WE Blog

“A different kind of politician.”

Riiiiiight. Move to the left, get the nomination. Tack to the right, pursue the election. And the beauty of it is he has so little record to explain away. What changes he has to make are dismissed as “inartful” explanations.

SS. DD. He’s just a Chicago machine politician with a polish on him. Different kind of politics, my ass.

Not much of a waffle, really.

His plan is to remove enough troops per month to get ‘em all out in 16 months.

He got a “what if” question.

“What if something happened?”

Depends on what that something might be.

After all, George WMD Bush still has six months worth of more fuc#-ups ahead of him.

I thought the democrats were going to get us out of Iraq after the ‘06 elections.

“Regular’ again posts lies,”

What is he lieing about?

Has anyone, anywhere, ever believed a campaign promise? If so…that gullible person gets what they deserve.

“In fact, Obama has said for months that he would set Iraq war policy in consultation with military commanders.”

Damn, “Regular” –

You’ve been wrong for eighty years?!

Hell, forgive me for falling to the slander and smears people have posted about your grotesque physical personage. Sounds like you look pretty good for a octogenarian!

“A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage” was Herbert Hoover’s campaign slogan in 1928.

How did that presidency work out?

While they don’t have the backbone to admit it, looks like Baracko and the cut-n-run crowd are admitting the surge worked, Bush is winning his war and normalcy is returning to Iraq.

Obama has the right to waffle a bit on the time and I can sit with that. If it is 16 or 20 or even 24 months as he sees fit, is fine with me. The point is that Obama WILL remove the troops- ALL of them.

Obama is in a tough spot now.

America is WINNING in Iraq.

Al-Queda is being destroyed, in Iraq.

The crazy left, with its liars like Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame, have been shown to be anti-American political hacks. Remember how the goofy Joe Wilson told the CIA that Iraq WAS trying to buy “yellow cake” uranium, then Joe Wilson wrote an Op-Ed in the New York Times that said Iraq was NOT trying to buy uranium in Africa? And then, Wilson cited “forged documents” that Wilson later admitted he did not, ever, see, and had no knowledge of, prior to his CIA report? Remember when Wilson then admitted, to a Congressional Hearing,t he “mis-spoke” in his famous Op-Ed piece?

Guess what?

“Yellow Cake” uranium was just removed from Iraq, and sent to Canada:

“At Iraq’s request, the US military recently transferred hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada in a secret, weeks-long operation, a Pentagon spokesman said Monday.

The 550 metric tons of uranium, which was sold to a Canadian company, was moved by truck convoy to Baghdad’s “Green Zone,” then flown by military aircraft to a third country where it was put on a ship for Canada, said Bryan Whitman, the spokesman.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080707/wl_mideast_afp/usiraqcanadauraniumnuclear_080707161202

The facts have changed, in Obama’s mind. Obama first listened to the crazy loons on the left. Reality contradicts what Obama was told.

Now, reality and the facts make Obama’s previous positions look ridiculous.

Obama does not want to look ridiculous (like the lefties on this Blog) so Obama is changing his mind.

Guess you’ve been gone on vacation or very busy, Franklin. The yellow cake moved recently to Canada has been discussed here at length. To bring you up to date where the rest of the board is: this yellow cake has been under lock and key, protected by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) since 1991! And of course back then we knew Saddam had it — the U.S. of A. sold it to him and still had the receipt!

Until the idiot in charge (bush!) began his war of choice in 1993 it was safely guarded! When Canada bought it recently it was difficult to get out of the unstable country which is Iraq.

There are many articles out there (most of which have been brought here to the discussion we all had!) so you could find one of your choosing, but here is a portion of what Reuters had to say:
——–
“The Tuwaitha nuclear complex was dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War. But tonnes of nuclear material remained there under the seal of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), until the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq when it was left unguarded and looted by Iraqi civilians.

The uranium, called yellowcake, had been stored in a compound at Tuwaitha, south of Baghdad, which was once the centre of Saddam’s nuclear weapons programme.

A U.S. embassy spokeswoman confirmed the U.S. military helped safely ship the uranium out of the country.

“The Iraqi government decided to get rid of the uranium, which amounted to 550 tonnes, because of its potentially harmful affects on Iraq and the region and because it causes pollution,” Dabbagh said on Iraqiya state television late on Sunday.

The Tuwaitha nuclear complex was dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War. But tonnes of nuclear material remained there under the seal of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), until the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq when it was left unguarded and looted by Iraqi civilians.

Dabbagh said the uranium had not undergone any enrichment. He did not name the Canadian company that bought the stockpile, but other media reports said it was Cameco.

Yellowcake is an impure mixture of uranium oxides obtained from processing uranium ore. It has to be enriched before it can be used in nuclear reactors or to make bombs.

“As far as the (nuclear) proliferation threat goes, natural uranium is not of direct use in a nuclear weapon,” U.S. embassy spokeswoman Leslie Phillips said.”

http://uk.reuters.com/article/burningIssues/idUKL0768496820080707?sp=true

That’s nice Franklin.

Since the good ole U.S. of A. still had the receipt I’ll venture a guess it came from — the U.S. of A.!

That is the last post with your name on it that I will ever read. Lucky me — your name appears first. But carry on, it’s a public board and you can read your posts!

“Many of you liberals would have SWORN, back before Wilson lost his luster, and all of his credibility, that Iraq had NO uranium at all.”

BS, Rossell, no one ever denied that Saddam had uranium. You are just full of skit.

“Saddam could have taken possession of the uranium at ANY time.”

False.

“Other terrorists could have taken possession of the uranium at any time.”

BS.

Got any other GOOD stories, Rossell? How about a story that Obama is really an Arab?

Got any back up for that one?

Sounds extremely fishy to me, Captors are notorious for not honoring their captives wishes. If they’d wanted to release him for a pr gain, they would have released him. Who would of believed him when he said he was released against his wishes.

The State Department under Bill Clinton listed Iraq as a State Sponsor of Terrorism.

Let’s just all ignore the media’s darling’s 10 flip flops in two weeks.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/16/mccain-sets-a-new-record-10-flip-flops-in-two-weeks/

econ101,

Thank you for proving (again) that you have no credibilty, with your very inaccurate yellow cake posts.

WS
How many bullets does the IAEA own?
What authority does the IAEA have?

Hey libs, I am giving Obama some credit. I am actually a bit releaved!

Obama does not appear to be as nuts as you anti-war lefties on this Blog.

It will be fun, watching Obama double cross all of you, just like Pelosi and Reid have double crossed you!

From Straight Talk’s lips to the media’s ears; doesn’t matter that Obama has been saying since October of 2007 that he’d go for phased withdrawal.

Another example of that “liberal media” once again acting as official stenographers for the McCain campaign. And then to watch GMC70 sneering triumphantly that this somehow discredits Obama–as if GMC70 would ever have regarded him in any other way–just kind of ices the cake.

Franklin,

“Obama is an Arab name!
Husseing is an Arab name!
Barrack is an Arab name!”

We’ve been over this before. “Barack” is an African name. But if you want to go on lying like only a Repuke minion can, then here’s the smackdown:

“There has been a lot of discussion about this one with some people connecting the name to Arabic words, others to Hebrew, and others to Swahili. Regardless, the name “Barack” or “Barak” is found among Africans and “Barak” is a Swahili word meaning blessing or prosperity. There are also related Arabic words such as “baaraka,” which relates to blessing and most agree that the name is derived from Arabic. Obama has cited both origins of the name. In his book Dreams From My Father, Obama describes the name in this way: ““It means ‘Blessed.’ In Arabic. My grandfather was a Muslim.” He has also described his first name as Swahili.”

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-lies.htm

And, Franklin, given that Barack Obama’s grandfather DID convert to Islam, and given that George Bush’s grandfather consorted with Nazis, it makes as much sense to argue that George Bush is a Nazi as it does to claim that Barack Obama is a Muslim. Actually, given W’s fascist attempts to override the Constitution, more sense.

If I didn’t know better, Franklin, I’d say your insistence on arguing this way paints you as an anti-Muslim bigot.

Obama is a loser..mark it on your calender.

This is fun.
You liberals are so predictable.

Did I say anything that was not true?

No, I did not.

Of course the Uranium in question was probably the “IAEA” uranium. So what? It still BELONGED to IRAQ did it not?

Did not Canada just purchase the uranium FROM Iraq?

Further, I have proven that Joe Wilson lied, delberately.

Me? I simply did not make clear where the uranium might have come from, and you jump all over me!

The uranium BELONGED to Iraq.

The IAEA was and is under the authority of a corrupt United Nations.

The IAEA has NO arms or enforcement power of its own.

Furthermore, the fact that Joe Wilson lied is a matter of public record. Wilson admitted, in a Congressional Hearing, that he “misspoke” on a particular fact.

So, it is fun, I can pretty much come up with any FACTUAL event or statement that I want, and you liberals go nuts.

However, if you go back and look, you can not pull up a false statement, in anything I have said.

You simply want me to make clear that this uranium was “IAEA” uranium? What would IAEA do, exactly, if someone pulled a gun on them and asked for it?

Again, was the UN “Oil for Food” program, also in Iraq, handled properly?

The Bush Administration has successfully removed uranium from Iraq. Iraq has been paid for its uranium.

Joe Wilson has been proven a liar, on several other points — but JOE WILSON did tell the CIA, in his ORAL report, that Iraq was STILL trying to buy uranium from Niger.

Wilson lied, in his op-ed, and said otherwise.

Wilson also lied when Wilson said he had seen forged documents. Wilson also lied when he said that Bush made his decision based on forged documents. The truth? US Intelligence figured out the forgery long before Wilson even knew about said documents, and Wilson NEVER saw said documents.

Wilson is a liar.

But, Wilson is a liberal.

So the liberals on this Blog stick up for him.

However, mention that Obama is an Arab (true) and the libs call you a “liar” though they have NO proof to back up their claim that you are lying.

Again, Obama seems to understand that there are some real kooks and hacks in his party, and Obama is trying to distance himself from the leftist nut cakes — LIKE THE LIBS ON THIS BLOG!

‘ere comes the new boss, just like the old boss.

Looks like we will be fooled again, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Tip ‘o the ‘at to the Who.

“Did I say anything that was not true?”

It’s your trademark here paulie.

I could post a long list. But you’ve done made your reputation.

Iraq’s leaders are now asking Bush for a timetable detailing when we will LEAVE Iraq.

Once Obama has the facts, I predict he will be have our soldiers home BEFORE the 16 month projection.

4000 died because Republicans worship a false god.

IF we had not gone to Iraq?

There would be MORE terrorists alive today.

Franklin,

With your attempts at misdirection regarding the IAEA-listed uranium now foiled, you go to the Wingnut fallback position that has been taken by lots of other Wingnuts on lots of other Wingnut sites: namely, that the point is that Joe Wilson “lied” by claiming that Iraq was NOT trying to buy yellowcake uranium in the late-1990’s.

OK, Franklin: prove it. Prove the Joe Wilson “told the CIA in his oral report that Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake uranium.” Give us links and documentation. Also prove that he never saw the documents he says he saw.

You’ve run your mouth and shifted positions in response to being called out: now prove your claims regarding Ambassador Joseph Wilson, Franklin.

Franklin
Posted July 7, 2008 at 9:23 pm | Permalink
IF we had not gone to Iraq?

There would be MORE terrorists alive today.
______________________________

American lives are far more valuable than any terrorist Econ.

But then it’s easy for YOU to volunteer OTHERs for your trumped up cause.

You’re a coward who won’t lift a finger to help the cause you blather on about.

When did YOU serve in Iraq? Never of cowardly course.

Talk about flip flopping. He has a long history of it:

It’s Only About Winning

By David Limbaugh

townhall.com/columnists/DavidLimbaugh/2008/06/24/its_only_about_winning?page=full&comments=true

The Washington Post reports that Sen. Barack Obama is aggressively trying to reintroduce himself to voters, echoing the spin of Obama’s advisers that not everyone knows him yet. In reality, Obama’s major campaign challenge will not be to reveal, but to conceal his true identity.

Obama is not trying to introduce himself to unreached voters, but is engaged in damage control with many he’s already reached — and insulted and disillusioned.

As long as he was soaring above the fray with the lofty rhetoric of hope, change and unity, Obama could masquerade as a quasi-messiah figure. But once forced into the nitty-gritty of contested issues and debates, his false visage began to crack. Those cracks expanded into campaign-threatening fissures when voters learned about Obama’s sordid associations and left-wing elitist snobbery toward small-town America.

The Post says that in his reintroduction, Obama has “offered a clear road map for the kind of candidate he is likely to become …: an ambitious gamer of the electoral map, a ruthless fundraiser and a scrupulous manager of his own biography in the face of persistent concerns about how he is perceived.”

What the Post left out is that Obama has also shown himself to be an unscrupulous master of the politics of calculation and expedience. Whether on public finance, NAFTA, Iran, Iraq, Jerusalem, special interests, Cuba, illegal immigration or the decriminalization of marijuana, Obama has demonstrated a propensity for flip-flopping that could embarrass the grandmaster himself, Sen. John Kerry.

But here’s what’s scary: For all of Kerry’s reputed smoothness and Eastern intellect, he often tied himself in knots trying to reconcile his absurdly opposing positions. Obama can flip and flop with unmatched alacrity and facility and with the absence of self-consciousness and accountability of an accomplished sociopath. This guy doesn’t even acknowledge he’s changing positions; he does it without breaking a sweat and never looks back.

Of course, Obama benefits enormously from a favorable press, one that, in furtherance of his electoral cause, will tolerate almost any degree of preposterousness from him.

In addressing Obama’s stunning position shift on public financing, the Post gropes for the best possible spin. The flip, says the Post, reveals Obama’s “determination to press his financial advantage, even at the cost of handing his Republican opponent the opportunity to raise questions about the sincerity of his rhetoric on reform.”

We are to accept Obama’s change on public finance as a positive because, according to the Obama supporters the Post favorably quotes, it dispels the myth that Obama is naive and proves he is tough enough to take heat for his change.

I get it. We should be grateful for Obama’s willingness to reverse himself on the issue of money and corruption in politics, which he led us to believe involved a nonnegotiable core principle, because it shows he’s got courage — courage enough to stare down the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Unbelievable.

But if pressed, even the slick Obama will have trouble squaring his new stance with his September 2007 statement that he would agree to public financing if his GOP opponent would and his February 2008 statement to Tim Russert that he would sit down with Sen. McCain and try to agree to a system fair for both sides.

But his shift on public finance is hardly shocking when taken in the context of his many other major (and some minor) flip-flops. I just ask you to consider the common thread underlying all of these turnarounds (though just a partial list): a) his condemnation of union contributions to the Clinton and Edwards campaigns as “special interest money” but his eager acceptance of such money for himself as coming from representatives of the “working people”; b) his flip on ending (January 2004) then retaining (August 2007) the Cuba embargo; c) his March 2004 statement that opposed a crackdown on businesses hiring illegal immigrants, compared with his Jan. 31, 2008, debate statement endorsing such a crackdown; d) his advocating the decriminalization of marijuana in January 2004 versus his Oct. 30, 2007, position opposing its decriminalization; e) his jaw-dropping same-day flip on having Jerusalem remain the undivided capital of Israel; f) his shameless reversal on NAFTA; g) his nearly immediate backtracking on whether Iran poses a serious threat to America; h) his progressive position shifts on Iraq — as documented by Peter Wehner and Michael Barone — from “don’t go in, stay in, and get out”; i) and his vigorous defense then abandonment of both his pastor and his church.

The common thread, in a word, is expedience. It is not toughness; it is not savvy; it is not gravitas; and by all means, it is not admirable.

Barack Obama is every bit as politically calculating as Bill Clinton but twice as smooth. And if that doesn’t jolt you, you’re sleeping.

“By David Limbaugh”

Yeah, now THAT’S a name you can trust.

500 tons of uranium shipped from Iraq, Pentagon says

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/07/iraq.uranium/

I know, I know, this was under supervision, or some other crap like that.
None the less Saddam had it all along and he wasn’t going to use it to spread on his crackers.

There is nothing “racist” about pointing out false statements in Obama’s fake “autobiography”

If you just can’t stand discussions of race, at all? Fine! Lets GET RID of “Affimative Action” and “Minority Set Asides” —

But, if we MUST have such programs, then we should force those who take advantage of them to FOLLOW THE RULES! It is not clear that Obama did follow the rules.

Furthermore, I bring up Obama’s Heritage because it helps ALL OF US to understand Obama!

Obama had to establish his “blackness” and that is why Obama hung around with looney Black activists and looney Black preachers.

I have had Black and Mexican room mates. There is NOT a racist bone in my body. Everything that I have brought up, on this Blog, is FAIR GAME in that Obama is the one who has introduced race, not me.

Heck, some of my sources on this issue are even Black!

Franklin,

Regarding the claim that “Joseph Wilson lied,” read his statements. They constitute nothing like a confession about having lied. That’s what you, Stephen Hayes, and the Wall Street Journal would impute to him, but it is in no way what he said. So give it up. You lose.

Regarding the Hayes “article” (my computer warned away from the Opinion Journal one: guess it carries a virus), given that you’d rather link than make arguments, two can play at that game. Here’s a takedown of Hayes’ dishonest and misleading article.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200510210001

You’ve shifted ground and proven nothing, Franklin. It was well-known that Iraq was not trying to acquire yellowcake uranium at the time Bush said they were. Bush lied so he would have a pretext for war. And we all know it.

Franklin,

There is EVERYTHING racist about inventing a Muslim identity for Barack Obama in order to leverage anti-Muslim racist prejudice against him. EVERYTHING. And that’s clearly the game you’re playing. Everybody sees it, Franklin: why pretend?

Your expediently narrow definition of what counts as “racist” befits someone as small-minded as you.

CF
WILSON said that Iraq WAS trying to get uranium, when Wilson made is oral (not written) report to the CIA.

Look libs, if Wilson or Plame ever supported a Republican, you libs on this Blog would be digging up all of my anti Wilson and anti Plame stuff, to use against them.

Your bias will never allow any of you radicals to admit that one of your own is wrong, or is not telling the truth.

Wilson and Plame will not work for any administration in the future, since nobody in Washington, in either party, trusts anything that they say.

Franklin,

As I said above, it’s what Limbaugh’s piece DOESN’T say that’s dishonest: namely, that John McCain pretended to adhere to public financing, and stopped when it was no longer expedient for him to do so.

Therefore, Franklin, not only is Limbaugh wrong by admission: his ENTIRE PIECE is invalidated since it fails to say anything about how JOHN MC CAIN was the one who broke the agreement regarding public financing.

In other words, Franklin, it’s not just that “one thing” he said wasn’t true: rather, EVERYTHING he said wasn’t true, because it all was premised on a deliberate omission regarding John McCain’s breaking of the agreement–and sins of omission are lies no less than sins of commission.

CF
NOPE, your anti Limbaugh stuff does not wash.

David Limbaugh made several charges against Obama.

You have not proven that Limbaugh was wrong on any of them. You only wish he had told Obama’s side of the story, on one charge.

“WS
“The column was not ‘phoney’ and nobody has refuted the facts in that column.”

You have proven on this blog that you are completely credulous when it comes to any allegation that supports your political biases. Or, probably more accurately, that you will not hesitate to relay any claim that is consistent with your biases regardless of evidence or truthfulness. Lamb’s claim is based on last names, and is ethnically, antropologically, and culturally illiterate (for reasons I posted the last time I responded to this nonsense).

“Obama is more Arab than Black.
If you believe otherwise, PROVE IT!”

No, shill. The one who advances the claim is obligated to defend it. That’s debate 101.

And finding shill websites like Lamb’s, where a guy claims to know a man’s racial heritage by looking up his names, does not count.

Obama is not telling the truth about his youth, or his heritage. Several people have reported on this fact, not just Lamb:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070325obama-youth-story,1,4006113.story

“The handful of black students who attended Punahou School in Hawaii, for instance, say they struggled mightily with issues of race and racism there. But absent from those discussions, they say, was another student then known as Barry Obama.

In his best-selling autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” Obama describes having heated conversations about racism with another black student, “Ray.” The real Ray, Keith Kakugawa, is half black and half Japanese. In an interview with the Tribune on Saturday, Kakugawa said he always considered himself mixed race, like so many of his friends in Hawaii, and was not an angry young black man.

He said he does recall long, soulful talks with the young Obama and that his friend confided his longing and loneliness. But those talks, Kakugawa said, were not about race. “Not even close,” he said, adding that Obama was dealing with “some inner turmoil” in those days.

“But it wasn’t a race thing,” he said. “Barry’s biggest struggles then were missing his parents. His biggest struggles were his feelings of abandonment. The idea that his biggest struggle was race is [bull].”

Then there’s the copy of Life magazine that Obama presents as his racial awakening at age 9. In it, he wrote, was an article and two accompanying photographs of an African-American man physically and mentally scarred by his efforts to lighten his skin. In fact, the Life article and the photographs don’t exist, say the magazine’s own historians.”

Obama lies about race. Obama makes race an issue.

“Yet even Obama has acknowledged the limits of memoir. In a new introduction to the reissued edition of “Dreams,” he noted that the dangers of writing an autobiography included “the temptation to color events in ways favorable to the writer … [and] selective lapses of memory.”

He added: “I can’t say that I’ve avoided all, or any, of these hazards successfully.”

Obama HEDGES in his own, NEW preface to Obama’s OWN book!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070325obama-youth-story,1,4006113.story

Claim: “While Barack Hussein Obama’s father was from Kenya , his father’s family was mainly Arabs. Barack Hussein Obama’s father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father’s birth certificate even states he’s Arab, not African Negro). (snip secondary link of someone who must have gotten his information from Lamb)”

Response from Truth or Fiction: “There is no evidence that any of this is true. The link provided for documentation is from a user forum on a game site, hardly a reliable source.

“Obama’s father’s family is overwhelmingly African. According to an overview of published genealogies of Barack Obama: His father was Barack Obama. His grandfather was Onyango Obama, a Kenyen who converted to Islam. His great grandfather was simply known as Obama of Kendu Bay, Kenya. His second great grandfather was named Obiyo. His third great grandfather was named Okoth. His fourth great grandfather was named Obongo. His fifth great grandfather was named Otondi. His sixth great grandfather was named Ogelo. His seventh great grandfather was named Ogelo.”

Of course, one again, ethnicity is much more complex in Africa than just about anywhere else. What Americans call “black” refers to an enormous diversity of people.

It doesn’t much matter about the President.

What paulie knows is that conservatism is going into deep freeze for the foreseeable future.

This is for you Clinton lovers who told us that Obama was too Republican:

“The most interesting thing about David Brooks’ recent pro-Obama column in The New York Times–along with Obama-friendly observations by Karl Rove and Rove’s former deputy Peter Wehner–is that they mark Obama as Republicans’ favorite Democratic candidate for president. But Brooks has also fallen into the delusional style. He likes Obama, he says, because of the senator’s “character and self-knowledge” which “matter more than even experience.” (Give Brooks credit for consistency; he said more or less the same thing in praise of George W. Bush in 2000.)

Brooks channels the late sociologist David Riesman to declare that Obama is a secure “inner-directed man,” who was “forged by the process of discovering his own identity.” Then, channeling Abraham Lincoln, Reinhold Niebuhr, and Isaiah Berlin, Brooks expostulates about Obama as a man with a tragic sense of life and acute powers of observation–relying chiefly, like the Globe, on Obama’s semi-fictional memoir. Brooks offers nothing about politics and knowledge and positions: it’s all about personality, character, and attitude–or what Brooks whips up about Obama’s personality, character, and attitude.”

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=1f22d28c-ced2-4761-b350-77f3513928ac&k=52616

Excuse me, but going back in the family tree, one generation at a time, and proving at least one African is each branch of that tree proves WHAT exactly?

I never said that Obama did not have ANY Black African roots. Neither has anyone else.

And once more………………

“Obama is more Arab than Black.”

Ah, the individual making the claim needs to PROVE it, not those that dispute the claim.

If you Google “Obama is Arab” all you get is Lamb’s column and quotes on blogs from Lamb’s column.

Lamb is a radio talk show host, not a genealogist.

So, Rossell, you said it was easy to prove, now prove it.

Get on with it, Rossell, you said it would be easy.

The chances are VERY high, that even if Obama IS our next President, there have been previous Black Presidents, before him:

http://www.computerhealth.org/ebook/5blkpres.htm

Dr. Vaughn’s work is intended to fight racist ideas like the “Bell Curve” as far as intellectual abilities according to race.

Vaughn makes that valid point that Americans have such mixed heritage, no scientific method to figure out race-based intelligence could possibly be accurate.

(Now call me racist for providing a Black person’s argument that we have 5 Black Presidents of the United States. The fact is that Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Harding and Coolidge might all have MORE African Heritage than Obama!)

And hours later, econ101 is still trying to take the BDP award away from fleettwood. . .

Get on with it, Rossell, you said it would be easy.

“The fact is that Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Harding and Coolidge might all have MORE African Heritage than Obama!)”

Might……………………………..

Hardly what a thinking person would call PROOF.

Get on with it, Rossell, you said it would be easy.

You libs dont get it, do you?

My major project on this Blog has ALWAYS been to prove that liberals allow other liberals to tell blatant falsehoods, with absolutely no consequences.

However, conservatives must document every single thing we say about any liberal!

How is it that Obama can slander the entire country with a falsehood: that we have more Black people in prison than we have in college, and get a pass?

“on this Blog has ALWAYS been to prove that liberals allow other liberals to tell blatant falsehoods, with absolutely no consequences.”

Oh, BS. Your agenda is to spread the Republican talking points as if they were fact - you know this, Rossell, and so does everyone else.

So, where is your PROOF that Obama is 44% Arab?

Come on, you said it would be easy!

How is it an “obvious falsehood”

Is it not racist to assume that skin color is the only indicator of heritage?

How can you be so sure of yourself?

It seems to me, after reading through every post on this thread, NOONE has come up with a majority of ancestors, on Obama’s Father’s side, in any one generation, that were not Arab.

Case closed!

Obama’s father was etnically more Arab than Black.

By the way, as the election moves closer, some reprints from Arab publications will be presented, that clearly show what Arabs think:

Arabs say that Barrack Hussein Obama says it all, and that he MUST be Arab in heritage!

Of course, I will admit some of them are wrong, especially the foreign Moslem sites that say Obama MUST be Moslem since his Father was Moslem.

This is a cultural thing. In other cultures, you ARE the religion of your father, period.

Obama is afraid of Moslems.

Obama is afraid of Arabs.

Obama admits, in his own book, that he often hides his true identity.

Obama admits, (or, perhaps, falsely claims) in his own book, that he tried to cover up the fact that his mother was White.

Franklin says: “It seems to me, after reading through every post on this thread, NOONE has come up with a majority of ancestors, on Obama’s Father’s side, in any one generation, that were not Arab.

“Case closed!

“Obama’s father was etnically more Arab than Black.”

“Case closed”. Idiot.

Did you miss this?

“Obama’s father’s family is overwhelmingly African. According to an overview of published genealogies of Barack Obama: His father was Barack Obama. His grandfather was Onyango Obama, a Kenyen who converted to Islam. His great grandfather was simply known as Obama of Kendu Bay, Kenya. His second great grandfather was named Obiyo. His third great grandfather was named Okoth. His fourth great grandfather was named Obongo. His fifth great grandfather was named Otondi. His sixth great grandfather was named Ogelo. His seventh great grandfather was named Ogelo.”

Pointing out, once again, that ethnicity in Africa is a complex thing, let’s just go with the “Arab names” bullsh*t from Lamb.

Franklin, plese identify the “Arab names” in this list.

And oh yes, someone talked to a guy in Obama’s past who has different recollections of his conversations with the man. Proog positive!

More like a red herring.

Obama’s Voting Record Complicates His Shift to Political Center

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=asZwMDvYWOPQ&refer=worldwide

Agnatha
I suggest you draw yourself a diagram.
You can not prove percentages by using a verticle, top to bottom calculation of all the people in his family tree.
You need, instead, to look at each generation, individually.
2,4,8,16,32 etc.
You have not done so.
YOUR OWN SOURCE only says that “there is no proof” for what Lamb is saying.
YOUR OWN SOURCE comes up with NO PROOF, actually, not even any evidence, to make any claim at all.

“This was a deliberate attempt to downgrade this topic.”

Instead repeatedly stating that “it is true” Rossell, why don’t you provide PROOF that Obama is 44% Arab?

It was YOUR claim, after all.

“Is it not fair to assume that Obama’s FATHER was Arab?”

No.

“If we ASSUME that Obama’s Paternal Grand Father was Arab”

There is no logical basis for that assumption.

“Now, what are the chances that Obama has even more Arab Heritage than he has admitted to?”

He has not admitted to Arab ancestry, he has admitted to Muslim ancestry. Muslim does not equate to Arab.

Your claim does not hold water because ALL of your so-called evidence is based on the name, not the ethnicity.

But to further counter your claim, Obama’s grandfather added the first name “Hussein” when he converted from Christianity to Islam. What are the odds of Kenyan Arab being a born and raised a Christian in the 1920’s?

Further…………………. look at this name.

“Abdirashid Ali Shermarke”

Arab?

Abdirashid Ali Shermarke was the first Prime Minister of Somalia, from the Bantu tribe, in 1960. Somalia, of course, is NE of Kenya.

Are you suggesting that Somalian, from the Bantu tribe, are Arab?

From the CIA World Factbook…………..

Ethnic groups: Kikuyu 22%, Luhya 14%, Luo 13%, Kalenjin 12%, Kamba 11%, Kisii 6%, Meru 6%, other African 15%, non-African (Asian, European, and Arab) 1%

Less than 1% of Kenya’s population is Arab.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ke.html

The Kenyan Government just fell.

They were all sitting on the same branch.

“The United States on Tuesday rejected a demand from Iraq for a specific date for pullout of US-led foreign troops from the country, saying any withdrawal will be based on conditions on the ground.
“The US government and the government of Iraq are in agreement that we, the US government, we want to withdraw, we will withdraw. However, that decision will be conditions-based,” State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos said. ”

Damn. Get out. Start the withdrawal process now.

“Agnatha
“‘Truth or Fiction’ is a joke of a website.
The bias is obvious.”

Says the guy who links to Worldnet Daily,Free Republic, and oh yes, Kenneth Lamb’s website with total credulity. Complete irony impairment. Remarkable.

So did this website get the names wrong? And again, keep in mind, the names don’t in and of themselves tell you a damn thing. Your claim was already clearly unsupported “bullsh*t”. Here is a website that provides the paternal names. Are those names wrong? The identity of the website in this case is not as relevant as the nature of the claim. The names listed are verifiable or falsifiable.

Franklin quoting Truth or Fiction:”‘We have not found documentation that “Life has yet to find the article.’”

Well, obviously, they are no Factcheck.org or snopes.com, now are they?

Franklin, I agree with you that the author could have picked up the phone, or even done a simple internet search, to find the information. But what does the Life story mean? Does it mean that Obama made up the tale about the story out of whole cloth? Or, does it mean that he remembers a glossy magazine story thatm looking back on it years later, he thought was Life? More to the point, assuming that this story is an apocraphyl, made up one, this does not, in any way shape or form, give greater credibility to Lamb’s nonsense, or to yours. They are completely seperate claims. Did Truth or Fiction get the list of names of Obama’s parentage wrong? Did Lamb make a spurious claim based on “names” that prove someone is Arab? The answer to the latter question, by the way, is absolutely yes. So-called Arab “names” are found across a wide diversity of people where Islam is an influence, from sub-Saharan Africa to Indonesia.

You like to fling about the term “liar” Franklin. As moral philosopher Harry Frankfurt has observed, however, a liar is at least aware of the truth and seeks to avoid it. The bullsh*tter, on the other hand, doesn’t care. He will relay anything that serves his purpose, so he will mix the truth with half truths and lies, all with equal conviction.

You are clearly a bullsh*tter, flitting from one claim to another with your one sentence paragraph posts, with a list of claims.

To a liar, the truth is important, at least as something to be avoided. To a bullsh*tter, the truth isn’t even important.

“Oh, Paul the Con, do you still claim that Obama is 44% Arab?”

I don’t have a clue, but this, coming from clark, the one who claims to be every nationality you have ever heard of, is rich.