Hussein the Fakir

Joe Biden gave a speech the other day and came a bit unhinged, shouting that:

They [meaning the Republicans, Tea Party folks and Mitt Romney] don’t get us!  They don’t get who we are!

But Joe  – we do “get” you, we know exactly who you are…and that’s your problem with us.

You rant about the 1% yet like new French President, Francois Hollande, you own mansions. You demand more taxes, yet don’t pay yours – owing $3.4 billion in taxes. You say we can’t cut government spending, yet waste taxpayer money on trips to Vegas for government bureaucrats and flying the Secretary of Defense home to California each weekend on the taxpayer’s dime. You tell us to tighten our belts, to sacrifice, and then fund frequent and lavish vacations for you and the First Lady. You tell us that you are laser focused on the economy and spend two years on legislation destroying it. You claim we can keep our insurance if we like it while knowing that the legislation prevents us from doing  just that. You say you are working hard “for the American people” and then go on 97 golf outings.

Yes, we “get” you. More people are “getting” you every day.

You, Mr. Vice President, are a fakir, and our President and your Democrat Party are all modern versions of a traveling carnival that is run by other fakirs to prey on small-town rubes.

The Obama author’s bio that states he was born in Kenya is rocketing around the conservosphere. I personally don’t think that it proves that he was born in Kenya and in fact, has been dismissed as a “fact checking error” by the person who wrote the original – but Obama had to have known and for 16 years, it stood uncorrected. This really is small potatoes unless you are still in the “birther” camp but I do think that it raises several issues that are very disturbing to me and really should be should be to you, too.

First – what is it that these people, all in the news within the past election cycle, have in common?

  • Richard Blumenthal
  • John Edwards
  • Elizabeth Warren
  • Barack H. Obama

That they all are liars is, of course, one thing – but that isn’t the only thing.

Dr. Melissa Clouthier writes something that I wish I had:

Imagine you’re a hippie kid. Your dad is some Kenyan big wig. Your mom is a self-important sociologist doing such important work that you, Barack Obama, must be left home with grandma and grandpa.

You are boring.

You are a mixed race kid on Hawaii in the sixties which is not a big deal because everyone has Hawaiian blood and has mocha skin. You are relatively wealthy and end up at a prep school with other wealthy kids.

You have to justify your existence.

No mom. No dad. Rather provincial, if privileged, Hawaiian life, but lots of questions from peers.

What do you do?…

You create a whole tapestry of falsehoods about yourself — not only does it make you feel better about being abandoned, it gives you credibility with those who judge not on the content of your character but the color of your skin, the exotic nature of your past, the superficialities of diversity.

Hippie lefties, it turns out, are kinda biased against people with conventional upper middle class American backgrounds.

Barack Obama wasn’t born in Kenya.

Barack Obama didn’t have some tortured, hard-scrabble youth.

Barack Obama was a materially indulged, emotionally deprived typical American child of divorce.

It’s his conventionality that embarrasses him.

And that’s why he lied.

Dr. Clouthier’s piece is well worth your time – please go read all of it.

All of the above folks  being Democrats is another commonality – but the characteristic that they share that is perhaps the most disturbing is that they all have created alternate versions of themselves in order to “sell” themselves to the public at large. Why? Is it because their “real” selves couldn’t get elected? Is that why they have to fool the electorate to gain power?

Let me ask you this: if someone has to create a façade to get you to believe in them are you voting for the real person or the façade? How will the person behave after you have put them in power over you and given your trust to them, will they behave like the façade or the person they are?

One thing that I have learned over these many years in managing people is this: we are who we are. By that, I mean that behavior is behavior and it is almost impossible to change that behavior. It takes a lot of energy to modify who we are at our core and even more to sustain that change. Radical behavioral changes are almost never sustainable and in moments of stress, crisis or challenge, we tend to revert to our core.

We are who we are and they are who they are.

That’s why having a fair, impartial, robust and inquisitive press is critical to democracy – but with the exception of Fox News and sadly, the National Enquirer, we now have only advocacy journalism. These “news” organizations are totally uninterested in anything that doesn’t advance their chosen narrative.

In the prologue to the second of his autobiographies, “The Audacity of Hope,” he said:

“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”

And yet he was still elected…because he was shielded from inquiry by a willing and compliant press.

This Kenya thing should drive the final nail in the coffin of media bias…This is complicity at the highest level. As Ace at AOSHQ reports, the bio was not corrected until 2007. Curiously, Obama also announced his run for the presidency in February of 2007. He gave a keynote speech at the Democrat convention in 2004, so it isn’t like this wasn’t out there to be found. They seem not to have trouble finding trumped up issues with Mitt Romney’s high school pranks from 1965, so this one should have been a “gimme”.

But it wasn’t.

It didn’t fit the chosen narrative.

Perhaps this illustrates another, more chilling prospect, that the media did know about this and decided that it was something that the public just didn’t need to know…for any reason. That is what is done in totalitarian states.

It is an issue now because the media themselves made it an issue by not reporting on it several years ago and giving Obama the chance to respond to it. Now it just looks like they were covering for him whether they were or not.

Obama became the political equivalent of Kim Kardashian – it didn’t matter who he had performed oral sex on to achieve his notoriety and position, he was hip, black (or at least half of him was), pretty and his story would sell…and they made sure that it did.

If there is any justice in the world, the advertising revenues of the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, NPR, ABC, CBS, NBC and all their cable incarnations should immediately drop by half.

29 thoughts on “Hussein the Fakir

  1. Since this just came to light, it does not vindicate the birthers on its own. But it is troubling, although the explanation in your piece seems sound. Some republicans have been known to ‘enhance’ their military records, and probaly for the same reason, it makes for a better story.
    No wonder Obama kept his mouth shut about the birthers, for the most part, anyway.

    Actually, this being Romney’s Second run for the nomination, the press obviously did have trouble digging up the ‘bully’ story,, and I wonder how many embarrassing stories about republicans the Breitbart organization has refused to publish.

    As for Biden’s mansions, check this out…..

    I’m quibbling here, you have written a pretty good summation of the problem; to wit, politicians lie( that’s no excuse Barack, baby, you were supposed to be different), and the media is too lazy-liberal(or some combination of the two) anymore to catch them. Imperfect as they are, we need organizations like Breitbart’s to keep some semblance of a free press going in this country.

    • I disagree. Your logic seems to be that because we don’t know something that it must be true – or that because the partisan press withholds information on Democrats, Breitbart must also be withholding information on Republicans. It is the classic, “we don’t know what we don’t know” position.

      Perhaps the Breitbart organization has held back information, who knows…but that organization doesn’t masquerade as an unbiased “news” outlet – they are clearly about advocacy. That’s not the case with the organizations that I listed. For the record, I don’t believe that Fox is – as I have stated before, just because an organization reports the other side of an issue doesn’t mean that they are advocating it – but they appear to when all other organizations are are lined up on the other side. Sometimes, you stand out from the crowd simply by not being in the crowd.

      The MSM investigative function seems to be able to work pretty well without Breitbart when Republicans are involved. There is simply no way that you can look at this and things like the Obama bio, the college transcripts, his “missing” writings and Bill Clinton’s peccadilloes, then compare the effort that went into Romney’s high school days of 46 years ago or Bush’s DUI coming out just before the election in 2000 and the Rathergate “fake but accurate” documents and believe that the press could not have found the Democrat dirt if they had wanted to.

      The brought down a president, Nixon, with investigative reporting.

      My meta point was that it sure seems that the press has no problem investigating Republicans to the nth degree while ignoring information that is publicly available. Like Liz Warren’s supposed Native American status, Liz’s status was allowed to sit out there for a very long time in the open without being questioned – Obama’s bio was also apparently out there for 16 years and he was never even asked about it, even though it was relevant in light of the “birther” controversy.

      Perhaps this illustrates another, more chilling prospect, that the media did know about this and decided that it was something that the public just didn’t need to know…for any reason. That is what is done in totalitarian states.

      It is an issue now because the media themselves made it an issue by not reporting on it several years ago and giving Obama the chance to respond to it. Now it just looks like they were covering for him whether they were or not.

  2. I always find it funny (and a little sad) when the Left is unable to see their own bias. They live in an echo chamber of illogic, and yet call those with whom they disagree illogical. They shout repeatedly “the science is settled” when the very definition of science means that it is NEVER settled, on anything. And they never, never, ever turn their backs on their heart-crushes in the press….and the press responds in kind.

    It’s not an original thought to compare the Left to fish in water who don’t KNOW they’re in water. However, I think it’s worse than that.
    The Left is like your buddy who’s had too much to drink. When you try to get his/her keys from them, they insist in a far-too-loud voice that no, YOU are the one that shouldn’t be driving. And then they stumble face-first into the wall.

    Fauxcahantas, Edwards, Obama, and many more are all walls that the Left has planted their kisser into, hard.
    And I fear, to all our detriment, that they’re not sobering up anytime soon.

  3. There IS a slight difference between the ‘crimes’ of the Obama Administration and those of Nixon’s, one of degree. I am talking about proven crimes, not ‘Obama is a muslim plant/commie/bilderberger crap.
    You are correct, I am sure, about the bias in the media. I doubt that there is an overall plan to squelch dissent and go all Obama, but one can indulge one’s own prejudices when surrounded by like-minded people.

    Isn’t it a shame that, as you said, the National Enquirer has higher journalistic standards than the WaPo?

    BTW, Dan Rostenkowski, a democrat, was caught and imprisoned for corruptionin a case led by none other than Eric Holder. And a pardon letter was written on his behalf by ex-pres. Gerald Ford. Go figure.

    John Kerrey co-led the investigation that brought down Clark Clifford, a Carter administration biggie.

    Democrats turned on William Jefferson, (D- la) and endorsed his repub challenger because he was so crooked. He was sentenced to 13 years in prison on august 5, 2009. In april of this year, an appeals court turned down his challege to teh conviction, and he started his sentence on May 4.

    Point is, there are still good democrats, honest ones, they just aren’t flocking to the profession of journalism.

    • I am not equating “crimes” and I did not suggest that the had been perpetrated. Lying to get elected may be a character flaw but currently isn’t prosecutable – but it should disqualify a candidate from holding the public trust. Republicans do commit these same errors but to a greater degree, they are either forced out by their own or resign – not so with the Democrats.

      I am merely referencing the disparity in the levels of energy expended with it concerns an R or a D. The point about Nixon is that they can dig when they are motivated to dig.

      Holder prosecuted a case that was investigated by the Capitol Police that started as an embezzlement charge against a low level employee and rapidly spread. They turned in a report to Speaker Tom Foley who buried it until the press got hold of it in 1992.

      So the press can do the work when they choose to.

      Rostenkowski was eventually pardoned by Clinton.

    • Kells, speak for yourself. When discussing our social compact, we should see and identify people, things, & problems as they are. Utah is completely correct about people. When temptation and difficulties arise, their true character shines and their decisions will be consistent with their inner character. I have been disappointed on numerous occasion. I realized I had been fooled by, or misjudged others. Marxism is a facade. “The ends justify the means” is their modus operandi because no one will buy what they are selling if they were honest. Our American Experiment, as described in the Declaration of Independence, is an unrealized dream. Her hopes and dreams are still alive. As long as that dream is striven for in the hearts and minds of the majority, it is not a facade.

      • Texas, let’s play pretend. Pretend I am a youngster whose parents have divorced and have shipped me to my grandparent’s to raise me. I want to fit in with others, so I tell the the other kids what they want to hear about me. I say things so often that I start to believe them as well as everyone around me. By my own convictions, I have slipped into the skin my new character.

        Am I not a facade as a person?

        • See, now that is close to what I REALLY believe (caps once again for Kells 🙂 ).

          Now, throw in a HEAVY dose of what Texas is saying – “I can do/say anything because my goals are superior to theirs” – and I think we’ve hit the target square on.

        • Kells: if we play pretend, can you wear a French maid’s outfit? I’ll wear my rich French socialist politician costume.

          • Ooooh! TRNL’s own Rule 5! B. can be our slave boy and feed me grapes while you, um, let me tickle you with my feather-duster! G. can take pics and Daddy can spank me. Unfortunately, I only have a very naughty Red-Riding-Hood costume……and a Bo-Peep…………and a sexy hippy…..and a sexy referee……. Okay! So I very much enjoy playing pretend!

  4. Utah, i agree with you on the integrity issue. If Clinton had not lowered the bar so far, Obama’s lying about his past, or at least his complicity in allowing the misinformation to stand, would have been enough to keep him from being nominated. It would be hard to prove Obama lied, harder still to prove he knew the info was wrong, although we know that he had to have been aware of the discrepancy.
    Clinton pardoned Rostenkowski, and Bush refused to pardon Libby? No wonder Cheney was ticked off.

    • Utah, i agree with you on the integrity issue. If Clinton had not lowered the bar so far, Obama’s lying about his past, or at least his complicity in allowing the misinformation to stand, would have been enough to keep him from being nominated.

      See, now THAT is what I’ve been trying to focus attention on. I have used this story, but have been trying to point out that it isn’t whether or not there’s anything to the charges that is important, it’s that we’ve slid down the slippery slope so far that a good number of people think there is. We’ve lost all trust in our society, and that is a recipe for collapse.

      EXCELLENT point, G 😀

  5. Utah,

    What evidence do we really have to substantiate the claims that Obama was born in Hawaii and lived the life that everyone claims? Seriously. I am NOT a ‘birther,’ just trying to apply reason to this issue (as I was trained to do). I know this: if you or I had made up a story about our lives as it is claimed Obama did, and it was considered factual as Obama’s apparently was, and we then needed something such as a security clearance, if the supporting documentation we provided was as shaky as Obama’s birth certificate, school transcripts, social security number, mulitple passports, Indonesian school attendance and other things such as eye witness reports claiming he was born in Kenya, do you think we would get our clearance?

    My point is this: why do we accept shaky ‘evidence’ that Obama was born in Hawaii and dismiss what is – to me – equivelant ‘evidence’ that he might not have been? Who established that Obama is what he says he is other than ‘group think?’

    And then, why do people so quickly dismiss the source of this story – the Clintons. True, they are masters of slime, but they are also experts at exposing skeletons. We also have Michelle Obama on video saying Obama was born in Kenya and both Biden and Bill Clinton telling us Obama’s life is a fairytale. They ‘could’ mean his claim to being Kenyan born is the fairytale, but it is equally possible they were being openly honest in full knowledge that no one would either understand or believe they were exposing a lie.

    To be honest with you, I have yet to see where this case has actually been established, one way or the other. BUT – the thing I find fascinating is how people line up on one side or another without anything we would normally consider credible evidence to support them. Maybe you will address this for me? I’d be interested in hearing your reasoning here, especially to the specific questions I have posed.

    • We have what we have and what we do have is more conclusive that he was born here than he wasn’t. Part of the thrust of my post was that if the Washington Post can conclusively prove that Mitt cut a gay guys hair in 1965, it should be a simple matter to find the real information on Obama.

      • I understand about your post, but you mention ‘what we have,’ and that is my point:

        We have a document claiming to be a Kenyan birth certificate that – from what I have read – seems to be more legitimate than the SCANS of Obama’s supposed Hawaiian birth certificate – something we do NOT ‘have.’

        We have a respected Sheriff telling us the document the WH produced is an obvious forgery. Experts on MS Office had already told us this much, Opiao has said he concurs.

        We have eye witnesses who have said Obama was born in Kenya.

        We have Michelle Obama on video saying Obama was born in Kenya.

        We have Obama’s own literary agent saying Obama was born in Kenya.

        We have the AP saying ‘candidate’ Obama – for the IL Senate – was born in Kenya.

        We have Bill Clinton and Joe Biden ‘possibly’ telling us that Obama’s life story is a myth (i.e. could be trying to tell us Obama was born in Kenya).

        We have Hillary Clinton telling us Obama was born in Kenya (the source of the whole ‘birther’ issue in the first place).

        And then we have people telling us that “It is obvious he was born in Hawaii.”


        Without trying to sound confrontational or hysterical, and with all sincerity, what do we have that suggests Obama was born in Hawaii other than ‘group think?”

        Personally, I’d like for him to have been born in Hawaii – but only because I know what would happen if he were proven to have been born in Kenya. I’d prefer to avoid that mess, but I am beginning to believe that is exactly why ‘serious’ people are ignoring what we have.

  6. Pingback: Defending Cannibis the First, the Pope of Toke | The Rio Norte Line

  7. Pingback: Utah Recieves Wisdom From The Oracle | The Rio Norte Line

  8. Pingback: Snark Week at the Obama Discovery Channel | The Rio Norte Line

  9. Pingback: Is This Something? | The Rio Norte Line

  10. Pingback: Ryan Owns The His Boston Marathon Statements, Unlike A Certain Unrepentant Liar We Know (With A 16 Year Author’s Bio That Claims Kenyan Birth) | The Rio Norte Line

  11. Pingback: Is It Starting? | The Rio Norte Line

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.