What's more fake? Mohammed or Obama's Bio?

[4est_4est_Gump]

In the reaction to the Boston Globe's controversial article on Harvard's EEOC reports which listed Elizabeth Warren as a Native American, one particular revelation has gone largely unnoticed. Alan Ray, the administrator who filed diversity reports during Warren's tenure, distances the university from any responsibility for erroneously listing her as a Native American.

[Ray] said through a spokeswoman that he "never encouraged any faculty member to list himself or herself in a particular way." Ray added that Harvard "always accepted whatever identification a faculty member wanted to provide," a characterization another highly placed former Harvard administrator backed up.

In previous reports by Breitbart News, there has been no definitive evidence--no silver bullet--that Warren is the one who volunteered the idea she was a minority. The evidence discovered by authors John Sexton and Michael Patrick Leahy suggest it is very likely, but the possibility has not yet been established as fact. However, with this statement, Harvard has denied the only other likely explanation for EEOC reports listing Warren as a Native American.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/27/Harvard-Throws-Elizabeth-Warren-Under-the-Bus

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Two, Three, Many Obamas
By Victor Davis Hanson, NRO
May 29, 2012 4:00 A.M.

As the campaign heats up, one problem is that we continue to meet lots of different Barack Obamas — to such a degree that we don’t know which, if any, is really president.

I think the president believes that private-equity firms harm the economy and that their CEOs are at best indifferent and sometimes unsympathetic to the struggle of average Americans. I say “I think” because Obama has himself collected millions of dollars from such profit-driven firms, and uses their grandees to raise cash for his reelection. Cynical, hypocritical, or unaware? You decide.

I think the president is in favor of publicly funded campaign financing but against super PACs; but again I say “I think” because Obama renounced the former and embraced the latter. Are Guantanamo, renditions, tribunals, and preventive detention constitutional necessities or threats to our security? Some of Obama’s personalities have said they are bad; others apparently believe them to be good.

One Barack Obama crisscrosses the country warning us that a sinister elite has robbed from the common good and must atone for destroying the economy. Another Barry Obama hits the golf links in unapologetically aristocratic fashion and prefers Martha’s Vineyard for his vacation. So I am confused about the evil 1 percent. Obama 1 feels they have shorted the country and must now pay their fair share, while Obama 2 feels they are vital allies in helping the poor by attending his $40,000-a-plate campaign dinners.

Barry Obama respects those who make billions from Berkshire Hathaway, Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Facebook, but Barack Obama does not respect those who make billions from oil, farming, and construction. Is Wall Street the source of our national problems or the source of the president’s political salvation? There is an Obama who runs against a prep-schooled mansion-living member of the elite; there is another Obama who was a prep-schooled mansion-living member of the elite.

I thought one Obama swore to us that borrowing $5 trillion was vital — Keynesian pump priming, stimulus, averting 8 percent–plus unemployment, and all that. But now another Obama claims that his serial $1 trillion deficits are proof not of “growth” of the sort that improved GDP and reduced unemployment, but rather of fiscal discipline that stopped reckless Republican spending. So Obama over the last four years brought both austerity that checked wild Bush spending, and also Keynesian growth that snapped us out of the Bush lethargy? Spending is saving? Record deficits are record fiscal restraint?

Lots of Obamas keep talking about civility and bringing us together; but lots more Obamas talk about punishing our enemies, emphasizing racial differences, and formally organizing supporters by racial groupings. An angelic Obama lectures about the end of red-state/blue-state divides; a less saintly Obama refers to xenophobic clingers, typical white persons, stereotypers, and arresters of children on their way to ice-cream parlors.

I recall that once upon a time Obama derided fossil fuels, bragging that “millions of new green jobs” would accrue from subsidizing wind and solar power and “bankrupting” coal companies, as energy prices would accordingly “skyrocket.” But then once upon another time, Obama bragged that on his watch we are pumping more oil than ever before, apparently because private firms ignored his pleas and drilled despite his efforts to shut down leasing on public lands. So we are to credit Obama for stopping oil leasing on public lands, which forced greater production on private lands, while being impressed that he lost billions subsidizing doomed solar and wind companies? When the government fails to promote new energy, that constitutes success because those outside the government then must do more? Do the various Obamas represent both the good but failed intention and the bad successful one?

Unfortunately, the paradoxes involve more than just the usual flipflopping of all politicians. They strike to the heart of who is, and is not, Barack Hussein Obama.

The fringe Birthers made outlandish claims for years that Obama was not born in the United States and therefore was not eligible to be president. But suddenly, after nearly four years of his presidency, we discover that for over a decade and a half Obama’s own publicity bio listed him as Kenyan-born. Why and how did this happen — given that authors customarily write their own autobiographies and have annual opportunities to edit them? Did Obama think that to fudge an identity might make his book on a mixed-race heritage more saleable in 1991, and then himself more exotic as a state legislator and senator in the ensuing 16 years — but for some reason not as a presidential candidate?

What is real and what is not? The Obama “composite” girlfriend who sort of existed and sort of did not? Was there one Obama named Barry and another who became Barack, one with the middle name Hussein that was taboo to utter in the campaign of 2008 and another with the middle name Hussein that after January 20, 2009, was supposed to resonate in the Muslim world?

One Obama was the constitutional-law professor at the prestigious University of Chicago; another was a part-time lecturer who never published and was rarely seen or heard at the law school. One Obama was a brilliant Harvard Law Review editor; another never wrote an article. One Obama had the highest IQ of any entering president and was indeed the smartest man we ever elected commander-in-chief; another Obama proved it by not releasing his college transcripts. One Obama is the fittest and most energetic of recent presidents; another Obama is the most secretive and reluctant about proving it through the customary releasing of medical records.

To be fair, Barack Obama wrote a memoir explaining how he had no identity, given the absence of his father, the serial trips of his mother, and his need not to be biracial, but sometimes black, sometimes white, in the manner that he had to be and not to be part of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Chicago community, and to vote present in the Illinois state legislature in order to be for and against what you must be for and against. Dr. Barack and Mr. Obama can both dutifully attend worship services “every Sunday” at Trinity United Church of Christ and emulate the pastor’s writing and speaking — and yet only occasionally drop in, to get married and to hear sonorous platitudes about self-help and healing.

Is Obama just the usual chameleon politician? Or is Obama emblematic of postmodern America, where there is no truth, but, like an Elizabeth Warren or a Ward Churchill, we legitimately are who we declare we are — and then again are not what we are when we choose not to be? Or is Barack Obama not a metaphor for much of anything other than the fact that it is harder to be president of the United States than to be at Harvard or Chicago Law School, the Illinois legislature or the U.S. Senate, where everyone declared that you did everything by doing not much at all?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Two, Three, Many Obamas
By Victor Davis Hanson, NRO
May 29, 2012 4:00 A.M.

Vicky Hanson is one of the few people who hates Obama as much as AJ does.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

As Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren and her Harvard partners in crime are learning, academic fraud is not as easy to get away with as it used to be in the good old days before the emergence of a vigilant alternative media.

Writing for Breitbart, Michael Patrick Leahy revealed on Friday a spring 1993 article that listed Warren as one of approximately 250 "women of color" in legal academia. The article was published in what was then called the Harvard Women's Law Journal and would have been released roughly when Warren was being considered for tenure.

At the time, Harvard Law was desperately seeking just such women. Just three years earlier, the Law School found itself embroiled in a nasty racial brouhaha. Black firebrand law professor Derrick Bell was demanding that Harvard appoint a woman of color to the law faculty. This protest would culminate in vigils and protests by the racially sensitive student body, in the course of which Bell supporter Barack Obama would compare the increasingly absurd Bell to Rosa Parks.

Feeling the pressure, Harvard Law Review editors wanted to elect their first African-American president. "Obama cast himself as an eager listener," the New York Times reported in the article that would catch the eye of literary agent Jane Dystel, "sometimes giving warring classmates the impression that he agreed with all of them at once."

In effect, the pressure Bell had brought to bear launched Obama's political career, and it may have given Warren the idea to reinvent herself as Pocahontas. One could almost forgive Warren for cheating a little. At the time, the Law School faculty was flush with cheats, including Obama's two most prominent mentors.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...ards_culture_of_corruption.html#ixzz1wGBwqVFz

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Harvard academics use ghost-writers?

The Audacity of their Dreams!

One of them, liberal icon Laurence Tribe, hired Obama as his research assistant in 1989 and took a powerful liking to the young man. After the 2008 election, Tribe would gush, "His stunning combination of analytical brilliance and personal charisma, openness and maturity, vision and pragmatism, was unmistakable from my very first encounter."

Obama found a second prominent mentor in professor Charles Ogletree. In the run-up to the 2008 election, Ogletree would enthuse, "I'm so excited about this candidacy that I just can't tell you. I'm just overfull with joy." If anything, both Ogletree and Tribe should have been overfull with joy in the simple fact that they had hung onto their Harvard jobs.

In August 2004, Ogletree had been forced to apologize for somehow letting words from Yale scholar Jack Balkin's book, What Brown v. Board of Education Should Have Said, find their way into his own book, All Deliberate Speed. At Harvard, given Ogletree's standing, none dared call this plagiarism.

At the University of Massachusetts Law School, however, Dean Lawrence Velvel called it exactly what it was, and publicly. Tribe, something of an academic showboat, moved swiftly to defend Ogletree. Although conceding that plagiarism by the prominent had become "a phenomenon of some significance," Tribe questioned the "decency" of those like Velvel who go public on issues "about which your knowledge is necessarily limited."

In a delightful turn of the paddlewheel, Tribe's showboating caught up with him just a few weeks later. Amazed by the sheer moxie of Tribe's defense, an anonymous tipster reported that passages from Henry J. Abraham's 1974 book, Justices and Presidents, had somehow found their way into Tribe's 1985 book, God Save This Honorable Court.

Forced to review the twin cases, Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan -- yes, that Elena Kagan -- and Harvard president Larry Summers faced an obvious challenge: Ogletree was a black star on a faculty often criticized for being overly white, and Tribe was the superstar of the judicial left. Had the plagiarists-in-residence not been such sacred cows, Harvard would have likely ground them into hamburger.

Instead, Summers and Kagan let months pass before even announcing that they had appointed a committee of inquiry.

On this chummy committee were future Harvard president Derek Bok and two other Harvard insiders. In April 2005 -- quelle surprise! -- the committee cleared Ogletree and Tribe. The transgressions, Summers and Kagan agreed, had surely been the "product of inadvertence." This being so, they thought it time to "consider the matter closed" and move on.

That same April, Velvel re-entered the fray, posting a lengthy analysis on his blog that explored the extent of the fraud and the depth of Kagan's complicity. Wrote Velvel of the administrative response, "t is a travesty. Its language is misleading, its logic miserable, and its spirit corrupt." What troubled Velvel most was this: Ogletree and Tribe could claim "inadvertence" because both likely had their research assistants write chunks of their books for them. Added Velvel, "Ghostwriting, horribly enough, has become all too prevalent in academia as a general matter."

The fact that Ogletree used ghostwriters, said Velvel, was "widely accepted." The case against Tribe was nearly as strong. The many instances of "copycatting" included a 19-word stretch in Tribe's book identical to a 19-word stretch in Abraham's earlier book.

This struck Velvel as "more like what one would expect of a student than of a Tribe." He pointed out too that a former Tribe assistant, Ron Klain, had already claimed to have written large sections of Tribe's God Save This Honorable Court.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...ards_culture_of_corruption.html#ixzz1wGDE00bv


Is anything the Left does real and on the up and up?

They make Islam look positively honest!

 

[Ishmael]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...ards_culture_of_corruption.html#ixzz1wGBwqVFz

I hope we're coming to an end of the age of fawning patronization.

Ishmael

 

[miles]

Harvard academics use ghost-writers?

The Audacity of their Dreams!




Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...ards_culture_of_corruption.html#ixzz1wGDE00bv


Is anything the Left does real and on the up and up?

They make Islam look positively honest!

They're experts at lying, manipulating, and misleading the the unenlightened and naive among us. Gotta give 'em credit, because it works. They stay on message.

The Left's response to this is always the same: all politicians do it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

They're experts at lying, manipulating, and misleading the the unenlightened and naive among us. Gotta give 'em credit, because it works.

The Left's response to this is always the same: all politicians do it.

Almost correct.



A_J's corollary #9, “When a Republican does it, it is a high crime and misdemeanor, when a Democrat does it, then it is, *shrug*, they ALL do it...”

 

[RobDownSouth]

This is the fourth day in a row my bitch AJ has been too scared to address criticism of his pseudo-logic in the Julia thread.

My bitch AJ can "talk the talk", but "walk the walk", aw HELL no!

Run away, pussy bitch, run away!

 

[miles]

Almost correct.



A_J's corollary #9, “When a Republican does it, it is a high crime and misdemeanor, when a Democrat does it, then it is, *shrug*, they ALL do it...”

In Bizarro World, less is more, bad is good, night is day!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I am not going to debate your lie.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

In Bizarro World, less is more, bad is good, night is day!

Exactly.

As soon as he was elected, the President became everything he railed against.

The VDH piece at NRO really nailed it down well this morning.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Same thing Islam does once it hits 51%...

 

[miles]

I am not going to debate your lie.

Did you know Throb reported himself after he posted personal information about himself and his family on Lit?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Did you know Throb reported himself after he posted personal information about himself and his family on Lit?

The guy is a real work...

... and he moved the goalpost on his Julia claim just so he could continue to troll.

Realizing that I never used the word extreme, he simply dropped it thusly rendering his whole attack moot, but once he's all wound up on burning hate, there's no stopping the clown from turning himself into a real idiot.

So, I get out of his way and let him alone with the bull...

 

[miles]

The guy is a real work...

... and he moved the goalpost on his Julia claim just so he could continue to troll.

Realizing that I never used the word extreme, he simply dropped it thusly rendering his whole attack moot, but once he's all wound up on burning hate, there's no stopping the clown from turning himself into a real idiot.

So, I get out of his way and let him alone with the bull...

He reminds me of spontaneous combustion from a pile of oily rags.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

He reminds me of spontaneous combustion from a pile of oily rags.

More like a pile of spermy rags...

 

[miles]

More like a pile of spermy rags...

His shirts?

 

[Peregrinator]

The guy is a real work...

... and he moved the goalpost on his Julia claim just so he could continue to troll.

Realizing that I never used the word extreme, he simply dropped it thusly rendering his whole attack moot, but once he's all wound up on burning hate, there's no stopping the clown from turning himself into a real idiot.

So, I get out of his way and let him alone with the bull...

It's astonishing that you read it that way.

You said "Why does the middle class need so many benefits?"

Rob said "'So many benefits?' Which ones do you consider 'excessive?'" Not "extreme."

What is so horrible about that question?

 

[Peregrinator]

Did you mean bitter?

I give him a pass on his politics and bitterness in exchange for his wicked sense of humor.

They're experts at lying, manipulating, and misleading the the unenlightened and naive among us. Gotta give 'em credit, because it works. They stay on message.

The Left's response to this is always the same: all politicians do it.

Almost correct.



A_J's corollary #9, “When a Republican does it, it is a high crime and misdemeanor, when a Democrat does it, then it is, *shrug*, they ALL do it...”

In Bizarro World, less is more, bad is good, night is day!

Did you know Throb reported himself after he posted personal information about himself and his family on Lit?

He reminds me of spontaneous combustion from a pile of oily rags.

More like a pile of spermy rags...

His shirts?

Uh huh.

 

[Peregrinator]

This is the fourth day in a row my bitch AJ has been too scared to address criticism of his pseudo-logic in the Julia thread.

My bitch AJ can "talk the talk", but "walk the walk", aw HELL no!

Run away, pussy bitch, run away!

This is as ugly as what they posted. Just ask the question. Ignore miles; he has always run away and lied. AJ, when taken to task, usually answers at some point.

 

[phrodeau]

His shirts?

The NRO.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I am not going to debate your lie.

"Inconvenient questions" are not "lies", no matter how much you want to define them as such

Did you know Throb reported himself after he posted personal information about himself and his family on Lit?

96.4% of Literotica doesn't believe you, Miles Ben Zonah.

More like a pile of spermy rags...

AJ's fascination with other mens' semen is fast becoming as obsessive as Vetteman's.

This is as ugly as what they posted. Just ask the question. Ignore miles; he has always run away and lied. AJ, when taken to task, usually answers at some point.

Oh, I agree. I gotta challenge the "black belt" "Marine"'s manhood, though, to get answers sometimes.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Okay bro, here's the payoff of the book.

The Arabic expansion occurred first in the vacuum created by the Byzantine-Persian wars.

When the empire began to gel, there was a need for a unifying religion with many signs pointing to the monotheism of the losing side at First Council of Nicaea where Jesus was pronounced god (trinity) and not a creation of god forcing a movement Eastward for those Syriac speaking Christians whose writings and hymns became the cornerstone of Islam and were translated into Arabic without diacritic marks (maybe to keep it a secret). The reason the Koran makes no sense in several parts is due to the misapplication of diacritic marks in subsequent years which spawned the Haddiths to try and make sense out of nonsense.

It most certainly did not come directly from Mohammed and in certainty did not lead the wars of conquest; it was purely a political document. It migrated from Syria to Mecca, not vice versa.

I'm not saying a but it lock, stock and barrel, but it fits in with most of my impressions about how men create religions to serve themselves.




PS - Additionally, it's a compilation of three separate works that were mentioned at the time of the conquests.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This is the essence of modern liberalism, whose object is to deceive the self or others, hopefully both, for personal gain in money, status, and power. It is neither liberal nor progressive in any intelligible definition of the words, and entirely reactionary. But it has succeeded to a great degree in gulling itself and others, even as the global economy goes into freefall from its very policies.

It gets worse, however. As modern liberalism bleeds into leftist socialism, it begins to border on the perverse. Elites imposing their views on the masses evolves into a more than slightly sadomasochistic societal relationship, turning increasingly sinister as it becomes increasingly non-consensual (socialism into communism). As I wrote earlier, leftism is just a massive form of social sadism that leads to the totalitarian state.

Elizabeth Warren and similar “liberals” are the sometimes witting, sometimes unwitting, aides de camp in this transformation. They know what’s best for us to such a degree that they are exempt from their own nostrums as well as from the results of their actions.

Warren can be an Indian if she wishes; she can exploit bank foreclosures if she wishes. Eliot Spitzer can bust hookers while employing them and end up with a television show. Who knows — Elizabeth may end up with her own reality show now, her own version of “Flip This House” called “Flip This Tepee”?

It’s their profession — modern liberalism. They can be capitalists while the rest of us rot under taxes and government regulation. Socialism for thee but not for me.

Roger L. Simon
http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/06/03/elizabeth-warrens-profession/?singlepage=true

I always tell Malia and Sasha, look, you guys, I don't worry about you. I mean, I worry the way parents worry, but they’re on a path that is going to be successful, even if the country as a whole is not successful.”
President Barack Obama, November 2011