1990 Vanity Fair Biography On Obama Discovered Stating He Was Raised In Singapore

Birthers.....Post Birthers....Conspiracy Theorists and just Obama haters in general.

Lol

 

Where did you get the idea there are millions of facts about Obama, these were both important pieces about him and his life. But let's just look at his own book as Mark Steyn reports

"Courtesy of David Maraniss’s new book, we now know that yet another key prop of Barack Obama’s identity is false: His Kenyan grandfather was not brutally tortured or even non-brutally detained by his British colonial masters. The composite gram’pa joins an ever-swelling cast of characters from Barack’s “memoir” who, to put it discreetly, differ somewhat in reality from their bit parts in the grand Obama narrative. The best friend at school portrayed in Obama’s autobiography as “a symbol of young blackness” was, in fact, half Japanese, and not a close friend. The white girlfriend he took to an off-Broadway play that prompted an angry post-show exchange about race never saw the play, dated Obama in an entirely different time zone, and had no such world-historically significant conversation with him. His Indonesian step-grandfather supposedly killed by Dutch soldiers during his people’s valiant struggle against colonialism met his actual demise when he “fell off a chair at his home while trying to hang drapes.”"

So we know Obama has no qualms about misrepresenting himself and his life history, so the question remains, where did the misinformation that has been noted come from. Who told these "facts" that weren't fact checked in the first place.

 

You don't know and they aren't saying.

 

Oh I know- Birthers and Post-Birthers and Conspiracy Theorists have said the same things over and over.

 

Not really a concern for me but I will use my own family's history as an example. For years, the story in my family was that we descended from a family of sailors- generations of sailors. Yet, when one of my cousins dug in and did a genealogy of our family, it turns out that my family were farmers- except for one generation that went to sea. My family's history was wrong- yet when I told my classmates my families story I wasn't lying- I was telling what I had been told by my family.

I look forward to actually reading Maraniss's book, rather than just reading the quotes mined by his opponents. Everytime I look at a source used by Birthers or Post Birthers, it ends up being a source complimentary about Barack Obama- but those quotes never seem to make it in.

Now if you can show me that Obama lied about his military medals or promotions or even lied about getting degrees he never earned- that might be relevant.

 

I could care less about your family, I do care when the person who was elected to lead our country has so many questions about his background and has allowed so much misinformation be published about it and his so misrepresented it himself.

And I know all you can do is try to engage in your simple dismissals and labeling of people so you can avoid the issue, of course since you can't give explain how this man has been so misrepresented it's all you have.

I find lying in your own book quite disturbing and the fact that those who were writing authorized bio's about him had such misinformation to work with relevant to the man himself. Why don't you? And that includes how did such an admitted slacker get into college and then into an ivy league school in the first place, that is a specific concern.

 

I find unsupported claims and specious 'questions' by political opponents- well not disturbing but just disingenious. I can't tell whether you are unable to distinguish between a lie and a mistake of fact, or whether you purposely equate the two. I tried to show you the difference by using an example, but I can't tell whether you are unable to understand the difference or just don't care.

I frankly have as little concern about how Obama got into college as I do how Romney did, as I did how Bush got into college when he was running. Totally irrelevant.

Anyone who can't decide whether to vote for Obama- or Romney- without seeing their college records is an idiot.

 

I care about the fact that such misinformation about Obama is not a singular occurrence but seems quite common about him. Whether you don't understand that the information came FROM SOMEWHERE, FROM SOMEBODY or you just don't care about these misrepresentations or simply wish they would go away I don't know.

I can't think of any other President that has had such a problem with things being so misrepresented about him. All the ones I know about have very accurate bio's about them. I also know that Vanity Fair is not some obscure magazine but a very professional one that DOES fact check their stories and don't just make things up to print them.

I note you ignore the misinformation in his own book and I let's throw in the misrepresentations he made about his mother not having access to health care and health insurance.

And if he did get into college by misrepresenting himself you wouldn't care either. I do, I think most people prefer not to have Presidents who misrepresented themselves in such a manner.

And anyone who does not care if the man running for President is willing to misrepresent himself in order to advance himself is what?

 

If a person makes a mistake, that means, by definition of "mistake," the SOURCE OF THE WRONG INFORMATION WAS THEM.

How much more clear can this be? My (*)(*)(*)(*)ing seven-year-old understands what it means to make a mistake.

 

Common? So far you have come up with about 5 bits, scattered in sources dating over 21 years. The common occurrence is that that the information about Obama is accurate. The uncommon- i.e. the outliars- are the mistakes that are in contradiction with the consistant information.

Lets take the 'birth in Kenya' thing- consistantly the media reports that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. After 5 years his opponents found a pamphlet that said he was born in Kenya- this is the 'outliar'.

The 'grew up in Singapore' bit- consistantly the media reports that Barack Obama lived part of his childhood in Indonesia- one publication out of hundreds said he was born in Indoneisa- this is an 'outliar'

Anyone who has studied statistics knows to eliminate the statistical outliers when compiling the data- because there are always statistical anomalies.

And yes, I purposely mis-spelled outlier

 

Wall Street Journal makes numerous, uncorrected mistakes on editorial pages

by George Edmonson

Published June 22, 2012 11:27 am

Few newspapers enjoy a reputation as solid as that of The Wall Street Journal, even after the consternation over ownership changing hands a few years ago. Its news reporting is solid, writing first-class, opinion pieces sharp and pointed. And, as Marilyn Monroe pointed out, there are all those tiny figures.

Lately, though, I’ve discovered numerous cracks in its editorial page fortress, which seems to be surrounded by a nearly impenetrable wall.

The cracks are errors on the opinion pages. I’m not talking about statements that might be open to interpretation or arguable viewpoints. No, I’m talking about things more basic. Like Kay Bailey Hutchinson.

That’s the way the surname of the Republican U.S. senator from Texas was spelled in a column last month about that state’s politics. It was still that way online when I checked the other day. And, as with other examples, I haven’t seen a correction in the print edition, either.

As I’ve undertaken a relatively close inspection of the Journal’s opinion pages over several weeks — red pen in hand and Google at the ready — here’s a sample of what I’ve found:

•The wrong day for a recent major political news conference.
•An incorrect dollar amount for per diem payments to one state’s representatives.
•Expressing a difference as 2 percent when it should have been 2 percentage points.
•A photo caption that reversed the identities of the two men in the picture, one of them Mitt Romney. (This error has now been fixed.)
•The wrong number of economic recessions in a specified historical period

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...rous-uncorrected-mistakes-on-editorial-pages/

So why does the Wall Street Journal make these mistakes? Is someone giving them the wrong information?

Or could it be that they are just mistakes and the Wall Street Journal has been lax in checking the details?

Or maybe we should be expecting more from a promotional brochure published 22 years ago than we can expect from the Wall Street Journal today?

 

these were not important pieces. one was an insignificant literarly publication, the other was in vanity fair. 2 errors, which were corrected by the authors.

this remains a non issue.

you aren't fooling anyone

 

Who's to say there was a mistake?
I mean he can't have so many mistakes in his life, can he?
His grandmother said she was present for his birth in Kenya. Oops! translation error.
His Hawaiian birth certificate shows that he was born after the Nordyke twins when he was born after them. Oops! no explanation given.
The page that records his birth in the Hawaiian Birth registry is the only one that doesn't have a date range on the top. Oops! No explanation given.
His social security number has the Connecticut state code. Oops! Typo.
His selective service card has a date stamp that only shows 80 instead of 1980. Oops! No explanation given.
His publicist prints that he was born in Kenya. Oops! Fact checking error (error remained for 16 years and at least four reprints)
Vanity Fair prints that he was raised in Singapore. Oops! What was the excuse given for this one again?

The point is either he is a complete fraud or he has had the unfortunate luck of having so many incompetent people doing his paperwork or writing about his life.

 

How do people explain these things away?

 

much like his economic policy, he makes it up as he goes along.

 

the economy was (*)(*)(*)(*)ing awesome until Dummycrats took control of congress in the 2006 elections...then everything started circling the toilet.

 

If I am writing a story about you and I interview your mother and she tells my you scored the winning touchdown in your high school championship game and I print that story and it is false, you sat on the bench the whole game, the source of the mistake was your mother not me. If someone ask later how did that misinformation get printed what was the source for it, it was your mother.

So who told the writers of the two stories the misinformation, where did it come from in the first place. Did they just make it up because they were too lazy to find out accurate information?

 

Not including the misinformation he himself published about himself.

A pamphlet promoting him by the literary agent he had hired, where did the misinformation come from back then? Where was the sign off by Obama before it was published which is common practice. Did the writer just make it up? Was it a guess?

Yes in a very prominent national magazine, where did they get the information he grew up in Singapore? Who told them? They guessed?

 

Well yes they were, one a very important piece about him that was to be used to promote his up and coming book, the second a piece in a prominent national magazine.

Then of course the misrepresentations in his own book.

 

They don't and the Obamatards don't want them to be explained.

 

No, they weren't. One was an insignificant bio publication, the other was vanity fair. 2 errors among thousands of publications.

This remains a non issue

 

They of course have been explained. But birther retards don't like the answers.

 

those 2 errors are 100% of what was written about him before he entered the national spot light. knowing where they got their facts is important. was it a misprint and a writer bad at geography or was their source a pathological resume padder?

it's a non-issue to those that think the private sector is doing fine.

 

It was not insignificant, it was an important piece about him, for him and his career.

There certainly weren't thousands of publications about him back then.

You desperately would hope so but the fact remains his life has been routinely misrepresented even in his own book and no one has yet to explain why there is so much misinformation surrounding him and why he let's it remain uncorrected.