Difference between revisions of "Talk:Barack Hussein Obama"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by Warder (Talk) to last version by Ed Poor)
(Question)
 
(968 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
<br />
 
<br />
  
== Trip to Canada ==
+
==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. 
  
Obama's first foreign trip as President of the United States occured yesterday, to Canada.
+
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.
  
Most telling, he declared "I love this country [Canada]" - has he ever even uttered such words about America?
+
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)
  
: *sigh* [http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama-loves-america-no-really/ yes, yes he has] --[[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 17:40, 20 February 2009 (EST)
+
::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)
  
== Demanding Major Change ==
+
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)
  
I'm not well educated on Obama enough to write an article on him, and even if I did I would not know where to start, but come on! Someone step up to the plate and correct this article. We atleast need a rewrite that presents a case for him being a christian. It can include all the Rev. Wright stuff you want, but if Conservapedia wants to become "The trustworthy encyclopedia" it has to convey both sides.
+
== "Faith" ==
  
As a conservapedian, I don't like where this site is going. When writing articles, we can have conservative viewpoints, just not conservative crusades.
+
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)
  
: It's remarkable how people who spell Christian with a small "c" want to insist that Obama is somehow a Christian.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:37, 5 January 2009 (EST)
+
: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)
:: Mr. Schlafly, how that makes someone less christian then somebody else is beyond me.  Petty remarks like that does not help conservapedia's image at all[[User:Skwisgaar|Skwisgaar]] 11:52, 18 February 2009 (EST)
+
:::Reminiscent of those who assert the title of catholic with a small c, which in fact means something wholly other than a Catholic (i.e., a Roman Catholic) with a large C. (All Christians are in fact catholic with a small c if I understand it's fairly broad meaning.) --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 23:42, 5 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
: I don't think you can "demand" anything here. This is not a place where you can get what you want with the well-worn liberal tactic of stamping your feet and throwing a tantrum.
+
==Proposal==
: If you have proof that Obama is a Christian, then let us see it. As far as I can tell, he is completely uninterested in Christian fellowship of any kind, which to me is very telling.
+
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)
: It is easy to talk the talk. As the Lord himself said:
+
: '''Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'''' (Matthew 7:22-23)
+
: When and if Barack Hussein Obama shows some evidence of having been washed clean in the blood of Christ, then we can talk. I'm not holding my breath. --[[User:DavidS|DavidS]] 08:34, 6 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
::DeanS, you have proof, it's been shown to you multiple times. All the people seem to be interested here is raising a conspiracy theory. They are so set in their ways that arguing against them will yield no results. That's the whole thing about conspiracy theorists: it doesn't matter what proof you show or how complete it is, they will find some hole, real or imagined, and fill it in with whatever belief they hold to actually add strength to their theories. A quick review of the page reveals 3 telling conspiracy theories that are held in belief by the people who hold power on this website: 1) That Obama is a Muslim (he isn't) 2) That Obama wasn't born in Hawaii (He was), and 3) That the majority of Obama's campaign contributions came from anonymous donors (they didn't). That's why this page has been locked from editing, because it has become a war zone and is unlikely to change if it was unlocked. The only solution at this point is to try and gleam what facts you can from this article, and do your own independent research for more facts concerning Obama. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 09:14, 6 January 2009 (EST)
+
==Here's a problem...==
::: First of all, I'm David, not Dean. Secondly, Obama certainly doesn't ''act'' like any sort of Christian I care to know: he supports [[abortion]], he is a radical [[socialist]] (possibly a [[Communist]]), and he tells falsehoods. I don't know if he is a Muslim or not, but it seems quite likely, and the page has a lot of evidence showing that he is. --[[User:DavidS|DavidS]] 11:44, 6 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
::::First, my apologies on the name. Secondly, I'm not claiming that Obama is a good Christian, just that he most certainly is not Muslim. The evidence on this page, many of which are blatant falsehoods, are hardly conclusive proof of anything. I have no doubt that if I held any user here under the same scrutiny that Obama has, I could gather enough "evidence" to make a case that they are any religion I choose them to be. Thirdly, just because he may not be the type of christian you want to know doesn't make him not christian. There are many Christians that I [[Ku Klux Klan|don't care to know]]. Does that make them not Christian?--[[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 12:13, 6 January 2009 (EST)
+
: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)
  
::::: Islam is a religion trained to not be noticed, it encourages Muslims to remain hidden, any evidence that Obama isn't Muslim is denied by the one fact that Islam is a religion designed to remain hidden until the moment is right to strike. Recent "negotiations" with the Middle East prove this! --[[User:Deadpool]] (EST)
+
::
 +
[[File:File:Dollard why believe Obama.png|400px]]
  
:::::: Even if he is a muslim ,(which i am sure he is not), how does that change anything. Are you suggesting that everyone who is muslim is an amoral terrorist with an agenda to kill all christians and destroy our family values? Are you suggesting that every single muslim follows the tenets unfailingly? Even the most devoted christians i have met follow all of the tenets. A person is a person, religion may play a part in their every day life, but the amount of people willing to die or kill for it is very fewI met the now-president myself onceHe was a good man who loved his family and his country, more so than many people I have met, liberals AND conservatives. Even though I voted for McCain, he seemed like a good candidate for president. [[User:Skwisgaar|Skwisgaar]] 11:51, 18 February 2009 (EST)
+
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 traditionObama 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)
  
== Obama's Atheism ==
 
  
I know it is a popular view on this site that Obama is a Muslim, but has anyone considered the possibility that his apparent lack of religious devotion indicates instead that he is an atheist? In an article about Obama on mensvogue.com, it is noted that "Though Obama had long been skeptical of organized religion, he gradually came to embrace it "as a choice, not an epiphany."<ref>http://www.mensvogue.com/business/politics/feature/articles/2006/09/11/barack_obama</ref> It is frequently observed on Conservapedia that his claims of religious activity may be self-serving; could they not be an attempt to hide his atheism instead of his Islamic beliefs? After all, Ron Reagan, Jr. once remarked that nobody ever elects atheists.
+
::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)
  
In addition, Conservapedia has also pointed out on numerous occasions that atheists are strongly inclined to dislike America. Is it also not possible that Obama's pro-Islamic behavior is not a series of Freudian slips, but rather a manifestation of his liberal dislike for America?
+
: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)
  
Just some interesting points to consider. Perhaps we could open this up for discussion. --[[User:Economist|Economist]] 18:30, 6 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::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)
  
== Obama Arab-American ==
+
::::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)
  
This article should, at some point, actually say that Obama is African-American, making him the first black president.  If you really want to leave room for speculation about Warren G. Harding's ancestry, you could write "first openly black president" or something.  But Obama's blackness is clearly a large part of his personal and political identity, and is probably going to be remembered as one of the most historically significant aspects of this election.  An article on Barack Obama should contain a direct statement of this information, period.
+
== Frank Marshall Davis ==
  
The editors should also consider putting that information in the first paragraph. I understand that there is no established rule about the ordering of information in a Conservapedia article. However, an uneducated reader looking at this article would learn how long his campaign was before learning that he is the first black president, which doesn't make much sense to me. [[User:Cb201|Cb201]] 16:20, 9 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
 +
== Birth location "reportedly" ==
  
There is much distortion in the media about Obama being African-American. '''Obama is actually Arab-American''', and I agree that this page should reflect his race.
+
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)
  
Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya, his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro). --[[User:Cwcopela|Cwcopela]] 14:11, 19 January 2009 (EST)
+
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?
  
:Does it really matter? It's not the technicalities that define what race Americans perceive Obama as - He looks more black, than white and arabic and that's how people will perceive him - They won't perceive him as another rich religious white guy or as an arab because of technicalities like that. --[[User:Atheuz|Atheuz]]
+
: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)
  
:*So, perceptions matter above facts? That is typical of [[liberal]] thinking, you know. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 16:06, 19 January 2009 (EST)
+
::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.
  
:Wait, by your own admission Obama is half-Caucasian. Shouldn't we say "first president with significantly ethnic roots" or something (not as politically correct, of course)? [[User:T2master|T2master]] 19:30, 31 January 2009 (EST)
+
::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.
  
== Small comments ==
+
::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)
  
Hello. Would it be appropriate to create a "family" section in this biography, it seems rather lacking on this point? For the rest it seems very informative, but rather cluttered. Would it be more logical to use a chronological build-up for this biography, such as placing the parts relating to his presidency more to the end of the biography, and his earlier endeavors to the front? Perhaps it would help if the contents table was moved up, at least to end up higher than the first muslim president bit? Let's hope I'm not asking any all-too-stupid questions! ;-) Regards, [[User:AVanbeek|AVanbeek]] 22:51, 12 January 2009 (EST)
+
::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)
  
: I don't see any of your suggestions as an improvementObama's presidential ambition predates the other items you mention, and his personal beliefs are the most significantEncylopedias, like newspapers, prioritize presentation based on significance.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:59, 12 January 2009 (EST)
+
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" nonsenseDo 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 articlesI 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)
  
:: Shall I go ahead then, and erase "Family" Sections on George W. Bush and McCain's articles? Their great accomplishments surely predate those insignificant sections. [[User:AMurdoc|AMurdoc]] 13:29, 15 January 2009 (EST)
+
: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:
:::Why not go ahead and make some positive contributions to this encyclopaedia by creating wanted articles, rather than attempting to be satirical? [[User:MikeSalter|MikeSalter]] 14:18, 15 January 2009 (EST)
+
:*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?
  
I'd also note that Michelle is refered to by her maiden name in the info box. Checking the previous Presidents, their wives are referenced in First Last or First Maiden Last (Laura Bush and Hillary Rodham Clinton). Any reason not to have Michelle Obama or Michelle Robinson Obama? Is there some dispute about her legal name? As her name has changed in the popular view and the law, this information would appear to be just wrong.
+
:::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)
  
== Lincoln's Bible? ==
+
: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)
  
Fox News is reporting that Obama will use the Lincoln Bible to be sworn in <ref>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/23/obama-sworn-using-lincoln-bible/</ref>. I think it's fairly safe to say that it will not be a koran. I also think it is safe to say that this is exactly the kind of trickery a manchurian muslim would use. Is it worth a mention in the "likely muslim" section?
+
:::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)
  
[[User:CWood|CWood]] 11:01, 15 January 2009 (EST)
+
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 />
 +
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 agree, it is safe to say it will not be a Koran. I think i'ts also safe to say this is exactly the kind of "trickery" a Christian would use. Is it worth a mention in the "likely Christian" section? oh wait... [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 11:59, 15 January 2009 (EST)
+
==This one's in the can==
: So Obama is damned if he does use a Bible, and damned if he doesn'tSeems a bit unreasonable. None of those other candidates were ever accused of being "Manchurian Muslims" just because they DID use a Bible to get sworn in.  Then again, none of those other candidates had brown skin and a funny name, right? [[User:Cb201|Cb201]] 12:55, 16 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
:::Typical [[liberal]] [[race baiting]]... How about you come up with evidence rather than allegations? [[User:CWood|CWood]] 16:47, 18 January 2009 (EST)
+
:Obama is a relatively young and healthy man who will probably do much more in his careerLook at Jimmy Carter's post-Presidency. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 05:28, 22 November 2016 (EST)
::None of the other candidates hid from questions about their past, it's Obama's own fault. Nobody ever said his name was funny except Obama. The brown skin comment is over the top racist ploy. You know very well that there are more respected, patriotic, qualified 'brown skin' people that are deserving of presidency, Obama isn't one of them. FYI- slanderous allegations are deserving of a permanent block here. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:03, 16 January 2009 (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)
:::How about slanderous allegations that a man is lying to the country about his religion?  Do those count?
+
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)
  
:::I'm not accusing anyone of racism per se.  I'm just pointing out that no other presidential candidate has ever had to prove to the country that he is not a Muslim.  And let's be honest - that's because all the other presidential candidates have been white guys named George or Bill or Ron or Jimmy, and this one is a black guy named Barack.  If people WANT to believe he's a Muslim (the authors of this article clearly do) it's easier to do so.  If you can't see the connection between his race/name and the popularity of the belief that he is a Muslim, you're not looking hard enough.
+
== If he is a Muslim, he is not a very good one ==
  
:::Anyway, this is all a moot point.  He's not a Muslim.  As time goes by after Obama takes office, this page will look increasingly loony.  I guess if Obama really turns out to be an Al-Qaeda sleeper agent poised to sabotage the United States in a plot straight out of a Tom Clancy novel, I will be the one looking loonyBut I think I'll take that chance.[[User:Cb201|Cb201]] 17:55, 16 January 2009 (EST)
+
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:ShahadahMuslims must give declaration of their faith and only of their faithSaying "I'm not a Muslim" automatically makes on an apostate)  He was sworn in on a Bible, not the Koran or HadithsIf he is a Muslim he is probably the worlds worst Muslim.--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk: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. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:39, 1 March 2017 (EST)
  
== References ==
+
::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)
  
Barack Hussein Obama (born in Honolulu,[1][2][3] August 4, 1961) served as a first-term Democratic Senator from Illinois (2004-2008) and then, along with his running mate Senator Joseph Biden, won the presidential election[4] after twenty-three months of campaigning, raising an unprecedented $750 million and spending over $700 million of it,[5]. Post-election, Obama indicated that he would make an unprecedented speech within his first 100 days from a Muslim capital.[6] (7][8]
+
:::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)
  
Obama has espoused the idea of "spreading the wealth,"[10]  
+
::::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)
in other words raising the tax rates on business and the wealthy  in order to redistribute their income to low income individuals, many of whom don't currently pay income taxes.[11] His health care plan requires employers to purchase health care or pay a fine and will require many into a single payer system.[12] To announce his trip to Berlin in July 2008, Obama used posters which show a marked similarity to posters of others.[13] During Obama's youth in Hawaii, he developed a strong, almost Father/Son relationship with Frank Marshall Davis.14]
+
:::::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)
{{unsigned|Lucyjordan}} 11:00, 17 January 2009
+
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)
  
The claim that Fareed Zakaria's book ''The Post-American World'' "is written from a Muslim point-of-view" is not supported by the reference, [35]. [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:41, 19 February 2009 (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.  
  
: Ah yes, Fareed Zakaria is actually a Jewish name, written from a Juda perspective. Let's get serious ok? --[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 15:53, 19 February 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
:: The ''Village Voice'' article that was referenced describes Zakaria as a secular Muslim, but it doesn't mention the book at all.  Do you not think it's possible for someone to write a book on a secular topic without injecting his religious point of view? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 16:20, 19 February 2009 (EST)
+
==Footnotes==
 +
{{reflist}}
  
==Picture==
+
== Title ==
[[Image:AC776AB92D53D08B124F57F6B9B6C2.jpg‎]] Here's a picture of our plotting leader. Too sinister? --[[User:StevenM|Ṣ₮ёVeN]] 09:41, 19 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
: Interesting, StevenBut where did you get it from?  The uploads should reflect the source and claim of ability to use it, unless before 1923 (in which everything is public domain).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:22, 19 January 2009 (EST)
+
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 calledBy 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)
  
::Oh yes. sorry, i got it from the msn.com do i need promission to take photos from there? --[[User:StevenM|Ṣ₮ёVeN]] 14:03, 19 January 2009 (EST)
+
== Yup, he's gay ==
  
== Obama/Muslim Support ==
+
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.
  
In the May be a Muslim section, it says that he had an increased support of Muslim voters. How does this prove he is Muslim? While this should be kept, It should be moved to another  section.
+
:::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/]
  
== I know we lost a week... ==
+
:::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.  
But we can't stay in some alternate universe where G.W.Bush is still president forever, especially if this article is going to link to the front page. We need to update this article to show that Obama is now president. I would do so, but its locked. As it has been. For quite some time. --[[User:DReynolds|DReynolds]] 23:57, 27 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
== Low Res Pic ==
+
:::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)
  
Why is the leading picture of Obama such a low resolution version? It looks crappy when stretched [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 08:20, 28 January 2009 (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. [[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]])
  
: That's the only picture we could get from the White House Web site. It certainly surprises me, because I would have thought that they would have a very high-resolution picture of..."Him." We might try the White House site again to see whether "He" has corrected this&mdash;er&mdash;oversight.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 08:26, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
== Sheila Miyoshi Jager ==
  
::Wikipedia found one (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/Official_portrait_of_Barack_Obama.jpg) [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 08:29, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
::(I could have sworn i edited this already, did we loose some more from the database?) The orginal high resolution image can be obtained from the change.gov site; http://change.gov/page/-/officialportrait.jpg . Updating to this version should fix all the scaling artefacts --[[User:SCarter|SCarter]] 22:10, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
== Suggesting addition of Arabic rendering  بارك حسین اوباما  per 2009 suggestion long forgotten ==
  
== Second swearing in ceremony? ==
+
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
  
I'm surprised that this isn't even mentioned in the article, but when Obama retook the Oath he DIDN'T USE A BIBLE. In fact, there was no video recording of the session and the picture taken only showed him from the chest up. This is profound evidence of being Unchristian at the very least. Since we can't see his left hand during the ceremony, it could be on anything ... dare I say, the Koran?? (source http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/01/21/obama-takes-oath-office/)  [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 08:40, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
: I consider swearing on the Bible to be un-Christian, because of Matthew 5:34-37, where swearing on anything is expressly forbidden by Jesus.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 08:48, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
===Poll===
 +
====Yes====
 +
*[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:07, 3 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
*[[User:DavidLReyes]]
  
Additionally, the second swearing-in ceremony was hardly "private."  There were a number of reporters present.  Even if it were private, the first ceremony is the one that is constitutionally binding. In any case, the allegation in the main article needs a citation.  There are plenty out there, so get to it!
+
====No====
 +
*[[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)
  
== Rejects ID, Pushes Evolution (Over Christianity!?) ==
+
====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)
  
This really needs to be a section in the mainspace. Someone unlock or please add a section mentioning the following:
 
  
''Rejects ID''
+
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)
From the responses to a Q&A sent out by Nature: Do you believe that evolution by means of natural selection is a sufficient explanation for the variety and complexity of life on Earth? Should intelligent design, or some derivative thereof, be taught in science class in public schools?
+
: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)
  
Obama: I believe in evolution, and I support the strong consensus of the scientific community that evolution is scientifically validated. I do not believe it is helpful to our students to cloud discussions of science with non-scientific theories like intelligent design that are not subject to experimental scrutiny. <ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/in-obamas-own-words/</ref>
+
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)
  
''Pushes Evolution Over Christianity''
+
::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)
Remnick, who at this point could be considered the President of the United States of Magazines, forced Obama to address the topic of religion. "It's not 'faith' if you are absolutely certain," Obama said, noting that he didn't believe his lack of "faith" would hurt him a national election. "Evolution is more grounded in my experience than angels." <ref>http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/magazines/barack_obama_i_inhaled_that_was_the_point_46068.asp</ref>
+
  
Wow. [[User:CherylE|CherylE]] 10:17, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::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)
  
== Allegedly born in Honolulu ==
+
::::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)
  
Why does it still say he was allegedly born in Honolulu? Later on in the page it says the it was proven his birth certificate is genuine. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:15, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::::::::::::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)
:We merely state that FactCheck.org believed the photo of the birth certificate was genuine.--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 10:58, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
::::::::::::::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)
Maybe it should be rewritten then since now it reads more like it states a fact that the birth certificate is indeed genuine. I'm guessing 99% of people never even check the reference.[[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:15, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
:Additionally, he's already been sworn in as president, so arguing over where he was born is a moot point. --[[User:FrankincenseMonster|FrankincenseMonster]] 23:57, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
== Why no family section? ==
+
==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. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:36, 18 May 2018 (EDT)
  
The Obama article has no family section. Neither does Clinton's or Carter's. However, Reagan's, Bush the elder's and W.Bush's articles have them. Why none on the democratic presidents'? [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:42, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
==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)
  
There's a simple answer: Obama, Clinton, and Carter are Democrats.  They belong to an anti-family party, therefore their family is irrelevant to their political existence.  Family is central to Republican policy, and so it is impossible to understand President Bush without mentioning his family.
+
== Obama's father ==
[[User:LatinScholar]] 1:36, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
:He has a family though, doesn't he? [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 13:47, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
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
  
Yes, but a Democrat family, which is something entirely different.  [[User:LatinScholar|LatinScholar]] 2:22, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
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 governmentIn addition there is a mass of biographical  information readily available. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk: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 [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)
  
: How about adding a family section now mentioning his half brother in Kenya who was arrested for drug possession? Shouldn't there be something about him on the page? [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 08:02, 1 February 2009 (EST)
+
::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.
  
== Some Changes ==
+
::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)
  
Why is this locked?
+
:::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)
Obama has not been succeded by "incumbent" nor will he be.
+
::::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)
Obamas term in office might not go to 2013, it might go further, it might not go that far, unless you are psychic this should be changed. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 11:58, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::::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.
:"Incumbent" means he is the current holder of the office. It's simply a term to indicate that he is the most recent. And while it is true that Obama could be elected to a second term and thus serve until 2017, he hasn't. His first term expires on 2013 regardless of what happens between now and then (barring impeachment or death, of course) so it's factual to list that date. Listing a second term when he's only a week and a half in his first one is speculative and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. --[[User:Ampersand|Ampersand]] 14:49, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::::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)
It's the exact same thing we did with [[George W. Bush]] - <s>there's nothing factually wrong about saying whoever replaces obama will be an incumbent.</s> - saying incumbent merely confirms that he is the current president - no one has succeeded him yet.--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 14:42, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
::::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)
  
==Is he or isn't he President?==
+
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)
This article has a lot of wildly inaccurate and unsourced information in it.  It also can't seem to decide whether BO is President or not - the picture on the right says he is, the text varies from claiming he's won the election, to him being Senator.  I'd love to help clean this up, but can't seem to edit the page?  Ready to help.  [[User:FNNoonan|FNNoonan]] 15:15, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
: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)
:Yes, it's pretty weird isn't it. One would have thought that if it was important enough to protect then it would be important enough to update. But the failure to update tells the casual reader what to expect in respect of the general accuracy of the article - so it's probably not a bad thing.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 11:12, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
::I notice the article has been updated to make it somewhat more reality-based.   Good.  However, I would expect  - almost to the case of 'demand' - that the article on the current POTUS begin with the short and simple line "Barack Hussein Obama is the 44th and current President of the United States of America".  Instead, the first sentence about this, arguably the world's most important person, is overlong, appallingly punctuated, begins immediately with unfounded gossip and wanders off into some other random irrelevant facts and utterly lacks focus.  It says a lot about what the reader can expect from the entire article to follow.  I wish I could help rewrite this article so as it would be more based on fact and reality - and particularly, better written - but as it's locked, that's impossible.  So all we, the casual readers, can do is suggest things which need to be done to improve the article.  I would begin by recommending the deletion of the entire monster and a total rewrite from scratch.   There's nothing here of substance and nothing that will engender any respect for this supposed 'encyclopedia'.  [[User:FNNoonan|FNNoonan]] 13:33, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::It's a shame we can't all be as learned and insightful as you, FNNoonan. However, I dare say all the hard-working editors here will jump up to obey your lofty commands. If you want a 'better' article, why not write one on your userpage/in a sandbox and submit it to the criticism of your peers? Or is this a case of 'those who can't, criticise'? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 14:19, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::: You must not have read my comment, in which I made a suggestion to improve the article's first sentence.   What's yours?  You might try contributing something to the debate rather than trying to shoot the messenger.  The message is  - the article's a disaster.  Now, what are you doing about that?  [[User:FNNoonan|FNNoonan]] 16:24, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::::I don't think it a disaster, but a multi-layered and well-argued piece. Looking at the revision history and talk pages, I see that some of the best minds on Consercvapedia think so, too. Therefore I have no need to do anything. You, on the other hand, see faults, but do nothing except indulge yourself in corrosive criticism. [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 17:10, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
::::::I would also point out that the article even fails to mention which country he's President of.  I would again recommend the inclusion of my suggested opening sentence - "Barack Hussein Obama is the 44th and current President of the United States of America".  Thank you for helping to improve this terrible article.  [[User:FNNoonan|FNNoonan]] 14:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
The article should begin with "Barack Hussein Obama is currently the 44th President of the United States of America." Someone please make this change. [[User:Gadzodilo|Gadzodilo]] 23:22, 1 February 2009 (EST)
+
:: [[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)
 +
:::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)
  
Thanks for improving the article's first few words - we now know what his job is and of what country he's President.  But I would ask that someone PLEASE look at the grammar in that first sentence - it's absolutely atrocious.  Again, since I cannot edit the page, I cannot help but instead can only point out the problems here.  First, if you want to make the point about his birthplace, the correct place would be later - and then with an explanation of why this might be a problem (the Constitution states that President's must be born in the USA - there's no mention of this anywhere in the article).  If you want to make the point where it is, despite that being a nonsequitor, simply add a period after 'States' and remove the word 'although'.  Also please note that the word 'although' is a conditional - and what follows the word 'although' has nothing to do with the opening part of the sentence.  You might as well write "He is the President of the USA, although he apparently doesn't like cheese".  The two items have no connection.   Subject-Object.   Next, the entire first sentence is utterly malformed, with a punctuation that woulod shame a four year old, including a period in the middle of the sentence.   There is what is presumably a birthdate just floating in the middle of the sentence, undescribed.  This is followed by a close-parentheses, where there was no open-parentheses.    The sentence then runs on with some gibberish about electoral donations.  It also appears as if Joe Biden was his running mate while he was a Senator from Illinois.   The first paragraph continues in what can barely be described as comprehensible English with a stream of random, unintroduced facts.   Finally, it ends with a nonsensical reference to the absolutely normal practice of politicians referring to the practices of their nation, and addressing their nation as a collective body.   I would love to help tidy up this amateur article, but the childish English throughout, combined with the fact that the article is locked, leave me to believe it is not possible, and this encyclopedia is anything but 'trustworthy'.  Would you trust your children with this article?  [[User:FNNoonan|FNNoonan]] 14:16, 4 February 2009 (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)
  
== Real Bible NOT Koran ==
+
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)
 +
: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)
  
Below is the kind of post I’ve been looking forward to:
+
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)
  
“Look, I wrote here and in the article that Obama would swear on the Koran, and now I’ve just got to eat humble pie. See, I was wwoo….wrooggga…woolooo..wopppaaa. wrong. There, I managed to say it, and I feel better for it.
+
[[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.  
  
Yeah, I been waiting for that one, but I’m not holding my breath. But since Obama DID in fact swear on Lincoln’s Bible that means (check this one in archives) you clowns owe me $100. Each. (American notes thank you.) [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 18:31, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
: You're clueless, Myles. Obama's real oath was not on the Bible. I don't know if it was on the Koran. Do you?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:01, 28 January 2009 (EST)
+
:::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)
  
OP Myles back. Right, let me see if I can sum up the state of play. Obama tries to take the Oath on the Lincoln Bible, which presumably has special powers not available to the usual Gideon’s Hotel edition. Anyways, Chief Justice Roberts manages to bellyflop his role in history. It’s like the guy who needs play only one note on a triangle during the symphony and manages to foul that up. Along with 90% of the world, I thought that Obama was completely blameless for this glitch, and actually quite gracious. His face and bearing said “Hey, you stuffed up, but I forgive you. Let’s try it again.” This was not what the foaming at the mouth crowd saw, and talk here was of how Obama was not properly inaugurated, and that somehow it was all his fault. Then, to satisfy the New Philistines, he takes the oath, again. This time, no one of the Born Again crowd who frequent these occasions thinks to bring a Bible, but it is Obama’s fault once more, because apparently he should have one in his back pocket at all times. He takes the oath again. Hey, that’s good enough for me, but apparently I’m clueless, according to Andy, who, in one of his regular 2 line missives from above believes there’s more to this than meets the eye.
+
::::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)
  
Well, let me see. I suppose Obama could have paid Roberts off in the first instance to screw up the wording, so he would not have to put his hand on the Bible. (Because then he would wince with pain as the Word of God burnt his skin, or something.) This set up the SECOND inauguration at which everyone was paid to make sure no Bible was there, so Obama gets to be Prez while cunningly evading the Bible. You see, it all makes perfect sense, don’t it? Yeah, and I’M the one who’s clueless! Truly, what a man believes, he sees. Look, I’ve got an idea. Instead of hurling everything you got including the kitchen sink at Obama on a second by second basis, every time he so much as scratches his nose, let’s take the fair-minded, objective, dare I say American approach. It’s the customary 100 day honeymoon. Why don’t we all give him those 100 days, and THEN have a look at the plus and minus sheet? Sound like a sensible notion? Of course, that would mean putting your knee in some other crotch for that time, which is asking a hell of a lot I know. But then you would have some REAL grievances at the end instead of the kind of sort of all this relentless muck-raking on the basis of trivia. And just think of the size of the bonfire you could build then.
+
===Sources===
  
You know, where I come from conservatives are known as people with a sense of honour, with ethical standards, polite and cultivated, aware of etiquette, educated, and with a keen sense for fair play. You might be using a different dictionary. [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 00:42, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
@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)
  
*Myles, please read the box at the top of this page, and adhere to it. Thanks. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 00:55, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
::[[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)
  
:Myles, one can tell you're a liberal just by observing how many words it takes you to say nothing.  Your non-American spelling of "honor" is also a giveaway.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:43, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 
  
::Somebody decides to spell 'honour' the way that it is spelt correctly in '''English''' (the mother-tongue of '''England''') and you decide to try and be insulting about it. Classy.--[[User:Ieuan|Ieuan]] 12:47, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
==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)
  
::Despite Myles' tone, his post does have some merit: It's time to let go of this "swearing in on the Koran" business because it is purely insulting speculation.  
+
==Know history better==
::And I have to ask... why is using non-American spelling a liberal trait? Our Prime Minister up here in Canada is as conservative as they come... [[User:SJames|SJames]] 13:37, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
::: It doesn't show you're non-conservative. It shows you are not American, or an un-American person. [[User:T2master|T2master]] 19:30, 31 January 2009 (EST)
+
: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)
  
== Incumbent ==
+
== Suggestion ==
  
In the box to the right of the page it says that Obama will be succeeded by [[incumbent]]? Doesn't this imply that he will have two terms? I'm a bit confused. [[User:AndyJM|AndyJM]] 11:19, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
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)
  
:I can understand the confusion, but all it implies is that he is the current President. It would probably be better if the whole line was removed until we actually know who he would be succeeded by. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 13:09, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
== Edit warring and the vulgar picture of Michelle Obama ==
  
::Well, I tried to fix it up, I really did. But it was hard what with the lock down. I tried dabbing liquid paper on my monitor but that didn’t work very well either. Normally, “Not known” or “To be announced” or “To be determined” are the accepted forms, but hey, what about "Sarah Palin"? Let’s be positive and proactive about this. That lady is gonna wipe the floor with this Obama ring in. I’m marching in her parade right now. “Palin ain’t for failin’ “
+
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)
::Whoo hooo!!” [[User:MylesP|MylesP]] 21:42, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
: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)
  
 +
:::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)
  
:::I fixed all this....what's the problem now, Myles?  --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 22:46, 29 January 2009 (EST)
+
::::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)
  
== Stylistic matter ==
+
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)
Technically, it is proper to simply list the day of Obama's inauguration followed by a dash, as, God forbid, he might be reelected in 2012. So we can't say until the election when his last day in office will be... --[[User:DReynolds|DReynolds]] 09:36, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
  
*I believe you are not correct. ''Technically'' he was elected to a four year term. The text for the info box says term of office, no?  That would be four years from his inauguration, 20 January, 2009.  One doesn't typically take into account the possibility of death, resignation or re-election. Perhaps you are saying what is "typical" for Wikipedia?  --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 12:52, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
==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]:
::This[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=George_W._Bush&oldid=598707] seems like a reasonable template "typical" for Conservapedia.  The Bush entry was changed from "present" to January 20, 2009 less than three weeks before the date that he was definitively leaving office.[[User:Mikek|Mikek]] 14:51, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
{{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)
::What he was elected to and his actual term in office can be different things. William Henry Harrison was elected for a four year term but his actual term was one month. As I recall Bushes article said 'present' until several days after his term was over. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 15:11, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
Actually, that's almost universal. We don't know when his term will end. He could be re-elected in four years, or shot tomorrow. We can't say when his term will ''actually'' end. Wikipedia, by the way, doesn't even have a dash- just "assumed office," "incumbent" and "January 20, 2009." If accuracy is our goal, it's best to simply put a dash, or a dash followed by "present" or "incumbent." --[[User:DReynolds|DReynolds]] 15:34, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Article Naming ==
+
 
+
As the article for [[Barack Hussein Obama]] includes his full name, [[John McCain]] should redirect to [[John Sidney McCain III]], [[Joe Biden]] to [[Joseph Robinette "Joe" Biden, Jr.]], etc. - [[User:LafinJack|LafinJack]] 17:05, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
*No.  But you just keep on LafinJack. ;-) --  --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 18:05, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
::Can we ask why we will have the inconsistency TK? --[[User:WillB|WillB]] 18:15, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
I fail to understand what LafinJack or WillB are complaining about.  What inconsistency? [[User:LatinScholar|LatinScholar]] 7:08, 30 January 2009
+
::They are referring to the fact that only Barack Obama's middle name is included in the article name, while the others are not. They are wondering why that is.
+
::The obvious answer: Hussein is a Muslim name. It helps when trying to portray the slant that President Obama is lying about being a Christian. "Sidney" and "Robinette" are regular Western middle names and serve no significant purpose.  A similar line of reasoning can also explain why the Table of Contents is oddly out of view in President Obama's article. [[User:AdamSchaley|AdamSchaley]] 19:21, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
Leave it to a liberal to reduce this discussion to nonsense, innuendo, and pointless name-calling.  What's the use of even trying to have this discussion when you won't discuss things rationally? [[User:LatinScholar|LatinScholar]] 19:42, 01/09
+
 
+
::I should remind you that this is a Conservative Christian encyclopedia with an ADMITTED BIAS. The goal is obvious: To show readers that Obama is a Muslim, however this is in line with the principals of the encyclopedia, so there isn't anything really to complain about. Conservatives want everyone to understand Obama is a Muslim. There is no NPOV, get over it (my $.02) [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 21:56, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Change of wording? ==
+
 
+
I think "Obama will likely be the first Muslim President" would be better written as "Obama is likely the first Muslim President" ... just a thought [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 22:08, 30 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Update picture? ==
+
 
+
I'd just like to rerequest that the Obama main picture get updated with a higher resolution version. It looks very bad stretched. Here is a URL to an official version (http://change.gov/page/-/officialportrait.jpg) [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 10:58, 31 January 2009 (EST)
+
[[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 10:58, 31 January 2009 (EST)
+
:Done. Thanks for the link. --[[User:DeanS|DeanS<sup>talk</sup>]] 11:24, 31 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
::Thanks. Looks a lot better [[User:NotALiberal|NotALiberal]] 12:10, 31 January 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Obama's religious outlook ==
+
'''Obama's "outlook is Muslim"?  That is simply not true'''
+
 
+
The Obama article presently reads: "Obama's background, education, and '''outlook''' are Muslim, and fewer than 1% of Muslims convert to Christianity."
+
 
+
I don't think the above sentence is true and I will give two notable cases where it can be shown that Obama's '''outlook''' is not Muslim.
+
 
+
First, Obama heavily promotes the abortion ("pro-choice")  ideology.[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72511]  How many Muslim countries promote the abortion ideology?  Not many at all.  I cite the following: "The rules are also influenced by the role of religion; in most Muslim countries abortion is prohibited and it is also restricted in Catholic Latin America."[http://www.newsbatch.com/abort.htm] 
+
 
+
One of the first things the Obama administration did was to put on the White House website that they were going to promote the homosexual agenda.  I cite the following: "President Obama had not even finished his inaugural address today before his agenda was posted on the WhiteHouse website, where he promised to "overturn" the Supreme Court's precedents on discrimination claims and to demand new laws requiring employers to provide special protections for homosexuals and others with "gender" issues.[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=86633]  I do know for a fact that homosexuality is presently generally looked upon very unfavorably in Muslim countries. I cite the following: "Same-sex intercourse carries the death penalty in five officially Muslim nations: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan, and Yemen. [3] It formerly carried the death penalty in Afghanistan under the Taliban, and in Iraq under a 2001 decree by Saddam Hussein. The legal situation in the United Arab Emirates is unclear. In many Muslim nations, such as Bahrain, Qatar, Algeria or the Maldives, homosexuality is punished with jail time, fines or corporal punishment. In some Muslim-majority nations, such as Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, or Mali, same-sex intercourse is not forbidden by law. However, in Egypt gays have been the victims of laws against "morality"."[http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/islam.htm]
+
 
+
I think it is untrue to say that Obama's outlook is Muslim. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:06, 1 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
:His background is [[Islam]]ic, but I am unaware of his theological beliefs. Has he ever espoused a particular Christian or Muslim idea? If so, what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 17:43, 20 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Obama's Historical Ignorance ==
+
 
+
The first statement in the Insights section claims that "Obama displayed ignorance about American history when he said, "Throughout our history, America's confronted constantly evolving danger, from the oppression of an empire, to the lawlessness of the frontier, '''from the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor''', to the threat of nuclear annihilation."
+
 
+
There are a few things wrong with what Obama said about Pearl Habor, but none of them constitute ignorance. The only things wrong with what he said are that he a) did no pluralize the phrase to "from the bombs that fell on Pearl Habor"; b) he wasn't accurate in the kind of weaponry used because they were actually torpedoes (which is hardly ignorance as it is a largely insignificant fact); or c) the fact that he failed to properly pluralize 'bomb' means that his phrase seems to reference a far more infamous bomb, the one on Hiroshima. This last point of course does not constitute ignorance. Even if he did mistaken Hiroshima for Pearl Habor I would see that as a gaff rather than evidence of impeded ignorance towards American history. But, given that, in the context of 'constantly evolving danger' and the other historical references contained within the whole statement, it is quite clear Obama did not mean Hiroshima, I would be inclined to either edit or remove this phrase entirely.
+
 
+
Politicians make gaffs all the time. If you want to find actual evidence of Obama's 'ignorance' towards American history look somewhere else.
+
 
+
==Rearranged content==
+
First, very little was removed or changed, but there was some there which was either repetative or in the wrong context.  This I hope was corrected.
+
 
+
Second, the place of birth was changed to Hawaii.  There has to be ''proof'' that he was ''not'' born in Hawaii, and we cannot allow someone else's opinion in the article which states that he was not.  But, the birth controversy is still a relevent topic as far as his possible history and the campaign is concerned, and this feature has been preserved.
+
 
+
And third, there are minor corrections to be made to the article, which include writing and grammer, accuracy, and minor info that could be added as to his presidency.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 01:50, 2 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
 
+
I think that Andrew Schafly was right to move the sections back into their previous order.  [[User:LatinScholar|LatinScholar]]
+
 
+
:I think that speculation should come after factual information in an article. Why are we talking about what Obama "may be" before what he actually is? --'' '''[[user:JArneal|<font color="#006666" >JArneal</font>]]'' ''' 18:29, 3 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
::There you go again!  "Actually is" ? I think first, JArneal, in the great tradition of liberals, you need to define what "is" -- ''is''!  Please find a new hobby, JArneal, as your present one of constantly arguing and disputing doesn't wear well. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 18:59, 3 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
::Why must liberals censor that Obama is likely a Muslim... get over it guys --[[User:PMichael|PMichael]] 20:06, 3 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
::: Why can't conservatives accept the fact that he isn't...get over it guys --[[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 20:37, 3 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
::: Sheesh, TK. I'm sorry if I offended you. Do you really want me to define "is"?  I was just asking why we don't put factual information in front, and speculation in back. Is there a reason? --'' '''[[user:JArneal|<font color="#006666" >JArneal</font>]]'' ''' 22:24, 3 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Obama and Sexism  ==
+
 
+
In the "Presidential Campaign" section of this article it states "Obama mocks Sen. McCain's for his age and Gov. Palin for being '''a woman''' and outsider." The evidence of Obama mocking Palin for being a woman is explained later: "Obama was caught for his quiet hiring of Winner & Associates to disseminate a sexist smear video against her." Are you talking about this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eu9Z2hXky0&eurl=http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194057.php ? How is this video a "sexist" smear? Not only that, but there is little evidence to support the claim that Obama hired Winner to make this video.
+
 
+
The article suggests that Obama was caught for hiring someone to make a sexist smear video. I am asking for definitive proof that Obama was behind the video, AND definitive proof that the video is a "sexist" smear. If there is no proof, I am at least requesting that the untrue statements about Obama mocking Palin for being a woman are removed. If I do not get a response from one of the editors of this article I will email the owners of Conservapedia directly. [[User:FairMan|FairMan]] 19:25, 4 February 2009 (EST)
+
:First, if you have correct information as to who was actually behind the video in question then it needs to be brought to our attention in a fair manner.  Second, the way you brought this about, by making your statement here in the form of a DEMAND, is not going to be tolerated.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:38, 4 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
First of all, if my tone sounded as though i was demanding something from you or seemed disrespectful in some way I apologize, that was not my intent. I am merely requesting that the article changes it's tone. It states: "Obama was caught..." we do not know for certain that Obama was behind the video at all. Are we as Americans not considered innocent until proven guilty?
+
 
+
And what about the charges of sexism? The article calls the video a "sexist" smear. Will someone please tell me what was sexist about it? [[User:FairMan|FairMan]] 23:02, 4 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
:Looking at the references, it is a documented fact that this video was made professionally; it is not an amateur attempt at all.  It's also documented that Winner & Associates (including Ethan Winner) are die-hard Obama supporters who have given much to the campaign.  While it is not proven from these pages that Obama supported such a video, it is also not proven that he didn't help out the creation of it in some way.  I added Ethan Winner's ''alleged'' claim that he made the video alone.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 22:17, 4 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
Well that is a start, thank you. I honestly didn't think I'd get anyone to change anything in the article. But there are still those sexism charges. Can you provide some explanation to those? The line reads: "Obama was caught for his quiet hiring of Winner & Associates to disseminate a sexist smear video against her." Do you think you might be able to take out that word sexist? And maybe reword it in a way that doesn't immediately imply that Obama is behind the video (Until damning evidence is brought forth)? And there is also the claim at the beginning stating: "Obama mocks Sen. McCain's for his age and Gov. Palin for being a woman and outsider." The only evidence supposedly supporting the claim that Obama mocked Palin for being "a woman and outsider" is this smear video. Am I just missing something here? How is Obama mocking her for being a woman in this video? How is the video itself at all sexist? [[User:FairMan|FairMan]] 23:02, 4 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
*FairMan, you are in danger of being blocked.  There was a well-documented news story, during the campaign, showing women were getting paid less on his campaign staff and in his Senate offices, which was hugely embarassing to Obama. [http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obamacommentary/222679,CST-NWS-sweet22.stng]  Palin was mocked by Obama and Joe Biden, for her so-called "lack of experience" even though her own exceeded Obama's, in terms of executive/managerial experience.  Please stop your liberal excuse making and time-wasting.  Learn the truth, and it will set you free! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 23:31, 4 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
Why exactly am I in danger of being blocked? I am aware of that news story, I will save that for another place and time (I don't want to stir up more trouble then I am already in). My main complaint is that the article claimed that Obama mocked Palin for being a woman. The only evidence that supports this claim in the article is the link to the smear video mentioned previously (If there is more evidence then please add it). It is claimed that the video is a sexist smear. Why is my questioning of the label "sexist" being ignored every time someone replies? Please tell me if I am missing something obvious here. It is not my intent to waste anyone's time. I am just looking for answers.
+
 
+
"Palin was mocked by Obama and Joe Biden, for her so-called "lack of experience" even though her own exceeded Obama's, in terms of executive/managerial experience. "
+
 
+
That is a great example! That is something you could add to the article to back up the claim of Obama mocking Palin for being an outsider. Currently there is nothing in the "Tone" section of the article backing that up.{{unsigned|FairMan}}
+
 
+
*Then that is what you should have said, is exactly my point! Everyone wants to be a critic, while offering nothing, as the box at the top of this page says, that will improve it.  If one doesn't do that, how am I, or any editor to distinguish you from the dozens of trolls and disruptor's who sign up everyday?  You know how long it took me to find that citation?  Less then two minutes. I ask for your understanding, but do not apologize for my comments, simply because I have just pointed out why I would think what I did.  "Assume good faith" is something  attempted by lots of other places, but it rarely is achieved, and certainly not so often here, where even the most casual reader/editor knows we are constantly set-up by liberal trolls and parodists.  Your last comments let all of us see your motivations are perhaps better than assumed, and I do thank you for that. This is how you will build your reputation here, and anywhere else in life. I look forward to other suggestions, offered in the same spirit, and in fact, if you want, put them on my talk to make sure I see them, if you want. Thanks.  --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 02:24, 5 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
== Category ==
+
 
+
Could a sysop edit this page to add it to [[:Category:Barack Obama]]? -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 14:20, 6 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
*No, sly mis-naming of the object isn't it? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 15:53, 6 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
==Minor Edits==
+
There is a missing parenthesis in his date of birth, and in the "Birth certificate controversy" section, the word "intelligible" should be "ineligible".  Those are the only 2 I caught in a quick scan of the page.  [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 23:32, 7 February 2009 (EST)
+
:Thanks!  [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 23:48, 7 February 2009 (EST)
+
 
+
Hi, I'm a new user. I was curious as to whether this talk page is actualy considered in the editing of this article. What i mean by that is, as this article is locked-down, does the editing administrator read this page and make changes to the article, or will the article always be left as it is? ( I don't mean to offend, as Imentioned, I am a new user, and I am honestly just curious)
+

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)