Posted on 10/20/2012 7:23:14 PM PDT by george76
A liberal writer named Elspeth Reeve, who writes for “The Atlantic” magazine, frets that Barack Obama’s relationship to Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis is getting more attention from voters and may constitute an “October surprise” that dooms the President’s re-election chances. She calls Davis only an “alleged communist” when in fact he was a card-carrying CPUSA member with a 600-page FBI file.
Her story goes further downhill from there, clearly suggesting that Obama’s media backers are worried and desperate to conceal the truth.
...
The cover-up is getting more intense as Election Day approaches.
Paul Kengor now draws our attention to the fact that Obama’s audio version of Dreams from My Father has omitted every reference to “Frank” that was in the book.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
All of the communist czars in his administration and the Pravda media is still trying to spin the lie that “he didn’t know”.
Stalinists lie. Always.
So they dumped "Frank" now. The whole story about Barrys early life is a provable lie, just like his later "composite" girlfriend. So is this being sold in the dollar bins in the fiction section?
Maybe Hillary has Frank Davis’ FBI file- She certainly stole enough of them.
Maybe that is the hold she has over Obama.
Did you watch the new YouTube? Loren has actual physical copies of the original magazines with published dates.
I'm not philosophically opposed to sleazy politics and unproven innuendo. I think what Kevin at Hillbuzz is doing "under the radar" may turn out to be one of the most effective base voter suppression efforts we've seen in a while.
But, if you're going to accuse the President's dead mother of being a soft-core porn model, being wrong has the strong potential of creating a sympathetic backfire. Not to mention, as we see on this thread, it being lumped in with real serious investigative work like 2016 and The Communist in an effort to discredit them all.
And unless you believe Paul is dead and Elvis is alive, these previous works by Joel Gilbert establish his willingness to exploit absurd conspiracies for a few bucks. He has no problem lying.
No I have not. I will look for it.
But, if you're going to accuse the President's dead mother of being a soft-core porn model, being wrong has the strong potential of creating a sympathetic backfire.
That is a possibility I have considered, but it appears that the people who would provoke the backfire aren't bothering to watch the movie and be provoked to outrage. I have been listening for a backfire, but apparently his work is so widely and instantly dismissed as to be incapable of producing one.
Another possibility is that those on the left who would produce a backfire may be so frightened of drawing attention to the movie that they are keeping silent.
Not to mention, as we see on this thread, it being lumped in with real serious investigative work like 2016 and The Communist in an effort to discredit them all.
Yes, I agree. Lying about facts just gives Liberals cause to dismiss other information which is actually true.
And unless you believe Paul is dead and Elvis is alive, these previous works by Joel Gilbert establish his willingness to exploit absurd conspiracies for a few bucks. He has no problem lying.
That is but one explanation. I have worked in the conservative movement for many decades and I am very well aware that there are good conservatives who believe all sorts of kooky crazy things. (The Kennedy Assassination stuff among them) I know Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers, and Army Officers, etc that believe all manner of nonsense but they are perfectly functional in all other aspects.
I do not automatically discount an otherwise functional person's information and opinion because they believe a lot of utterly silly crap. (Such as the New World Order conspiracy.)
In the case of Gilbert though, it appears he crosses the line between gathering and relaying information, and knowingly falsifying the truth for his own political reasons or personal gain.
Apparently he has no problem lying... To us, his audience.
Obama's DNA could be compared to Malcolm X's living children, but we know that's never going to happen.
As far as the theory that MX could be Obama's father, I think it holds as much water as any other theory. Per what I've read of Stanley Ann Dunham's history, she was in the same vicinity as Malcolm X for a brief period, at least nine months prior to Obama's birth. That possible connection has been explored here many times.
I take your point that totally unrelated people can strongly resemble each other, but that's really a rare occurrence, and shouldn't be used to try to prove that Obama isn't related to MX. Factually, most people bear a stronger resemblance to their parents than most others in the general population.
No, resemblance between two people isn't proof positive that they're related, but it can definitely weigh as circumstantial evidence that they are, in cases such as this. This is why you're going to continue to hear people bring up MX as a likely candidate for Obama's real father.
I’ll pass.
I find sufficient material for which to dislike Obama among those facts that are known.
I find no need to delve into the speculatory realm.
I think you see this “transaction” backwards.
The MSM is not the propaganda wing of the Democratic Party.
Exactly the reverse.
The Democratic Party and Barack Obama are the political wing of the MSM.
The MSM has the political power and the Hard Left political agenda.
The American MSM also has the most passionate, most creative, most skilled, and most highly paid political activists in world history.
As long as Obama competently serves THEIR political vision, they will back him.
Exactly the reverse.
And this begs the question - who is paying the MSM? Because that is where the real power resides. The media doesn't "have" money. It's paid money, either via direct injection from Soros, Arabs, or through advertisers.
MacDonald's doesn't have to pay the obamacare tax, and GE pays very little in taxes at all. I know they both advertise. I've seen their ads on those same networks which tell us that obama is the light and the way, and that Romney "lied" about Benghazi.
“What does the left care? Today’s Democratic party is nothing but a clown car full of communist advocates.”
Correction: Today’s Democratic party is nothing but a clown car full of murdering, lying, subversive, communist scu*bags.
IMHO
I can’t help but think if the Obama machine would just post some truth, all of this speculation would be put to rest.
Much of this is probably untrue, but it is fueled from the original secretiveness and lies.
Lies which may make Obama ineligible to be a President.
If his past is straight up, there would be no reason to hide it.
Malcolm X was in Seattle briefly at the same time as was Stanley Ann Dunham. That she would run to him to impregnate her while he happened to be in town strikes me as very unlikely, though groupies do exist. Even so, the numbers don't work (if the official birth date is true) because she became pregnant in November-December of 1960, long after they had left Seattle.
I take your point that totally unrelated people can strongly resemble each other, but that's really a rare occurrence, and shouldn't be used to try to prove that Obama isn't related to MX. Factually, most people bear a stronger resemblance to their parents than most others in the general population.
Everything about Obama is a "rare" occurrence. What's one more amazing coincidence? :)
upon ???
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.