Difference between revisions of "Talk:Barack Hussein Obama"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(1,000 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Archives:
+
{{articletalkheader|prefix=archive}}
−
[[/archive1|1]]
+
<br />
−
[[/archive2|2]]
 
−
[[/archive3|3]]
 
−
[[/archive4|4]]
 
  
 +
==Obama's claim to being a Christian==
 +
The article briefly states Obama converted to Christianity as an adult. There is no indication Obama had any inclination to converting to Christianity ''prior'' to his marriage to Michelle Robinson Obama. It may be even his conversion was a concession, or matter of convenience in an agreement on child rearing. 
  
−
== Disgusted Conservative ==
+
This indeed, is a first: no American President in history ever attested to ''not'' having a Christian background in their youth, or converting in later life. More emphasis should be placed upon Obama's non-Christian, and possibly anti-Christian (be it secular atheist, Marxist, or Islamic) upbringing and early youth.
  
−
I've voted Republican in every election since 1960, but I'm absolutely disgusted by this page.
+
2000 year old Christian communities are being exterminated, black Christian girls abducted, enslaved, and raped while Obama is more concerned about his golf swing. The time for speculation about Obama is over. He is now building his legacy.  [[User:OscarO|OscarO]] 17:28, 24 August 2014 (EDT)
  
−
What happened to the dignity of our party under Goldwater and Reagan? This "encyclopedia" page is just one long rant.  
+
::He has been seen eating during daylight hours of ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim.--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 21:23, 1 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
Are there any real conservatives out there willing to present objective, factual criticism of Obama? God knows there are enough valid arguments to make. Why are we channeling Michael Savage rather than William Buckley? Currently this page makes me cry for my party.
+
I agree with [[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]]. Quite a few things he's done violate Islam's rules. [[User:Whiterose|Whiterose]] ([[User talk:Whiterose|talk]]) 18:21, 22 April 2017 (EDT)[[User:Whiterose|Whiterose]] ([[User talk:Whiterose|talk]]) 23:20, 22nd April 2017 (BST)
 +
:Just because he's not a very "good" Muslim doesn't make him anythnig else.  On a side note, the Liberals are all mad because Trump put a stop to the times of silence in the White house corresponding to the Muslim times or prayer.  I'm sure Obama just wanted the quite so he could focus on his work... (Of course, all the liberals strambled to cover it up and call it all a joke.) --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 18:32, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
:He's done things that violate God's commandments too, so saying he's a Christian because he has violated Islamic commands is a logical fallacy. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 18:34, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Technically, I'm not entirely sure if Reverend Wright's parish would truly be Christian. At most, it's Christian-in-name-only due to adhering to Liberation Theology. And I don't know about others, but I most certainly doubt Obama's Christian either (like I said about his "adherence" to Islam below, he most likely only used the label of Christian in a cynical manner to gain votes). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:40, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Obama claimed to be a Christian and was sworn in a bible. You get to keep your healthcare plan, too. It doesn't mean anything. We are the ones who must suffer for eternity because of his lies. By their fruits ye shall know them. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters are going down'']]</sup> 18:51, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Yeah, and he also claimed to be a Muslim as well, and even a gay man. That's not going to mean much when he's willing to put on appearances in a cynical attempt to grab votes. I might as well also point out there have been plenty of Marxist infiltrators into the Church during the 1960s, and considering one of the requirements of Marxism is that one must be an atheist, it's pretty obvious those infiltrators do not even believe in God and were faking it. The exact same is to be said about Obama being sworn in via the Bible. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 19:19, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
  
−
:Sounds like disgusted conservative is voting for BO. I happen to think it is an accurate account of a man that is dishonest. Where will you get the real picture about about if not here? Are you disgusted by Wikipedias article? How about the coverage on MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, PBS, LATimes, WaPo, NYT, Google, The Guardian. Why not be mad and except that the majority of America is being fooled? Why not be mad at someone as disgusting as BO, actually has a real chance to take the Presidency and doesn't deserve it IN THE LEAST? Reagan is rolling over in his grave and so all the Founders.--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 09:54, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
+
== "Faith" ==
  
−
Voting Republican again this year. I know you're mad about what's going on, but it shows throughout the page. An encyclopedia can't be written from an angry point of view. Let me be specific:
+
I would content that Obama is more of an atheist with islamic tendancies than a muslim. He shows distinct islamic traights and atheistic traits which are ruining are great country . [[User:FFAF|FFAF]] 09:42, 15 January 2015 (EST)
 +
:I agree with that. Muslims dont support abortion or gay marriage like Obama does.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] 11:41, 15 January 2015 (EST)
 +
==Ironic Misspellings==
 +
It's rather ironic that the article mocks Obama for misspelling "Respect" and "Ohio" when it spells "consensus" incorrectly in the preceding paragraph. [[User:BrodyJorgenson|BrodyJorgenson]] 18:31, 9 April 2015 (CST)
  
−
1) "Obama and Elitism" plus "Obama and Islam" are not valid main introductory sections. Start with his early life.
+
:Leftists are experts in spelling the word consensus given that they so often engage in groupthink! :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:47, 9 April 2015 (EDT)
  
−
2) His birth certificate gets its own section but his healthcare and tax plans don't? Focus on what's really important.
+
==Proposal==
 +
I propose all the material on his pre-Presidential careers, and the two election cycles, be spun off to other or new articles, and we focus the damage he's done and legacy in two broad subsections, Domestic and Foreign policy. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:25, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
  
−
3) The "Insights" section is just a list of criticisms and belongs under a "Criticism" section. Categorize corectly.
+
==Here's a problem...==
 +
This page took the "Obama is a Muslim" theme and went overboard. '''Now we know that line originated with [[Sidney Blumenthal]] and [[Hillary Clinton]].''' That's why Obama banned Blumenthal from working in the government. I suggest culling ''some'' of it out; while I've no doubt Obama was influneced by both his father and step-father's Islamic heritage and growing up in Indonesia, using what essentially was Blumenthal's trash now not only (1) is counterproductive, and (2) makes CP look foolish while Blumenthal & Hillary skate away unscathed. There is an important lesson here. Comments? And trust me, if Hillary wins, Blumenthal will be her chief advisor ''for years to come''. Do want those idiots dictating anymore CP content?  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']]</sup> 14:42, 28 June 2016 (EDT)
  
−
4) Off-topic side-swipes: "He became a member of the Harvard Law Review, which uses racial quotas, in 1989". Why is "which uses racial quotas" in there? If it was a reason that he was chosen, say that. If it wasn't leave it out.
+
:The line didn't originate with Blumenthal, although he contributed to it and passed on e-mails about it.  But anti-Obama people were spreading the "Obama is a Muslim" thing before Blumenthal got to it.  Debbie Schlussel was blogging about it before Blumenthal got his hands on it, and she claimed her article was in response to "e-mail questions".  It's sort of a perfect storm of a rumor...it mixes fear of Islam with the idea that Obama is somehow "foreign" or "un-American".  So I don't think it's going away.  It's easier to slander somebody with made up rumors if you don't care about the facts than it is to criticize actual stuff that President Obama believes and does.  So while it lowers the tone of the website, and honestly, is antithetical to what Conservapedia says it stands for, it's not going away any time soon, I don't think.--[[User:Whizkid|Whizkid]] ([[User talk:Whizkid|talk]]) 23:35, 28 June 2016 (EDT)
  
−
5) Unsubstantiated claims: "Obama's campaign has been financed largely by leftist donors opposed to the war and to the American military in general." Citation definitely needed.
+
::
 +
[[File:File:Dollard why believe Obama.png|400px]]
  
−
You have several good sections in here: "Senate career", "Foreign policy experience", "Published criticism", "Religious affiliations". These are high-quality and reflect well on Conservapedia. The others do not.
+
It's easy to conclude Obama is a Muslim by his name. Though the narrative to hit Obama with it is first and foremost propagated by the Clintons. Possibly taking a cue from talk radio.--Jpatt 07:01, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
 +
:Some of it ought to be culled; it makes CP look stupid to march to Blumenthal & Hillary talking points.  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']]</sup> 08:29, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
 +
::Please see: [[Counterexamples to Obama being a Muslim]] and http://www.conservapedia.com/Obama%27s_Religion#Counterexamples_to_Obama_being_a_Muslim
 +
:::By the way, many apostates (like his father) keep Muslim names out of tradition.  Obama told TIME that while his father was born a Muslim, his father left Islam before he met his mother.<ref name="spiritual journey">{{Cite news| author=Obama, Barack | title=My Spiritual Journey | url=http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1546579,00.html | work=TIME | accessdate=September 26, 2008 | quote=My father was almost entirely absent from my childhood, having been divorced from my mother when I was 2 years old; in any event, although my father had been raised a Muslim, by the time he met my mother he was a confirmed atheist, thinking religion to be so much superstition. | date=October 16, 2006}}</ref>Regardless, he has been seen eating during daylight hours of Ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during Salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 21:30, 1 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
See the reply from hsmom below as the kind of constructive, factual accuracy this page needs.
 
  
−
::This sounds like you're standard liberal bellyaching.  The fact is that no real conservative Christian can vote for this man.
+
::I don't believe Obama is a Muslim. The evidence does not support it and there is evidence pointing to him not being a Muslim. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:42, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
 +
:::It doesn't matter, I'm saying the amount if space given to speculation and assertion is out of balance. More importantly, Conservapedia should be more careful about taking the bait dangled by Democrat talking points and making a fool of itself. Unless you're content spinning your wheels and marginalizing yourself as extremist.  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']]</sup> 13:44, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
 +
I don't agree with how Conservapedia handles the Obama/Muslim issue.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:50, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
  
−
:::??!?! Trying to hold this article to some kind of standard is bellyaching? Would you like to address any of my points?
+
:What difference, at this point, does it make? A sizable chunk of the population believes, right or wrong, that Obama is a secret Muslim. So it trends toward conspiracy and doesn't look flattering to the beholder. The bonus, Conservapedia draws traffic. There is much here that would upset the senses of millions. Oh and Cons, ever since the ape was shot at the Cincinnati Zoo...Rush Limbaugh has been hitting [[Evolution]] on  a regular basis. Good stuff. --Jpatt 21:50, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
 +
::Jpatt, I was thinking the same thing. Obama is a lame duck.  I don't think Andy would be very upset if the "Obama is a Muslim" material is stripped out of the article. On the other hand, he is very sympathetic to Islam so that should remain in the article. He is also not a friend of Israel. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:19, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
  
−
::::Your points is liberal talking points.  The fact is that Barack Hussein Obama wants to talk with Iran without predeterminations, flip flops, and is close friends to an unrepentive TERRORIST.  What more can you know?
+
:::Obama is a Muslim theme makes headlines on Drudge today [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3678209/Bill-O-Reilly-reveals-pictures-young-Obama-Islamic-wedding-claims-emotional-attachment-Muslim-world-hurt-USA.html] Americans are interested in this stuff. --Jpatt 09:32, 7 July 2016 (EDT)
−
:::::Trying to shift the focus on an ''encyclopedia page'' about a presidential candidate from hypothetical statements (his possible Islamic faith) and trivial matters (his birth certificate), to his actual stance on the issues is liberal bellyaching? If anything, we should be casting aside these trivial circumstances as beneath us and take the time to dissect each of his stances on the actual issues. That's what a real, dignified Conservative would do. Relying on ridiculous tactics such as these is asinine and cowardly. --[[User:FrankincenseMonster|FrankincenseMonster]] 16:21, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
::::::I think this article doesn't go far enough.  I think there should be a picture of Hitler as the top photo, just like the Evolution page.
 
  
 +
::::He has been seen eating during daylight hours of ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 21:30, 1 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
Disgusted Conservative, sadly you are only wasting your time.
+
== Frank Marshall Davis ==
  
 +
Barack Sr.'s papers were recently released. The letters cover 1958 to 1964, but "Barack Obama Sr. never mentioned his new wife and son, not even in his scholarship applications," as the ''[http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/nyregion/letters-by-and-about-barack-obamas-father.html?_r=1  New York Times]'' puts it. On Barack Sr's student loan application, the section concerning family was left blank. He already had a wife and children back in Kenya when he married Ann Dunham, so it's possible the marriage was a sham. [http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/kincaid/160623 This article] makes the case that communist writer Frank Marshall Davis was Obama's biological father. From the pictures given, the president certainly looks a whole lot more like Davis than he does like Barack Sr. None of the reasons for suspecting Davis actually nail the thing down, but it's the most plausible theory I am aware of. The article implies that it's a political cover up, but surely no one expected little Obama to go into politics when he was born. Davis was already married and single motherhood was a scandal. The sham marriage protected Barack Jr from bastard status. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:51, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
Why does it say he MAY be the first Muslim President (a horrible, false claim) and he MAY use the Koran to be sworn in
+
== Birth location "reportedly" ==
  
−
==Nation of Islam==
+
A suspicious Hawaii "Certificate of Live Birth" (''not'' the same as a birth certificate), with a ''Connecticut'' Social Security number (a SSN to my knowledge is always from the birth state) and airline records which seem to indicate Barry ("Barack") Obama's mother came to Hawaii three days ''after'' his birth all make the statement of his birth location suspicious at best.  I believe that it is being generous to Obama to say that he was "reportedly born" there, so I don't think this word should be removed. If there is proof that he surely was born here, then sure, take it out. For now, let's not be arbitrary when it isn't clear.  I apprecate your contributions, but with controversial issues like this, please provide sufficient reliable proof when making such an edit.   Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 16:10, 26 July 2016 (EDT)
−
''Obama's pastor of twenty-years, Rev. Wright, was originally a member with the Nation of Islam (likely always has been, see [[taqiyya]])'' Let's be careful not to confuse the Nation of Islam with the traditional Muslim faith - they are two quite different things. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 10:10, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 
  
−
: What differences do you find so compelling?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:15, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
+
Long form birth certificate can be found here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf. No social security number on it, because that is assigned from the SSA, not the hospital. I'm not sure where the information on the flights come from. What proof is required?
  
−
::I don't know that I'd use the word "compelling"; I don't know a whole lot about either faith.  I do know that they're quite different.  The Nation of Islam was started in Detroit in the 1930's as something of a black empowerment/separatist movement - it's a very race-based group, from what I understand, and (in what I would consider a cult-like way) based largely on the teachings of two or three men, who are considered more-or-less prophets.  It's been portrayed in the media as very racist and anti-Semitic, though I don't know enough about it to know how accurate that is.  It's a uniquely American faith.  Traditional Islam is quite a different thing - it's been around for thousands of years.  Malcolm X, for example, became a member of NOI in prison, then, due to disillusionment brought on by NOI leader/prophet Elijah Mohamed's adultery, converted to traditional Islam. I have assumed that when you say that you believe that Barak Obama is a Muslim, you are referring to traditional Islam, right? --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 09:37, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:The process of concealing, concealing, concealing and then releasing something widely criticized as being inadequate creates enough doubt to let the readers decide.  A pattern of [[liberal denial]] on other issues, such as [[Obama's Religion]], undermines credibility of the [[liberal media]] as it cheerleads for Obama.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 09:24, 27 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
::: Perhaps you think Nation of Islam is a denomination of Islam that has slightly different motivations from other denominations, but it's still Islam.  Are you saying that NOI adherents do not pray and submit to Allah? I'm sure they do.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:52, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::The cartoon image inserted in the upper right of this talk page is actually a pretty good checklist.  As far as the birth certificate issue goes, this is an certificate of live birth.  As [http://thelawdictionary.org/article/difference-between-birth-certificate-and-certificate-of-live-birth/ this article] explains, a certificate of live birth is largely unverified by the government.  It is simple a record which states a person is alive, and parent information.  In many cases, this document is enough for personal identification and passport application, but it is not really verified.  These can be registered after birth, so Mrs. Obama could have easily registered it after his birth in another country.  Additionally, there is still question as to whether his certificate of live birth is actually genuine. [http://www.infowars.com/new-obama-birth-certificate-is-a-forgery] [http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birthplace-controversy/2015/01/obama-birth-certificate-a-forgery-mathematical-proof-2-2485352.html] Some in fact believe that he was first an Indonesian citizen [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/11/05/was-obama-once-an-indonesian-citizen-heres-what-we-found-when-we-went-there-looking] He has reported having been born in a hospital, which would have seen to getting him an official birth certificate, but yet this did not happen. And actually, he can't make up his mind which hospital he was born in since he has named two different ones. [http://www.obamacrimes.com/p/obamas-birth-history.html]
 +
::As for the airline records, apparently someone reported this discrepancy, but when officials went to look, they found that the immigration records for that week [http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/immigration-records-missing-for-week-of-obamas-birth/ mysteriously vanished].
 +
::There are other factors worth considering, such as an article which Barack Hussein Obama published as U.S. Senate hopeful in 2004 in which he self-identified as having been born in Kenya. Newsmax has another list [http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/Barack-Obama-Citizenship-Scandal-Birth-Certificate/2015/01/28/id/621307/ here], if you want to do a little further reading.
  
−
::::''Perhaps you think Nation of Islam is a denomination of Islam that has slightly different motivations from other denominations, but it's still Islam.''  No, I wouldn't put it that way.  I wouldn't consider NOI to be Islam.  As I understand it, I think they are two fundamentally different faiths, though NOI has some trappings borrowed from traditional Islam, as well as some borrowed from Christianity.  NOI believes, among other things, "that Allah (God) appeared in the Person of Master W. Fard Muhammad, July, 1930; the long-awaited "Messiah" of the Christians and the "Mahdi" of the Muslims."[http://www.noi.org/muslim_program.htm]  As I understand it, when NOI members pray to Allah, they mean (at least in part) W. Fard Muhammad (the founder of NOI).  Wheras of course traditional Muslims don't include anything about W. Fard Muhammad in their beliefs, nor do they recognize NOI as a Muslim denomination.  (Christians don't believe W. Fard Muhammad is the Messiah either, obviously.)  NOI is a uniquely American black separatist movement.  I believe it's quite a different faith from traditional Islam.  Maybe I was wrong about assuming you think Barak Obama is a traditional Muslim?  Do you think Barak Obama is a member of the NOI?  That would lead to quite different concerns; as I understand it, the NOI wants, among other things, quite substantial reparations for slavery. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 10:40, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::As for what proof I would like to see, I would say:
−
:::::The Nation of Islam's relationship to Christianity is similar to the relationship of Christianity to Judaism. They use the same texts (to some extent), and have practices that are shared with and developed out of the other - but such distortions take place that one is clearly no longer the other.  It's not even about "not being mainstream", it's about that place and time when one religion truly ceases to be it's parent religion.  You would be fully inaccurate to call a christian merely a "Jesus loving Jew".  Christianity became its own religion in the year 30 (give or take) when our Lord died and rose for us. For the Nation of Islam, with the Prophet Elijah claiming to be the reincarnation of Mohammad, they cease to be merely "Muslim" and become their own religion.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 11:08, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::*An authenticated Birth Certificate
 +
::*The missing immigration records
 +
::*The hospital records
 +
::...and any other records available which would prove this claim.
  
−
==57 Islamic states==
+
::I'm not trying to attack you by saying all this, but I'm just saying that there is still significant question in this matter. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 09:38, 27 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
I attempted to make this article better by noting, as several other Conservapedia writers have, that "57 states" could be a reference to Heinz ketchup or simple a misstatement (Obama had visited 47 states), as well as the fact that there were not 57 Islamic states when Obama attended an Indonesian school. It was reverted. Why? Is this an encyclopedia, or a liberal hate blog? [[User:Egen|Egen]] 10:42, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::Also, there are sworn affidavits of [http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/PROJECTS/Obama/Evidence/AFFIDAVIT-Bishop.pdf Bishop Ron McRae] and [http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/PROJECTS/Obama/Evidence/AFFIDAVITexhibit2.pdf Kweli Shuhubia] which further indicate he was born in Kenya. Kweli Shuhubia's affidavit includes partial transcript of an audio recording of Obama's grandmother stating she attended Obama's birth in Kenya. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 09:46, 27 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
: Your edit was baseless, and probably politically motivated.  The entry is factual and will remain that way.  Obama has likely remained a Muslim long after attending grade school.  Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:52, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
+
David, this birther stuff is just a big steaming pile of garbage.  No one believes it any more, except utter nutcases.  I know you are a smart and productive person.  If you have gotten caught up in this, you need to re-evaluate / recalibrate your mental processes of deciding what is true.
 +
''No one'', except total fruitcakes, believes any of this stuff.  Absolutely convincing evidence has been out there for years by now.
 +
If you want to investigate the issue on your own, I suggest that you start with:
 +
*The "Barry Soetoro" nonsense.  Do you see the absurdity underlying it?
 +
*The "E.F. Lavender" / "You've been punked" document.  If you have investigated the issue, you are no doubt familiar with this.
 +
*The forged picture of the sign "Welcome to Kenya, birthplace of Barack Obama", along with the picture of the actual sign.  (I don't remember the exact wording.)  These pictures were making the rounds of the internet a few years ago.  The forged one was actually uploaded to Conservapedia a few years ago, with no awareness of irony, and appeared in one of the articles.  I was about to upload the correct sign, and put it next to the forged one, with a caption of "The issue of Obama's birth location inflames passions so much that people even forge pictures of signs, such as the one on the right."  But, alas, more sensible heads prevailed at Conservapedia, and the whole thing was taken down before I could get to it.
 +
*Sherrif Arpaio's investigation.  What became of that?  What did WND have to say about it?
 +
*The disposition of case 8-cv-04083, alluded to above.  It was dismissed "on the grounds that [plaintiff] lacks standing and failed to state a cognizable claim".
 +
*The well-financed investigation that a very wealthy person said he was conducting.  What became of that? Over the last few years, this person ahs repeatedly said, when asked about it, the he doesn't want to talk about it.
 +
David, you can do better than getting caught up in an incredibly nonsensical conspiracy theory like this.
 +
[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 11:36, 30 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
:: On the subject, I think someone should add the following line to your page: "The odds against Aschlafly's claim to be named 'Andrew Schlafly' being truthful are less than 1 billion to one, as fewer than 6 people in the world are named Andrew Schlafly." Don't put malarkey like this on a serious encyclopedia page and defend it as being "factual". I remind you of Conservapedia Commandments 1, 2, and 5. [[User:Egen|Egen]] 11:04, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:You're right, there is evidence against this as well as for.  It's not my intention to make a big deal about it, since it it irrelevant at this point, but there is still suspicion surrounding this.  I don't have much time, but wanted to post a brief response.  Since I haven't time to put my disjointed thoughts into paragraph form, here are my points:
 +
:*Not sure what you are referring to as the "E.F. Lavender" / "You've been punked" document
 +
:::I didn't expect you to know about it.  It's about the weird ways these "facts" make their way into the birthers' heads.  It was a photograph (cropped, but the originator didn't say that at first) that someone planted as evidence that BHO was born in Kenya.  It was obviously fraudulent&mdash;it listed the birth city as a place not in Kenya at the time. (Mombassa?  I don't remember the details.)  It was signed by "E.F. Lavender", which was apparently an old brand of laundry detergent or something.  None of that stopped the birthers from latching onto it as "evidence".  The prankster then released an uncropped version of the same photograph&mdash;I believe it was laid out on a bed or something&mdash;with a sign below it saying "You've been punked!"
 +
:*I probably know about the case 8-cv-04083, but I don't know it by the number.
 +
:::It was the case involving the affidavit of a transcript of a statement from the grandmother or whatever.  You can Google the case number.
 +
:*Sherrif Arpaio's investigation ended when all the evidence became unavailable
 +
:::How convenient that he was able to end his "investigation" so cleanly.
 +
:*I hope that most people would realize that for Kenya to make a sign like that is...a stretch, at best
 +
:::Yes, it's utterly incredible.  But it was displayed here at Conservapedia for a while.
 +
:*The released birth certificate contains digital layers and frames, even though it is supposedly a scanned-in document.  That simply can't happen with a scanner alone. (This can be verified by view the officially published certificate, as linked to above)
 +
:::Have you downloaded the alleged document from the white house source and analyzed it, or are you willing to take the word of a birther?
 +
:*As I mentioned before, a S.S. number always comes from your birth state.  Some real monkey business would be required for someone to have a Certificate of Live Birth from one state, and a S.S. number from another.
 +
:::Do you know what BHO's social security number is?  I believe they are confidential, even when you are President.  Isn't it convenient that people can nevertheless claim that they know it and that it is fraudulent?
  
−
:: In any case, I fail to see how it is "baseless" to note, as other Conservapedia writers have, that "57 states" cannot possibly be a reference to "57 Islamic states" and probably has a more benign origin. It does not to any good to assert that anyone who disagrees with you probably does so because they are "politically motivated" (read: liberal) when many conservatives have expressed disdain for this point. I doubt that the majority of Conservapedia editors would disagree with my edit. This encyclopedia is not a personal blog for you or for anyone else. Therefore, I am reinserting the edit. If anyone can provide proof that Obama was referring to the "57 Islamic states" which did not exist when he was growing up '''and''' provide proof that that is what he was referring to, I'll retract this. [[User:Egen|Egen]] 12:16, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:::The indented interleaved comments in the above paragraph were written by me, SamHB.  It is a common practice on wikis to use this kind of indented reply format when replying to specific points in another person's post. That's really what wiki indentation is for, and wiki users know that. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:27, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
::: Egen - I entirely agree with you. A lot of people here think this is a redstate comments thread rather than, as it says in the top left corner, "the trustworthy encyclopedia". Snopes on this one: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/57states.asp
+
:I'll concede in this case, but I can't agree with what the liberal media has declared about this. It is almost pointless though, since he has already gotten all he wants from the race card, and he's set for life. I will agree that the left tried to make his critics look like fools by withholding then releasing the certificate. I wasn't going to fall for it then, but now that it is out, anyone with [[Photoshop]] or [[Paint.NET]] can see that something's fishy about the "document."--[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 13:42, 30 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
::Is it any surprise that SamHB (who actually agrees with what the liberal media says and condescends to anyone who doesn't agree with his POV - notably in calling those who legitimately question where Obama was born "birthers", "nutcases" and "fruitcakes" and calling the question itself a "nonsensical conspiracy theory" in [[Liberal Style#Debate and rhetorical tactics|typical liberal fashion]]) is yet again attempting to impose a liberal viewpoint on this website (and in this case, on both the main page and the talk page of this article) by pulling legit doubts about Obama's birthplace from the main article without justifiable reason, then also broke up the flow of DavidB4's previous post on the issue on the talk page by not only inserting his own liberal POV in between each of David's points (per [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Barack_Hussein_Obama&curid=9967&diff=1267762&oldid=1267703 this post]), but not even bothering to sign his post (both actions in poor form)? Such actions as those typically smack of desperation on the part of the Obama defenders to keep their "messiah" looking squeaky-clean when plenty of evidence provided over time (including Obama's own well-documented actions) says otherwise. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 07:53, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
::::Well, that was indeed one long sentence you've got there, 839 characters.  But it can't beat my 1054 character sentence in [[Talk:Rugby_School]].  AlanE and I were joking around.
 +
::::I was only commenting about the Obama birthplace issue, not about whether to keep a "messiah" looking squeaky-clean.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:27, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
:::::Ridicule is a form of [[Saul Alinsky#The Alinsky Method|Alinskyism]] (a favorite fallback of liberals when they can't refute the truth or formulate rational arguments) and only makes the one doing the ridiculing look foolish. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 22:21, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
I removed the mention of the 57 states, since the article later refers to a source that says that it was probably a misstatement as he has in fact visited 47 states. <sub>unsigned JohnFA</sub>
+
:::Might as well add something to the bit. I remember there being a PDF of some documentation from Kenya that actually confirmed that Obama was born in Kenya. I'll try to dig it out. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:01, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
:::I haven't found the PDF yet, but I think I may have found an even bigger smoking gun, something not even SamHB could possibly deny: http://thepowerhour.com/news4/obama_kenyan_birth_certificate.htm [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:05, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
::::YES!!  You found it!  Congratulations.  It's as I remembered it.  Laid out on a towel or bedspread or whatever on a bed.  I had assumed that this bit of history was long gone.  But the internet is forever!  The writing in this picture is hard to read; a cleaner copy may be found at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kenyacert.asp.  Though that copy has Orly Taitz's (Remember her?  Probably the original birther) web site superimposed on it.  You can clearly see the "E.F. Lavender" name.
 +
::::Whatever you may think of the political views of the Snopes people, the article makes fascinating reading.  They even found the person (an Australian named David Jeffrey Bomford) whose birth certificate provided the basis for the forgery.  I believe the later "You've been punked" picture came out on the long-defunct ''Top 10 Conservative Idiots'' website.
 +
::::Ah, yes.  Orly Taitz.  Birthers.  The whole thing is entertaining.  That is, the fact that people still believe this stuff is entertaining.  But those intelligent and sensible people at Conservapedia (meaning DavidB4 and Pokeria1) should move on.  Donald Trump has.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:04, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
:::::Wasn't Snopes.com filled with errors, though, at least, that's what this site's article stated when it said, and I quote, "Snopes.com is a website devoted to collecting and debunking urban legends. It was started in 1997, run by husband and wife team Barbara and David Mikkelson. '''It is filled with numerous, intentionally inaccurate information because the Mikkelson's have no formal background or experience in investigative research.'''"?
 +
:::::And honestly, why is a liberal like SamHB on a site like Conservapedia? Shouldn't there be some form of a vetting process for new members to make sure they aren't liberal? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 13:57, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
::::::To me, the test of being a "conservative" or a "liberal" is a philosophy of government and how it applies to economic and social issues.  The location of President Obama's birth is a fact that is proven with evidence.  Your conclusion on this issue has nothing to do with whether you can be labelled as a conservative or liberal.  To be fair, SamHB is not "a new member" of Conservapedia and has been around for many years. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 14:25, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Maybe not, but if it walks, talks, and quacks like a duck - it's a duck. Same thing with liberals (which SamHB has shown himself to be time and again). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 22:21, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
  
−
This statement has been here for some time. It stays for now.--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 09:44, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
+
I can't speak for the photo of a supposed birth certificate. It seems a little convenient, but I won't discount it.  Snopes is certainly wrong at times. Just because they put a red circle with an "X" on it next to a claim doesn't make the claim false.  To unquestioningly accept this would be as much an error as to accept everything in the newspaper.<br />
−
      Jpatt - Why should it? It's repeated later on in the article where it is also explained. This statement is redundant since it doesn't even have a source.
+
There are many reports which are hard to verify, and even more telling, the lack of many records which should exist. (For example, why does no school have a record of him attending much less graduating their institution, even though he claims he did?  There are liberal institutions, so they would not attempt to harm him by burying such records.)  I still maintain that the official birth certificate is its own poof of fraud.  Anyone with photo editing skills can see that it is composed of multiple image layers.  These layers are generated with modification of a digital image, and can never be created by scanning in a document.  The "scan," therefore, is clearly more than just a scan.<br />
 +
Pokeria1, Conservapedia does allow liberal members, as long as they do not undermine the conservative point of view of CP.  SamHB has made many helpful contributions, so I don't think it's entirely fair to question whether he should even be allowed to be here. Although I disagree with him on this, I think his suggestion still is worth listening to--move on.  He's already deceived the public, trashed the country, and proven that the system has become a joke.  Complaining about it now will not help, but we will need to be all the more vigilant in the future.  He's proved it can be done, so who will be the next to try? --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup><small>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</small></sup> 12:38, 29 September 2016 (EDT)
  
−
I added the fact that there were not 57 states when he went to school in indonesia, if we are going to mention that he went to an islamic school we are implying that that is where he learned about the 57 states, this is impossible and that should be noted. People will reference conservapedia and if they reference that he visited the 57 islamic states or that he learned about there being 57 islamic states in islamic school they will look like fools.--[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 13:06, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
+
==This one's in the can==
 +
I'm gonna start structuring this artic!e for posterity now that Obama's riding off to the rendering plant. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']]</sup> 02:33, 22 November 2016 (EST)
 +
:Obama is a relatively young and healthy man who will probably do much more in his career.  Look at Jimmy Carter's post-Presidency. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 05:28, 22 November 2016 (EST)
 +
::Yep. He started with an apology tour and ended preaching American excrptionalism in Peru the other day. I guess he has grown. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']]</sup> 08:19, 22 November 2016 (EST)
 +
As one pundit summed it up with a classic baby boomer idiom: ''"Obama was like a nine year bad trip on bad drugs."'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']]</sup> 10:24, 10 January 2017 (EST)
  
−
::Right now, the implication made about Obama's gaff and "57 Islamic states" indicates the United States.  If it's about Indonesia, then state Indonesia, as well as prove that Indonesia is divided into 57 states.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:12, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
+
== If he is a Muslim, he is not a very good one ==
−
:::I double-checked the references provided, one of which has a video of Obama himself doing the gaff; it may have been a minor slip of the tounge or a minor mistake, but not once was there a reference to visiting Islamic states or countries.  He specified visiting 57 ''U.S. states''.  The article was changed to reflect that fact, and the speculation on Islamic states was removed.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:23, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
::::I wanted to do that but I figured I would just get reverted. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 13:53, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:::::I'll let you take credit then for the fixing, or at least getting it started :)  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:57, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
  
−
==Biased==
+
He has been seen eating during daylight hours of ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah.  Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith.  Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate)  He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths.  If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim.--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 21:19, 1 March 2017 (EST)
−
Isn't this site supposed to be unbaised?-[[User:Red4tribe|Red4tribe]] 16:46, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:Obama's religion is self-worship. He once defined sin as, “Being out of alignment with my values.” To thine own hype be true. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:39, 1 March 2017 (EST)
−
:Welcome to Conservapedia[[User:Pluto|Pluto]] 18:19, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 
  
−
== "born, allegedly, in Honolulu" ==
+
::He is at the very least a sympathizer.  Don't forget, though, that it is permitted to lie to infidels to further the cause. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 22:54, 1 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
there's no doubt he was ''born''. that should read "allegedly born in Honolulu"
+
:::Eating bacon and having a pet dog aren't exactly acceptable to further the cause.  If he was a true Muslim he wouldn't eat pork out of fear because it is considered unclean.  The Koran gives a short list of excuses for not fasting during Ramadan (Pregnant, menstruating...) but trying to prove one is not a Muslim is not on the list.--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 16:46, 2 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
God bless. [[User:JohnBarma|JohnBarma]] 13:30, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::::Yeah, and besides, considering his birth father was pretty blatantly a Marxist, it's extremely unlikely that either Barack Obama Sr. OR his son would have adhered to Islam. More likely than not, Barack Obama just cynically adopted the "religion" for votes. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:27, 2 March 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::If we go by Obama's memoirs, he was brought up as a non-religious Marxist, a so called "red diaper baby," and was converted to Christianity by Jeremiah Wright. After Wright criticized Obama, Obama "threw him under the bus" and prosecuted the man's daughter.[http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/daughter-jeremiah-wright-convicted-fraud-scheme-n47841] As I understand it, they worshiped together at the First Church of Getting Even.<br/>As for Obama's birth father, I assume that was married party member Frank Davis. Obama Sr. already had a family back in Kenya. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:12, 2 March 2017 (EST)
 +
You don't have to be a church going Muslim to be a Muslim. All you have to do is reject the idea [https://www.al-islam.org/principles-shiite-creed-ayatullah-ibrahim-amini/lesson-6-god-one-and-has-no-partner God has partners] like Jesus, and reject the notion of [[national sovereignty]] as evil, Satanic, and blasphemy. That any law or government that purports to rule over you and your Christ-rejecting brethren, is an enemy of Allah and Allah has decreed to destroy using any means necessary, including lies, deciet, and fraudulent oaths to gain their confidence. These attitudes is all it takes to be a Muslim and do Allah's will. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|CIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win?]]</sup> 22:26, 3 March 2017 (EST)
 +
::::: "You don't have to be a church going Muslim to be a Muslim. All you have to do is reject the idea [https://www.al-islam.org/principles-shiite-creed-ayatullah-ibrahim-amini/lesson-6-god-one-and-has-no-partner God has partners]"  So what if somebody does not believe in a god or diety at all, would that make them a muslim?  No, Islam has a strict set of rules (Primarily declaring that the only god is Allah and Muhammed was his messenger)--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 15:35, 4 March 2017 (EST)
 +
::::::One of those strict rules is the doctrine of ''takfirism'', or 'once a Muslim always a Muslim', with the threat of death hanging over would-be defectors. This is why so few, if any, alleged Muslim socialists and atheists publicly foreswear Islam. So yes, it is possible for a Muslim secularist, atheist, or socialist to still be considered or identified as a Muslim. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|CIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win?]]</sup> 18:17, 4 March 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::::I'm pretty sure that if you adhere to Atheism, you automatically cut off ties to your religion just for adhering to it, whether it be Christianity or Islam. That's why I'm not so sure about whether ''takfirism'' truly applies. I know if I were a Muslim and someone did become an atheist, I'd target them all the same even when they haven't openly renounced their faith precisely because I view even becoming an atheist as meaning you gave it up regardless if it isn't explicitly stated. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:59, 4 March 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::::::No, they would not be automatically cutoff from the body of believers. First, the imams would have to investigate. Then, after being found in sin, the wayward Muslim is supposed to be admonished and given time to repent. Then finally, if they continue in sin, the execution is ordered.
 +
:::::::::However today, since bin Laden revolutionized things, the scholars and religious authorities can be by passed, and low level rank and file Muslims can expedite the whole process without consulting higher-up religious authorities. But as ever, if a Muslim socialist or atheist knows in the end he will be found guilty of sin and rejecting the truth of Islam, and knowing he's surrounded by 1.2 billion true believers, he has no interest in denying or rejecting his Muslim identity.
 +
:::::::::Furthermore, Muslims are granted license to lie and deceive non-Muslims, denying the faith to non-Muslims being an example.[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|CIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win?]]</sup> 22:50, 4 March 2017 (EST)
 +
::::::::::Yeah, I know about taqqiya, but I'm pretty sure in this particular case, even being an atheist at all, even if you still lay claim publicly that you are a muslim, would be reason enough to get your head removed. I know if it were me, I'd been muslim, and someone became an atheist even in secret, I wouldn't even care if he's still publicly a muslim, I'd still kill him under the reason of him adhering to atheism at all. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 16:30, 5 March 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::::::::Just because somebody had a Muslim father that was barely present doesn't make them a Muslim.  Remember, he was raised by his mother, who was not a Muslim.  And regardless of Islamic law, one can be an ex-Muslim without going through the ''takfirism'' process: one merely has to stop all praying, stop all fasting, and live a normal secular life.  Many people leave Islam without shouting from the rooftops that they are not a practicing Muslim anymore:  a gallup poll showed 5% of Saudis are atheists.  (Remember, prayer upon the call the prayer is mandatory in the KSA, apostacy is punishable by death.  It is a dishonor to 1,441,500 atheists in the KSA some have a habit of calling Muslims in ordinance of Islamic law, when they self-admit to being atheists.)  There are documented cases of Muslims converting to Christianity without going through the takfirism process.  Takfirism is for if you live in an Islamic nation with an Islamic criminal code.  The US does not on the preise of your argument that Obama was ever a Muslim; most American Muslims who become atheists just stop going to masjid, stop praying, stop fasting.  After all, if you are an atheist, why would you testify before the congregation of your masjid that you are an atheist an face humilitaion and worse when you could just cut of all contact and move?  Does the atheist who quietly leaves their masjid qualify as "still a Muslim" to you?--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 19:45, 6 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
:As the previous poster said, "(born, allegedly, in Honolulu,<ref>MSM Ignores Democrat Lawsuit Against Obama[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/08/22/msm-ignores-democrat-lawsuit-against-obama]</ref><ref>[http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg Large, high-resolution picture of his birth certificate]</ref> August 4, 1961)", implies that he may not have been born, which I think is not what is intended.  "Allegedly born in Honolulu" has the same problem. Putting aside whether or not the "allegedly" is silly (and frankly I think the factcheck.org folks debunked this one), if you want to convey the idea that he was born, but may have been born somewhere other than Hawaii, then it should read "(born, allegedly in Honolulu,<ref>MSM Ignores Democrat Lawsuit Against Obama[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/08/22/msm-ignores-democrat-lawsuit-against-obama]</ref><ref>[http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg Large, high-resolution picture of his birth certificate]</ref> August 4, 1961)".  Comma placement matters. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 20:58, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
Muslims don't go to churches. They go to mosques. :) I think all the wrangling about Obama's religion will largely cease once the dust settles about the fate of ObamaCare. I think the public's interest in Obama will wane if large changes happen to ObamaCare or it its repealed and replaced.  
  
−
Correct. Factcheck did take this one apart: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
+
But I could be wrong. Liberals are often more active in politics than conservatives and maybe Obama will still crave the power/spotlight since he is a egotist/narcissist and take actions to retain the spotlight. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:13, 4 March 2017 (EST)
  
−
"Of course, it's distantly possible that Obama's grandparents may have planted the announcement just in case their grandson needed to prove his U.S. citizenship in order to run for president someday. We suggest that those who choose to go down that path should first equip themselves with a high-quality tinfoil hat. The evidence is clear: Barack Obama was born in the U.S.A."
+
==Footnotes==
 +
{{reflist}}
  
−
Snope also: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
+
== Title ==
−
::''Of course, it's distantly possible that Obama's grandparents may have planted the announcement just in case their grandson needed to prove his U.S. citizenship in order to run for president someday'' What foolishness! As if the ability to run for President is the sole benefit to be derived from US citizenship! That his grandparents planted the announcement is entirely credible. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 14:30, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:What we need to see to settle this controversy is the actual birth certificate; not a copy of it, and not someone's written opinion.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:47, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
 
  
−
It is my understanding from a recent article on Fox that the form presented lists him as "African". This was 1961.  The concept of African-American or any reference to African in racial makeup, while very prevalent in the last 15+ years, was still more than 20 years off. Birth certificates in 1961 used "Negro".  I'm surprised this isn't mentioned anywhere. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 17:19, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
+
Why is the page title "Barack Hussein Obama" when even George W. Bush's page title is just "George W. Bush"
 +
:My best explanation is that his middle name is known or used, like how our page title for L. Frank Baum isn't Lyman F. Baum or L. F. Baum because that's what he was called.  By the way, please try to sign your comments with the signature tool above.--[[User:Abcqwe|Abcqwe]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 20:05, 31 March 2017 (EDT)
 +
:: Same reason Hilary Rodham Clinton is named what it is - so CP doesn't have to compete with Wikipedia for results. I'm for Barack Hussein "Piece o' Crap" Obama as more befitting his legacy, however. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 20:48, 31 March 2017 (EDT)
  
−
== Favorite black leader ==
+
== Yup, he's gay ==
  
−
I've just finished reading Dreams from My Father. I don't recommend it. But one thing I missed was a reference to Malcolm X being Obama's "favorite black leader". He speaks highly of Malcolm X's autobiography, but doesn't like the "religious baggage" that the guy "discarded in later life". Is the reference here correct? [[User:Marcdaniels|Marcdaniels]] 17:10, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
Now that Obama is no longer president, we can finally say the obvious. This author is no birther or conspiracy theorist. He wrote a Pulitzer-prize winning MLK bio: "[http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/26/new-biography-young-obama-considered-gayness-amazon1/ New Biography: Young Obama ‘Considered Gayness’]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:19, 27 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
:Take a look at the picture of Obama and Branson and tell me they aren't gay:[http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2017-02-07T153633Z_1_LYNXMPED160Y8_RTROPTP_4_PEOPLE-BRANSON-OBAMA-e1493240389754.jpg] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:56, 27 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
::I suspect in coming months as we get more tell-books, more will come out. It's never been a secret in Chicago or Washington. What prevents both of them. <s>Michael</s> Michelle and Barack from coming out is how the public will react. No problem. Let's play along. Wait and see. If the two wish to continue being ashamed of themselves, leave them alone. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters won, for now'']]</sup> 01:10, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Cool story, Rob. Thanks to Trump, the Obamas' stock is so high with liberals, they could both come out as pan-galactic reptilian shapeshifters and still receive ticker tape parades in every major east coast and west coast city.
  
−
: Search Google on {"Malcolm X" Obama favorite} and you'll find numerous credible confirmations of the statement about Malcolm X being Obama's favorite black leader. The entry need not be limited to the silly Dreams book.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:03, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:::Hell, even Dubya's looking good in comparison to the straw-thatched self-publicist you voted for in November. Buckle up for the mid-terms, my man. It's not going to be pretty. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 15:55, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::An Obama speech is worth more than a Clinton speech-he's lucky she lost, he'd be picking up cans right now for a living. Midterms are a long long way off. Trump critics take what he say's literally but not seriously; Trump supporters take him seriously but not literally. Never mind tho, he's already a captive of the [[Deep State]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters won, for now'']]</sup> 17:42, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Yeah, JohnZ, it won't be pretty, alright - for the Democrats, as their supporters' (the liberal media, Hollywood celebs, Antifa, etc.) current antics end up losing them even more governorships, Congress and Senate seats, mayors' offices, etc. to the GOP. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 18:48, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
 +
Obama is not some evil genius who is hiding being a homosexual. At best, he is a bisexual. Last time I checked, he is married with two children.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:46, 25 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:You need to check closer. The Obama's aren't just the first Black First Family, their the first gay married First Family and gay adopted First kids. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 04:36, 26 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:To be fair, Conservative, Elton John was married to a woman and had kids with her once, yet he most certainly was gay, so him being married and having children isn't necessarily something that would rule him out as being gay. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:34, 26 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::Those kids aren't sisters. Look closely. Their skin tones don't match and the shape of their heads is entirely different. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 08:38, 26 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::::One of the many limitations of the internet is the difficulty in conveying sarcasm or satire unambiguously in text form; of course this is not a new problem, as Jonathan Swift well knew. So I'm not clear as to whether you consider this tale a lighthearted bit of satire that no one should take seriously, like the leftists who claim that Ted Cruz was the Zodiac Killer despite his being born after the murders, or whether this is a sincere belief of yours, or whether you believe that this is a narrative that is useful to promulgate in retaliation for narratives promulgated against others, e.g. "(y)ou backoff your scandalmongering nonsense and I'll backoff mine" as you said in the Pizzagate discussion. I realize that explaining a joke usually destroys it, and I wouldn't normally step on another person's joke, but it does seem that an admin here has taken your argument at face value and may suffer embarrassment as a result. On the other hand, it may be I who should be embarrassed, mistaking genuine sentiment for sarcasm or tactical scandalmongering nonsense.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 15:34, 26 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::These are the letters Obama wrote to his college girlfriend.[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/10/20/letters-barack-obama-wrote-his-college-girlfriend/783438001/]
  
−
::Not really seeing it. Various claims Obama loves Malcolm X's autobiography (which, subject to the point above, seems correct), but the claims that he is Obama's "favorite black leader" all cite no reference, or cite Dreams - I think incorrectly. Is there a source for Obama having said or written this? If not, it should go. [[User:Marcdaniels|Marcdaniels]] 18:12, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:::Obama is not an evil genius who cleverly covered up being a homosexual. See also: [[Fallacy of exclusion]]  Obama's bio suggests someone who was arrogant, corrupt and lacked competence for the office of the presidency. Not some evil genius.  
  
−
:::I agree that it should be sourced, preferably with a quote from his book or one of his speeches, otherwise it could be mistaken for an untrue rumor.  If he qualified the statement with something about X's religion, as Marcdaniels noted above, that should be included in the quote.  I looked for a credible source, but couldn't find one.  I have added a fact tag, which can be removed when a suitable citation is found. (Let's not forget that Malcolm X was involved with the Nation of Islam, which is quite a different thing than traditional Islam.  He rejected the Nation of Islam later in life.)--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:13, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:::If you read the Conservapedia's [[homosexuality]] article you will see that a person's sexual behavior is not caste in stone. Hence, the existence of bisexuals and [[ex-homosexuals]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:46, 26 November 2017 (EST)
  
−
:::: Examples supporting the statement are easy to find. I just added one. I don't think anyone seriously doubts the truth of the statement.  Feel free to find and add other citations supporting it. The discomfort expressed above seems to be with the fact itself.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:54, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::::Okay, fair enough. Still... considering his radical left-leaning views, I'm doubtful he's going to be an ex-homosexual (IF he's gay anyways) in any case, being too far to the left to even consider renouncing it. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 10:01, 26 November 2017 (EST)
 +
Elton John said he was a [[bisexual]] (Bisexual refers to a person with both heterosexual and homosexual desires.).[http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/the-25-boldest-career-moves-in-rock-history-20110318/elton-john-comes-out-of-the-closet-20110323] He did not say he was a [[homosexual]] who exclusively had sex with males.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
  
−
::::: Your source goes back to the book, which I'd thought we'd both agreed wasn't on point. It's entirely plausible that Obama might regard Malcolm X as his favorite black leader, and that would discomfort me in the slightest, but I'm having real difficulty finding any evidence that he has said or written this. [[User:Marcdaniels|Marcdaniels]] 07:40, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
== Sheila Miyoshi Jager ==
  
−
:::::: No, you've misread me now.  I did not agree that book wasn't on point. I did say there is further evidence beyond the book, which is easy to find on the internet.
+
Here's a picture of the live-in girlfriend Obama broke up with because a white gal would hold him back politically: [http://celebrityinsider.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Sheila-Miyoshi-Jager.jpg]. She's a bit on the manly side, as you might expect.<br/>Based on what Jager has to say, we can now nail down exactly when Obama got on the road to the White House: "I remember very clearly when this transformation happened, and I remember very specifically that by 1987, about a year into our relationship, he already had his sights on becoming president."[http://perezhilton.com/2017-05-02-barack-obama-first-lady-michelle-obama-sheila-miyoshi-jager-ex-girlfriend-biography-book#.WQyGJdKGPcs] This was when he was a community organizer in Chicago. It was also right around the time Obama joined Wright's church, which makes it less likely that he joined for religious reasons. He entered Harvard in 1988. ''Dreams from My Father'' came out in 1995 and is thus a campaign bio in this timeline. ''Dreams'' doesn't mention Jager or O's presidential ambitions. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:58, 5 May 2017 (EDT)
  
−
:::::: The quote from the book is convincing enough. If you won't accept it, then I doubt you would accept anything now.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:20, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
== Suggesting addition of Arabic rendering بارك حسین اوباما  per 2009 suggestion long forgotten ==
  
−
:::::: I am now a little confused, and I'm not sure why you are getting personal. You suggested there were additional sources for the claim on the internet, other than those referring to the book, but I cannot find one. I may be missing something obvious - would be helpful if you could provide a link. The book shows Malcolm X's autobiography to have been Obama's favourite autobiography, and it would be accurate to say that, but anything further seems supposition rather than fact. [[User:Marcdaniels|Marcdaniels]] 11:35, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
This idea was pitched by another editor in 2009, but they had an awkward GoogleTranslate attempt at a phonetic rendering. I know the script and also used the standardized Arabic spellings for the first two names, and the result is: بارك حسین اوباما
  
−
== "if elected, Obama will become the first black, and possibly Muslim, President of the United States." ==
+
So revisiting a 9 year old issue, but are folks interested in including the Arabic spelling of his name in the lead? [[User:DavidLReyes|DavidLReyes]] ([[User talk:DavidLReyes|talk]]) 22:12, 2 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
What's the problem with this sentence in place of the one currently there? For starters, it isn't proven that he's Muslim, but it ''is'' proven that he's black, so certainly it should be mentioned over the hypothetical. --[[User:FrankincenseMonster|FrankincenseMonster]] 21:25, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
===Poll===
 +
====Yes====
 +
*[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:07, 3 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
*[[User:DavidLReyes]]
  
−
: The racial composition of all the past presidents is not completely known, so I doubt it's appropriate to insist that Obama would be the '''first''' black President.  Also, the racial composition of a man is not as important as his beliefs.  It is known that none of the prior presidents were Muslim.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:54, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
====No====
−
::Well said, Aschlafly.  It is the content of a person's character that should determine how we "judge" them.  Although, who are we to judge?  I suspect, however, looking at the photos, that Senator Obama would at least be the first President (if elected) with a clear [[African American]] heritage.  Whether a few others may have had a lineage leading back to Africa in their family tree is another, albeit interesting, question. [[User:Human|Human]] 23:16, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
*[[User:DavidB4]]
 +
*Not a very strong oppose, but an oppose nonetheless. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:33, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
::That's an interesting argument. If we know so little about the former presidents that we cannot say whether any of them met society's contemporaneous definition of Black - the one-drop rule, for example - then how can we say than none of them were Muslim? If they could keep their African ancestry secret, why not their true religion? Is there evidence of political opponents accusing a candidate of being of mixed-blood ancestry?--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 23:21, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
====Irrelevant stupid comments====
 +
Arabic Wikipedia gives "Barack Obama" as باراك أوباما and "Barack Hussein Obama, Jr." as  باراك حسين أوباما الابن . See [https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%83_%D8%A3%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%A7 here]. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:59, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
:Right, I'm just saying that for consistency our Arabic rendering should be identical to the English rendering of our title, so include the حسین (H-S-Y-N) that we render as Hussein in our current English title. Your points are totally valid and our spellings agree, I'm just saying if we have first-middle-last (no Jr) in the Englis title, Arabic rendering should be the same. [[User:DavidLReyes|DavidLReyes]] ([[User talk:DavidLReyes|talk]]) 02:20, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
::Two days and two votes. Looks like we have an emerging consensus. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:54, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
::: When people vote, they are called to judge.  So the liberal canard of "judge not" is a useless argument here.  What will voters judge on?  More important than race is the views and beliefs of the candidates.
 
  
−
::: As to whether past presidents were Muslims, simply look at what they did and said ... including before they became politically ambitious.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:33, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
+
I'm not going to vote "no" outright (yet), but what is the point of doing this?  It seems a little low to translate his Engl(ish) name into Arabic to prove a point. Besides, aren't people saying that his name was originally "Barry Soetoro"? I agree that he probably was (by their definition, a bad) Muslim, but I don't really see the profit in doing this. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 11:59, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
−
::::Of course we "judge", or at least "decide" when we vote. However, when did "judge not... [lest ye be judged]" become a "liberal canard"?  I thought it was a warning in the Bible not to overstep our bounds?  Voting, of course, does not overstep them - we pencil in a space, or pull a lever. That is not "judgment", it is an expression of personal opinion or preference or ideas.  Moving beyond that simple step, however, leads us into judgment territory, potentially.  When we should be humble and add commentary on ourselves as well as those we judge is an issue of personal ethics - or morality.  A good time to sit down with good words and contemplate. [[User:Human|Human]] 01:22, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:Basically, we need to rekindle interest in this page before it dies on the vine. Stir the pot, so to speak. With 3.5 million hits, it's long been a marquis attraction to CP. We're not saying he's Arab or Muslim, only that he's well known and respected in that part of the world. If one did a poll, you'd probably discover more Arabs think he's Muslim than rednecks do. We could put Nixon's name in Chinese too, since he's the one who sold us out to China. But the Nixon page never had the interest, pro or con, that this page is known for. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:24, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
== Main Picture ==
+
I was considering voting "no" when I first saw this, but I wanted to see what others thought. I like the fact that this page might get some publicity if we do this, but at the same time, I also don't see how this helps the article. It might look like trolling, and readers may choose not to read beyond the first paragraph after seeing it. Maybe I'm being too negative, but I'm not convinced it will help the article. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:52, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
I would like someone to please explain to me how this is unbais? At least with the article you can try to make something up saying how its unbais but the main picture is trying to show very obviouisly that Obama is unpatriotic... If you look at McCains page or Palins the picture of professionally done. Please someone give me a reasonable answer [[User talk:Horriblesite]]
+
::So it's a publicity stunt?  I appreciate the intent, but I'm going put my vote on "no."  Let's just focus on offering good articles on everything we can, rather than trying to drum up attention for one good article.  He may have been "one big awful mistake America," but he's gone now, and I think it better to focus on both current and timeless issues instead. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:50, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
: Funny you should comment. Is it Conservapedia making Obama unpatriotic or is it Obama who IS unpatriotic? I will say the latter.--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 21:56, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:::The box clearly states he is said to have converted to Christianity. We simply need to add a section on how he has not been a friend to Israel and has facilitated a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He's very popular in the Middle East with his support for the oxymoronic "moderate rebels". Between his " Austrian language" and "Polish death camp" comments there is no reason to hold to the kenard that Obama identifies as a Westerner or with Western civilization. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:30, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
−
::Also, "unbais" and "professionally done" are Liberal canards. --[[User:FrankincenseMonster|FrankincenseMonster]] 21:56, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
 
  
 +
::::I agree, his claim at being Christian was just a ploy to get more votes.  He was an enemy of Israel, and a friend of all their enemies.  However, his legal name is just that.  Translating or transliterating it into Arabic doesn't really help anyone, nor will it be persuasive to critics. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 17:05, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
:::::Given the subject, I think we'd be hard-pressed to even be capable of a "low blow" relative to the subject... That said, even if it is a bit of a "stunt", the people it would turn off are not our supporters anyway, so I don't mind tweaking the nose of liberal "tourists" who come here to gape. Plus it's a shout-out to our readership who have grave concerns about Obama's divided loyalties. I would ''also'' be in favor of including his earlier "Barry Soetero" name since it also highlights the suspicious malleability of his "marketing". [[User:DavidLReyes|DavidLReyes]] ([[User talk:DavidLReyes|talk]]) 21:33, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
::::::That's right. Diversity is our strength. It's multicultural and inclusive. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:45, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
:::::::If we want to imply that Obama is from Kenya, what about Swahili? Kenya uses English and Swahili, but both languages use the Latin alphabet. So a personal name like Obama is written the same way in Swahili. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 13:18, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
::::::::It's not an effort to rekindle the birther movement. It's more paying homage to the Muslim hordes he's unleashed on Europe and Western civilization. For example, we're not proposing to insert the Persian spelling of his name despite his efforts to aid a nuclearized Iran. Or a Pakistani or Indonesian spelling which he is more closely identified with. Or a Turkish spelling, which also is closely associated with his presidential legacy. An Arab spelling pays homage to his anti-Isreali constituent base. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:55, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::The problem is that nobody is going to know that it's an illustration of Obama's leftist immigration policy -- they're all going to think that we're promoting the "birther" theory. If we're going to do this, we should at least make our intentions clear, but I don't see how we can do that in a consise way and without distracting from the rest of the article. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:33, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::On the face of it, yes. In context, no. No one ever alleged he's Arab. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 22:29, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::True, but most ordinary people think of Arabs and the Arabic language as synonymous with Islam, so to them, seeing Arabic, they'll think "Islam." --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:31, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::We are an educational resource, after all. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 22:38, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
== Taqiyya ==
+
:::::::::::::We ''are'' an educational resource, which is why I don't think this is appropriate. He is not Arab, so I see no good reason to translate his name into Arabic. I understand that this is an attempt to speak to his religion, and favoritism.  I'm not opposed to that idea whatsoever. However, doing this serves no educational purpose.  Let the article speak for itself, and let the readers look at the facts. If you want to write out his name in his native African dialect, feel free.  However, you wouldn't find something like this Arabic translation in Britannica, and it doesn't belong here either.  I'm happy to have this article discussing his religious preferences--that's not that at all which I object to. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:30, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::::Britannica? Britannica called Barack Obama an "organizer" of [[Louis Farrakhan]]'s Million Man March for a decade - up until June of 2008 when Obama won the primaries but before the election. This is a matter of record. Britannica is hardly a source on Obama's life. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:48, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
  
−
The definition of Taqiyya in this article (''(allowed if) ... it advances the cause of Islam'') is incorrect for the Sunni Muslims. Taqiyya is only allowed when it will danger their lives otherwise.
+
==Pity the poor Democrats==
−
Also, even with this allowance, many chose instead a honorable death.
+
They are now in the position of defending the most corrupt President before or since [[Richard Nixon]], or arguing he was too stupid and naive to see the criminal conduct of his underlings. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:36, 18 May 2018 (EDT)
  
−
Shi'ites (shia) is the one who practices this (taqiyya) in almost any situation that will cause discomfort to them otherwise.
+
==This page is highly disorganized==
 +
Considering it's  one of the the top five most popular, it needs a makeover.[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:00, 20 November 2018 (EST)
  
−
Sunni muslim and some branches of Shi'ite, because of their extreme stances, are pretty much a different religion. --[[User:Sufehmi|Sufehmi]] 11:23, 9 November 2008 (EST)
+
== Obama's father ==
  
−
== Taqiyya & takeyya ==
+
Re this continuing controversy. A quick search of [https://www.google.ca/search?source=hp&ei=ASG7XI2vDKix5wKyh7XYDg&q=ancestry.com&oq=ancestry.com&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0i131j0i3j0l8.2117.8637..12614...0.0..0.216.1508.0j11j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0.Ls5_OKxU5h0 ancestry.com] reveals that his father was indeed resident in Honolulu in 1961:
 +
 +
:Name: Barack H Obama
 +
:[Barack Hussein Obama Sr]
 +
:Residence Year: 1961
 +
:Street address: R625 11th Av
 +
:Residence Place: Honolulu , Hawaii
 +
:Occupation: Student
 +
:Publication Title: Polk's Directory of City and County of Honolulu, 1961
  
−
Are these the same thing? [[User:LiamG|LiamG]] 15:34, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
+
There must also be other documentation relating to Barack Obama senior's time in Hawaii as a student and the scholarship that he received from the Kenyan government.  In addition there is a mass of biographical  information readily available. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 09:45, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
−
:Yes. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 15:52, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:Hah! ancestry.com also says Michelle Obama was born female. And what about when [[John Brennan]] hacked into [http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/22/passport.files/index.html Obama's passport files] at the State Department? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:49, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
== wife opinions  ==
+
::What [[User:RobSmith|RobS]] has this to do with anything: "ancestry.com also says Michelle Obama was born female"??? Can you please clarify. The point that I raise relates to Obama senior.
  
−
The thing that bothers me about Obama is the comments attributed to his wife. 1. That it was the first time she was proud of america and 2.That black children had no future in america. Both she and her husband are examples of how well a black child can do so its hard to understand why she has that view. [[User:Markr|Markr]] 16:38, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::Obama junior's birth was announced in the local Honolulu newspapers. See, for example, [http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Nov/09/ln/hawaii811090361.html "OBAMA'S BOYHOOD HOMES IN HAWAII: Obama's Hawaii boyhood homes drawing gawkers". ''Honolulu Advertiser''Posted on: Sunday, November 9, 2008]. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 10:32, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
::See similar comments from John McCain: http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/2008/06/mccain-it-can-be-%E2%80%9Ctough%E2%80%9D-to-be-proud-of-usa/  “I’ll admit to you … that it’s tough in some respects,” McCain said when asked by a questioner at a town hall meeting how to be proud of the country. “We have not always done things right and we mismanaged the war in Iraq very badly for nearly four years.”
+
:::Technically, that article was dated on 2008, so it never actually reported on his birth. Maybe if you give an archived copy of the local newspapers dating back to the 1960s reporting on his birth, I MIGHT believe you there. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 10:41, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Was the 2008 article before or after John Brennan hacked into the State department computer system to alter [http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/22/passport.files/index.html Obama's name and social security number?] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:19, 20 April 2019 (EDT) '''An employee of Brennan.  This has nothing to with the topic. More red herrings. You might check the facts. ''' [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:43, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Obama's official government records were tampered with. That's a fact, according to CNN. Leaving aside CNN's credibility problems for the moment, Brennan was just referred for criminal investigation regarding other matters he may or may not have done on behalf of Barack Obama.
 +
:::::Frankly, I don't know what we are arguing about. You seem to have only three discredited sources for whatever it is you are trying to do: (1) Barack Obama; (2) John Brennan; and (3) mainstream media. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:08, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Thanks [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]]. There is an image on the page (a little hard to read) of the 1961 report–and the source is quoting from its own archive. See also [https://www.newspapers.com/image/?clipping_id=16284708&fcfToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJmcmVlLXZpZXctaWQiOjI2MDM2ODQ1NCwiaWF0IjoxNTU1Nzc2OTcxLCJleHAiOjE1NTU4NjMzNzF9.crlksl6aUgKbZg3XxRYnYq6STC9w_zXb8oU9b7LkgyM for the ''Honolulu Advertiser''] and [https://www.newspapers.com/clip/11651167/honolulu_starbulletin_aug_14_1961/ ''Honolulu Star Bulletin'']. There are other sources confirming Obama Senior's residence in Hawaii in 1961 as a student, if this doesn't convince you. Finally there is the [http://health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/ Hawaii  Government site].  [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 12:34, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Duh, even if he was resident, doesn't mean he's Obama's father, duh. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:40, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
== Obvious fake photo (hand on heart) ==
+
Evidence [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]? So try checking his mother's place of residence. Real research is preferable. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 12:56, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:It doesn't mean anything. Obama never held a passport until 2004 when he was elected to the Senate, yet he traveled to Pakistan in 1981 under an alias with a false Social Security number. ''Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:12, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
I suspect this very obvious fake photo (look at how small the two women are compared to the chairs behind them, check out the flag's edges itself and what exactly is holding it up) was placed here by people hoping to discredit Conservapedia. I understand a popular activity among liberals and vandals is to insert things seeming to support Conservative and Christian values, but that are either extreme or fake, and so undermine the encyclopedia as a whole.--[[User:TruthOfChrist|TruthOfChrist]] 11:11, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:: [[User:RobSmith|RobS]] you constantly stray from the topic, which relates to the year 1961. This suggests to me that you are deliberately avoiding dealing with the facts. Did you look at the birth announcements and the evidence on the Government of Hawaii's web page? [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 14:22, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
−
:It isn't fake.  Many other photos of this occasion exist.  Video, too.  The goofy-looking perspective is an artifact of the angle and lens used. --[[User:XavierJ|XavierJ]] 12:29, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
+
:::So what about 1961? Frank Marshall Davis was in Honolulu in 1961. As to Ann Dunham and Obama Sr., we have a trail littered with doctored evidence. Obama's not alone; [https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/books/chapters/stalin.html we'll never know who his idol] [[Joseph Stalin]]'s real father was as well. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:55, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
−
Answer: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp {{unsigned|Littleriverr}}
 
  
−
The single photo lacked context, and the writer of this article, unfortunately, chose to translate it negatively. A more balanced discussion is available on Snopes : http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp --[[User:Sufehmi|Sufehmi]] 10:51, 9 November 2008 (EST)
+
:::Clearly  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]] you have a closed mind. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:02, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Not really; I got Obama's paternity narrowed down to two suspects. Davis & Obama Sr. Birthers tend to think Obama Sr. was his real father, whereas Frank Marshall Davis makes a stronger case for U.S. citizenship. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:12, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
==birth certificate lawsuit number 2==
+
Clearly this article needs to be revised. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]] has not produced one piece of evidence to support his position. Perhaps he might try checking the Hawaiian newspapers, or the Hawaiian government web site.  [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:43, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
−
In a second lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's "natural born" citizenship, a Washington resident is demanding officials review original or certified birth documents for the Democratic Party presidential candidate.
+
:No offense, but saying you should check the Hawaiian government web site for information is the same thing as claiming that official Vietcong press releases are to be counted to prove or disprove massacres as a student radical claimed back in the Vietnam War, so you really need to take its statements with a grain of salt. And besides, I definitely recall seeing a PDF once showing Barack Obama's birth certificate as Kenyan. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:02, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:EDIT: Found this, it at least looks like the PDF I stumbled upon: http://www.infiniteunknown.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/barack-obama-kenyan-birth-certificate.jpg [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:20, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
::These are all moot points. The real question is whether President and First Ladyboy Buttigieg will be the first gay married couple in the White House. Evidence suggests more DNC/liberal media fake news. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:26, 20 April 2019 (EDT)  Excellent parody. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 18:05, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::What is the source of this second birth certificate? Personally I'd trust the State of Hawaii, Department of Health Vital Records before a dubious source like www.obamanotqualified.com.  What evidence is there that it's not a forgery? [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 17:49, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::What exactly are you arguing? That Obama's not gay? That Frank Marshall Daivis is not his real father? That Obama's records have not been tampered with?
 +
::::Stop. Answer directly. Is the CNN article that says Obama's official government records were tampered with by a company headed by John Brennan credible or not? We then can take it from there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:10, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Yeah, and besides, there's certainly less evidence that the Kenyan birth certificate is forged than the Hawaiian one was, especially when Sheriff Joe Arpaio [https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/joe-arpaio-barack-obama-birth-certificate/2016/12/15/id/764243/ did an investigation that revealed that] the "scanned certificate of live birth" the latter represented had multiple layers, meaning it was digitally manufactured. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:17, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
Steven Marquis of Fall City, Wash., filed suit Oct. 9 in Washington State Superior Court, calling for Secretary of State Sam Reed to determine whether Obama is a citizen before Election Day. Marquis released a statement saying the state has the authority to "prevent the wholesale disenfranchisement of voters" who might have otherwise had the opportunity to choose a qualified candidate should records show Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen. [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78111]
+
See [https://www.wnd.com/2017/03/malik-obamas-kenyan-birth-certificate-for-brother-is-fake/] and from President Trump [https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-37389180/donald-trump-admits-president-obama-was-born-in-us] {{unsigned|Timber}}
 +
:Yeah, sorry, don't buy it. If his Hawaiian birth certificate were not fake, please explain why Sheriff Arpaio and his legal experts discovered many discrepencies [sp?] in the certificate that pointed to it being doctored, as shown [https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/joe-arpaio-barack-obama-birth-certificate/2016/12/15/id/764243/ here]? And besides, that's not the same birth certificate as the one Malik posited. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 19:17, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
:See my analysis of this on this Talk Page, point 58: "Barack raises the bar". [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 00:25, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
+
[[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] didn't you not read the evidence? "Maybe if you give an archived copy of the local newspapers dating back to the 1960s reporting on his birth, I MIGHT believe you there".  Or looked carefully at the 2008 report, which is based on the paper's own archive.
  
−
==Errors and dubious claims==
+
The Sheriff has a dubious reputation (was convicted for a crime); but more importantly, do you have any information about the forensic experts, from around the world, that the sheriff claimed to have consulted? [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 08:15, 21 April 2019 (EDT) An encyclopaedia article should not be based on unsubstantiated gossip. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 08:21, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:First of all, we don't know if the "archived newspapers" were even real, especially not when John Brennan was established to have tampered with official government records. For all we know, the records were hacked and had the articles replaced indicating Obama was born there, similar to Stalin's use of photoshop for lack of a better term. Second of all, even if it actually were true that Obama was born in Hawaii, that does NOT confirm that Obama Sr. was his dad. There's also plenty of evidence to suggest that Frank Marshall Davis is his father as well. Third of all, you are aware that Joe Arpaio's "crime" was more like trumped up charges by the Obama administration in an attempt to silence him, right? He did the same thing with Dinesh D'Souza earlier. And as far as the forensic experts, there's [https://videos.usatoday.net/Brightcove2/29906170001/201612/2037/29906170001_5250884901001_5250882346001.mp4 actual video of him speaking about the discrepencies that his team discovered online], even showing exactly HOW it was forged. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 08:50, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
- The first sentence says Obama was born in Hawaii. At first I was under the impression that someone decided to act in a competent manner and remove the baseless innuendo about his place of birth. Alas I was mistaken because later in the article the word 'alleged' is still used.  I thought all reasonable people would presume that a document from the State of Hawaii would suffice to prove one's citizenship instead of using the rants of the lunatic fringe.
+
:::The video doe not name these so-called experts and it sounds more like propaganda. One dubious source is not acceptable. As noted earlier it wasn't Brennan who was guilty of hacking. By supporting these lies you are helping the enemies of American democracy–especially Putin. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 09:17, 21 April 2019 (EDT) See also [https://www.conservapedia.com/Fake_news#Identifying_fake_news Fake News]. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 09:28, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Of coarse Brennan wasn't found guilty, cause [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/19/key-witness-in-passport-fraud-case-fatally-shot/  a key witness and whistleblower was found dead] of a gunshot wound two weeks later. Are we suppose to sweep all this under the rug and go with DNC/MSM fake news, again? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:09, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
: A lawsuit has been filed by someone seeking the real birth certificate.  Complain to him, and explain why it still apparently has not been produced.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::::The fact that they're even SHOWING the documents at ALL, and showcasing WHERE there are multiple layers (look at the blue bordered boxes, they're there for a reason) should be sufficient of a source as any (and besides, that video came from the liberal USA Today, so it's not like it's particularly conservative-based, meaning that if anything it's even MORE unbiased). Also, I'm not helping Putin at all. Actually, if anything, posting the lies about Obama's birth in Hawaii is helping Putin, as is posting lies about Hillary winning the election (what, you think that Putin elected Trump? Absolutely not! Actually, think critically: Why would Putin back Donald Trump when he's got an even bigger ally in taking down America with Hillary, especially with the Uranium stuff). And let's not forget that Obama was already selling out to Putin's Russia since 2012 with his infamous "one last election" claim. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:52, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
::The state of Hawaii is not just going to let anybody get a copy of Obama's birth certificate, let alone his original.  I can't even get my hands on my own original birth certificate and I'll bet neither can you.  A certified copy of Obama's birth certificate has been provided for anyone to look at.  If this copy is good enough for our government officials that are not part of the lunatic fringe, then why isn't it good enough for Conservapedia?  I'd like to think Conservapedia is not aligning itself with the likes of the people filing these nonsense lawsuits.--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
===Sources===
  
−
- Obama only attended religious schools until he reached the age of ten (Islamic and Catholic). The rest of his education from Punahou School, Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard was nonsectarian. Clearly the vast majority of his education was non-religious. [[http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/]]
+
@Timber: Once again, don't make massive changes like what you just did on this page without the agreement of long-standing editors. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 11:31, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
*Agreed. Sourced material was removed. It should at a minimum have gone into subpages, like Early Life of Barack Obama. We should give him a few hours to fix it before a mass revert. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:34, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
: Obama's formative years were spend being indoctrinated in Islam.  Less than 1% convert to Christianity after that experience. Enough said.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]],  "massive" is an exaggeration. What I removed was off topic and not consistent with Conservapedia's Commandments: "Everything you post must be true and verifiable". Some Conservapedia editors use dubious sources and dismiss anything that they disagree with as forgery. The views of an obscure 85 year old sheriff is deemed, for example. more trustworthy than civil servants. What do the ''real'' forensic experts say?The reliance on gossip and gutter journalism is unbecoming–the idea that Michelle Obama is a man is lavatory wall graffiti. Again innuendo and gossip trumps the "true and verifiable".{{unsigned|Timber}}
 +
:::Is the ''[[Washington Post]]'' a dubious source? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:42, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Let's continue this discussion on sourcing (rather than specific subject material). Timber, would you agree that there's is a difference in the reliability of source (say, WaPo, NYT, CNN, etc.) that omits information versus deliberate misreporting of facts? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:47, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
  
−
::I was never under the impression that a person's formative years stopped at the age of ten.  According to you, Obama shouldn't be a liberal because he attended conservative religious schools during his alleged formative years, 6 - 10.  How is it that he is now a liberal after living another 35+ years and attending an ivy-league college?  You are also ignoring his years in a Catholic school during his time in Indonesia.  Why?  If he spent two of his formative years at a Catholic school, shouldn't he be a Catholic?--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
  
−
- Malcom X was not THE leader of the Nation of Islam, he was A leader. There is a distinct difference. [[http://www.finalcall.com/national/savioursday2k/hem_nation.htm]]
+
==Judgment very harsh==
 +
The judgment of Barack Obama in this article is very harsh. It says he is "arguably the worst president in U.S. history" but does not refer to a website, connected with ABC news, that says that 31% of Americans said he was the greatest president in their lifetime. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 10:36, 9 December 2019 (EST)
 +
:Why would that be surprising? 100% of Americans thought George Washington was the greatest president in their lifetime in 1800; 50% of Americans thought Lincoln was the worst president in 1865; 60% though FDR was greatest president in 1945; 62% thougth Nixon was the greatest president in 1972; big deal. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 12:09, 9 December 2019 (EST)
  
−
: Nitpicking here. I'll change "the" to "a" for you.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
==Know history better==
 +
I suggest who ever typed this article gets to know U.S. history better. It says that Obama is "arguably the worst president in U.S. history" but would one really rank him as worse than [[Lyndon Johnson]] or [[James Buchanan]]? [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 11:52, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Given what's known of [[Obamagate]], he ranks below [[Nixon]]. And he set back race relations for decades, not to mention that he destroyed the Democrat party. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]]</sup> 11:56, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Oh, let's not forget he resurrected Black African slavery in Libya. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]]</sup> 11:57, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Or his responsibility for the European immigrant rape crisis that is destroying feminism and women's rights in Europe. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]]</sup> 11:58, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
 +
::Don't forget the $200 billion he gave to the Iranians.[[User:Bytemsbu|Bytemsbu]] ([[User talk:Bytemsbu|talk]]) 12:31, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
 +
:::Let's be clear on that - the Iranian terrorist regime; Iranians ''per see'' are good people. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]]</sup> 13:02, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
  
−
::Don't do it for me, do it for the reputation of Conservapedia.--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
== Suggestion ==
  
−
- Obama was baptized in 1988, the same year he started attending Harvard.  If there is a reference stating he was baptized prior to his political ambitions, please post it. [[http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/30/america/30obama.php?page=2]]
+
RobSmith suggests we add "Despite his personal involvement, Obama was not impeached for [[Spygate]] crimes after leaving office", though he can't access CP right now to recommend a good place to put it. Does anyone have any suggestions? —[[User:Liberaltears|<code><span style="color:black; background:#FFABAB">'''LT'''</span></code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|<sup>May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!</sup>]]''''' Saturday, 16:50, 13 February 2021 (EST)
  
−
: 1988 makes no sense, as no one ever saw any Christian behavior or church attendance by Obama at law school from 1988 to 1991.  Post his baptismal certificate.  You can't and neither can Obama.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
== Edit warring and the vulgar picture of Michelle Obama ==
  
−
::Why doesn't 1988 make any sense?  Was there a problem with my reference? Are you able to provide reputable evidence that Obama's baptism didn't occur in 1988?  Just because a person doesn't attend church on a regular basis or hardly at all is not a reason to deny someone's baptism. Elsewhere in this article is criticism directed at Obama's CHRISTIAN pastor of 20 years. Either Obama is a Christian that attended a Christian church for 20 years or he is not.  If he is a Muslim, then why all the fuss about his Christian pastor of 20 years?--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
I believe that at least three people have objected to this picture,  including [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michelle_Obama&diff=1851764&oldid=1850444 the founder of Conservapedia]. There has been no discussion of this here before the reverts. Posting it is against  Christian family values, and belongs to the world of teenage lavatory wall graffiti ([https://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Aschlafly#Obscenity:_Lewd_pictures_and_comments see also]). But perhaps I'm a prude? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:37, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
 +
:Pehaps you're a homophobe. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 13:57, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
 +
::Don't be so coy, [[User talk:RobSmith]], the picture is making smutty fun of Michelle Obama. To visually suggest, with a doctored picture, that a woman has a penis is topical of the dirty minds of schoolboys. I accept all of God's creation, including those born into the wrong body. I clearly have a distorted picture of what is conservative, and Christian. --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 15:03, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
  
−
- Just because someone reads a book allegedly 'from a Muslim point-of-view' does not mean they are actually a Muslim.  I have read parts of the book and I am not a Muslim.
+
:::Do you dispute the there's consensus to remove the picture, including editor [[User talk:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]]? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 15:09, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
  
−
: It adds to the evidence.  If Obama were reading the Bible, then that would detract from the evidence.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
::::The picture is from a Hollywood awards ceremony or something. Why don't you take up something useful, like debunking the fake J6 insurrection or Trump-Russia conspiracy theory.  Honestly, I don't have time for kinda nonsense. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 15:14, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
  
−
::Obama does read his Bible and has encouraged others to do so as well.  Would like a reference?--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
Conservapedia continues to shoot itself in the foot, by undermining its own professed values and charter.  --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 15:35, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
  
−
- Roosevelt communicated with America's enemies.  After the outbreak of WW II, Roosevelt was negotiating with the Japanese.  Things didn't go well and the Japanese were embargoed, thus losing most of their import capability including over 90% of their oil supplies. [[http://www.fff.org/freedom/1291c.asp]]
+
==Question==
−
 
+
Didn't [[User:Conservative]] add [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Barack_Hussein_Obama&diff=prev&oldid=2116000#cite_note-230 this edit]:
−
: Your point is lacking here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
+
{{Cquote|[[Benito Mussolini]] defined [[fascism]] as the wedding of state and corporate powers. Accordingly, trend forecaster Gerald Celente labels Obama's corporate bailouts as being "fascism light" in nature.}}
−
 
+
Hasn't [[User:Conservative]] [[spammed]] [[ad hominem]] attacks against another editor for years for saying the same thing?[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Zelensky Must Go!'']]</sup> 19:35, March 17, 2025 (EDT)
−
::In reference to Obama saying we should talk to our enemies, the following claim was made, "Roosevelt spoke with none of the Axis or Japanese leaders and the only communication that was sent to them was unconditional surrender."  Roosevelt and members of his administration talked to our enemies, the reference provided by the article was written by a columnist with a distinct lack of historical credibility.--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
- If Obama' likely benefited from special scholarships not available to most students', then which scholarships were they?  Could a reference at least be provided?
 
−
 
 
−
: You tell us.  Obama won't disclose who paid for his education.  He claimed he worked his way through school, but that was disproved.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::Why should I tell you?  The claim was made in the article without a shred of evidence to back it up.  I do happen to know that the Obama's used college loans to pay for much of their schooling and they only just recently paid them off with the proceeds from his books.  Since someone writing for Conservapedia is making the incredible claim that Obama was somehow able to acquire loans not available to most others, shouldn't a reference be provided so the claim will withstand scrutiny? --[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
- Any chance a reference could be provided for the claim concerning the flag pin?  The way it reads now makes the entry look like partisan whining.
 
−
 
 
−
: Be clearer.  No one denies Obama avoided wearing a flag pin as he catered to the anti-war crowd.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::The claim, ' Recently, he has begun wearing one again for reasons that are likely political pandering' was made without a reference.  Any chance this opinion could be verified so the article doesn't sound like a smear?--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
The general tone of the article makes it look like a partisan smear campaign, not the encyclopedic scholarly work Conservapedia alleges to produce.--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 17:08, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I think your conclusion applies more to your own comments.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::Thanks for your response.--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 18:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam==
 
−
''Obama has written that the autobiography of Malcolm X, a Nation of Islam leader, inspired him in his youth.''  I think this statement needs to be tweaked a bit.  While it's true that Malcolm X was a leader in the Nation of Islam (a radical black separatist group, not to be confused with the traditional Islam faith), by the time he wrote his autobiography (as told to Alex Haley, of Roots fame), he had rejected the Nation of Islam and converted to traditional Islam.  If Obama was inspired by the book to take up Malcolm's religion (which is a stretch, IMHO, as lots of people have read this book and not become Muslims), he would most likely have chosen traditional Islam like Malcolm did.  I think it's important to make that distinction clear.  (Unless this item is intended to suggest that Obama is a member of the Nation of Islam?  If so, it should be in a different section, as it's quite a different claim.)  FWIW, Malcolm X was assassinated in 1965, four years after Obama's birth.  Also, the title of the book is ''The Autobiography of Malcolm X''.  So I suggest this item be changed to something like:
 
−
 
 
−
* Obama has written that reading ''The Autobiography of Malcolm X'' inspired him in his youth.  Malcolm X converted to traditional Islam after leaving the radical Nation of Islam (a black separatist group).
 
−
:Sounds considered and precise.  Most black muslims are NOT NOI, they are in fact sunni Muslim.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 20:11, 20 October 2008
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Obamas Grandmother==
 
−
Breaking news, Americans still forbidden to speak with Obamas grandmother. Now, we may never. Democrat Barack Obama is canceling nearly all his campaign events Thursday and Friday to fly to Hawaii to visit his suddenly ill 86-year-old grandmother.
 
−
Campaign spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters Monday that Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, who helped raise him, was released from the hospital late last week. But he says her health has deteriorated to the point where her situation is very serious.
 
−
Gibbs said Obama would return to the campaign trail on Saturday, though he was unsure where.
 
−
Obama events originally planned for Madison, Wis., and Des Moines, Iowa, on Thursday will be replaced with one in Indianapolis before he makes the long flight to Hawaii. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 21:16, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Suggesting corrections to 'atom bomb' sentance ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello again,
 
−
 
 
−
I think it should not say "atom bombs" because this is slang expression. It should be "atomic bombs" except since 1960s it usually is said "nuclear bombs" and even then there are other weapons from bombs (missles are not bombs, then there are torpedoes and so on) so it should say "nuclear weapons."
 
−
 
 
−
Also my memory is fuzzy here but didn't Clinton have ties to other washed up sixties communist terrorists? Like former Black Panther Party people who were re-made into "moderate" democrat politicians.
 
−
 
 
−
Finally and this is just style, I do not like the '''Bold text''', it makes look rather alarming, not that we are not alarmed about this, but I think it is best to say the raw facts directly and people will know to be alarmed, instead of trying to shock people with text formatting into coming to their sense. I heard Conservapedia wants to get away from "that other encyclopedia"'s use of sensationism and tabloid style, so, maybe take off the bold. [[User:ELeger|ELeger]] 21:28, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
other than this a very good job in the article, maybe it is too late to change direction your country is going, but at least people will know who had the facts before things all went wrong! [[User:ELeger|ELeger]] 21:30, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: I appreciate your comments but don't find them compelling.  "Atom bombs" is a familiar term; whether Clinton did likewise concerning terrorists is irrelevant; and bolding is obviously helpful for emphasis.  Thanks anyway and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:44, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::While I plan to stick to the 90-10 ratio here, and this is the first comment I've made, I did want to note that I agree with Eleger about "Atomic Bombs" or "Nuclear Weapons" simply on the basis of the being more accurate terms. My person phrase of choice would be Nuclear arsenal though. Maybe nitpicking, but I think fair. -EternalCritic
 
−
 
 
−
:I came to post that too; I also have a problem with "first" part of "If elected, Obama would become the first person having ties to a known terrorist to gain control over America's atom bombs". The most recent Democrat President was bad too. OTOH, something like "second person..." might distract from the point that Obama is a threat.[[User:MikeMike|MikeMike]]
 
−
 
 
−
== How low can you go? ==
 
−
 
 
−
Is this meant as an "How To" article on character assassination? Though I do find some of the 'links' in the Obama and Islam hilarious, I'd thought that the conservative parts of the US had a shred of dignity left. It appears not to be the case. But keep feeding the lies to your fellow yes-men, the rest of us are quite amused.
 
−
 
 
−
:::We are not going low at all, You Who Did Not Leave Your Name. This entry is nothing about the truth about Barack Obama. Unfortunately, liberals like you will not find out until it is too late.--[[User:Saxplayer|Saxplayer]] 21:20, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::: ''"the rest of us are quite amused."'' I am sure the leftwingers are quite amused of the nonstop Obama media lovefest. I am sure they are also amused at the whole disenfranchisement of voting in a Democracy thanks to ACORN. I am on a conservative website and I can't find a good Obama bio, shucks billybob, I need the Obama I can believe in, let's look at MSNBC... La La La, liberal fantasy land.--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 21:48, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::: In response to the first (unsigned) comment above, liberals enjoy deceit.  But not everyone is fooled by it, and liberals get very irritable when they see that.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:57, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==Berg Obama lawsuit==
 
−
Philip J. Berg announced 10/21 that Obama and the DNC “ADMITTED”, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit. Obama is “NOT QUALIFIED” to be President and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President. [http://obamacrimes.com/]--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 10:26, 23 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:The "admission" is nothing more than an acknowledgment that there was no response to his suit, so Berg is claiming that this qualifies as an admission that all his allegations are true.  Berg's now positioning this as "Obama admits he's not a citizen", but that is legal spin, not reality, and I'd be hesitant to claim it as anything other than the latest round in a lawsuit.  --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 10:52, 23 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
::There's a legal principle that the silent are understood to consent.  Obama's failure to deny Berg's request for admission means that he admits those items under the law.  This definitely should be included, and should be reason enough to disqualify him from the election.  [[User:QWest|QWest]] 16:03, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::::The judge in the Berg-Obama case has tossed out the suit [http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jvhtmoNEnyP1Bu6Ol4zJsN94mlewD941NCJG0]--[[User:Saxplayer|Saxplayer]] 16:30, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Just because an activist judge tossed out the suit doesn't mean that the admissions don't count.  I'm sure Berg will appeal.  [[User:QWest|QWest]] 16:54, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Is the judge activist? Is there reason to believe he's an Obama partisan? [[User:Marcdaniels|Marcdaniels]] 11:38, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Lefty DindaleP was right, though it shouldn't be hard to find a sympathetic judge in Democrat bastion of Philadelphia. If, if the bozo (obama) wins, this issue will not go away easily and will be justification for impeachment. Though, will be hard to impeach with super-majority liberal congress, God help us. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 12:35, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:::::::Actually, McCain has a similar issue, in that he was not born in the US, and arguably not on US territory.  Most every single scholar I've read in the last few days on this has said McCain's case will be a compelling one, legally, because no court in the land would dare say a person born out of this country to two citizens, one of whom was SERVING HIS COUNTRY, would be denied the right to be president.  As we become more and more of a mobile population, with people traveling and living overseas for extended periods of time (business, government, or travel) I think more children will be born of two natural citizens, but not on the US territory.  I will be curious to watch how the term "Natural Born Citizen" is defined by the Court under any case, Obama or McCain, just for the historical precedent it will set.  --[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 12:41, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
::::::::: By the way, Qwest, there is no legal principal that "silence is admittance".  Until or unless a Judge posts an Order compelling you to provide a particular document or telling you to agree or deny, you are not obligated to.  Some instances this might be used could include famous people being hit over and over again with frivolis lawsuits, just cause they have money or power.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 12:52, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
::::::::::McCain was born in United States territory, which the Panama Canal Zone was prior to 1978, when by treaty it was turned over to Panama.  Anyone born in the United States, its territories, or its overseas military bases is an American citizen.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:18, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:::::::::::Yes, very much an American citizen.  The interesting language is "Natural Born Citizen".  That is what will be interesting to see how it's defined.  I think it makes rational sense that anyone born to American parents should be "natural born", regardless of where they are born.  But the Framers didn't explain the terms.  (I'm not arguing, by the way, for any point.  I'm simply saying scholars say this issue of an American Citizen not born on US land has not yet been addressed - or rather, what do the words "natural born" mean, in that context.)  The lawsuit for McCain is totally irrelevant (even though the judge has not seen fit to toss it yet), since the Congress already said he is exempt per their own Resolution. --[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 13:23, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==Birthplace and Grammar Revisited==
 
−
''Barack Hussein Obama, II (allegedly born in Honolulu,[1][2] August 4, 1961)''  Putting aside all issues about whether the "where Obama was born" issue is worth mentioning, given that it ''is'' going to be mentioned, let's get it right.  The issue (as a previous poster mentioned somewhere above), is not ''whether'' he was born - we all agree on that.  The issue is whether he was born ''in Honolulu''.  Thus the phrase should read: ''Barack Hussein Obama, II (born, allegedly in Honolulu,[1][2] August 4, 1961)'' --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:06, 23 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==Request addition==
 
−
I would like to add this external page and somehow link to this photo Democrat_Obama_during_the_Pledge.jpg  [http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Obama_doesnt_put_hand_over_heart_1022.html No hand over heart from Obama during national anthem video]| Original footage ABC, now available through RawStory Media. [[Fair use]] --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 14:07, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: Will unlock for you now.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:13, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== First Muslim President ==
 
−
 
 
−
I found this claim quite amusing at first, especially with Snopes already had it debunked quite extensively : http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp
 
−
 
 
−
Then I remember that we, Indonesian, also got the wrong information. We thought Obama is a muslim, and we rejoiced.
 
−
We found out later that (1) clearly his parents are quite liberal on religions (2) the context at that time in Indonesia is that most Muslims were not religious. We were pretty laid back then. My parents drink alcohol and misses their obligatory religious duties.
 
−
 
 
−
So even if (again, IF) Obama was a Muslim, there's no way he's enrolled in a "radical Wahabi school". It just didn't exist back then.
 
−
 
 
−
Anyway, if we, Indonesians, were wrong about Obama at his time in Indonesia, it's quite understandable if others were also mistaken. --[[User:Sufehmi|Sufehmi]] 11:47, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
"If elected, Obama would likely become the first Muslim President".
 
−
The evidence pointing to Obama being a Muslim can be included, but Barack Obama has said he is a Christian, and is a member of the United Church of Christ. So is saying he is likely to become a Muslim president meant to imply that Obama is secretly a Muslim? Perhaps a better phrased version of this sentence would be "If elected, Obama would become the first president with a strong leaning toward Islam". This is concurrent list that follows it, and is much less hypothetical like a good resource should be.  --[[User:anonymous123|anonymous123]] 21:52, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Obama's claims to be a Christian are meaningless for three reasons; first, his distinctly non-Christian stance on issues such as [[abortion]] and the [[homosexual agenda]]; second, the radical, [[Marxism|Marxist]] theology preached by his church; and third, the [[Muslim]] concept of [[taqiyya]] outlined in the article. All the of the evidence points away from his being a Christian. [[User:SMichaels|SMichaels]] 16:06, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: Using Taqiyya as a defense is a joke. I'm not doubting it's authenticity, but I could claim the same thing about you and you would have no defense. See Salem Witch Trials for more information. --[[User:Limbo|Limbo]] 09:42, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::Obama's stances on [[abortion]] the [[homosexual agenda]] and [[marxism|Marxism]] do take credibility away from his Chrisitian stance, but Muslims are against [[abortion]], [[homosexual agena|homosexualiity]] and women's rights themselves. Furthermore, [[Marxism]] is against all religions, and if his church preaches Marxism, that makes him a Marxist Christian, not a Marxist Muslim. While I myself question his faith in Jesus, I sincerely doubt that he is a Muslim. And as for Taqiyya? Isn't that just an obscure segment of a doctrine practiced only by some Sunnis and considered hypocrisy by other muslims? [[user:justiceisblind|Justice Is Blind]]
 
−
 
 
−
:The facts you gave are true, but you did not address my bringing up the idea of rewording the phrase. Having a set of words like "might be" or "could be" seem extremely unscholarly. Those facts you threw up also would correspond to him having a strong leaning toward Islam, minus the hypothetical thought he might be a Muslim. --[[User:anonymous123|anonymous123]] 23:03, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::The truth is what it is, whether you find it "unscholarly" or not.  We're not fooled here when politicians try to deceive the public about who they are and what they believe.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:00, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::Why is it so hard to directly answer my question? First off, do not mix my words, I said the way the sentence is phrased is not scholarly, what is truth or not does not matter to me.  I don't really care what you say is the truth, and what you are or are not fooled by. I am just bringing up the option that as long as Obama himself and no mosques claim he is a member, perhaps it should be reworded to "If elected, Obama would become the first president with a strong leaning toward Islam", which also corresponds to the list that follows it, and is all based on fact no conjecture. The reader should have the right to make up their own mind after reading the examples which are listed. --[[User:anonymous123|anonymous123]] 22:18, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::::There are strong evidence that Obama is a muslim and it has been layed out again and again.  He has never come out and said he's not a muslim among all the questions.  There for if elected, he will be the first muslim president ever elected.  It's as simple as that. --[[User:Patriot1505|Patriot1505]]
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Sure he has.  [http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=0GFKqOf8EHQ]--[[User:KathrynMonroe|KathrynMonroe]] 22:23, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Yes, he has. [http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2008/01/obama_mail]  --[[User:Limbo|Limbo]] 09:42, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Barack raises the bar ==
 
−
 
 
−
The snide accusation that Barack Obama insulted America because he refused to hold his hand over his heart is completely off-target. (See photo at top of article). The human heart is just a pump , medically speaking, but culturally it represents the finest, most vital and sensitive parts of our soul. Barack is indicating precisely how much he loves America by putting not one, but both hands over that part of his body which truly encompasses the most vital, potent and sincere components of his soul. Bill Clinton might not be his biggest fan, but he would be the first to applaud this magnificent gesture. [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 23:37, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: ??? --[[User:Limbo|Limbo]] 09:36, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
 
−
::LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL [[User:Aperson41|Aperson41]] 01:50, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
: Wow. I have no idea of what to say to that.--[[User:JArneal|JArneal]] 19:07, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== A hypothetical article ==
 
−
 
 
−
The vast majority of this article appears to be purely hypothetical and some of it seems to be fradulent, such as the pornographer donation and the speculation that Obama is a muslim. It is refreshing to see Obama in such a sober light, but I would encourage previous and future writers to be less interested in controversy, and to use legitimate information on the article instead.
 
−
 
 
−
Also, the article lacks structure, and seems to dive in and out of his history, his policies, quotations in a manner which pleases the tone. It is all quite juvenile and sad; an encyclopedia is where questions are answered, not where additional questions are brought up.
 
−
 
 
−
== Birth Certificate Controversy ==
 
−
 
 
−
The whole section should be reworded or entirely deleted. According to [http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081031/BREAKING01/81031064/0/BREAKING04 this], there can be no more doubt about Obama's birthplace. The article also states, that Obama has no right to release his birth certificate, so all demands for him to do that can only be part of a smear campaign. --[[User:Ascat|Ascat]] 15:22, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:Agreed.  For more confirmation see [http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html?rss=hon&psp=news KITV Honolulu] and [http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Nov01/0,4670,InternetPoliticalRumors,00.html Fox News' article about Web political rumors.]  Having 'allegedly' made sense before all the facts were on the table, but now I'm removing the word because it lessens the strength of our true, verifiable criticisms if we leave it there. [[User:Jinkas|Jinkas]] 20:58, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:: What about the lawsuit against him about this? [http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=2313]--[[User:Limbo|Limbo]] 21:23, 1 November 2008 (EDT)
 
−
:::The lawsuits all fell through, because anyone looking at the official documents could tell that they were real, it was a manufactured controversy thanks to Hillary (boy I wish expletives were allowed on conservapedia). --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 16:49, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::This issue remains valid even though rejected by the courts. Expect it to be revisited if he wins. Plus, allegiances owed to Keyna and Indonesia are part of the birth certificate controversy. Neither gossip nor the certificate proven true and Hawaii actions are unexplained, still. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 17:06, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::: My version doesn't violate comandments 1, 3, and 5 like the version that was removed. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 17:24, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::: I don't like the edit, but I will let it remain. It does violate CP with personal opinion, (costly time and money during busy election season). --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 17:30, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
::::The tone is bad I will admit, but that is all fact and not opinion. Is it an opinion or a fact that it takes tie to sit in court for several days? Is it an opinion or a fact that it takes money to pay court costs and extra lawyers? Is it an opinion or a fact that he is in a campaign where the outcome depends largely on the tie and money he spends campaigning? --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 17:44, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::::JPatt, could you explain "allegiance to Kenya?"  I don't understand this comment.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 17:57, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:: The original post on this page says "that Obama has no right to release his birth certificate."  I do not believe this to be what the original article says.  I think it means simply that no state official has the authority to release publicly a birth certificate, not that Obama himself is unable to do so. [[User:TGeary|TGeary]] 20:15, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Mr. Obama's Grandmother just died==
 
−
Without getting into politics, it would be nice to mention it respectfully on his page.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 17:33, 3 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:Do we have any reputable sources for that?  Given Obama's history of engaging in [[liberal deceit]], I wouldn't put it past him to fabricate a story like this to nullify attacks on Election Day. [[User:Neutronium|Neutronium]] 14:06, 4 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
::May I say, comments like this are what hurt our republican party this year.  His politics may be liberal, but he's still a human and making fun of a death of a loved one is beneath a good Christian. {{unsigned|JeanJacques}}
 
−
:::Neutronium, keep the parody to a minimum, please. That is simply heartless.
 
−
:::JeanJacques, yes, if it's relevant (do we have the mention of grandparents on anyone else's page? I don't know without looking) the we need it added in a respectful way. No matter what we think about Obama, he is a human and so is his grandmother. The was it is presented now, it almost seems as if we are implying that her death contributes to the controversy, when it clearly doesn't. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 18:54, 4 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Neutronium, there is a difference between being a cautious & prudent person, and being a paranoid, heartless person (i use the word "person" only due to the website rules of proper conduct). You would do well to realize that...AndrewM
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Obama attending his Grandma's funeral? No mention from the O-MSM! --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 01:03, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==This Is Why Obama Is Wining==
 
−
Articles like this make me think that Conservapedia is run by liberals. Burying real facts like Obama's membership in a Black Liberation Theology church, with silly lies like he is a "muslim", only serve to discredit real objections to the Obama candidacy.
 
−
 
 
−
Agreed. Congratulayions Andy, you did more for the Democrats than you can possibly know. Thoroughly discrediting this site with ridiculous partisan accusations based onm the flimsiest of evidence meant that anything that was a genuine talking point just got lost among the nonsense. That many on the left pointed to this page to discredit the entire conservapedia idea just goes to show that you can go too far. Congratulations for playing your part in losing the election and being successfully gamed by the left, who knew that you would leave tenuous ridiculous nonsense up.
 
−
 
 
−
Let's not badmouth the side that lost. Andy, you did your best, and I appreciate that. However, you can see from my comments from way back, that the Obama article was way too extreme, and included a number of outright falsehoods. Not saying that this lost the race for McCain, but going too extreme eventually starts to hurt. Like in business - a good CEO is someone who is willing to go to the edge of what is legal, but not cross that line. Those CEO's who stay on the edge are winners, those who go over, go to jail. Same thing here...I think the whole Republican campaign was just too darn negative, and put off a lot of undecided voters. Anyway, here's looking forward to President Schwarzenegger in 2012...
 
−
 
 
−
: Both sides were overly negative, but in reality that's a natural thing for long campaigns. The longer it runs the less fresh the ideas seem. It gets repetetive so after a while, in order to keep things fresh, mudslinging becomes common. I honestly wish we had a much shorter election time frame. Like six months max. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 13:41, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::I've just decided that this site's main contributors are probably liberals messing around with people. I bet there are some liberals somewhere getting a huge laugh at people who are seriously offended, or seriously believe half of these articles.
 
−
 
 
−
::: I have decided the same thing, though maybe not to that extent.--[[User:JArneal|JArneal]] 19:11, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Is going to be the next president==
 
−
Barack Obama has won the election, and I think this should be added to the page. [[User:Arthur205|Arthur205]] 00:12, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Yes he is, sadly. I encourage all of us to PRAY for the FATE OF OUR COUNTRY. Unfortunately, this page must be updated. [[User:LuvinGodDP|LuvinGodDP]] 10:10, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
I'm surprised no one has updated it yet, it's been over 12 hours since it's been announced. Honestly this sort of time lag on the internet is just sad. You would think that they would at least un-protect it in order for someone else to update it. --[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 10:13, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America==
 
−
Article should be updated accordingly
 
−
: President-''Elect'', technically speaking. He won't be President until he's inaugurated, and we should hold off on explicitly saying he's the winner until the electoral college has voted (not that I'm pretending there's any real chance of 100+ faithless electors suddenly popping up to help McCain). Right now, he's just the likely winner of the presidential race. --[[User:JeremyDB|JeremyDB]] 12:24, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:: Let's not disrespect McCain's gracious concession. We should put in that he's the President Elect and when he will be inaugurated. Let's at least be up to date. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 12:56, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::The first section of this article has been updated to reflect that Obama is now president-elect, but the rest needs to be updated also.  For instance, the section entitled "Obama would be the first Muslim President" should now be "Obama will be the first Muslim President," "will use the Koran to be sworn in," etc. -[[User:Rfreeman|Rfreeman]] 18:04, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== What happening with the muslim section? ==
 
−
 
 
−
I don't see why it needs to be above the TOC, The TOC lets people find what they are looking for, which may very well be proof that he is a Muslim, and really should be on the first page for formatting reasons.
 
−
 
 
−
Also some points that really stand out to me,
 
−
*''Obama's middle name (Hussein) references its namesake Husayn, who was the grandson of Muhammad, which most Christians would not retain.''
 
−
In this case the reference should be after the word Muhammad, because it does not reference the notion that christians would have there name changed, also it is his fathers name, and if he changed it it could negatively impact his relationship with his family, I would not consider this strong evidence. Seems like Opinion to me
 
−
*'' Obama recently referred to his "Muslim faith."'' You do know that the video cited as its source showed clearly that he was talking about a tactic that McCain could use, not his real faith (I strongly suspect Obama to be pretty apathetic to religion)
 
−
*''On the campaign trail Obama has been reading "The Post-American World" by Fareed Zakaria, which is written from a Muslim point-of-view.'' If reading a book written in a muslim POV makes you a muslim than how do we know what is in this book, because we can't trust anyone who read it to not be a muslim. If he were seen praying out the the qran that would be another story entirely.
 
−
*''Obama uses the Muslim Pakistani pronunciation for "Pakistan" rather than the common American one.'' Pakistan is an islamic nation, the american way of saying it is a bastardized version, he is using the name the nation calls its self.
 
−
 
 
−
I really think that this should be reworded in to prose and that it needs to be below the TOC.--[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 13:46, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Copyediting needed ==
 
−
 
 
−
I know that updating things like this as the news changes is tough, but:
 
−
 
 
−
"Barack Hussein Obama II (born in Honolulu,[1][2] August 4, 1961), Democratic Party member, junior senator of the state of Illinois, and president-elect of the United States, winning the 2008 Election over Arizona Senator John McCain [3]."
 
−
 
 
−
is not a sentence... [[User:Human|Human]] 14:17, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:I know they won't let me because I'm too new and can be a bit controversial, but I would love to rewrite the entire first paragraph. It has become such a muddled mess that it doesn't read well at all. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 14:27, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Muslim? ==
 
−
 
 
−
That section of the article looks like its attempting to proove that he is a muslim. Why not simply say "some prominent christian sites including X and Y have suggested that Obama may be a muslim". It currently looks like it's trying to make people think that he is a muslim, and that for some reason that's bad. What's wrong with muslims?--[[User:Newguy123|Newguy123]] 16:15, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:I think the point is that - no there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim but lying about it for political gain is a problem. [[User:AdamBeyer|AdamBeyer]] 16:32, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
::Again, that makes the presupposition being that someone lies when all you have is superficial, rather strained evidence to say he isn't lying.  Not very gracious on our part.  There are plenty of legitimate issues with Mr. Obama.  Living in gossip and innuendo and "he once made a mistake when talking" seems petty on our part.  Isn't it more important to emphasis why he is a socialist?  All we say is "he is", not what that means, and how it could effect the country, etc.  It bothers me that this site emphasizes gossip.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 16:42, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::Personally I dont think he is a Muslim however I am not going to kick up a fuss as I was already warned by Aschlafly (is he the boss?) for....something I did? Not sure what. [[User:AdamBeyer|AdamBeyer]] 16:45, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
I think it's funny how at the beginning of the article it claims he is a muslim, and then at the end discusses his previous church and pastor. It even lists 1988 as his year of baptism despite the beginning of the article stating he didn't have a date for baptism, which for everyone here in the conservapedia zone seems to take as undeniable proof he is a super secret muslim spy out for your children and pets.
 
−
Seriously though, I've mentioned it above that having an article for the current president of the U.S. start out with a poor and unnecessary argument over his faith is ''unprofessional'' at best. The beginning makes no valid points, manages to insult Muslims as a whole, and also contains that stupid picture of Obama in a traditional Kenyan costume.--[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 23:17, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== A Muslim President-elect! ==
 
−
 
 
−
Since the article assures us the Barack is a secret Muslim and would if elected become the first Muslim President of the United States, for consistency's sake, it should now be updated by something like the following:
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
"Now that the unthinkable has occurred and Obama has duped the American People and stolen the election, he will become the first [[Muslim]] [[President]], and will probably use the [[Koran]] to be sworn into office."
 
−
 
 
−
and:
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
"It is widely believed that now he is President-elect, Obama will drop the tiresome pretence of being a Christian and produce his other wives from hiding, don a turban and a scimitar, pray buns-up five times a day on a Persian carpet while facing Mecca, have a minaret built on top of the White House from which he will personally play the role of the muezzin and call the faithful to prayer, will establish policy recommending that “the Zionist entity be driven into the sea”, and put bin Laden’s face on the American dollar. The week after that will probably be even worse." If no one objects, I will make some such interpolations in the article proper. [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 23:30, 5 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== "70's terrorist" ==
 
−
 
 
−
I object to Ayers being referred to as a "terrorist from the 70's"
 
−
 
 
−
he is a "terrorist" end of story. once a terrorist, always a terrorist
 
−
 
 
−
we won't call Bin Laden a "2000's terrorist" in 2050
 
−
 
 
−
[[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 00:22, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Good point, [[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]]. Thanks for the edit. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:24, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
The man is a functioning member of society, an educator, a family man, who has condemns his past actions, and has worked greatly towards improving the lives of others through charity work. He was a part of a group that destroyed ''property'', which doesn't make him a terrorist because that would imply he did random acts of terror on ''people''. Blowing up statues and parts of buildings was wrong but they did not go after people, and no one was hurt or killed. To compare him to Bin Laden is ''despicable''. And to put a section about this man at the top of the page of Presidential-elect Obama who worked with him in an organization to help reduce poverty levels is neither well thought out or ''tactful''. --[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 08:46, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Except that the Weather Underground did in fact kill people - 3 of their own, in a bomb-making accident.  Sometimes that happens when you set off bombs, even if it's not what you had in mind.  I would put other property-destruction crimes such as cross burning in the terror category as well.  I do agree that Obama's association with Ayres is minimal, at best, and I have huge issues with all the guilt-by-association tactics employed by the McCain campaign.  I'm not taking a stand on the content of this article one way or another. I'm just trying to organize it and cite it as best I can. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 09:17, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::I don't believe an accidental death of their own people should be considered "terror" though. People could technically die while making signs for a normal type of protest, not as likely, but an accident is an accident. Although I do think that some property destruction like cross burning could be argued to be terroristic because it is done in order to terrify a group of people and incite violence against that group. However I still think that what the weather underground did does not quite carry that same connotations. They were protesting a war, and doing so by costing the government money and drawing attention to their cause, at no time was a group of people targeted in a way that would indicate that they were in danger directly from a hostile organization, unless you were an office desk or a public statue/monument. To use the word "terrorist", especially nowadays, in the case of Bill Ayers is misleading, and it is a word that should not be tossed around lightly. It seems that people believe that Ayers = Terrorist, so therefore he must have killed people or tried to kill people, and this article does little to correct this misconception. --[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 10:41, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== MInd Control? Really now? ==
 
−
 
 
−
The people who published this lost what little credibility they had when they published this. Repeating it on this page just makes you look bad. I mean an O looks like a crystal ball? First of all it also looks like an orange or a penny or anything else that is round and circular. Also, I think that crystal balls are the favorite of ''fortune tellers'' so unless Obama can predict the future (which I think might make him a ''better'' president) this doesn't mean much. --[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 10:54, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:I agree.  I am a practicing stage hypnotist (practicing because I still need work :) and I can tell you that most hypnotists use nothing but their voices and physical presence, and those who do use props traditionally use a pencil. [[User:SamuelA|SamuelA]] 13:21, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Absence of Dancing ==
 
−
 
 
−
Dancing is a popular form of celebration and partying by all ethnicities.  But why is [[Barack Obama]] rarely seen dancing, or even allowing and attending dancing.  Perhaps I've missed it (please let me know if I have).  I know, there was one highly staged politically correct dance with Ellen DeGeneris as Obama was catering to her audience.  But where's the rest?
 
−
 
 
−
One explanation is that the Islamic [[sharia]] disfavors dancing.[http://docstalk.blogspot.com/2008/10/islamic-scholars-denounce-dancing-say.html] --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:08, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:When's the last time you went dancing, Andy? [[User:HDCase|HDCase]] 11:23, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::um, lol?
 
−
::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpxJQABkSsQ Dancing in Puerto Rico]
 
−
::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axH9bhwI8os Dancing to Snoop Dogg]
 
−
 
 
−
::so there it is... at least three different places where he's seen dancing. Here's my question: lets see you find videos of Mccain dancing! xP your Islamic assumption thingy holds no water since you can say the same for McCain! [[User:Ema|Ema]] 11:26, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::Ah! Ema, don't be fooled by this [[deceit]], he might secretly be a [http://www.dankphotos.com/whirling/ whirling dervish!] They're members of [[Sufi]] Islam, by the way. --[[User:Wikinterpreter|Wikinterpreter]]
 
−
 
 
−
:::: I took a look at the Puerto Rico video.  It proves my point.  I've never seen anyone dance-without-dancing like that.  Have you?
 
−
 
 
−
:::: It will be fascinating to see how long it takes people to wake up to who Obama really is.  Judging by the determined objections above, it may be quite a while for some of his supporters.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:06, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::::Your argument is that he is a bad dancer so he must be a Muslim? Seriously Andrew, take a deep breath and relax, proving him to be a Muslim is not going to get him impeached, he has the presidency and that is that. In four years it might matter, but that means you have poor years to find less circumstantial evidence. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 12:27, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::: No, Brendanw, it is obviously not my argument that he is a "bad dancer."  I think you understand my argument perfectly well and won't admit it.  Suit yourself.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:31, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::::::: Brendan's right about one thing at least. All the evidence listed is either circumstantial or draws illogical conclusions. The one about him when he says he joins a church after a suggestion does not in any way imply him as a muslim, though it might imply him as a disingenuous Christian. The two are mutually exclusive. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 12:38, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::::::: Well please explain it to  me differently, initially you said he didn't dance, and now that we have three videos of it you say that he "dances with out dancing" what does that mean if not bad dancer? --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 12:45, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::::::Andy's saying that, in those three videos, Obama isn't really ''dancing'', in the sense of crossing a line of Muslim (im)morality.  It's like being against swearing, but recognizing that words like "heck" and "geez" don't really cross that line.  That said, however, I did run across a video where [http://splicd.com/wzyT9-9lUyE/31/52 Obama dances] by anyone's definition.--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 14:25, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::::::::::RossC, this video is obviously faked. [[User:BHarlan|BHarlan]] 14:32, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
I wonder if he will dance at his inaugural ball, if it gets to that point. (see: Berg) [[User:BHarlan|BHarlan]] 13:47, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
−
:In some Islamic traditions dancing is not allowed, in some christian traditions dancing is not allowed, some people regardless of religion just don't dance with enthusiasm (was he supposed to be [dancing inappropriately with] Ellen? While Barrack is a hottie I'm not sure she would let him do that) I was raised catholic and as a result I am a very quiet person who does not raise his arms in celebration. This is just such a far stretch that it doesn't mean anything. Heck if he were keeping his faith hidden and not praying to meca and not following the rules of Islam in order to complete the 35 year long mission that was trained in to him at a public school in indonesia at the age of 10 don't you think he would dance anyways? And his wife is a great dancer, in Islam men have a whole lot more freedom than women. this just doesn't add up to anything but crazy. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 15:30, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
I love to dance.  For what it's worth, I have seen an Obama campaign button with a picture of him dancing, and the words "Dance Yes We Can" on it.  It caught my eye because I take dance lessons.  See here [http://www.zazzle.com/obama_dance_button-145707809176961889] for a picture of the button. Over the years, I have met homeschooling moms of various faiths (Christian, Muslim, Jewish) who are careful about their children dancing for modesty reasons. Not everyone enjoys dancing, of course, particularly men.  While it's an interesting facet of Obama, to be honest I don't see it as a strong indicator of his religious beliefs.  When weaker arguments are included, it detracts from the stronger ones, I think. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:21, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:I don't dance, and I can assure you that I'm not a Muslim. I'm a lousy dancer, and self-conscious about it. I also don't have a tinfoil hat, which might be why this whole conversation seems ludicrous to me. Godspeed.[[User:Thecount|Thecount]] 21:40, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::The very conservative former Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, did not dance in public. This is despite the fact that his treasurer, Peter Costello, and his rival and current Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, both danced on national television. Is this evidence that John Howard is a Muslim? Certainly not. There is a much less sinister and blatantly obvious explanation for Obama's lack of dancing - he isn't good at it. Just have a look at the videos posted, he has clearly received minimal dance instruction and is evidently self conscious.
 
−
 
 
−
And just out of curiosity, has anyone actually seen John McCain dance? How about Palin or Biden? If these three have not then why should the explanation for their lack of participation not be extended to Obama? [[User:NormanS|NormanS]] 22:05, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Not to mention the fact that Spectral Evidence was outlawed in America back in the 1600's after 19 people were murdered for being accused of witchcraft. Get with the times, Schlafly. [[User:DRuss|DRuss]] 08:51, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:What is different about Obama that makes it unusual for him to not be much of a dancer?  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 09:45, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Still waiting on an answer, Andy. When'd you last hit the dance floor? [[User:HDCase|HDCase]] 15:43, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
: Though irrelevant to the issue, I dance in times of celebration, and have also arranged for the availability of dancing by attendees at such events.  Pursue this irrelevancy further and your account will be blocked, per my comment on your talk page.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:41, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:: He does somewhat have a point, even if his methods of conveying it are a little childish. He's pretty much pointing out that your accusation opens up a big can of worms. If I was to say that Obama's lack of dancing must mean he is Muslim due to Islamic Sharia, I could also say that if I saw you sitting on the floor you must be a Muslim who is kneeling to Mecca. [[User:St0dad|St0dad]] 09:09, 8 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Anti Americanism ==
 
−
 
 
−
Many points in this article could be summarized into a section called "Anti Americanism"
 
−
 
 
−
I'm surprised this hasn't been done already. Anti Americanism should be a given a very prominent place in this article.
 
−
 
 
−
: I like this idea because I feel the article is too fragmented and not organized. People are adding self contained ideas in various points in the article, especially at the top, which disrupts the flow and readablity. I cleaned up the first paragraph, but I can't smooth up everything [[User:MikeMike|MikeMike]]
 
−
 
 
−
If I make such an edit will I be banned? [[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 13:01, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== "Muslim Faith" comment ==
 
−
 
 
−
I believe Barack Obama is a Muslim or at least more sympathetic to them than Christians, but the "Muslim Faith" statement is taken out of context. I removed it as part of the evidence of him being Muslim.
 
−
 
 
−
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpoAVAA1F30
 
−
 
 
−
[[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 13:06, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:I don't like that video btw, I only posted it to show the full context [[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 13:07, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:: On a side note, the entire section, for accuracy's sake, should be called "Why Barack Obama is not a Christian" since the only parts that are not circumstantial are in regard to disingenuous Christianity. Beyond that the idea of him not changing his name making him muslim is ridiculous. He was named for his Father. Example from reality: my middle name is Paul. I received it fromt he name of my grandfather. I'm no longer Christian. But I don't change my middle name because I no longer believe Paul's words. I keep it because I love and respect my grandfather. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 13:14, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::: I partially agree. Maybe there should be two sections. One detailing Anti-Christian facts and one for Pro-Muslim [[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 13:17, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
: Schlafly reverted my change ... Why? [[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 14:18, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
::Because you don't agree with him.[[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 15:14, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::So it's Schlaflypedia then? I had high hopes for Conservapedia [[User:Mike770781|Mike770781]] 15:17, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::: I reverted your change because you deleted factual information.  That reason should be obvious.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:41, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Socialistic==
 
−
It is interesting to note that the MSM has buried the exact phrase and can only be found on blogs. The media will use the third person term, e.g. "Obama responds to McCains allegations of Socialistic." The quote itself is relevent. A play on words to blunt its' true impact. Actual charges of 'Socialism' or of being a 'Socialist'. Nobody uses "Socialistic"--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 15:26, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Wait==
 
−
 
 
−
Can someone please explain to me how Barack Obama is a Muslim? Thanks. [[User:Rockthecasbah|Rockthecasbah]] 23:12, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:Clearly someone's not paying attention. Not that I endorse the, uh, theory, but there's a whoooooole big section about it in the article. And several discussions on this talk page. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 23:15, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
At this point the very thought that he's a Muslim is preposterous. No Muslim would willingly put Rahm Emmanuel, someone so notably Jewish and pro israel in such a powerful position (chief of staff). All in all though, a pretty good choice from the pool. [[User:EternalCritic|EternalCritic]] 23:27, 6 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Obama isn't a muslim.  He doesn't have the character we see on the trail to do so.  I think Obama will be an awful President, is not a christian (it's too liberal), supports infanticide and sodomy, and won't do almost ''any'' of the thigs he has promised.  That aside I don't think he's a muslim.  Alot of the proof is probably just part of his warped view of multi-culturism, which includes the so-called ''peaceful'' religion of Allah and Muhammed.  This should be placed on a different page and other more certain information placed on this page (e.g. a better photo should be placed on the top, not a picture of him which tries to accuse his patriotism.)  He is going to be President, a bad one, but one nonetheless.  Please, let us respect the authority of our time.  [[User:Additioner|Additioner]] 07:34, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Think about this: If I had told you on September 12 2001, that in 6 years we'd ellect a liberal, socialist muslim named Barack Hussein Obama, who has terrorist friends, you call me crazy.  But here we are.  [[User:Patriot1505|Patriot1505]]
 
−
 
 
−
==Connections with Irish Terrorists==
 
−
 
 
−
I note that a liberal contributor has seen fit to add a line stating that The Republic of Ireland refused to extradite Rita O'Hare -- the IRA terrorist who Obama met last year -- for one of several alleged offences. Why is this of any interest? She served time in the Republic for smuggling explosives. So that country's legal authorities were in no doubt as to her status. Does Wikipedia regard shooting British soldiers in Northern Ireland as a "political offence"? If so, then should we regard killing American soldiers in Iraq the same way? I don't think so. --[[User:KeithJoseph|KeithJoseph]] 18:29, 7 November 2008 (GMT)
 
−
:Well spoken Keith!  I intend to contact the Irish Embassy in Washington and ask that they make a clear statement condemning our Marxist Terrorist President-Elect's meeting with these vile killers.  I would encourage ASchlafly to perhaps make a television appearance about this?  As a lawyer, I'm sure he can speak to the international law aspects of this very serious matter.  What's next I wonder - how soon are Nobama's Shining Path, Khmer Rouge, Sandanista, and Red Brigade friends going to crawl their way from their terrorist swamps into the halls of Washington power?!  Not long I'll bet!  [[User:ArnieS|ArnieS]] 13:34, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Nodanca was was probably a member of the [[FLQ]], too! [[User:HDCase|HDCase]] 18:38, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Actually, it was the High Court in the Republic of Ireland that regarded her case as falling under the exemptions for 'political offences'.  That is why they refused to extradite her to N. Ireland.  Also, Arnie S., if you truly are indignant about the "vile killer" Rita O'Hare, why don't you call your members of Congress to condemn the fact that she is the duly appointed Sinn Fein Representative to the US. [[User:Tordenvaer|Tordenvaer]] 18:37, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::: I don't understand. I genuinely don't understand. My edit to the Obama page on this subject has been deleted as being "inappropriate and silly". What is the distinction between a link with the Weather Underground and a link with the IRA? Why are inverted commas placed around “terrorism” (like this) when discussing the latter organisation and not when deriding Bill Ayres's mob. I suppose it's different -- and less significant -- when Obama's pals are blowing up Irish folk rather than Americans. Would it be different if he were pictured grinning next to some PLO hoodlum?  --[[User:KeithJoseph|KeithJoseph]] 02:42, 8 November 2008 (GMT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::: Tordenvaer (if that is your real name), I already HAVE called my member of Congress about the matter - I don't mess around!   The Sinn Feiners are a terrible organization with deep terrorist roots who killed many British soldiers and people over a hundred years in Ireland.  I'm as surprised as Keith is about the removal of his well-referenced material.  [[User:ArnieS|ArnieS]] 21:57, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Guys, grind your ax about Irish "terrorism" somewhere else.  Obama has no plausible connection with it and I'm not going to waste any more time on this silliness.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:01, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Andy, why do you place quote marks around the word terrorism? [[User:Ferret|-- Ferret]] [[User talk:Ferret|<sub>Nice old chat</sub>]] 22:08, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
<- I'm not going to get involved in any discussion here, but it appears a lot of you know a fair bit about [[Rita O'Hare]]. I have started her article, please contribute and spread your knowledge. [[User:NormanS|NormanS]] 22:13, 7 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::: If the site administrator does not think this worthy of inclusion then there is no point arguing the case. But I must again ask -- the question is reiterated above by Ferret -- why this site puts inverted commas around terrorism when discussing the IRA, but not when discussing the Weather Underground. The slaughter of innocent Northern Irish people may seem "silly" to you. It does not to us. --[[User:KeithJoseph|KeithJoseph]] 12:36, 8 November 2008 (GMT)
 
−
:::: Could be because Irish terrorism was largely funded by US "Irish" Catholics? [[User:GeorgeK|GeorgeK]] 07:48, 8 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Inciting hatred ==
 
−
 
 
−
Wow, have you ever asked yourselves "What would Jesus do?". I hardly think He would write such a biased and bigoted "factual" article. Real Christians don't need this sort of tripe. People are worked up over fundamentalist muslims, but it is writing like this that brings hatred on Christians and Americans and makes you just as bad, if not worse, than them. This was the first article I have ever read on Conservapedia and it will be http://www.conservapedia.com/skins/common/images/button_sig.pngthe last. WWJD?
 
−
 
 
−
: Jesus came to tell the truth, no one can deny that.  And many people hated Him for it, obviously.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:02, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."  -Gandhi
 
−
 
 
−
::Now who's the ONE? [[User:Wikified|Wikified]] 10:41, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::: Gandhi deserves much respect, but I've never heard Christians cite him as an authority on Christianity.  I wouldn't expect a Christian to interpret Gandhi's religion for him either.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:10, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Trust, but verify; then get an eight day block==
 
−
 
 
−
Trust, but verify.  Though he was not the originator of this quote, it was one of Ronald Reagan's favorites.  He quoted it when signing treaties with the Soviet Union and it's a useful concept in today's society.  It was in the spirit of this quote that I first read and edited at this encyclopedia.
 
−
 
 
−
The commandments and guidelines appear to support Reagan's idiom, yet some of the people in charge feel they can rule with an iron fist and pick and choose which rules they want to follow.  I experienced it first hand when I edited this article.  I first made several comments about the shortcomings of this article on the talk page so anyone could give me their opinion of my thoughts.  These comments highlighted various portions of the article that were factually incorrect, contained partisan sniping, unsupported assertions, gossip or deception by omission.  The response I got from Aschlafly was not encouraging, yet he didn't say I was prohibited from making any changes.  In fact, the pages that govern this encyclopedia say a lot about how articles must be sourced, placement of citation tags, how facts must to true and verifiable, etc.  Based on reading the guidelines, I made several changes that I thought reflected well on conservatives and Conservapedia.  Yet alas, I was blocked by Aschlafly for eight days.  The reason given was for 'inappropriate edits', that's very vague but I was unable to get any more information because Aschlafly doesn't provide contact information for people that have questions about their block.  This says a lot about a person's integrity if they refuse to follow the rules and then block other people because they made an 'inappropriate edit' that followed the spirit and intent of the commandments and guidelines.
 
−
 
 
−
Since this encyclopedia is being used an educational resource for home-schooled children, I'd like to think the information contained within would be factual and verifiably true.  I'd feel very embarrassed for my child if she read some of the inaccurate content of this encyclopedia and then repeated it to an informed person that was educated on the true and verifiable facts of Barack Obama or others.  It is my honest opinion that this encyclopedia is a long way from earning respectability; and blocking editors for making true and verifiable edits is not going to help.  The administrators should clean up their act because there are a lot of people out there that will follow Reagan's advice; trust, yet verify.
 
−
 
 
−
In conclusion, I will continue to make the same edits proposed by the commandments and the guidelines.  If an admin feels they can do without another conservative editing this encyclopedia in an ethical and trustworthy manner, it is their loss.--[[User:NormaN|NormaN]] 16:23, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Reference 29 ==
 
−
 
 
−
Under the "Obama is a Muslim" section there is a point about his name, and following that there is a reference. That reference includes a big chunk of argument and then a few references of its own and some examples and its just a mess. I am about to go through and trim the fat, that means I'm going to take off the examples, and I'm going tot take off the parts that say that it is common to change your name of conversion (Obama never claims to have converted from Islam, so it doesn't really stand out as an inconsistency in his story, some might even claim its a [[straw man]]) and I am going to move the reference to the fact with in the bullet point that it supports and put up a fact tag. I am not taking down the bullet point which I would dispute. I would encourage any one who has a problem with this to go out and find a real reference that shows that most christians would not maintain their fathers name if it were tied to another religion. Please don't block me for a good faith factual edit. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 19:12, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Muslim, Koran, ''redux'' ==
 
−
 
 
−
I removed the silly Muslim and Koran references in the first paragraph for two reasons - one, they are completely unfounded statements with no basis in reality, and two, they are repeated ''ad nauseum'' in the first "section", which is apparently intentionally placed above a TOC tag.  Let's leave the panicky POV-pushing to sections, at least, in the desperate attempt for this site to resemble an encyclopedia. [[User:Human|Human]] 23:30, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Obama is not a muslim nor a person who embraces biblical Christianity because the evidence contradicts this matter ==
 
−
 
 
−
Here is a well written and scholarly piece that examines Obama's religious views and it was written by the National Clergy Council:  http://nationalclergycouncil.org/010807BarackObama.htm  The evidence does not support Obama being a muslim.  The evidence also does not support Obama embracing biblical Christianity.[[User:Conservative|conservative]] 09:19, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
: I skimmed it and don't see where it concludes that Obama is not a Muslim.  The article fails to recognize that less than 1% of people raised Muslim (as Obama was) ever leave the religion.  The article says Obama is a member of a Christian church, but he left that many months ago.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:24, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:: Okay, a couple questions.  1) Where are you getting this 1% figure from? 2) How was he raised muslim? Countless acquaintances of mine who were 'raised catholic,' spending ample time learning about Catholicism in school are nothing of the sort.  3) Why would a 1% conversion rate even matter? A person's religion isn't probabilistically determined.  By that logic, since 0% of previous Presidents were black, it's unlikely that Obama is president.  I don't like this guy or his policy, but real criticism seems to be the way to go, not pointless claims about his religion. [[User:RodWeathers|RodWeathers]] 10:50, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::Also, as he is the president now, wouldn't it be far more constructive to work on things about his articulated agenda, and how it will affect Americans, write about how to influence our Congress people to stand up to agenda, and how to work with him to reflect what real Americans want - rather than report on unproven and unsupported claims?  It would be beyond comprehension if something said by panicked conservatives (not specifically here, just in genera) caused someone to think the right answer is to assassinate him.  Far better to focus on what we CAN do to remind our government who they serve - themselves or us.--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 11:26, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
::::There are several points wrong with youe assertion.  1) He is not the president now, George W. Bush is. 2) His muslim faith is not unsupported and is far from irrelivant.  It will effect his leadership (shiria law anyone?) and his cabinet choices.  It is a very big deal seeing as he is the first non-Christian president ever elected.  Are we suppose to just stick our heads in the sand??[[User:Patriot1505|Patriot1505]] 12:43, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Andy, you say that less than one percent of people raised as Muslims convert to another religion and use that percentage as if it is not a significant number.  It is.  Let us assume that there are one billion Muslims in the world today- this is a conservative estimate, using numbers from [http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html www.adherents.com].  Let us then assume that, for the sake of a conservative estimate, that 0.1% of Muslims convert to other religions.  That means that out of the one billion Muslims alive today, one million would convert.  That's more than the population of San Jose, California.  This is not an insignificant number of people.
 
−
 
 
−
:::::My point here, Andy, is that your use of this statistic is not a good argument.  Less than one percent is a far cry from none.  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 12:46, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::: Statistical evidence is relevant and compelling.  But it does not stand alone here.  There are at least a dozen other compelling evidentiary items, and the list is growing.  Supporting a ruler who has an agreement to convert the country to Islam, for example, is persuasive evidence also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:28, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::::Fist of all, I think you mean Sh'''a'''ria, but seeing as how you misspelled some English words, I can't really blame you for getting that wrong. To think that just because you believe he is a Muslim (and I emphasize ''believe'', but there are already multiple sections on this page saying why he is not) he would somehow be able to implement Sharia law in the U.S. is silly. The First Amendment prevents religious laws from being able to be made from ''any'' religion. So even if he was Muslim, that doesn't mean it would make pass some sort of Muslim laws, although I'm not exactly sure what ones you are worried about anyway, no intoxicants perhaps? You may be interested in hearing that the U.S. legal system may have been founded in part on ideas from Sharia law. And last but not least, what makes you think every president was Christian? The majority were to be sure, but as far as we know Jefferson was a deist whose ideas were closest to unitarianism, and Grant, Lincoln, Johnson, and Hayes had no religious affiliation and could have ranged from anything such as some sort of personal Christianity, simple theism, agnosticism, or even atheism. --[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 15:43, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::Maybe he wouldn't be able to push sharia law (although the liberals have a majority now), but that doesn't not mean that he wouldn't like to, or introduce pieces of it little by little using deceit.  Liberals love to use "what if's" and draw conclusions using their "feelings" about someone or something, but to me it's a matter of facts: As Mr. Schlafly has pointed out, less than 1% of people raised as muslims ever leave the religion.  In other words, 99% of those raised muslim stay that way for the rest of their lifes.  Whether or not Obama is a muslim at this time is contested, but it is a fact that he was RAISED with muslim beliefs.  Which means there is a 99% chance that he still holds those beliefs.  Those are tough odds.  The US is engaged in a war on terror against muslim extremeists, and there is a 99% chance that our soon to be commander and chief is himself a muslim.  Now, no rational person believes that he shares the views of radical muslims or would wish harm on the country, but it is a connection that is difficult to ignore.  Especially given his relationship with an unrepentive domestic terrorist.  The issue is not that he has a religion other than Christianity, it's that his religion may lead him to sympathize with the very people trying to kill us.  Just as if a presidential nominee had had fuzzy ties to the USSR during the cold war.  People would, and should, look at those ties closely.[[User:Patriot1505|Patriot1505]] 16:54, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
==Muslim Votes==
 
−
Wondering if the following should be added to Why barack is a Muslim. "90 Percent of American Muslims Voted for Obama." [http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=39031] They voted in such numbers because he is Jewish? No, because he is Muslim. They voted for him because he is a convert to Christianity from Islam? Nope, they voted for a Muslim. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt|  ]]</sup> 15:33, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Correlation does not equal causation. A lot of other demographics were won over by Obama too, it doesn't make him an hispanic, a young white college student, a Native American, or a resident of California. I think a stronger reason why Muslims voted for Obama may be more of a problem with McCain's and Palin's treatment of certain minorities during the campaign such as the "he's not an Arab, he is a good family man" comment, as well as what other groups these Muslims belonged too such as their overall economic status. --[[User:Rainedaye|Rainedaye]] 15:48, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::Often correlation is indicative of causation.  Can you cite any other voting pattern as high as 90% that is not based on religion or ethnicity?  Not your other examples of Hispanic and young white college student, that's for sure.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:53, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::::With the greatest of respect, what an extraordinary thing to say!  Are you suggesting that Muslim voters can somehow read Obama's mind and see that he is really a Muslim?  The most that such a correlation could indicate is that Muslim voters might ''think'' that Obama is a Muslim.  And frankly, it doesn't even show that because you cannot know what was in their minds when they voted (possibly any number of different things).  Talk about clutching at straws!  --[[User:HGridley|HGridley]] 16:48, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::78% of Jewish people voted for Obama, and I doubt they want to convert to either Christianity or Islam.  70% of people who live in urban areas > 500,000 voted for him.  Just two examples, from the excellent [http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/11/09/weekinreview/20081109_CONNELLY_GRFK.html National Election Pool synopsis], [http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/national-exit-polls.html tables] and [http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html data].  There's plenty of information there, so any trends should be visible.  But one does need to be careful about correlation and causation, clearly.  Famously, the population of penguins at the North Pole is supposed to correlate perfectly with the number of sitting MP's in the UK Labour Party.  [[User:BenHur|BenHur]] 16:07, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::::So what? Big cities are notorious cesspools of subversion and licence - just the sort of people to be attracted by a chancer like Obama. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:17, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::::The point he was making before you blocked him is that while Obama received a high percentage of the Muslim votes, he also received high percentages from numerous other demographics.  Clearly Obama does not belong to all of these demographics, and as such it is a misuse of the data to pick the one group you want to tie Obama to and declare him a part of it.
 
−
 
 
−
:::::An interesting idea to consider is the possible circularity or self-fulfillment of this argument.  Some people say that Obama is a Muslim, and hence a bad guy.  Voting Muslims generally take offense and vote for Obama, giving him a high percentage of their vote.  Some people then claim that receiving most of the Muslim vote further indicates that Obama is a Muslim.  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 16:44, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Excellent find.  This should help put to rest any doubts that remain about Obama's muslim faith. [[User:RodWeathers|RodWeathers]] 16:46, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Gays overwhelmingly voted for Obama, cleary this is because this married man is a flaming homosexual. If Obama is a socialist, why do you guys silence any mention that Americans VOTED FOR a socialist president?--[[User:MichaelMo|MichaelMo]] 16:53, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Deniers, you strike out.  Nothing approaches the 90% statistic cited by Jpatt, and for obvious reasons.  Go somewhere else to try to fool people.  You're not fooling anyone here, particularly when you look at the even more compelling evidence.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:55, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:It doesn't matter how strong the correlation is, it still doesn't prove causation. '''[[user:FernoKlump|<font color="#000066" >FernoKlump</font>]]'''<sup>[[User:FernoKlump/petition|<font color="#bd2433" >Look at this petition!]]</font></sup> 17:00, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::The real question should be: why are you arguing with facts on this website? We argue with feelings here. I ''feel'' that Obama is a Muslim, so it's true.--[[User:AshleyB|AshleyB]] 17:02, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::Andy, none of this evidence is compelling- it's all weak at best, and when strung together and passed off as proof it just doesn't work.  90% of Muslim votes.  Less than 1% of Muslims convert.  The list goes on.  This "evidence" amounts to a wobbly house of cards, and I'm looking forward to it falling over and people discussing facts and positions, not resorting to religious persecution.  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 17:04, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
::::Not persecution, Corry. Discussion. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:08, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:::::The argument is that if Obama were Muslim that would be a reason not to vote for him.  I don't know what else to call that.  Also, I would recommend you don't Google what AshleyB advised you to Google on your talk page.  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 17:10, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:::: This suggestion by ASchlafly is worse than weak, it's nonsensical.  ASchlalfy talks about correlation being indicative of causation.  How can there be any '''causation'''?  In order for there to be causation the Muslim voters would have to have ''known'' that Obama was a Muslim.  Is there some vast secret conspiracy going on?  Have the Muslim voters been given contacted and given the secret "Obama is a Muslim" information by the Obama campaign?  Are the rest of us being kept in the dark?  How many Muslim voters are we talking about?  This is just plain silly.--[[User:HGridley|HGridley]] 17:14, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Be aware, all commenters above, that your accounts will be blocked if you misrepresent what someone else says (as in Corry claiming that "[T]he argument is that if Obama were Muslim that would be a reason not to vote for him" or HGridley pretending this is about some "secret conspiracy.")  You won't be warned again.  Be respectful and truthful in this discussion, or you'll be ranting in the future on a different site.
 
−
 
 
−
No one else can come up with anything close to a 90% voting correlation except where there is religious or ethnic identity.  Scientifically and objectively, that is noteworthy.  There are a dozen more compelling pieces of evidence, but that does not mean this data point is not suggestive also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:26, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:I have been utterly truthful in what I have said.  You appear to have missed the point.
 
−
 
 
−
:In order for there to have been causation (i.e. Obama's being a Muslim caused Muslims to vote for him) the Muslims would necessarily have to ''know'' (not just suspect) that Obama is a Muslim.  In order for that to be the case there would need to be a vast conspiracy. 
 
−
 
 
−
:Pretty simple really.  Can you tell us what you know about this secret conspiracy?  --[[User:HGridley|HGridley]] 17:33, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::And how am I misrepresenting you, Andy?  Are you trying to convince people that Obama is a Muslim for purely academic reasons?  I stand by my statement.  This article, in the collection of "evidence" that Obama may be a Muslim, reads that "Contrary to Christianity, the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya encourages adherents to deny they are Muslim if it advances the cause of Islam."  So we have the premise that Muslims lie to advance Islam, and Obama is part of this.  I would also like to point out you comment in a different section that "It will be fascinating to see how long it takes people to wake up to who Obama really is."  That definitely sounds like it'd be a pretty bad thing if Obama was a Muslim.  [[User:Corry|Corry]] 18:08, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
[[Mystery:Why Do Black Americans Vote For Liberal Candidates?|Black Americans vote for the Democrat presidential candidate over 90% of the time]], even when that candidate is not Black. [[User:BHarlan|BHarlan]] 18:20, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Often correlation is indicative of causation.  Those Democrat cantidates were probably secretly black.  --[[User:HGridley|HGridley]] 18:23, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::We are trying to build an encyclopedia here. Either help out or get out of the way, HGridley. You might find more people who think you are funny on a liberalpedia, if one exists.
 
−
::The only truly funny thing about your note is that you call them "cantidates", which is a true record of how liberals treat Black Americans -- telling them "You can't, so depend on the government to do so for you." [[User:BHarlan|BHarlan]] 18:29, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
I have to confess to being very confused by everything that's being said here.  None of it seems to quite line up.  Wouldn't the Jewish community be LESS likely to vote for a Muslim candidate, particularly one with the alleged terrorist links?  Yet 78% of them voted for him - in greater proportion than they have previously voted for a Democrat?  That seems to be completely counter to the allegation?    It just all seems very odd, and very confusing to a passing reader.  [[User:HarryR|HarryR]] 22:46, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
==Confusion==
 
−
 
 
−
I'm just a little bit confused about one of the dot points claiming Obama is a Muslim, and was wondering if someone could explain it. It is the one about him leaving his Church without first finding a new one.
 
−
 
 
−
Here in Australia, while many people are members of a Church, a majority of us Christians are not. There is often no official enrolment beyond donations or small groups, and most families simply attend the Church closest to them, some even attending a number of Churches. As such it is quite confusing to state that a person is not a Christian simply because they have not "joined" a Church, as this is not a reflection on whether or not they attend, let alone their individual faith. Perhaps this could be clarified for an international audience.
 
−
 
 
−
Also the line "Many of Obama's statements about religion conflict with Christianity" is entirely conterproductive to the argument, as the statements made by Obama that are in opposition to Christianity (regarding homosexuality) are also in opposition to Islam. If anything this is proof that Obama is not a Muslim and is in fact an atheist, and should be removed asap! [[User:NormanS|NormanS]] 19:48, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:Also Malcolm X did not become a Muslim after he was a National of Islam leader, it was before. The current wording needs to be fixed. [[User:NormanS|NormanS]] 19:51, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Lenin Poster ==
 
−
 
 
−
The statement about the Lenin-like poster is informative.  We don't censor informative information here.  Let the reader decide.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:22, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
:Andy, did you happen to take a look at the reference? The article claims that "Obama also ''revealed'' his ''deep Marxist/Leninist roots''" and that "clear parallels between the poster design and Lenin's earlier poster was ''obviously a deliberate yet hidden hint'' to his European, socialistic audience as to his political roots and beliefs" (emphasis mine). The citation, which was a blog, by the way, and not in any way a trustworthy source of informative information, gives no evidence to back up these statements. It shows a poster of Lenin and a poster of Obama, both of which show profiles of the figures. Assuming these pictures weren't entirely made up, do you really think that this slight similarity is Obama's way of confessing closet Marxism? Not to mention the fact that Obama likely didn't make the posters anyway -- maybe we should accuse his (very expensive!!) marketing designer of being a Marxist/Leninist. 15:45, 11 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Obama and beer ==
 
−
 
 
−
There are several stories (with photos) of Obama drinking beer, which as an intoxicant is banned by Muslim sharia. <ref> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2008/05/06/20/125-6web-Obama_Beer-minor.standalone.prod_affiliate.91.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.mcclatchydc.com/100/story/36055.html&h=325&w=485&sz=47&hl=en&start=28&um=1&usg=__ShpWdieNIwhr4Rp3jHtLe7U9MB8=&tbnid=Se90xFLBo6rNQM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=129&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Bdrinks%26start%3D18%26ndsp%3D18%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN </ref> <ref> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nancarrow-webdesk.com/warehouse/storage2/2008-w18/img.211156_t.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nancarrow-webdesk.com/warehouse/storage2/2008-w18/img.211156.html&h=332&w=400&sz=16&hl=en&start=15&um=1&usg=__Yubc0nmus36Cf4Rrf7BL7-33-0g=&tbnid=xuWGKQ1Sl8_bQM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Bbeer%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DG</ref> No rational person can say that a practicing Muslim wouldn't violate the law in such a blatant, repeated manner. Another strike against the goofy Muslim charge. And remember, we don't censor here. Godspeed. [[User:Thecount|Thecount]] 12:52, 11 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
: I think many American Muslims drink beer.  Nice try, though.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:57, 11 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::Do many of them dance as well? [[User:Thecount|Thecount]] 13:03, 11 November 2008 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Reference ==
 
−
 
 
−
<references/>
 

Latest revision as of 05:15, March 19, 2025

This Talk Page is for Discussion Focused on the Improvement of the Corresponding Article
  • Your post should not deviate from the aforementioned purpose; this is not a page for debate on the topic.
  • Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~).
  • Please place new text under old text; click here to add a new section.
Archives:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10
For article guidelines please see the Commandments and Guidelines


Obama's claim to being a Christian

The article briefly states Obama converted to Christianity as an adult. There is no indication Obama had any inclination to converting to Christianity prior to his marriage to Michelle Robinson Obama. It may be even his conversion was a concession, or matter of convenience in an agreement on child rearing.

This indeed, is a first: no American President in history ever attested to not having a Christian background in their youth, or converting in later life. More emphasis should be placed upon Obama's non-Christian, and possibly anti-Christian (be it secular atheist, Marxist, or Islamic) upbringing and early youth.

2000 year old Christian communities are being exterminated, black Christian girls abducted, enslaved, and raped while Obama is more concerned about his golf swing. The time for speculation about Obama is over. He is now building his legacy. OscarO 17:28, 24 August 2014 (EDT)

He has been seen eating during daylight hours of ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim.--IluvAviation (talk) 21:23, 1 March 2017 (EST)

I agree with IluvAviation. Quite a few things he's done violate Islam's rules. Whiterose (talk) 18:21, 22 April 2017 (EDT)Whiterose (talk) 23:20, 22nd April 2017 (BST)

Just because he's not a very "good" Muslim doesn't make him anythnig else. On a side note, the Liberals are all mad because Trump put a stop to the times of silence in the White house corresponding to the Muslim times or prayer. I'm sure Obama just wanted the quite so he could focus on his work... (Of course, all the liberals strambled to cover it up and call it all a joke.) --David B (TALK) 18:32, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
He's done things that violate God's commandments too, so saying he's a Christian because he has violated Islamic commands is a logical fallacy. DMorris (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
Technically, I'm not entirely sure if Reverend Wright's parish would truly be Christian. At most, it's Christian-in-name-only due to adhering to Liberation Theology. And I don't know about others, but I most certainly doubt Obama's Christian either (like I said about his "adherence" to Islam below, he most likely only used the label of Christian in a cynical manner to gain votes). Pokeria1 (talk) 18:40, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
Obama claimed to be a Christian and was sworn in a bible. You get to keep your healthcare plan, too. It doesn't mean anything. We are the ones who must suffer for eternity because of his lies. By their fruits ye shall know them. RobSThe coup plotters are going down 18:51, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
Yeah, and he also claimed to be a Muslim as well, and even a gay man. That's not going to mean much when he's willing to put on appearances in a cynical attempt to grab votes. I might as well also point out there have been plenty of Marxist infiltrators into the Church during the 1960s, and considering one of the requirements of Marxism is that one must be an atheist, it's pretty obvious those infiltrators do not even believe in God and were faking it. The exact same is to be said about Obama being sworn in via the Bible. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:19, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

"Faith"

I would content that Obama is more of an atheist with islamic tendancies than a muslim. He shows distinct islamic traights and atheistic traits which are ruining are great country . FFAF 09:42, 15 January 2015 (EST)

I agree with that. Muslims dont support abortion or gay marriage like Obama does.--JoeyJ 11:41, 15 January 2015 (EST)

Ironic Misspellings

It's rather ironic that the article mocks Obama for misspelling "Respect" and "Ohio" when it spells "consensus" incorrectly in the preceding paragraph. BrodyJorgenson 18:31, 9 April 2015 (CST)

Leftists are experts in spelling the word consensus given that they so often engage in groupthink! :)Conservative 19:47, 9 April 2015 (EDT)

Proposal

I propose all the material on his pre-Presidential careers, and the two election cycles, be spun off to other or new articles, and we focus the damage he's done and legacy in two broad subsections, Domestic and Foreign policy. Rob Smith 22:25, 14 June 2015 (EDT)

Here's a problem...

This page took the "Obama is a Muslim" theme and went overboard. Now we know that line originated with Sidney Blumenthal and Hillary Clinton. That's why Obama banned Blumenthal from working in the government. I suggest culling some of it out; while I've no doubt Obama was influneced by both his father and step-father's Islamic heritage and growing up in Indonesia, using what essentially was Blumenthal's trash now not only (1) is counterproductive, and (2) makes CP look foolish while Blumenthal & Hillary skate away unscathed. There is an important lesson here. Comments? And trust me, if Hillary wins, Blumenthal will be her chief advisor for years to come. Do want those idiots dictating anymore CP content? RobS#NeverHillary 14:42, 28 June 2016 (EDT)

The line didn't originate with Blumenthal, although he contributed to it and passed on e-mails about it. But anti-Obama people were spreading the "Obama is a Muslim" thing before Blumenthal got to it. Debbie Schlussel was blogging about it before Blumenthal got his hands on it, and she claimed her article was in response to "e-mail questions". It's sort of a perfect storm of a rumor...it mixes fear of Islam with the idea that Obama is somehow "foreign" or "un-American". So I don't think it's going away. It's easier to slander somebody with made up rumors if you don't care about the facts than it is to criticize actual stuff that President Obama believes and does. So while it lowers the tone of the website, and honestly, is antithetical to what Conservapedia says it stands for, it's not going away any time soon, I don't think.--Whizkid (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2016 (EDT)

400px

It's easy to conclude Obama is a Muslim by his name. Though the narrative to hit Obama with it is first and foremost propagated by the Clintons. Possibly taking a cue from talk radio.--Jpatt 07:01, 29 June 2016 (EDT)

Some of it ought to be culled; it makes CP look stupid to march to Blumenthal & Hillary talking points. RobS#NeverHillary 08:29, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
Please see: Counterexamples to Obama being a Muslim and http://www.conservapedia.com/Obama%27s_Religion#Counterexamples_to_Obama_being_a_Muslim
By the way, many apostates (like his father) keep Muslim names out of tradition. Obama told TIME that while his father was born a Muslim, his father left Islam before he met his mother.[1]Regardless, he has been seen eating during daylight hours of Ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during Salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim--IluvAviation (talk) 21:30, 1 March 2017 (EST)


I don't believe Obama is a Muslim. The evidence does not support it and there is evidence pointing to him not being a Muslim. Conservative (talk) 09:42, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
It doesn't matter, I'm saying the amount if space given to speculation and assertion is out of balance. More importantly, Conservapedia should be more careful about taking the bait dangled by Democrat talking points and making a fool of itself. Unless you're content spinning your wheels and marginalizing yourself as extremist. RobS#NeverHillary 13:44, 29 June 2016 (EDT)

I don't agree with how Conservapedia handles the Obama/Muslim issue.Conservative (talk) 13:50, 29 June 2016 (EDT)

What difference, at this point, does it make? A sizable chunk of the population believes, right or wrong, that Obama is a secret Muslim. So it trends toward conspiracy and doesn't look flattering to the beholder. The bonus, Conservapedia draws traffic. There is much here that would upset the senses of millions. Oh and Cons, ever since the ape was shot at the Cincinnati Zoo...Rush Limbaugh has been hitting Evolution on a regular basis. Good stuff. --Jpatt 21:50, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
Jpatt, I was thinking the same thing. Obama is a lame duck. I don't think Andy would be very upset if the "Obama is a Muslim" material is stripped out of the article. On the other hand, he is very sympathetic to Islam so that should remain in the article. He is also not a friend of Israel. Conservative (talk) 22:19, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
Obama is a Muslim theme makes headlines on Drudge today [1] Americans are interested in this stuff. --Jpatt 09:32, 7 July 2016 (EDT)
He has been seen eating during daylight hours of ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim--IluvAviation (talk) 21:30, 1 March 2017 (EST)

Frank Marshall Davis

Barack Sr.'s papers were recently released. The letters cover 1958 to 1964, but "Barack Obama Sr. never mentioned his new wife and son, not even in his scholarship applications," as the New York Times puts it. On Barack Sr's student loan application, the section concerning family was left blank. He already had a wife and children back in Kenya when he married Ann Dunham, so it's possible the marriage was a sham. This article makes the case that communist writer Frank Marshall Davis was Obama's biological father. From the pictures given, the president certainly looks a whole lot more like Davis than he does like Barack Sr. None of the reasons for suspecting Davis actually nail the thing down, but it's the most plausible theory I am aware of. The article implies that it's a political cover up, but surely no one expected little Obama to go into politics when he was born. Davis was already married and single motherhood was a scandal. The sham marriage protected Barack Jr from bastard status. PeterKa (talk) 21:51, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

Birth location "reportedly"

A suspicious Hawaii "Certificate of Live Birth" (not the same as a birth certificate), with a Connecticut Social Security number (a SSN to my knowledge is always from the birth state) and airline records which seem to indicate Barry ("Barack") Obama's mother came to Hawaii three days after his birth all make the statement of his birth location suspicious at best. I believe that it is being generous to Obama to say that he was "reportedly born" there, so I don't think this word should be removed. If there is proof that he surely was born here, then sure, take it out. For now, let's not be arbitrary when it isn't clear. I apprecate your contributions, but with controversial issues like this, please provide sufficient reliable proof when making such an edit. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 16:10, 26 July 2016 (EDT)

Long form birth certificate can be found here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf. No social security number on it, because that is assigned from the SSA, not the hospital. I'm not sure where the information on the flights come from. What proof is required?

The process of concealing, concealing, concealing and then releasing something widely criticized as being inadequate creates enough doubt to let the readers decide. A pattern of liberal denial on other issues, such as Obama's Religion, undermines credibility of the liberal media as it cheerleads for Obama.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 09:24, 27 July 2016 (EDT)
The cartoon image inserted in the upper right of this talk page is actually a pretty good checklist. As far as the birth certificate issue goes, this is an certificate of live birth. As this article explains, a certificate of live birth is largely unverified by the government. It is simple a record which states a person is alive, and parent information. In many cases, this document is enough for personal identification and passport application, but it is not really verified. These can be registered after birth, so Mrs. Obama could have easily registered it after his birth in another country. Additionally, there is still question as to whether his certificate of live birth is actually genuine. [2] [3] Some in fact believe that he was first an Indonesian citizen [4] He has reported having been born in a hospital, which would have seen to getting him an official birth certificate, but yet this did not happen. And actually, he can't make up his mind which hospital he was born in since he has named two different ones. [5]
As for the airline records, apparently someone reported this discrepancy, but when officials went to look, they found that the immigration records for that week mysteriously vanished.
There are other factors worth considering, such as an article which Barack Hussein Obama published as U.S. Senate hopeful in 2004 in which he self-identified as having been born in Kenya. Newsmax has another list here, if you want to do a little further reading.
As for what proof I would like to see, I would say:
  • An authenticated Birth Certificate
  • The missing immigration records
  • The hospital records
...and any other records available which would prove this claim.
I'm not trying to attack you by saying all this, but I'm just saying that there is still significant question in this matter. --David B (TALK) 09:38, 27 July 2016 (EDT)
Also, there are sworn affidavits of Bishop Ron McRae and Kweli Shuhubia which further indicate he was born in Kenya. Kweli Shuhubia's affidavit includes partial transcript of an audio recording of Obama's grandmother stating she attended Obama's birth in Kenya. --David B (TALK) 09:46, 27 July 2016 (EDT)

David, this birther stuff is just a big steaming pile of garbage. No one believes it any more, except utter nutcases. I know you are a smart and productive person. If you have gotten caught up in this, you need to re-evaluate / recalibrate your mental processes of deciding what is true. No one, except total fruitcakes, believes any of this stuff. Absolutely convincing evidence has been out there for years by now. If you want to investigate the issue on your own, I suggest that you start with:

  • The "Barry Soetoro" nonsense. Do you see the absurdity underlying it?
  • The "E.F. Lavender" / "You've been punked" document. If you have investigated the issue, you are no doubt familiar with this.
  • The forged picture of the sign "Welcome to Kenya, birthplace of Barack Obama", along with the picture of the actual sign. (I don't remember the exact wording.) These pictures were making the rounds of the internet a few years ago. The forged one was actually uploaded to Conservapedia a few years ago, with no awareness of irony, and appeared in one of the articles. I was about to upload the correct sign, and put it next to the forged one, with a caption of "The issue of Obama's birth location inflames passions so much that people even forge pictures of signs, such as the one on the right." But, alas, more sensible heads prevailed at Conservapedia, and the whole thing was taken down before I could get to it.
  • Sherrif Arpaio's investigation. What became of that? What did WND have to say about it?
  • The disposition of case 8-cv-04083, alluded to above. It was dismissed "on the grounds that [plaintiff] lacks standing and failed to state a cognizable claim".
  • The well-financed investigation that a very wealthy person said he was conducting. What became of that? Over the last few years, this person ahs repeatedly said, when asked about it, the he doesn't want to talk about it.

David, you can do better than getting caught up in an incredibly nonsensical conspiracy theory like this. SamHB (talk) 11:36, 30 July 2016 (EDT)

You're right, there is evidence against this as well as for. It's not my intention to make a big deal about it, since it it irrelevant at this point, but there is still suspicion surrounding this. I don't have much time, but wanted to post a brief response. Since I haven't time to put my disjointed thoughts into paragraph form, here are my points:
  • Not sure what you are referring to as the "E.F. Lavender" / "You've been punked" document
I didn't expect you to know about it. It's about the weird ways these "facts" make their way into the birthers' heads. It was a photograph (cropped, but the originator didn't say that at first) that someone planted as evidence that BHO was born in Kenya. It was obviously fraudulent—it listed the birth city as a place not in Kenya at the time. (Mombassa? I don't remember the details.) It was signed by "E.F. Lavender", which was apparently an old brand of laundry detergent or something. None of that stopped the birthers from latching onto it as "evidence". The prankster then released an uncropped version of the same photograph—I believe it was laid out on a bed or something—with a sign below it saying "You've been punked!"
  • I probably know about the case 8-cv-04083, but I don't know it by the number.
It was the case involving the affidavit of a transcript of a statement from the grandmother or whatever. You can Google the case number.
  • Sherrif Arpaio's investigation ended when all the evidence became unavailable
How convenient that he was able to end his "investigation" so cleanly.
  • I hope that most people would realize that for Kenya to make a sign like that is...a stretch, at best
Yes, it's utterly incredible. But it was displayed here at Conservapedia for a while.
  • The released birth certificate contains digital layers and frames, even though it is supposedly a scanned-in document. That simply can't happen with a scanner alone. (This can be verified by view the officially published certificate, as linked to above)
Have you downloaded the alleged document from the white house source and analyzed it, or are you willing to take the word of a birther?
  • As I mentioned before, a S.S. number always comes from your birth state. Some real monkey business would be required for someone to have a Certificate of Live Birth from one state, and a S.S. number from another.
Do you know what BHO's social security number is? I believe they are confidential, even when you are President. Isn't it convenient that people can nevertheless claim that they know it and that it is fraudulent?
The indented interleaved comments in the above paragraph were written by me, SamHB. It is a common practice on wikis to use this kind of indented reply format when replying to specific points in another person's post. That's really what wiki indentation is for, and wiki users know that. SamHB (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
I'll concede in this case, but I can't agree with what the liberal media has declared about this. It is almost pointless though, since he has already gotten all he wants from the race card, and he's set for life. I will agree that the left tried to make his critics look like fools by withholding then releasing the certificate. I wasn't going to fall for it then, but now that it is out, anyone with Photoshop or Paint.NET can see that something's fishy about the "document."--David B (TALK) 13:42, 30 July 2016 (EDT)
Is it any surprise that SamHB (who actually agrees with what the liberal media says and condescends to anyone who doesn't agree with his POV - notably in calling those who legitimately question where Obama was born "birthers", "nutcases" and "fruitcakes" and calling the question itself a "nonsensical conspiracy theory" in typical liberal fashion) is yet again attempting to impose a liberal viewpoint on this website (and in this case, on both the main page and the talk page of this article) by pulling legit doubts about Obama's birthplace from the main article without justifiable reason, then also broke up the flow of DavidB4's previous post on the issue on the talk page by not only inserting his own liberal POV in between each of David's points (per this post), but not even bothering to sign his post (both actions in poor form)? Such actions as those typically smack of desperation on the part of the Obama defenders to keep their "messiah" looking squeaky-clean when plenty of evidence provided over time (including Obama's own well-documented actions) says otherwise. Northwest (talk) 07:53, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
Well, that was indeed one long sentence you've got there, 839 characters. But it can't beat my 1054 character sentence in Talk:Rugby_School. AlanE and I were joking around.
I was only commenting about the Obama birthplace issue, not about whether to keep a "messiah" looking squeaky-clean. SamHB (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
Ridicule is a form of Alinskyism (a favorite fallback of liberals when they can't refute the truth or formulate rational arguments) and only makes the one doing the ridiculing look foolish. Northwest (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
Might as well add something to the bit. I remember there being a PDF of some documentation from Kenya that actually confirmed that Obama was born in Kenya. I'll try to dig it out. Pokeria1 (talk) 11:01, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
I haven't found the PDF yet, but I think I may have found an even bigger smoking gun, something not even SamHB could possibly deny: http://thepowerhour.com/news4/obama_kenyan_birth_certificate.htm Pokeria1 (talk) 11:05, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
YES!! You found it! Congratulations. It's as I remembered it. Laid out on a towel or bedspread or whatever on a bed. I had assumed that this bit of history was long gone. But the internet is forever! The writing in this picture is hard to read; a cleaner copy may be found at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kenyacert.asp. Though that copy has Orly Taitz's (Remember her? Probably the original birther) web site superimposed on it. You can clearly see the "E.F. Lavender" name.
Whatever you may think of the political views of the Snopes people, the article makes fascinating reading. They even found the person (an Australian named David Jeffrey Bomford) whose birth certificate provided the basis for the forgery. I believe the later "You've been punked" picture came out on the long-defunct Top 10 Conservative Idiots website.
Ah, yes. Orly Taitz. Birthers. The whole thing is entertaining. That is, the fact that people still believe this stuff is entertaining. But those intelligent and sensible people at Conservapedia (meaning DavidB4 and Pokeria1) should move on. Donald Trump has. SamHB (talk) 13:04, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
Wasn't Snopes.com filled with errors, though, at least, that's what this site's article stated when it said, and I quote, "Snopes.com is a website devoted to collecting and debunking urban legends. It was started in 1997, run by husband and wife team Barbara and David Mikkelson. It is filled with numerous, intentionally inaccurate information because the Mikkelson's have no formal background or experience in investigative research."?
And honestly, why is a liberal like SamHB on a site like Conservapedia? Shouldn't there be some form of a vetting process for new members to make sure they aren't liberal? Pokeria1 (talk) 13:57, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
To me, the test of being a "conservative" or a "liberal" is a philosophy of government and how it applies to economic and social issues. The location of President Obama's birth is a fact that is proven with evidence. Your conclusion on this issue has nothing to do with whether you can be labelled as a conservative or liberal. To be fair, SamHB is not "a new member" of Conservapedia and has been around for many years. JDano (talk) 14:25, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
Maybe not, but if it walks, talks, and quacks like a duck - it's a duck. Same thing with liberals (which SamHB has shown himself to be time and again). Northwest (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2016 (EDT)

I can't speak for the photo of a supposed birth certificate. It seems a little convenient, but I won't discount it. Snopes is certainly wrong at times. Just because they put a red circle with an "X" on it next to a claim doesn't make the claim false. To unquestioningly accept this would be as much an error as to accept everything in the newspaper.
There are many reports which are hard to verify, and even more telling, the lack of many records which should exist. (For example, why does no school have a record of him attending much less graduating their institution, even though he claims he did? There are liberal institutions, so they would not attempt to harm him by burying such records.) I still maintain that the official birth certificate is its own poof of fraud. Anyone with photo editing skills can see that it is composed of multiple image layers. These layers are generated with modification of a digital image, and can never be created by scanning in a document. The "scan," therefore, is clearly more than just a scan.
Pokeria1, Conservapedia does allow liberal members, as long as they do not undermine the conservative point of view of CP. SamHB has made many helpful contributions, so I don't think it's entirely fair to question whether he should even be allowed to be here. Although I disagree with him on this, I think his suggestion still is worth listening to--move on. He's already deceived the public, trashed the country, and proven that the system has become a joke. Complaining about it now will not help, but we will need to be all the more vigilant in the future. He's proved it can be done, so who will be the next to try? --David B (TALK) 12:38, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

This one's in the can

I'm gonna start structuring this artic!e for posterity now that Obama's riding off to the rendering plant. RobS#NeverHillary 02:33, 22 November 2016 (EST)

Obama is a relatively young and healthy man who will probably do much more in his career. Look at Jimmy Carter's post-Presidency. JDano (talk) 05:28, 22 November 2016 (EST)
Yep. He started with an apology tour and ended preaching American excrptionalism in Peru the other day. I guess he has grown. RobS#NeverHillary 08:19, 22 November 2016 (EST)

As one pundit summed it up with a classic baby boomer idiom: "Obama was like a nine year bad trip on bad drugs." RobS#NeverHillary 10:24, 10 January 2017 (EST)

If he is a Muslim, he is not a very good one

He has been seen eating during daylight hours of ramadan (fourth pillar of Islam), ate pork at the White house Easter egg hunt, has not been on Hajj (Fifth pillar), has never been seen praying during salat times (Second pillar), has a pet dog (banned by Hadiths), has been seen consuming alcoholic beverages at state dinners, and said he is not a Muslim. (Violates first pillar:Shahadah. Muslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faith. Saying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate) He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or Hadiths. If he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim.--IluvAviation (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2017 (EST)

Obama's religion is self-worship. He once defined sin as, “Being out of alignment with my values.” To thine own hype be true. PeterKa (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2017 (EST)
He is at the very least a sympathizer. Don't forget, though, that it is permitted to lie to infidels to further the cause. --David B (TALK) 22:54, 1 March 2017 (EST)
Eating bacon and having a pet dog aren't exactly acceptable to further the cause. If he was a true Muslim he wouldn't eat pork out of fear because it is considered unclean. The Koran gives a short list of excuses for not fasting during Ramadan (Pregnant, menstruating...) but trying to prove one is not a Muslim is not on the list.--IluvAviation (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2017 (EST)
Yeah, and besides, considering his birth father was pretty blatantly a Marxist, it's extremely unlikely that either Barack Obama Sr. OR his son would have adhered to Islam. More likely than not, Barack Obama just cynically adopted the "religion" for votes. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:27, 2 March 2017 (EST)
If we go by Obama's memoirs, he was brought up as a non-religious Marxist, a so called "red diaper baby," and was converted to Christianity by Jeremiah Wright. After Wright criticized Obama, Obama "threw him under the bus" and prosecuted the man's daughter.[6] As I understand it, they worshiped together at the First Church of Getting Even.
As for Obama's birth father, I assume that was married party member Frank Davis. Obama Sr. already had a family back in Kenya. PeterKa (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2017 (EST)

You don't have to be a church going Muslim to be a Muslim. All you have to do is reject the idea God has partners like Jesus, and reject the notion of national sovereignty as evil, Satanic, and blasphemy. That any law or government that purports to rule over you and your Christ-rejecting brethren, is an enemy of Allah and Allah has decreed to destroy using any means necessary, including lies, deciet, and fraudulent oaths to gain their confidence. These attitudes is all it takes to be a Muslim and do Allah's will. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 22:26, 3 March 2017 (EST)

"You don't have to be a church going Muslim to be a Muslim. All you have to do is reject the idea God has partners" So what if somebody does not believe in a god or diety at all, would that make them a muslim? No, Islam has a strict set of rules (Primarily declaring that the only god is Allah and Muhammed was his messenger)--IluvAviation (talk) 15:35, 4 March 2017 (EST)
One of those strict rules is the doctrine of takfirism, or 'once a Muslim always a Muslim', with the threat of death hanging over would-be defectors. This is why so few, if any, alleged Muslim socialists and atheists publicly foreswear Islam. So yes, it is possible for a Muslim secularist, atheist, or socialist to still be considered or identified as a Muslim. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 18:17, 4 March 2017 (EST)
I'm pretty sure that if you adhere to Atheism, you automatically cut off ties to your religion just for adhering to it, whether it be Christianity or Islam. That's why I'm not so sure about whether takfirism truly applies. I know if I were a Muslim and someone did become an atheist, I'd target them all the same even when they haven't openly renounced their faith precisely because I view even becoming an atheist as meaning you gave it up regardless if it isn't explicitly stated. Pokeria1 (talk) 18:59, 4 March 2017 (EST)
No, they would not be automatically cutoff from the body of believers. First, the imams would have to investigate. Then, after being found in sin, the wayward Muslim is supposed to be admonished and given time to repent. Then finally, if they continue in sin, the execution is ordered.
However today, since bin Laden revolutionized things, the scholars and religious authorities can be by passed, and low level rank and file Muslims can expedite the whole process without consulting higher-up religious authorities. But as ever, if a Muslim socialist or atheist knows in the end he will be found guilty of sin and rejecting the truth of Islam, and knowing he's surrounded by 1.2 billion true believers, he has no interest in denying or rejecting his Muslim identity.
Furthermore, Muslims are granted license to lie and deceive non-Muslims, denying the faith to non-Muslims being an example.RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 22:50, 4 March 2017 (EST)
Yeah, I know about taqqiya, but I'm pretty sure in this particular case, even being an atheist at all, even if you still lay claim publicly that you are a muslim, would be reason enough to get your head removed. I know if it were me, I'd been muslim, and someone became an atheist even in secret, I wouldn't even care if he's still publicly a muslim, I'd still kill him under the reason of him adhering to atheism at all. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:30, 5 March 2017 (EST)
Just because somebody had a Muslim father that was barely present doesn't make them a Muslim. Remember, he was raised by his mother, who was not a Muslim. And regardless of Islamic law, one can be an ex-Muslim without going through the takfirism process: one merely has to stop all praying, stop all fasting, and live a normal secular life. Many people leave Islam without shouting from the rooftops that they are not a practicing Muslim anymore: a gallup poll showed 5% of Saudis are atheists. (Remember, prayer upon the call the prayer is mandatory in the KSA, apostacy is punishable by death. It is a dishonor to 1,441,500 atheists in the KSA some have a habit of calling Muslims in ordinance of Islamic law, when they self-admit to being atheists.) There are documented cases of Muslims converting to Christianity without going through the takfirism process. Takfirism is for if you live in an Islamic nation with an Islamic criminal code. The US does not on the preise of your argument that Obama was ever a Muslim; most American Muslims who become atheists just stop going to masjid, stop praying, stop fasting. After all, if you are an atheist, why would you testify before the congregation of your masjid that you are an atheist an face humilitaion and worse when you could just cut of all contact and move? Does the atheist who quietly leaves their masjid qualify as "still a Muslim" to you?--IluvAviation (talk) 19:45, 6 March 2017 (EST)

Muslims don't go to churches. They go to mosques. :) I think all the wrangling about Obama's religion will largely cease once the dust settles about the fate of ObamaCare. I think the public's interest in Obama will wane if large changes happen to ObamaCare or it its repealed and replaced.

But I could be wrong. Liberals are often more active in politics than conservatives and maybe Obama will still crave the power/spotlight since he is a egotist/narcissist and take actions to retain the spotlight. Conservative (talk) 16:13, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Obama, Barack. "My Spiritual Journey", TIME, October 16, 2006. Retrieved on September 26, 2008. “My father was almost entirely absent from my childhood, having been divorced from my mother when I was 2 years old; in any event, although my father had been raised a Muslim, by the time he met my mother he was a confirmed atheist, thinking religion to be so much superstition.” 

Title

Why is the page title "Barack Hussein Obama" when even George W. Bush's page title is just "George W. Bush"

My best explanation is that his middle name is known or used, like how our page title for L. Frank Baum isn't Lyman F. Baum or L. F. Baum because that's what he was called. By the way, please try to sign your comments with the signature tool above.--Abcqwe (talk) 20:05, 31 March 2017 (EDT)
Same reason Hilary Rodham Clinton is named what it is - so CP doesn't have to compete with Wikipedia for results. I'm for Barack Hussein "Piece o' Crap" Obama as more befitting his legacy, however. RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 20:48, 31 March 2017 (EDT)

Yup, he's gay

Now that Obama is no longer president, we can finally say the obvious. This author is no birther or conspiracy theorist. He wrote a Pulitzer-prize winning MLK bio: "New Biography: Young Obama ‘Considered Gayness’." PeterKa (talk) 10:19, 27 April 2017 (EDT)

Take a look at the picture of Obama and Branson and tell me they aren't gay:[7] PeterKa (talk) 22:56, 27 April 2017 (EDT)
I suspect in coming months as we get more tell-books, more will come out. It's never been a secret in Chicago or Washington. What prevents both of them. Michael Michelle and Barack from coming out is how the public will react. No problem. Let's play along. Wait and see. If the two wish to continue being ashamed of themselves, leave them alone. RobSThe coup plotters won, for now 01:10, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
Cool story, Rob. Thanks to Trump, the Obamas' stock is so high with liberals, they could both come out as pan-galactic reptilian shapeshifters and still receive ticker tape parades in every major east coast and west coast city.
Hell, even Dubya's looking good in comparison to the straw-thatched self-publicist you voted for in November. Buckle up for the mid-terms, my man. It's not going to be pretty. JohnZ (talk) 15:55, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
An Obama speech is worth more than a Clinton speech-he's lucky she lost, he'd be picking up cans right now for a living. Midterms are a long long way off. Trump critics take what he say's literally but not seriously; Trump supporters take him seriously but not literally. Never mind tho, he's already a captive of the Deep State. RobSThe coup plotters won, for now 17:42, 28 April 2017 (EDT)
Yeah, JohnZ, it won't be pretty, alright - for the Democrats, as their supporters' (the liberal media, Hollywood celebs, Antifa, etc.) current antics end up losing them even more governorships, Congress and Senate seats, mayors' offices, etc. to the GOP. Northwest (talk) 18:48, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

Obama is not some evil genius who is hiding being a homosexual. At best, he is a bisexual. Last time I checked, he is married with two children.Conservative (talk) 18:46, 25 November 2017 (EST)

You need to check closer. The Obama's aren't just the first Black First Family, their the first gay married First Family and gay adopted First kids. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 04:36, 26 November 2017 (EST)
To be fair, Conservative, Elton John was married to a woman and had kids with her once, yet he most certainly was gay, so him being married and having children isn't necessarily something that would rule him out as being gay. Pokeria1 (talk) 06:34, 26 November 2017 (EST)
Those kids aren't sisters. Look closely. Their skin tones don't match and the shape of their heads is entirely different. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:38, 26 November 2017 (EST)
One of the many limitations of the internet is the difficulty in conveying sarcasm or satire unambiguously in text form; of course this is not a new problem, as Jonathan Swift well knew. So I'm not clear as to whether you consider this tale a lighthearted bit of satire that no one should take seriously, like the leftists who claim that Ted Cruz was the Zodiac Killer despite his being born after the murders, or whether this is a sincere belief of yours, or whether you believe that this is a narrative that is useful to promulgate in retaliation for narratives promulgated against others, e.g. "(y)ou backoff your scandalmongering nonsense and I'll backoff mine" as you said in the Pizzagate discussion. I realize that explaining a joke usually destroys it, and I wouldn't normally step on another person's joke, but it does seem that an admin here has taken your argument at face value and may suffer embarrassment as a result. On the other hand, it may be I who should be embarrassed, mistaking genuine sentiment for sarcasm or tactical scandalmongering nonsense.--Brossa (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2017 (EST)
These are the letters Obama wrote to his college girlfriend.[8]
Obama is not an evil genius who cleverly covered up being a homosexual. See also: Fallacy of exclusion Obama's bio suggests someone who was arrogant, corrupt and lacked competence for the office of the presidency. Not some evil genius.
If you read the Conservapedia's homosexuality article you will see that a person's sexual behavior is not caste in stone. Hence, the existence of bisexuals and ex-homosexuals. Conservative (talk) 09:46, 26 November 2017 (EST)
Okay, fair enough. Still... considering his radical left-leaning views, I'm doubtful he's going to be an ex-homosexual (IF he's gay anyways) in any case, being too far to the left to even consider renouncing it. Pokeria1 (talk) 10:01, 26 November 2017 (EST)

Elton John said he was a bisexual (Bisexual refers to a person with both heterosexual and homosexual desires.).[9] He did not say he was a homosexual who exclusively had sex with males.Conservative (talk)

Sheila Miyoshi Jager

Here's a picture of the live-in girlfriend Obama broke up with because a white gal would hold him back politically: [10]. She's a bit on the manly side, as you might expect.
Based on what Jager has to say, we can now nail down exactly when Obama got on the road to the White House: "I remember very clearly when this transformation happened, and I remember very specifically that by 1987, about a year into our relationship, he already had his sights on becoming president."[11] This was when he was a community organizer in Chicago. It was also right around the time Obama joined Wright's church, which makes it less likely that he joined for religious reasons. He entered Harvard in 1988. Dreams from My Father came out in 1995 and is thus a campaign bio in this timeline. Dreams doesn't mention Jager or O's presidential ambitions. PeterKa (talk) 20:58, 5 May 2017 (EDT)

Suggesting addition of Arabic rendering بارك حسین اوباما per 2009 suggestion long forgotten

This idea was pitched by another editor in 2009, but they had an awkward GoogleTranslate attempt at a phonetic rendering. I know the script and also used the standardized Arabic spellings for the first two names, and the result is: بارك حسین اوباما

So revisiting a 9 year old issue, but are folks interested in including the Arabic spelling of his name in the lead? DavidLReyes (talk) 22:12, 2 April 2018 (EDT)

Poll

Yes

No

Irrelevant stupid comments

Arabic Wikipedia gives "Barack Obama" as باراك أوباما and "Barack Hussein Obama, Jr." as باراك حسين أوباما الابن . See here. PeterKa (talk) 01:59, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

Right, I'm just saying that for consistency our Arabic rendering should be identical to the English rendering of our title, so include the حسین (H-S-Y-N) that we render as Hussein in our current English title. Your points are totally valid and our spellings agree, I'm just saying if we have first-middle-last (no Jr) in the Englis title, Arabic rendering should be the same. DavidLReyes (talk) 02:20, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
Two days and two votes. Looks like we have an emerging consensus. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 09:54, 4 April 2018 (EDT)


I'm not going to vote "no" outright (yet), but what is the point of doing this? It seems a little low to translate his Engl(ish) name into Arabic to prove a point. Besides, aren't people saying that his name was originally "Barry Soetoro"? I agree that he probably was (by their definition, a bad) Muslim, but I don't really see the profit in doing this. --David B (TALK) 11:59, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

Basically, we need to rekindle interest in this page before it dies on the vine. Stir the pot, so to speak. With 3.5 million hits, it's long been a marquis attraction to CP. We're not saying he's Arab or Muslim, only that he's well known and respected in that part of the world. If one did a poll, you'd probably discover more Arabs think he's Muslim than rednecks do. We could put Nixon's name in Chinese too, since he's the one who sold us out to China. But the Nixon page never had the interest, pro or con, that this page is known for. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:24, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

I was considering voting "no" when I first saw this, but I wanted to see what others thought. I like the fact that this page might get some publicity if we do this, but at the same time, I also don't see how this helps the article. It might look like trolling, and readers may choose not to read beyond the first paragraph after seeing it. Maybe I'm being too negative, but I'm not convinced it will help the article. --1990'sguy (talk) 14:52, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

So it's a publicity stunt? I appreciate the intent, but I'm going put my vote on "no." Let's just focus on offering good articles on everything we can, rather than trying to drum up attention for one good article. He may have been "one big awful mistake America," but he's gone now, and I think it better to focus on both current and timeless issues instead. --David B (TALK) 15:50, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
The box clearly states he is said to have converted to Christianity. We simply need to add a section on how he has not been a friend to Israel and has facilitated a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He's very popular in the Middle East with his support for the oxymoronic "moderate rebels". Between his " Austrian language" and "Polish death camp" comments there is no reason to hold to the kenard that Obama identifies as a Westerner or with Western civilization. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:30, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
I agree, his claim at being Christian was just a ploy to get more votes. He was an enemy of Israel, and a friend of all their enemies. However, his legal name is just that. Translating or transliterating it into Arabic doesn't really help anyone, nor will it be persuasive to critics. --David B (TALK) 17:05, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
Given the subject, I think we'd be hard-pressed to even be capable of a "low blow" relative to the subject... That said, even if it is a bit of a "stunt", the people it would turn off are not our supporters anyway, so I don't mind tweaking the nose of liberal "tourists" who come here to gape. Plus it's a shout-out to our readership who have grave concerns about Obama's divided loyalties. I would also be in favor of including his earlier "Barry Soetero" name since it also highlights the suspicious malleability of his "marketing". DavidLReyes (talk) 21:33, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
That's right. Diversity is our strength. It's multicultural and inclusive. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:45, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
If we want to imply that Obama is from Kenya, what about Swahili? Kenya uses English and Swahili, but both languages use the Latin alphabet. So a personal name like Obama is written the same way in Swahili. PeterKa (talk) 13:18, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
It's not an effort to rekindle the birther movement. It's more paying homage to the Muslim hordes he's unleashed on Europe and Western civilization. For example, we're not proposing to insert the Persian spelling of his name despite his efforts to aid a nuclearized Iran. Or a Pakistani or Indonesian spelling which he is more closely identified with. Or a Turkish spelling, which also is closely associated with his presidential legacy. An Arab spelling pays homage to his anti-Isreali constituent base. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:55, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
The problem is that nobody is going to know that it's an illustration of Obama's leftist immigration policy -- they're all going to think that we're promoting the "birther" theory. If we're going to do this, we should at least make our intentions clear, but I don't see how we can do that in a consise way and without distracting from the rest of the article. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:33, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
On the face of it, yes. In context, no. No one ever alleged he's Arab. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:29, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
True, but most ordinary people think of Arabs and the Arabic language as synonymous with Islam, so to them, seeing Arabic, they'll think "Islam." --1990'sguy (talk) 22:31, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
We are an educational resource, after all. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:38, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
We are an educational resource, which is why I don't think this is appropriate. He is not Arab, so I see no good reason to translate his name into Arabic. I understand that this is an attempt to speak to his religion, and favoritism. I'm not opposed to that idea whatsoever. However, doing this serves no educational purpose. Let the article speak for itself, and let the readers look at the facts. If you want to write out his name in his native African dialect, feel free. However, you wouldn't find something like this Arabic translation in Britannica, and it doesn't belong here either. I'm happy to have this article discussing his religious preferences--that's not that at all which I object to. --David B (TALK) 00:30, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
Britannica? Britannica called Barack Obama an "organizer" of Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March for a decade - up until June of 2008 when Obama won the primaries but before the election. This is a matter of record. Britannica is hardly a source on Obama's life. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:48, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Pity the poor Democrats

They are now in the position of defending the most corrupt President before or since Richard Nixon, or arguing he was too stupid and naive to see the criminal conduct of his underlings. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:36, 18 May 2018 (EDT)

This page is highly disorganized

Considering it's one of the the top five most popular, it needs a makeover.RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:00, 20 November 2018 (EST)

Obama's father

Re this continuing controversy. A quick search of ancestry.com reveals that his father was indeed resident in Honolulu in 1961:

Name: Barack H Obama
[Barack Hussein Obama Sr]
Residence Year: 1961
Street address: R625 11th Av
Residence Place: Honolulu , Hawaii
Occupation: Student
Publication Title: Polk's Directory of City and County of Honolulu, 1961

There must also be other documentation relating to Barack Obama senior's time in Hawaii as a student and the scholarship that he received from the Kenyan government. In addition there is a mass of biographical information readily available. Timber (talk) 09:45, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

Hah! ancestry.com also says Michelle Obama was born female. And what about when John Brennan hacked into Obama's passport files at the State Department? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 09:49, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
What RobS has this to do with anything: "ancestry.com also says Michelle Obama was born female"??? Can you please clarify. The point that I raise relates to Obama senior.
Obama junior's birth was announced in the local Honolulu newspapers. See, for example, "OBAMA'S BOYHOOD HOMES IN HAWAII: Obama's Hawaii boyhood homes drawing gawkers". Honolulu AdvertiserPosted on: Sunday, November 9, 2008. Timber (talk) 10:32, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Technically, that article was dated on 2008, so it never actually reported on his birth. Maybe if you give an archived copy of the local newspapers dating back to the 1960s reporting on his birth, I MIGHT believe you there. Pokeria1 (talk) 10:41, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Was the 2008 article before or after John Brennan hacked into the State department computer system to alter Obama's name and social security number? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:19, 20 April 2019 (EDT) An employee of Brennan. This has nothing to with the topic. More red herrings. You might check the facts. Timber (talk) 16:43, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Obama's official government records were tampered with. That's a fact, according to CNN. Leaving aside CNN's credibility problems for the moment, Brennan was just referred for criminal investigation regarding other matters he may or may not have done on behalf of Barack Obama.
Frankly, I don't know what we are arguing about. You seem to have only three discredited sources for whatever it is you are trying to do: (1) Barack Obama; (2) John Brennan; and (3) mainstream media. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:08, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Thanks Pokeria1. There is an image on the page (a little hard to read) of the 1961 report–and the source is quoting from its own archive. See also for the Honolulu Advertiser and Honolulu Star Bulletin. There are other sources confirming Obama Senior's residence in Hawaii in 1961 as a student, if this doesn't convince you. Finally there is the Hawaii Government site. Timber (talk) 12:34, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Duh, even if he was resident, doesn't mean he's Obama's father, duh. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:40, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

Evidence RobS? So try checking his mother's place of residence. Real research is preferable. Timber (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

It doesn't mean anything. Obama never held a passport until 2004 when he was elected to the Senate, yet he traveled to Pakistan in 1981 under an alias with a false Social Security number. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:12, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
RobS you constantly stray from the topic, which relates to the year 1961. This suggests to me that you are deliberately avoiding dealing with the facts. Did you look at the birth announcements and the evidence on the Government of Hawaii's web page? Timber (talk) 14:22, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
So what about 1961? Frank Marshall Davis was in Honolulu in 1961. As to Ann Dunham and Obama Sr., we have a trail littered with doctored evidence. Obama's not alone; we'll never know who his idol Joseph Stalin's real father was as well. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:55, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Clearly RobS you have a closed mind. Timber (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Not really; I got Obama's paternity narrowed down to two suspects. Davis & Obama Sr. Birthers tend to think Obama Sr. was his real father, whereas Frank Marshall Davis makes a stronger case for U.S. citizenship. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:12, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

Clearly this article needs to be revised. RobS has not produced one piece of evidence to support his position. Perhaps he might try checking the Hawaiian newspapers, or the Hawaiian government web site. Timber (talk) 16:43, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

No offense, but saying you should check the Hawaiian government web site for information is the same thing as claiming that official Vietcong press releases are to be counted to prove or disprove massacres as a student radical claimed back in the Vietnam War, so you really need to take its statements with a grain of salt. And besides, I definitely recall seeing a PDF once showing Barack Obama's birth certificate as Kenyan. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:02, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
EDIT: Found this, it at least looks like the PDF I stumbled upon: http://www.infiniteunknown.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/barack-obama-kenyan-birth-certificate.jpg Pokeria1 (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
These are all moot points. The real question is whether President and First Ladyboy Buttigieg will be the first gay married couple in the White House. Evidence suggests more DNC/liberal media fake news. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:26, 20 April 2019 (EDT) Excellent parody. Timber (talk) 18:05, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
What is the source of this second birth certificate? Personally I'd trust the State of Hawaii, Department of Health Vital Records before a dubious source like www.obamanotqualified.com. What evidence is there that it's not a forgery? Timber (talk) 17:49, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
What exactly are you arguing? That Obama's not gay? That Frank Marshall Daivis is not his real father? That Obama's records have not been tampered with?
Stop. Answer directly. Is the CNN article that says Obama's official government records were tampered with by a company headed by John Brennan credible or not? We then can take it from there. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:10, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
Yeah, and besides, there's certainly less evidence that the Kenyan birth certificate is forged than the Hawaiian one was, especially when Sheriff Joe Arpaio did an investigation that revealed that the "scanned certificate of live birth" the latter represented had multiple layers, meaning it was digitally manufactured. Pokeria1 (talk) 18:17, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

See [12] and from President Trump [13] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timber (talk)

Yeah, sorry, don't buy it. If his Hawaiian birth certificate were not fake, please explain why Sheriff Arpaio and his legal experts discovered many discrepencies [sp?] in the certificate that pointed to it being doctored, as shown here? And besides, that's not the same birth certificate as the one Malik posited. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

Pokeria1 didn't you not read the evidence? "Maybe if you give an archived copy of the local newspapers dating back to the 1960s reporting on his birth, I MIGHT believe you there". Or looked carefully at the 2008 report, which is based on the paper's own archive.

The Sheriff has a dubious reputation (was convicted for a crime); but more importantly, do you have any information about the forensic experts, from around the world, that the sheriff claimed to have consulted? Timber (talk) 08:15, 21 April 2019 (EDT) An encyclopaedia article should not be based on unsubstantiated gossip. Timber (talk) 08:21, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

First of all, we don't know if the "archived newspapers" were even real, especially not when John Brennan was established to have tampered with official government records. For all we know, the records were hacked and had the articles replaced indicating Obama was born there, similar to Stalin's use of photoshop for lack of a better term. Second of all, even if it actually were true that Obama was born in Hawaii, that does NOT confirm that Obama Sr. was his dad. There's also plenty of evidence to suggest that Frank Marshall Davis is his father as well. Third of all, you are aware that Joe Arpaio's "crime" was more like trumped up charges by the Obama administration in an attempt to silence him, right? He did the same thing with Dinesh D'Souza earlier. And as far as the forensic experts, there's actual video of him speaking about the discrepencies that his team discovered online, even showing exactly HOW it was forged. Pokeria1 (talk) 08:50, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
The video doe not name these so-called experts and it sounds more like propaganda. One dubious source is not acceptable. As noted earlier it wasn't Brennan who was guilty of hacking. By supporting these lies you are helping the enemies of American democracy–especially Putin. Timber (talk) 09:17, 21 April 2019 (EDT) See also Fake News. Timber (talk) 09:28, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
Of coarse Brennan wasn't found guilty, cause a key witness and whistleblower was found dead of a gunshot wound two weeks later. Are we suppose to sweep all this under the rug and go with DNC/MSM fake news, again? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:09, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
The fact that they're even SHOWING the documents at ALL, and showcasing WHERE there are multiple layers (look at the blue bordered boxes, they're there for a reason) should be sufficient of a source as any (and besides, that video came from the liberal USA Today, so it's not like it's particularly conservative-based, meaning that if anything it's even MORE unbiased). Also, I'm not helping Putin at all. Actually, if anything, posting the lies about Obama's birth in Hawaii is helping Putin, as is posting lies about Hillary winning the election (what, you think that Putin elected Trump? Absolutely not! Actually, think critically: Why would Putin back Donald Trump when he's got an even bigger ally in taking down America with Hillary, especially with the Uranium stuff). And let's not forget that Obama was already selling out to Putin's Russia since 2012 with his infamous "one last election" claim. Pokeria1 (talk) 09:52, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

Sources

@Timber: Once again, don't make massive changes like what you just did on this page without the agreement of long-standing editors. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:31, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

  • Agreed. Sourced material was removed. It should at a minimum have gone into subpages, like Early Life of Barack Obama. We should give him a few hours to fix it before a mass revert. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:34, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
1990'sguy, "massive" is an exaggeration. What I removed was off topic and not consistent with Conservapedia's Commandments: "Everything you post must be true and verifiable". Some Conservapedia editors use dubious sources and dismiss anything that they disagree with as forgery. The views of an obscure 85 year old sheriff is deemed, for example. more trustworthy than civil servants. What do the real forensic experts say?The reliance on gossip and gutter journalism is unbecoming–the idea that Michelle Obama is a man is lavatory wall graffiti. Again innuendo and gossip trumps the "true and verifiable".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timber (talk)
Is the Washington Post a dubious source? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:42, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
Let's continue this discussion on sourcing (rather than specific subject material). Timber, would you agree that there's is a difference in the reliability of source (say, WaPo, NYT, CNN, etc.) that omits information versus deliberate misreporting of facts? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:47, 21 April 2019 (EDT)


Judgment very harsh

The judgment of Barack Obama in this article is very harsh. It says he is "arguably the worst president in U.S. history" but does not refer to a website, connected with ABC news, that says that 31% of Americans said he was the greatest president in their lifetime. Carltonio (talk) 10:36, 9 December 2019 (EST)

Why would that be surprising? 100% of Americans thought George Washington was the greatest president in their lifetime in 1800; 50% of Americans thought Lincoln was the worst president in 1865; 60% though FDR was greatest president in 1945; 62% thougth Nixon was the greatest president in 1972; big deal. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:09, 9 December 2019 (EST)

Know history better

I suggest who ever typed this article gets to know U.S. history better. It says that Obama is "arguably the worst president in U.S. history" but would one really rank him as worse than Lyndon Johnson or James Buchanan? Carltonio (talk) 11:52, 28 May 2020 (EDT)

Given what's known of Obamagate, he ranks below Nixon. And he set back race relations for decades, not to mention that he destroyed the Democrat party. RobSLive Free or Die 11:56, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
Oh, let's not forget he resurrected Black African slavery in Libya. RobSLive Free or Die 11:57, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
Or his responsibility for the European immigrant rape crisis that is destroying feminism and women's rights in Europe. RobSLive Free or Die 11:58, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
Don't forget the $200 billion he gave to the Iranians.Bytemsbu (talk) 12:31, 28 May 2020 (EDT)
Let's be clear on that - the Iranian terrorist regime; Iranians per see are good people. RobSLive Free or Die 13:02, 28 May 2020 (EDT)

Suggestion

RobSmith suggests we add "Despite his personal involvement, Obama was not impeached for Spygate crimes after leaving office", though he can't access CP right now to recommend a good place to put it. Does anyone have any suggestions? —LTMay D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well! Saturday, 16:50, 13 February 2021 (EST)

Edit warring and the vulgar picture of Michelle Obama

I believe that at least three people have objected to this picture, including the founder of Conservapedia. There has been no discussion of this here before the reverts. Posting it is against Christian family values, and belongs to the world of teenage lavatory wall graffiti (see also). But perhaps I'm a prude? --Jackin the box (talk) 13:37, April 18, 2022 (EDT)

Pehaps you're a homophobe. RobSLet's Go Brandon! 13:57, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
Don't be so coy, User talk:RobSmith, the picture is making smutty fun of Michelle Obama. To visually suggest, with a doctored picture, that a woman has a penis is topical of the dirty minds of schoolboys. I accept all of God's creation, including those born into the wrong body. I clearly have a distorted picture of what is conservative, and Christian. --Jackin the box (talk) 15:03, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
Do you dispute the there's consensus to remove the picture, including editor Aschlafly? --Jackin the box (talk) 15:09, April 18, 2022 (EDT)
The picture is from a Hollywood awards ceremony or something. Why don't you take up something useful, like debunking the fake J6 insurrection or Trump-Russia conspiracy theory. Honestly, I don't have time for kinda nonsense. RobSLet's Go Brandon! 15:14, April 18, 2022 (EDT)

Conservapedia continues to shoot itself in the foot, by undermining its own professed values and charter. --Jackin the box (talk) 15:35, April 18, 2022 (EDT)

Question

Didn't User:Conservative add this edit:

“ Benito Mussolini defined fascism as the wedding of state and corporate powers. Accordingly, trend forecaster Gerald Celente labels Obama's corporate bailouts as being "fascism light" in nature. ”

Hasn't User:Conservative spammed ad hominem attacks against another editor for years for saying the same thing?RobSZelensky Must Go! 19:35, March 17, 2025 (EDT)