A media service of European Americans United

Main Menu

  • Home
  • Forum
  • About Us
  • Search
  • Action Alerts
  • FLYERS
  • Free Podcasts
  • Stories by Author
  • New Online Store
  • Archives
  • Categories
  • Links
    Blogs

  • Frank Roman
  • John Young
  • Garden Blog




  • User Menu

  • Register
  • Login
  • Logout
  • Submit News

  • Email This Page


    Syndication Feeds

  • Handheld/PDA
  • XML News Feeds
  • View Sidebar
  • Mozilla Sidebar

  • 16


     
    A Theory on Obama's Family History Misstatements
    Race; Posted on: 2008-05-28 17:52:37 [ Printer friendly / Instant flyer ]
    The campaign decided Obama was better off touting his mother's family than his father's Kenyan roots.

    Mama Obama

    Barack Obama escaped hot water over his mistaking Auschwitz for Buchenwald. Fair enough. But I have a new theory now -- one that's more a curious observation than a criticism, or perhaps a little of both.

    He makes a lot of mistakes about his family history. It's like he's retelling stories he's heard from third parties, including campaign staff who looked the stuff up. Maybe, aside from his grandparents with whom he lived for several years, he didn't know their side of the family that well -- including the great uncle who was one of the first at Buchenwald. In other words, he's telling stories he's learned on the campaign trail rather than ones he grew up hearing.

    It probably wasn't his father who mistakenly told him the Kennedy family paid for his travel to the U.S. to study in Hawaii. It probably wasn't his mother who told him the 1965 March in Selma, AL allowed her to marry his father (he was born in 1961). More likely, I think, campaign researchers and aides came up with it.

    Just like the Boston Globe reported the campaign came up with the story about his Indiana "homestead." I doubt he even knew there was a family homestead before going to Indiana to campaign:

    "On Saturday, Obama made his first visit to an Indiana house built by a great-great- great-grandfather for a potluck dinner with neighbors. Obama's local patrimony was recently uncovered by campaign researchers, an aide said, and the candidate was uncharacteristically short on words about it. "Look at this: the Dunham, uh . . ." he said, bounding off his bus toward the white clapboard house. After a long silence, he described it as a homestead."

    Why would Obama do this -- tell family stories he's only recently learned from others? According to the same Boston Globe article, the campaign decided Obama was better off touting his mother's family than his father's Kenyan roots.

    Previously, the Obama strategy was to focus on his multiculturalism and the Kenyan side of his family.

    Continue...

    Says a reader: One interesting thing about "the Kenyan side of his family" that Obama, post-Wright, would probably now like to forget are statements like the one he made in his book "Dreams From My Father" about his disappointment with them when he found out a politically incorrect fact. At the time of the Kenya Emergency (1952 to 1959), Obama's black family worked as loyal servants of the English colonialists, like most of their Luo fellow tribesmen, and played no part in the Mau Mau bush rebellion. (Involvement in the uprising, incidentally, would have implied the killing of whites. You know: the cousins of all those bitter religious gun nuts). Obama was disappointed that his kin had not instead joined the Mau Mau terrorists, a vicious group which practiced, among other things, forced sexual perversion on black victims. Like all "liberation struggles" in Africa, the Mau Mau were based on tribal networks, consisting mainly of the Kikuyu ethnic rivals of the Luo.

    Obama's regret reflects far left and black supremacist American "Afrocentric" ignorance of the history and complex cultural landscape of "The Mother Continent." According to these canons, all "liberation struggles" are "progressive" if the "enemy" is white, and thus fictions persist about various revolutions even though the whites were often peripheral. Two examples: South Africa: Primarily Xhosa (the tribe of Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and Thabo Mbeki) against Zulus, Coloreds (mixed race), Indians and whites. Zimbabwe: Shona (Robert Mugabe's people) versus Matabele (Ndebele) and whites. In post-colonial Africa the dynamic continues, only worse. Rwanda is perhaps known best, where Hutus undertook widespread slaughter against Tutsis, mainly hampered in their genocidal task only by being limited to (imported) iron age weapons technology (machetes). The list goes on: Liberia and Chad, Congo/Zaire and Somalia. Namibia, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Mozambique...all Africa is consumed by ethnic conflict, and has been long after the "evil white man" left (while continuing to feed the continent).

    To top it all off, Obama's Luo are not even "black" according to ethnic standards widely accepted as literally life and death in Africa. Distantly related to the Ethiopian ruling groups, who forged what is arguably Africa's only "indigenous civilization," the Luo are Nilotics, like their Tutsi cousins distinct culturally, linguistically, economically, genetically and ethnically from the Bantu blacks, who make up most of Africa's black population. Needless to say, the vast bulk of America's blacks are of Bantu origin, whose "family" back in the homeland are the blood enemies of the Nilotic cousins of America's first presumptive "black" prez.
    News Source: talkleft.com

    Comments

    Entire site copyright ©2007-2008 European Americans United.
    Opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of EAU,
    the editors, or any other entity. Some clearly marked materials are
    parodies or fiction. By submitting material you grant European
    Americans United a non-transferable 100 year non-exclusive license
    to use the submitted material.
    The following copyright pertains to the news site software only:
    Copyright ©Copyright (C) 2007-2013
    Powered by Esselbach Storyteller CMS System Version 1.8
    Licensed to: European Americans United