Most of Dreams from my Father IS nonsensical gibberish.
The way I read that quote is that it wasn’t your typical happy-day wedding with all the trimmings (white dress, family, party and cake and happy, smiling photo album). It was a bare bones affair done in an almost shameful manner; an inter-racial marriage with a barely 18 year old, pregnant bride. It was, nonetheless, a legal wedding.
If there was no wedding, there’s no need for a divorce. If there was no wedding in Hawaii, the divorce documents wouldn’t have referred to it and the judge wouldn’t have signed off that he’d seen ‘due proof’ to that fact and it wouldn’t have appeared in the official Hawaii Index of Marriages for that era.
‘Most of Dreams from my Father IS /nonsensical gibberish.’
This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever seen on FR. What is the source for that assessment? Is it just one of those cases where, if an anti-birther says it, it must be true? Or are you able to cite some actual evidence to back up that one-hundred percent false statement?
‘The way I read that quote is that it wasn’t your typical happy-day wedding with all the trimmings (white dress, family, party and cake and happy, smiling photo album). It was a bare bones affair done in an almost shameful manner; an inter-racial marriage with a barely 18 year old, pregnant bride. It was, nonetheless, a legal wedding.’
Classic, classic anti-birtherism. Something I noticed from my very first ever encounter with anti-birthers: facts are their enemies. That was several years ago, and I’ve seen nothing in the meantime to change my opinion. Present an anti-birther with facts, and they (1) ignore them, (2) ‘forget’ them, (3) attack them, or (4) mock them. In no case does a fact actually affect the thinking of an anti-birther. Nothing else does either. Their thinking is cast in concrete, facts & evidence notwithstanding.
Here are some facts for you. The opposite of a “real” wedding” is not a “legal” wedding. A legal wedding is “real”. A wedding which is ‘not real’ is not legal.
Here is another fact. There is nothing “murky” about a bare bones wedding. Even if the parties were ashamed, it still wouldn’t be “murky”. Rather, it would be a simple, bare-minimum wedding. Nothing ‘murky’ about it; in fact, it would be manifestly straightforward.
Here is another fact. It doesn’t take “courage” to learn the ‘bill of particulars’ re: a ‘bare bones’ wedding. Obama, via Ayers, was not confessing in Dreams that he is so cowardly that he couldn’t bear the thought of a simple, scaled down wedding. He certainly bore the fact that there was no cake, no witnesses, no photographs, etc. Having courageously borne these facts, is he then supposedly too scared to acknowledge that the ‘wedding’ was nothing elaborate?
Your suppositions are gibberish. Dreams from my Father is anything but. [If I have to explain that to you, I will. I hope I’m not dealing with a person too dense to grasp it on their own, but if so, I will unpack it for you. Say the word.]
Now here is another fact. Stanley Ann Dunham was alive when Dreams from my Father was published. Obama knew she would read that her ‘marriage’ was “murky” and that her son had insufficient courage to hear the details. If the ‘wedding’ was as you describe, just a simple, minimalistic affair, then the words Ayers wrote & Obama signed off on were viciously cruel. A mother doesn’t need to hear that her marital arrangements were too outré for her delicate son’s ears even to hear. If what Ayers/Obama wrote was lies, they were lies designed to cast Obama in the worst possible light. Tell me that not even anti-birthers believe that was the purpose of Dreams from my Father.
As a matter of fact, I believe Stanley Ann was already ill in June/July of ‘95. If so, Ayers’ idea of introducing Obama to the broader political stage was to depict him as a man who took vile, gratuitous potshots at a sick, dying and undeserving mother. How foolish does even an anti-birther have to be to imagine Ayers & Obama thought this was a smart political move? ‘Vote for me: I told nasty lies about my mother when she was on her deathbed, and made sure her final mos were as miserable as possible’.
The only reason Ayers/Obama would have included that passage is if it was true, & they needed to cover that base to protect Obama’s political future. That is the ONLY reason.