likewise, with a BC how was it possible for Soetoro to adopt him? How did he manage to get enrolled in an Indonesian school? etc. etc. etc.
Like any sociopath, Obama lies at the drop of a hat, morphing into whatever he thinks will make him most acceptable to his audience of the moment and get him what he wants.
I think by now he himself has probably lost track of the truth. Not that he ever meant to tell it, anyway; but he has so many self-created stories about himself circulating in his head that he must get confused just choosing among them.
A) Obama Sr. never answered the 1964 divorce complaint. Consequently, his testimony was not heard or considered.
B)The US State Department will issue temporary US passports to potential adoptee children so the child can appear in US Court and participate in his/her adoption process. Sometimes a child from a failed state, a state where birth records are not kept adequately or were destroyed, are adopted by American parents. The American parent request temporary travel docs for the child through the US State Department to bring the child to the US to complete the adoption.
And I didn’t state Obama didn’t have a BC prior to 1971. I said Obama is placing that part of his life off limits. In 1971, a Court ordered a vital record to be created that named Obama Sr as the father and voided all previous birth records.
Didn’t 0’s alleged hero, Abe Lincoln, once say that nobody has a good enough memory to get away with constant lying?
Heading into 2012 Cashill will be more and more visible digging into Obongo’s murky past.
Team Obama is preparing the media for a shift in the official Obama saga.
Anything for a re-election scam.
“Obama Sr. never answered the 1964 divorce complaint. Consequently, his testimony was not heard or considered.”
Right, but didn’t they have to notify him of the hearing? I thought that unrebutted claims become assumed matters of fact under the law. Anyway, thanks for clarifying that you weren’t trying to imply he had no BC prior to 1971.
As for temporary passports for adoptees, I was unaware of that. Thanks.
So, going back to your theory: what would motivate Ann to suddenly try and “sanitize” Obama’s record at age 10? And what would motivate a man who essentially had abandoned his child for 10 years (and didn’t even bother responding to the notification of his divorce hearing) to go along with this? Or are you arguing that Obama will fraudulently claim such testimony was given, in hopes that people will accept the COLB and not pry further into his original birth records?
Put another way, if Obama has the power to fabricate Hawaiian records to reflect testimony never given, why wouldn’t he also have the same power to fabricate original birth records having the equivalent appearance of authenticity? At this juncture, it seems implausible that anyone is going to accept Obama’s revised account just on his say-so. So any fabricated records used to support a new account that entails paternal testimony provided in 1971 presumably are going to have to be of sufficient quality to successfully withstand a great deal of forensic probing. But if “his people” can produce written documents with that level of apparent authenticity, it would appear far simpler (and demand far less explanation) to simply fabricate the original long form BC. Maybe I’m missing something.
By his fruits, we know him. When he starts growing good fruits we might come to believe him.
In the mean time does he still believe that murdering babies is ok? Does he still push socialism/communism?
I believe that radical change is possible, even for Obama. He needs to show me that change for the better, not just voice pious platitudes.
The man seems totally devoid of spirit. Not Christian, not even muslim but a complete Obamaist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.