I wouldn’t take snopes seriously, isn’t soros behind snopes?
If Mister Obama were to falsely claim that he attended, his cover story would say something like being a studious "monk" (unbelievable as he's not even that in the WH).
Anyone who has attended college will have many friends and acquaintances who would recall them. It's not all ust classroom, either. There are discussion groups, committees, social situations, and of course, casual conversation. And, in the classroom, students tend to sit in the same seat for every lecture and to know who normally sits near them. If Mister Obama were in your class or discussion group or on your committee, you would remember that he was.
I tend to think that this story is potentially huge. Ma and Pa Kettle might not understand Benghazi, and might not even worry about the IRS when if don't pay taxes, but they do understand (what appears to be) lying about college attendance and degrees.
Huge?
Quite possibly so.
.
Root also doesn't dispute that Obama has a degree from Columbia. What he disputes is whether he actually attended classes there.
Let’s take Snope’s debunking evidence item by item”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1.
The first interview with his Pakastani roomate Sohale Siddiqui
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-05-15-3144401415_x.htm
discusses his time in NY but NOT ONE WORD by any of his ‘friends’ mentions his time at Columbia University.
The only reference to Obama at Columbia in this article was made before a statement by his press secretary at the time of the 2008 article when Obama was running for President.
Snopes should not have included this to counter the claim that Obama never attended Columbia.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2.
The second reference of Snopes seems at first more persuasive
but still it offers no proof that Obama was at Columbia.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3.
The last reference promises to be a clincher because it purports to be direct by a Columbia Professor of American Foreign Policy. But it merely redirects to another Snopes link
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/columbiathesis.asp
whereby it states that no formal thesis was presented by Obama and then tries to whitewash this lack of academic rigor with a reference to a year-long in the making paper that no one can find a copy of!
So this last reference is a joke at best. As for the statements of the professor that were heard direct by Snopes or radioed by another of Obama’s spokespeople, this is all hearsay. There is no proof of any kind that Obama was a fully matriculated student at Columbia.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
THE LIKELY SCENARIO:
Given Obama’s background at Oxy and the difficulty in getting into a school like Columbia, a much more plausible account would be that Obama was an affirmative action (AA) student who was treated in a way that he could not fail.
Obama’s AA status would explain why the venerable Professor Graff did not remember him. Obama was likely granted an exemption from taking courses from the Professor.
My own experience with tenured ivy league professors and their reputation for challenging students and grinding them to dust if need be, is that they would at best accept begrudgingly the existence of AA as a political reality and console themselves that such ‘graduates’ would never see a position of real responsibility.
For example, one ivy league medical school established a ‘Bridges Program’ whereby AA students would be admitted into medical school in additional to the normal complement of admitted medical students. These Bridges students would have their own student office spaces with their own tutors. Whatever political power was behind this program, it was evident that the students would not be allowed to fail.
Failure was not an option for Bridges students. But at the same time the regular students knew these Bridges students were deficient and were given passes on qualifying exams. In other words there were two tiers of grading performance, one for the regularly admitted students and one for the Bridges students. Professors and regular students were concerned that these Bridges students could somehow be licensed Physicians and they were assured that only administrative jobs would await these deficient students.
The evidence points to Obama as an AA student who was perhaps matriculated as an extension student of sorts. In any event he needed a bachelors degree to get into Harvard Law and likely he was admitted there as some sort of ‘Bridges’ student based on his race and background.
As for my own opinion of AA, I understand its premises but it gives rise to putting people in influential positions of power where they can be dangerous. Some beneficiaries of AA policy are grateful, others see it as the game they needed to play to get power, money and influence. There’s a lot we can do to improve opportunity for persons of underprivileged background but there is much we must do to ensure the process is honorable.
MY SUMMATION:
The account given by Sohale Siddiqui is moving in the sense of the struggle that the young Obama had to endure to realize a higher ambition. I think most of us can empathize with such struggles.
But to get to high political office takes a network of wealthy or poweful contacts and lower level influences. It is these contacts and influences that should be the target of our investigation, not the young struggling Obama. He is merely their puppet to affect the agenda of the hard left. I saw this clearly in the campaign of 2008, that Obama was controlled. We all know that now.
Lower level influences could be a Director inside the Hawaii Health Department and the people associated in such offices. They need to be prosecuted. An atmosphere of severe consequences for fraud or gaming that smells of fraud needs to be created in such bureaucracies so that the game is effectively gummed up as no one will be so willing to risk incarceration and a loss of career. Of course if the gamers get to such influencers and offer them protection or their own brand of severe consequences, then we have a bureaucrat finding themselves between a rock and a hard place. This is where strengthening whistle-blower laws can keep people honest.
The life of Obama is a fraud unfortunately for him and conservatives. His birth certificate is a fraud, his selective service registration is a fraud, his entire life is built on fraud.
Who would push for all these frauds and be able to do it?
When someone is a useful puppet to their agenda, there are people in academia, in government and in financial positions that can “make things happen” especially is there is legislation and policy to support cutting corners or gaming a background.
Communist party members want the finer things of life and the access to privilege for themselves. They may not have individually a billion dollars in their bank accounts but they control such wealth and they control key people in key offices.
The process of admission to Columbia, admission to Harvard followed on the process of admission to Punahou in Hawaii. Communist parents and sympathizers know how to game the system. They are deceptive, they are intelligent and they are united in their belief that the deck is stacked against them from accessing the upper strata of society. Lie, cheat, and steal is their modus operandi but more importantly the process of ‘cover up’ is the cinching of their takings.
Personally I sense Obama is an arrogant person. I don’t think he worked or earned anything that would enable him to be admitted to Punahou, Columbia or Harvard. I think others in his society behind the scenes facilitated his rise, especially Affirmative Action policies.
His past is simply not honorable. But a less than honorable past seems to be the rule in high circles these days. As they say in Hollywood, as long as you have money or money behind you, you will be accepted and no one cares where the money came from.
But Obama is not the issue here. It is the movers and shakers behind him. These people would be the hardcore Left.
People in high places know that to rule over the lower classes one need only a scary enforcer, someone so nasty and criminal that no one dare make a move against him or her. With this in mind it is easy to understand how the media is controlled to a large extent and how the rank and file are kept in place. These nasties are the people we need to out and turn. We could do that for example by taking them on a helicopter ride and opening the cargo door where they see the ground below. They would understand our tactics because that’s the only thing such nasties understand, raw fear.
Another method to get at the Obama criminal network, or Hillary’s or Gore’s or anyone that the network puts in place as their puppet is to use RICO Statutes against them and haul them into court. But this is the political arena and RICO investigations would be tainted as partisan.
The answer is to get at the kingpins behind the fraud and to get the goods on them. They will turn evidence if we have the power to disconnect them from the gaming elements. But we unfortunately don’t have that power to disconnect. Look at the story of the Mirandizing of the Boston Bomber. He is still connected to the game controllers, thus we can bet we won’t see him talk.
Short of becoming dirty ourselves I unfortunately see no solution except to suffer until we have the power to reform. Suffering is then what most of us will have to do.
For what it´s worth:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/columbia.asp
Do you expect anything from snopes.com other than a weak attempt to spin the Obama narrative so as to “fill in the blanks” of the years of purported Columbia attendance. Wasn’t it snopes.com that first posted an alleged “Certification of Live Birth” to purportedly document Obama’s birth in Honolulu?
Here is a 2011 piece by Jack Cashill on WND relating to the issue of the Columbia years:
http://www.wnd.com/2011/04/283881/