Questions On Obama's Past Remain
I've ignored the more inflamed rhetoric like radical Islamic Father this, or that, while trying to search out a little of Presidential contender Barack Obama's early years. But it appears as though a few questions may still remain.
If a translation of an article from, I believe, Jakarta is accurate, he would have been in Jakarta for five years, not four. Some individuals still living in the neighborhood he is said to have lived in don't recall any of the family members, and he may have only attended a school CNN claims to have checked out for only one year.
In fact, Barry together with his mother and his stepfather lived in Indonesia for quite a long time. Apparently Barry went to Primary School here for only one year in Primary 4, but the information from Maya Soetoro is that Barry had lived in Indonesia between the years of 1968-1973.
However, the exact location of Barry's house for 5 years remains unclear.
Before going on, as to who started all this? - see Insight's original piece - to Howard Kurtz - back to Insight, again and now CNN - Insight and or the Right has the least to gain, the most to lose and the least motivation of the three most likely sources: Hillary, the Right, and perhaps surprisingly, Obama himself.
The best thing for the Right is for Obama and Hillary to compete for money and media attention through the primary, beating one another up as they go. It makes no sense for the Right to try and take either one of them out now, particularly while most of the population isn't even watching. All it would do is give the one left standing a decided edge.
Obviously Hillary has the most to gain - she jumped in this early only because of Obama. Anything to weaken Obama's viability and fund raising serves her cause very well. But what of Obama? Assuming this is all debunked, which wouldn't be surprising, why not have it dealt with now, long before even a primary vote?
Better that than some last minute bimbo-like eruption weighing on someone's mind as they go to vote or caucus. It wouldn't be bad strategy at all, considering it was always going to see the light no matter what. By the time people are thinking of voting, this will be old news and he'll be inoculated from the charge. But I digress.
No question Obama likes to push himself as a man of God now:
Obama is especially proud of being a husband and father of two daughters, Malia, 8 and Sasha, 4. Obama and his wife, Michelle, married in 1992 and live on Chicago ’s South Side where they attend Trinity United Church of Christ.
Barack Obama was born on August 4th, 1961, in Hawaii to Barack Obama, Sr. and Ann Dunham. Obama graduated from Columbia University in 1983, and moved to Chicago in 1985 to work for a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor neighborhoods plagued with crime and high unemployment. In 1991, Obama graduated from Harvard Law School where he was the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.
But he tried to make himself appear as just the opposite in one of his recent books:
In Indonesia, I’d spent 2 years at a Muslim school, 2 years at a Catholic school. In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies. In the Catholic school, when it came time to pray, I’d pretend to close my eyes, then peek around the room. Nothing happened. No angels descended.
I don't care so much about what he is or isn't. But I detest people who want it both ways.
Googling around, his Father was said to have been a non-practicing Muslim and his Mother an atheist or secularist. So why four or five years in two religious schools? There were, I believe, a few fine International schools available in Jakarta at the time.
Finally, while I'd dismiss the bulk of charges at this site just out of reasonableness - one question might remain as valid:
"Fiction: Obama stated in his Convention speech: 'My father … grew up herding goats.' The 'goat herder' claim has been repeated endlessly. It is a lie.
"Fact: Obama's grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama was a prominent and wealthy farmer. His son, Obama's father, was a child of privilege, not privation. He was an outstanding student, not a herdsman.
It does seem a bit of a stretch that a goat herder from Kenya would end up at an American college in Hawaii circa 1959, or so. Even today most of the foreign nationals pursuing an American education manage it as children of privilege and not from growing up down on the farm.
If Obama is spinning his past as it seems he might be, how much should anyone care about his vision for the future? That might be part fiction, too.
As I came across it, here's an interview with one of his aunts, Mrs. Hawa Hussein.
"Fact: Obama's grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama was a prominent and wealthy farmer. His son, Obama's father, was a child of privilege, not privation. He was an outstanding student, not a herdsman.

http://www.peasantville.com/the_peasantville_blog/2007/01/insight_magazin.html
Check the above site for links to the relevant articles. Riehl is behind the curve on this one.
Insight Magazine Exposed as a Right Wing and Republican Sun Myung Moon Tool
Well, the Moonie rag known as Insight Magazine is exposed!! They went on a tear about Barack Obama and tried to tie him to a 'madrassa,' a Islamic fundamentalist school - and it turns out it's all a lie straight from Insight Mag. Further, Insight Moonies tried to incite a intramural skirmish in the Democratic Party by asserting the allegation about Obama came from Hillary Clinton.
They're on the defensive, but the truth is out. You cannot trust the Washington Times or Insight Mag or any other Sun Myung Moon linked publication. It's no secret that the Unification Church is strongly tied to the Republican Party.
Now we know how they work, an insidious web of lies, deceit and corruption. CNN is out for blood on this one and Insight Mag is on the run. It's about time someone called these people out for what they are - dishonest, corrupt, lying and part of the dangerously stupid rightwing.
Posted by: Bill Adkins | Monday, January 22, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Wow, good work, Danny. Only a few hours behind on trying to spin nothing into something vis a vis this non-story, which *shocker* has already been roundly debunked - much like the premise that you scored major points on CNN this weekend, whining about bad language in reference to Hanninty. It's not surprising though, that you feel the need to dishonestly distract while the public has so obviously rejected the radical right's take (read: fabrications) on current events.
But keep up the effort; you and your buddies at Panties Media make yourselves look like buffoons in public without any help from the dreaded MSM, or anyone else.
Posted by: Legalize | Monday, January 22, 2007 at 10:50 PM
Spreading another right-wing lie, are we?
You already got your balls caught in a shredder with that bullshit you spewed about CREW. Now you have to issue TWO retractions.
Now, motherfucker. NOW.
Posted by: dave | Monday, January 22, 2007 at 11:41 PM
Man, this Riehl loser is like lightning rod of wrong. If you've got a story you're working on, you absolutely positively DO NOT want him linking approvingly. Talk about the death knell.
Have you ever been right about anything?
Posted by: Seitz | Monday, January 22, 2007 at 11:45 PM
How is misbehaving during prayer as a youngster and later being more devout having it both ways? Have you not changed since you were a child? I know I have. W claimed to be a texan, yet was born in CT and went through prep school and college there, isn't that trying to have it both ways? As for why his parents sent him to church schools? According to his book it was for academics not religion, if that's not good enough for you, well maybe it was a cost issue. Who knows, but I fail to see how where he went to elementary or middle school is an issue.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Monday, January 22, 2007 at 11:52 PM
misbehaving
I don't think he misbehaved and he wrote the passage as an adult. All I am pointing out is that it stands in contrast to the "Christian" image he fosters on his site, that's all.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Monday, January 22, 2007 at 11:56 PM
So what if he wrote the passage as an adult? He was simply relating an experience he had as a child. Have you read the whole book or are you simply doing the same thing you accuse the left of and pulling things out of context?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:05 AM
Hillary's operation will turn him out.
Posted by: Darth Malice | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:10 AM
"All I am pointing out is that it stands in contrast to the "Christian" image he fosters on his site, that's all."
Dan just maligned every single "born again" Christian on the religious right. Maybe you should point out the contrast on everyone who claims to be Christian who hasn't been a lifelong devout Christian. You can start with Mr. 28%.
Posted by: Seitz | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Maybe you should point out the contrast
Maybe the Left should get honest. You'd tolerate your candidates painting themselves up as Holy Rollers if they had to to get elected, yet you seem to despise that very thing. Lotta room on the Left to criticize on that score ... yup!
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:32 AM
Again I fail to see any inconsistancy in a young boy not taking religion seriously and later being a devout christian. It's called maturity.
I didn't always pay attention in school and sometimes I didn't do my homework, now I'm a teacher. Should I give that info to my students on the first day of class?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:49 AM
Oh, and speaking of getting honest with your candidates, when do you plan on calling out Mitt Romney? He's moved so far to the right on social/religious issues that's he's unrecognizable from the candidate that ran for senate in MA in '94. If he were a dem you'd have already labeled him a flip flopper.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:51 AM
Uh, Dan... you're criticizing his religious beliefs based on his behavior in grade school? When I was in Catholic boys' school, I'm fairly sure I spent most of the "prayer time" contemplating the girls in the Catholic girls' school down the street, especially the ones on the swim team. And that was when I considered myself somewhat religious.
You know, Dan, there is a growing majority of the American that is sick of sanctimonious bullshit from charlatans and hypocrites about how our lives should be as perfect as theirs. You show me a man who claims that he's never had an impure thought or an irreverent moment and I'll show you a basket/closet case with little boys chained up in his garage.
Posted by: scarshapedstar | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:56 AM
It's called maturity.
You might have to define that term for Dan. I don't think he's familiar with it.
As for not paying attention in church, it sounds like every single adolescent who ever attended Catholic school in this country, including most priests I've ever spoken to.
Dan's also too dumb to know the difference between someone who considers themselves devout, and someone who becomes a Holy Rollers. One is concerned with his/her relationship with God. The other is concerned with everybody else's relationship with God.
Posted by: Seitz | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:59 AM
you're criticizing his religious beliefs based on his behavior in grade school?
No, not at all. I am pointing out bits of his life he chose to relate in his book. I suppose you think he wrote it for a purpose other than postiioning himself politically? I don't buy it. Like all of them, he has been positioning himself for this since he started breathing. Good Lord you buy his stuff? I don't buy it from those on the Right or Left. There isn't one individual who runs for Prez in this country today who isn't some sort of egomaniac that's been shaping his public personnae for years. Geesh!
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 01:09 AM
First of all, the 'interview' that you linked doesn't appear to have a single quote from his Aunt. It's a short bio that features several quotes from American politicians. Her picture doesn't quite constitute an interview IMO.
Second, you reject his assertion that he is religious because he tried to look for signs of angels during prayer? Is it really so bizarre that a young person would do something like this? I know that I did it myself during Sunday School. Just like I remember looking for signs of the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus. Young people tend to take these things quite literally, and I think it's quite natural. I'm not sure how that you can reject his faith on this statement alone. (Also, my parents were secular, but somehow they didn't stop sending me to church every week.)
And really, how many politicians are going to campaign and say, "I come from a family of wealthy landowners." If you didn't notice, Bush certainly downplayed his family's wealth and presented himself as your average, humble Texan... (that just happened to attend Prep School and Harvard.)
Posted by: Tuna | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 01:11 AM
"Before going on, as to who started all this? ......Hillary, the Right, and perhaps surprisingly, Obama himself."
My money is on Hillary, brillant work as usual.
Posted by: pawley | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 02:01 AM
Until now, I'd always considered this blog to be a credible source for right-wing opinion. I haven't always agreed, but I'd always respected the voice. No more. This post is complete and utter nonsense, so much so that it is now difficult to me to take its author seriously as anything other than a two-bit hack -- and a dupe as well. Dan, you've made a fool of yourself.
Posted by: freelancecritic | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 02:56 AM
"No, not at all. I am pointing out bits of his life he chose to relate in his book."
Yeah. I know. My point is, nobody cares. There's a difference between autobiography and autohagiography, isn't there?
Posted by: scarshapedstar | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 07:54 AM
It's been totlly debunked after CNN went to his schol in Indonesia that he attended at 6 YEARS OLD!!! It's a public school with Christian children attending along with Muslims. It's anything BUT a madrassa!As usual , Obama comes out smelling like a rose and Fox news "We DISTORT You Decide" looks once again like crap after thei on air apologies to Obama. Keep it up Fox, you're virtually guaranteeing a Democratic victory in 08!
Posted by: Martin | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 08:56 AM
One thing is blatantly obvious now. FOX news and the right wingers are TERRIFIED of Obama and Hilary. Why else devote all this attention to them with nonsensical false stories. Me thinks Fox and the republicans protest way too much!! They're scared as crap. You got to love it!
Posted by: Talula | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 08:59 AM
"One thing is blatantly obvious now. FOX news and the right wingers are TERRIFIED of Obama and Hilary."
That seems clear to me now too, which surprises me. The GOP has some pretty heavy-hitters who could appear credible to the public. If they want to attack either, certainly they could pick apart their records?! Ha - a joke. We all know the wingers are loathe to engage in a factual debate vis a vis the material issues of the day. Of course, they think that the "Rathergate" is the ultimate acheivement in "citizen journalism."
But FAUX, Riehl, LGF et al have already stepped up the Swiftboating on the most asinine of invented "issues." Obama as a 6 year old? Faking his conviction purely for political ends? The absurdity and hypocrisy is astounding. If a liberal espouses his Christian faith in a public manner, the wingers instantly put on their tin-foil hats. I only hope you guys keep it up; as the lies of the radical right get more exposure, more and more of the public is realizing that the radical right wears no clothes - you have about 75% of the country against you as it is. Let's see if you can get up to 80% by Spring!
Posted by: LEgalize | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 09:17 AM
so the obama smear must have come from the hillary camp because, well, the conservative media have nothing to gain from perpetuating it? my, that's some airtight logic.
you don't think fox maybe thought they'd get a ratings boost by accusing a black presidential candidate of being a closet terrorist? nah. how outlandish...
Posted by: dubiousraves | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 12:27 PM