This would explain so much *UPDATED*

Normally, if I stumbled across a political hit piece rife with unsubstantiated accusations, I wouldn’t include it in any serious discussion at my blog.  Depending on its target, I might read it with a certain amount of pleasure, and I might even provide a link for you guys, along with a warning that the linked post is unreliable.  Indeed, that’s what I’ll do right now:  the post to which I linked, and that I’m about to discuss, contains one man’s assertion of facts, with no corroboration.  Nevertheless, I’m going to discuss it here because it explains something that’s baffled me about Obama:  The absence of past girlfriend; indeed, the absence of any past friends before he appeared in Chicago’s political world.

Ever since Obama emerged on the national political scene, I’ve commented on the peculiar fact that no one from his past has stepped forward to reminisce about him.  No former girlfriend has talked about dating him, no college roommate has achieved his 15 minutes of fame by telling about Obama’s collegiate escapades (or lack thereof).  Jack Cashill has made a fairly convincing argument that the girlfriend in Dreams is the spittin’ image of Bill Ayers’ girlfriend, meaning that, as to Obama, she’s a fictional creation.  Cashill also points out that, aside from this fictional character (who has never stepped forward to identify herself), Obama apparently led a completely chaste life until he met Michelle.  But did he really?

Kevin DuJan argues that the real reason Obama has no romantic past is because he’s gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that), and that Michelle is merely his beard:

You know full well the “journalists” on sites like Politico would have spent the last three years digging relentlessly into a Republican president’s past, repeatedly asking why not a single former girlfriend has ever stepped forward to identify  herself or speak on the record about her past with the man currently in the Oval Office.

Isn’t it strange that the public’s never been introduced to A SINGLE GIRLFRIEND that Barack Obama ever had in high school, college, law school, or the days before he met his beard wife Michelle?

Don’t you wonder why the “journalists” of the Left have never done any in-depth profiles of Barack Obama’s male friends from his years at Occidental College in California, talked about his “roommate” while at Columbia, or wondered about any of his social activities through the years?

I know there are endless mysteries centered around a man whose college transcripts, vital records, and other important paperwork were apparently sealed away from the public in an impregnable vault somewhere cloaked in riddles and enigma — never to be seen by human eyes again — but if Barack Obama was a Republican he would have been outed as gay many years ago.

If Barack Obama was a Republican, the agenda-driven media would have hounded him about the nature of his relationship with his “bodyman” Reggie Love.

If Barack Obama was a Republican, the Left would have somehow gotten ahold of his lifetime membership at Chicago gay bathhouse Man’s Country and would have plastered those records across Politico to destroy his political career.

If Barack Obama was a Republican, the press would have quickly interpreted the dearth of girlfriends in his past as evidence of a surfeit of boyfriends and no one at the New York Times would have slept a wink until every Tom, Dick, or Larry in Barack Obama’s little black book was awarded his own reality show to gush about their down-low adventures.

As I said, everything above (as well as everything in DuJan’s whole post) is unsourced and uncorroborated speculation.  Nevertheless, it finally adds the necessary air of verisimilitude to what has always been, for me, an unconvincing narrative.

Reading DuJan’s post, I had that light bulb moment where you think, “Well, that finally answers all my questions. That explains the missing past.  He’s not a Manchurian candidate hatched by George Soros in a secret lab.  He’s a gay guy whose past has been neatly buried because it’s not politically expedient for it to be known.”

DuJan’s statements reminded me of Sherlock Holmes’s advice to Watson? “How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”

What say you?

(Hat tip:  The Radio Patriot)

UPDATE II:  I have been informed that Kevin is being satirical:  there have long been rumors out there about Obama’s sexuality, so Kevin is restating existing rumors, rather than making rumors up out of whole cloth, but his full-frontal attack has less to do with Obama’s sexuality than with Kevin’s frustration about the media’s stunning lack of interest in Obama’s past.  I prefer my satire more light-handed, so that it’s actually recognizable as satire.  As for me, I continue to believe that the best way to put to rest stories about Obama’s past is for the Obama and friends to stop hiding that same past.

UPDATE:  Earl, in the first comment to this post, asks such a good question I think it deserves a full answer here, in the body of the post.  You can decide whether what I write actually constitutes a good answer or if it is merely a full answer, as in full of something unsavory.  Here’s what Earl wrote:

I do wonder how come you can entertain this narrative even for a single moment…..yet, doubt that Herman Cain may very well be the victim of a Chicago setup because he’s getting a bit too “uppity” for a conservative black man.  Is the latter even marginally less believable than the former?

The reason I find the accusations against Obama worthy of note, although I’m fully aware that they lack support, is because, as matters now stand, they are at least as believable as the charges against Cain (and, as I’ll explain below, perhaps even more believable).  I’ve already pointed out that, given the way in which the Ninth Circuit, in 1991, opened the floodgates to greenmail harassment claims, I don’t find the existence of the lawsuits against Cain themselves persuasive proof of harassment.  There were just too many claims against everyone back in the 1990s, and too many (some of which I worked on or researched) that were motivated by greed or revenge, rather than actual injury.

Having said that, if someone emerges with concrete, contemporaneous evidence that Cain is a serial harasser, I’m not going to perjure my soul by defending him.  I did that once with Clinton, back in my liberal days, and I still feel soiled.  Currently, to the extent the charges are vague, or the accusers are so flaky, it’s hard for me to take the anti-Cain charges seriously.  I’m therefore still inclined to view this as the usual liberal attack against a conservative black man. After all, we know that liberals, especially liberal journalists, will lie in defense of a greater political goal.

For me, though, the real issue is one of narrative:  Clinton came to D.C. with a sordid reputation already well intact.  The subsequent accusations of sexual harassment and assault were entirely consistent with the existing narrative.  Cain did not come onto the national political scene with a sullied reputation.  Neither did another black man whom the media pilloried out of the blue for sexual behavior.  That would be, of course, Clarence Thomas.  As to both Cain and Thomas, the claims are inconsistent with their life narratives.  It doesn’t mean the claims are untrue.  But usually, if such claims are true, and there is a sordid past, the dominoes fall very quickly once the story finally gets out.

The above explains why I’m holding my fire re Cain.  It’s not that I’m a rabid Cain supporter, because I’m not.  I like him, but I have strong doubts about his ability to be president.  If he’s soiled goods, I’d just as soon see him out of the game quickly and finally.  Nevertheless, I’m not going to leap upon shady accusations from the MSM.

Obama is a different matter entirely.  While Cain and Thomas had narratives inconsistent with sexual harassment, and Clinton had a narrative entirely consistent with sexual harassment, what’s been fascinating about Obama is the complete absence of a narrative.  I’ve been fulminating about that black hole for years.  It’s not credible that someone could have been born and raised in America (as I believe he was) and have absolutely no past beyond the snippets he grudgingly offers.  The media’s lack of interest in this golden boy’s past was also incredible and offensive.  To hark back to Sherlock Holmes, the media’s coverage or, more precisely, the media’s refusal to provide coverage, was the case of the dog that didn’t bark in the night.  When those who are supposed to be watchdogs are completely silent, that too is suspicious.

I wouldn’t mind if Obama was gay.  I don’t have any problems with the fact that people, in their private lives, love their own sex.  I would never presume to direct the heart.  If a gay candidate was a rock solid gay conservative, strong on national security; dedicated to individual liberty (which, really, all gays should be); a believer in free markets; proud of his country; and supportive of traditional middle-class values, I would vote for him in a New York minute.  My issue with Obama isn’t his sexuality, whatever it is, but the fact that he stands for so many things that offend me as a citizen:  He’s weak on national security; dedicated to subordinating individuals to the power of the state; hostile to free markets; embarrassed by his country; and, to top it all off he, consistently undermines traditional middle-class values.

To sum it up, what really bugs me is the double standard.  The media refused to bark or even sniff around Obama, despite the fact that the accusations against him are worthy of inquiry, while the same media used its bully pulpit and resources to provide wall-to-wall coverage savaging Clarence Thomas and is now doing the same to Herman Cain.  The double-standard is especially offensive given the fact that the Cain and Thomas accusations are inconsistent with the men’s known histories, while the Obama accusations mesh quite nicely, thank you — as nicely as any other salacious rumors could — with Obama’s entirely unknown history.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Earl

    Well, THAT’s the epitome of a “hot topic”…..Wowsers!
    I do wonder how come you can entertain this narrative even for a single moment…..yet, doubt that Herman Cain may very well be the victim of a Chicago setup because he’s getting a bit too “uppity” for a conservative black man.  Is the latter even marginally less believable than the former?

  • Danny Lemieux

    Don’t forget Obama’s sordid history with Franklin Marshall Davis, a communist and admitted pedophile. Look very carefully at Davis’ photo.

    And, then, to resurrect an old post from one of Book’s blogs she likes, there is this: 

  • suek

    Irrelevant. Now…if there was hard info on the birth certificate…!!

    If he were a strong effective president who not only studied the Constitution but actually believed in its principles, I wouldn’t care what his sexuality preferences were. If instead, he is what I think he is – a man who studied the Constitution in order to find ways to work around it, because he thinks that marxism is a preferred form of government – I still don’t care what his sexuality is – I just want him _OUT_!

    I believe homosexuality is immoral by the standards I hold. It’s “above my pay grade” to determine anyone else’s moral culpability. I also think it’s biologically abnormal (by the definition of “normal”). But that’s a different discussion.

  • Danny Lemieux

    Suek, I agree with you on this: I don’t care about his sexual orientation.

    However, the more we that we learn about his hidden background the more an image emerges of a very psychologically disturbed family background.

    And that, I suggest, is very important for us…and the world at large…to know.

  • suek

    >>And that, I suggest, is very important for us…and the world at large…to know.>>

    Why? He’s president unless he’s impeached or voted out. I frequently ponder on the consequences if someone (and it seems completely unclear who has the authority) finds the legal ability to declare him to have been ineligible to be president – but at this stage of the game, that seems extremely improbable. All concerned would rather let sleeping dogs lie. I get so frustrated – because we haven’t even taken this opportunity to determine what should be done should such a situation somehow occur again, and who is able to do what, and what should result. Personally, I think he’s guilty of fraud. And I think that there are some in the Democrat Party who should go to jail. But that’s just my opinion.

    So – suppose you expose his hidden background and confirm that he has a very psychologically disturbed family background. Then what? What difference do you think it would make?

  • Mike Devx

    A radio show was having a LOT of fun with this very topic yesterday.

    As they put it: Since Politico has established a new level of journalistic standard, where innuendo and rumors and anonymity are grounds for “legitimate stories” about presidents and presidential candidates, let’s discuss all the rumors surrounding Barack Obama’s apparent gay proclivities while in Chicago.”

    I’ve had the radio podcast running while messing with my computer this morning.  The show is QUITE entertaining.  After the first half, you really do start to wonder whether there’s any there there.  If Sharon Bialek is to be believed, then the one of Obama’s “accusers” who also has gone public is to be believed as well!

    Check it out, it really is fun stuff.

    suek says: Irrelevant.
    Danny L says:  Suek, I agree with you on this: I don’t care about his sexual orientation.

    For the two of you this may be true.  But it isn’t true overall for most people.

    For me the Cain controversy would come down to integrity and his ability to lead the American people, and so after another week I will take a look at all the allegations seriously.  For some people, a gay Obama is a disqualifier.  For me, the lying and cheating and conspiracy would be the disqualifiers.  In any case, if Obama were outed, he would have to withdraw from the nomination run for 2012.  It’s the same problem for him as these current allegations against Cain:  So many people, for so many DIFFERENT reasons, would refuse to support him, that he couldn’t possibly be elected.


  • jj

    Obama exhibits so many signs and indications of so many pathologies – either as actor or victim – that it’s hard to see this as being at all unusual.  Or particularly unexpected: having Frank Marshall Davis around for what were referred to at one time as the ‘formative years’ more or less puts a seal on it.  The idea hardly comes as a surprise.  Though it must be said, if this were his only issue he’d be making a much more convincing pass at being normal than he currently does.
    Not to blow my own horn in the prescience department, but I’ve been wondering about this for a couple of years.  Plenty of people exhibit behavior A; plenty exhibit behavior B; plenty exhibit behavior C: those do not by themselves make for certainty.  But, when someone exhibits behavior A in combination with B, then one is free to begin speculating.  When in combination with A and B there begin to appear episodes of C, then the matter becomes worthy of question.  That’s the stage we’ve attained – those of who are capable of paying attention – with Obama.
    There is so much wrong with him that he’s a compendium of questions.  As I said: if he were just gay he’d be far more normal than he presents.  I am absolutely amazed that this person is anywhere within reach of the levers of power of this country, and I am less and less and less capable of civility toward those who intend to vote for him again.

  • Mike Devx

    If you listen to just the first 15 minutes of that radio podcast I linked to in #6, and consider as well the level of proof described on Obama’s gay activities with Cain’s sexual activities.  You’ll find I think that there is JUST AS MUCH, or even MORE, evidence for Obama’s activities as Cain’s activities.  So why not take the Obama charges seriously and also worthy of deeper investigation?  If it’s good for the goose…

    As unfair (by professional journalistic standards) as it may be, this is an interesting question:  The MSM *should* have loved to give us a whole bunch of soft pieces on Obama’s former girlfriends.  Puff pieces, glowing pieces on what a wonderful and romantic and delightful fellow he is.  But there hasn’t been even a SINGLE ONE?  That is telling odd, isn’t it?

    If they can do it to Cain, and they’re *journalists* for crying out looud, then I can do it to Obama.  Where there’s smoke, baby, there’s FIRE!

  • Tonestaple

    I believe if you read further back in Kevin DuJan’s blog, you will find that he claims to know first-hand witnesses who saw Obama in the bathhouse, always pitching, never catching.

    I don’t particularly want this discussed in public because there are two little girls involved.  If it were Obama all by himself or just O and Michelle, I wouldn’t give a damn, but this sort of thing is bound to be very upsetting to his daughters and so I reluctantly give him a pass.

    The MSM is always going to misbehave as long as the universities are hopelessly politicized and messing up two innocent bystanders’ lives isn’t going to fix that.

  • Earl

    In case you missed it over on the other post, here’s the Chicago story about Bialek and Cain last month:

  • Simplemind

    you dont  think he’s straight because no contemporary girlfriends or friends are on record stating that he is hetero. I don’t think he’s gay because no contemporary boyfriends or friends are on record as stating that he is homo. I don’t believe you could keep that in the closet. Too many would know.     Is it possible that he’s such a narcisist that he never bothered to date, and only deigned to court and marry michele because she insisted. . .

  • Bookworm

    Simplemind:  On its face, your argument is logical.  In fact, given that the vast majority of the gay community supports Obama’s political goal, I’m not so sure.  The gay community is also good at keeping its secrets.  As a child growing up in San Francisco, I’d long heard the rumor that Rock Hudson was gay, but the community sat on that rumor.  They preferred having Rock out there as a manly man, rather than being a gay target.  Even in this “Glee” day and age, people, including gays and lesbians themselves, approach closet homosexuality differently from other secrets.

  • oceanguy

    No old girlfriends have been heard from?  Well neither have any old boyfriends.  The lack of friends of any sort is significant enough and his sexuality is meaningless.  His lack of record of accomplishment is remarkable, and the lack of a voice to humanize his early years is eerie.  And as you say, what’s most troubling is the utter lack of curiosity from the media… but lack of girlfriends coming forward?  i don’t know… show me a past boyfriend and I might give it a thought. 


  • Pingback: Transterrestrial Musings - Why Won’t The Media Report On Barack Obama’s Sexual Orientation?()

  • jj

    Sort of what I said, simplemind and oceanguy.  The issue of orientation is a minor one in the long list of this guy’s problems.

  • Bookworm

    I agree.  It’s not the orientation, it’s the tabula rasa.  This guy is a cipher, because no one talks, and investigators who might be the slightest bit hostile to him are blocked at every turn.  It’s just inconceivable to me that a man can have gone through a life lived in Hawaii, Indonesia, California, New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois; written “autobiographical” books; run for several elected offices; and still be wrapped in a cloud of nothingness. 

    His sexual orientation is a salacious question that is as enjoyable or unpleasant as one wants it to be; his secrets and the media’s lack of curiosity are much larger problems for the integrity of the American system.

  • Mike Devx

    Concerning Obama’s sexual nature:
    If you were to decide that the large number of rumors surrounding Obama are true, you would decide that he is bisexual, and his “gay side” is to be dominant receiving oral sex, and to have short flings with youngish Pakistani men.  The lack of a long-term relationship would be due to his extreme narcissicism and the leftist gay aproach to sex, which is to have frequent anonymous encounters, one-night stands, or other very short “encounters”.

    One accuser has gone public: Larry Sinclair.
    The YouTube link to his public press conference complete with lawyer:

    An accurate transcript of that YouTube press conference:

    The key two paragraphs from that statement (though there is plenty more of a less salacious nature):
    Senator Obama and I then departed the bar in my limousine and proceeded to an unknown location where Senator Obama exited the limousine with two hundred fifty dollars ($250) I had given him and returned a short while later with an “eightball” of cocaine which he gave to me. I did ingest a couple of lines of cocaine, and shortly thereafter Senator Obama produced a glass cylinder pipe and packet of crack cocaine from his pants pocket and Obama smoked the crack cocaine. I performed fellatio on Senator Obama in the limousine during the time Senator Obama was smoking crack cocaine, after which I had the driver take me to the my hotel, The Comfort Suits, Gurnee, Illinois.
    The following day, November 7, 1999, Senator Obama appeared at my hotel room where we again ingested cocaine and I again performed fellatio on Senator Obama. Significantly, both the driver’s telephone call to Senator Obama and his call to the drug dealer should appear on the driver’s and Senator Obama’s cellphone billing statements.
    There are the pictures of Obama with the Pakistani man in which they are, at a minimum, surprisingly affectionate.  this is the man with whom Obama visited Pakistan for a trip shrouded in mystery.  There are the unusual circumstances surrounding Kal Penn and Reggie Love, both men widely surmised to be gay.  There is Obama’s bisexual roommate while at college.

    There are widespread rumors in Chicago of Obama, while Illinois Senator, cruising a gay bathhouse and receiving many, many instances of oral sex there.  There’s the odd behavior at a more upscale and restricted-access health club there.

    I’m sure there’s plenty more I haven’t heard yet; just as there may be more concerning Herman Cain I haven’t heard yet?

    If you substitute a conservative man’s name in all of these Obama incidents and allegations, one public and many anonymous – just like with Herman Cain! – so, say, substitute Herman Cain for Barack Obama – and put Politico on the case, what do you think would have been the result?

  • MacG

    Speaking of his past and Suek mention of the Birth cert, my 2.01 GPA needs a hand diagramming this sentence “





    /* Style Definitions */
    {mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
    mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
    mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
    mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;

    “If there is an Arab American somewhere getting rounded up by [Attorney General] John Ashcroft, without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties even if I am not an immigrant,” he declares,”  Is he saying he is an immigrant?

  • bizcor

    (tabula rasa) I’ll be over at the online dictionary. (I love it when you do this to me.) OK

    I have often wonder where the hell he came from and why his past is so secret. Perhaps Mike Devx has hit the nail on the head. It never occured to me that he was gay. I figured he covered his past in order to hide his Marxist affiliations. I have heard that Frank Marshal Davis was a pedifile and I did know Obama was involved with him it just never clicked. I do wish he would go back to where he came from but I am afraid Barack Obama, like Bill Clinton,  will be doing his best to ruin our lives long after he is out of the White House.

    Regarding Herman Cain I tend to agree with the Bookworm. Back in those days ifa man turned his head the wrong way he was accused of sexual harrasment and it was far less expensive to pay off the accusers than to go through the litigation. The fact that Gloria Alred is involved makes me immediately suspicious. I have the same regard for Gloria as I do Elizabeth Warren, Martha Coakly, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi. Please excuse me if I have left anyone out. I wouldn’t want to slight anyone.    


    All of “it” including Zippy’s biography, the  lingering unanswered questions either never asked or never answered eludes me. The biggie for me is and continues to be the silence of all those “fine” politicians. I think it was Joe Wilson? who called Zippy a “liar” the conservatives went bonkers demanding an apology. Yeah, yeah I know the press did everything but “press” for answers, but let’s face it, they’re fed the bait from insiders and friends of insiders and and and.
    So, you gotta ask yourself the five W’s – Who? What? Where? When? Why? Maybe there is no real opposition in Washington, maybe they’re all playing on the same team and they just wear different colors to confuse the fans. Good grief, Bush I was the former head of the CIA – is someone telling me he doesn’t know the five W’s of Obama or Bush II or the GOP or those that serve in a hundred other departments don’t know diddly.
    There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your television set.

    If you have ever wondered about the government’s ability to control the civilian airwaves, you will have your answer on November 9th.
    On that day, federal authorities are going to shut off all television and radio communications simultaneously at 2:00PM EST to complete the first ever test of the national Emergency Alert System (EAS).

  • Indigo Red

    At least we can rule out Obama as an extraterrestrial because the White House denies contact with space aliens.

  • who me

    I’ve always thought BO’s poem, Pop, was about Franklin M Davis and their sexual encounters:

    Pop takes another shot, neat,
    Points out the same amber
    Stain on his shorts that I’ve got on mine, and
    Makes me smell his smell, coming
    From me; he switches channels, recites an old poem

    In all probability, BO was sexually abused as a child. Add all the Marxist indoctrination that fed him, is it any wonder he’s a psychological mess? It’s most likey that the advent of Obama caused the
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders to eliminate narcissistic personality disorder.

  • ConnectTheDots

    Lest we forget, Kal Penn’s appointment as “Arts Liasion” for the White House was quite suspicious. Rumor was that he was a favorite boy-toy of Teh Won.
    There is plenty of innuendo about Obowmao’s sexuality swirling on the ‘net, particularly the discussion of “Man’s Country” in the Chicago area. Read this:
    Apparently he prefers fellatio from old white men to give him a sense of power.
    I really don’t care about his sexual orientation. I DO care that this is yet another lie that has, shall we say, been shoved down the throat of the American public?
    Obama’s past is totally blank. No past friends. No school records.
    Since we can’t count on the Republicans in the House to do the right thing and investigate him (always curious – what are they afraid of), the best we can hope for is that we can reduce the ballot-box cheating enough in 2012 to run him out of town.

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Kettle Calling The Pot Black Edition()

  • Spartacus

    “We understand that the United States has developed a defense against our anti-ship missiles, but we have no details at this time.  A certain Mr. Jones from your Department of Energy will be requesting an upgrade to his security clearance to access the files — please see to it that this is granted.”
    There are many, many federal jobs for which one may have a sexual orientation other than the one advertised, and it is irrelevant; CINC ain’t one of ’em.  Ferreting out the pressure points and weaknesses of key individuals is Foreign Intelligence Collection 101.  Who paid for Harvard Law School?  What’s the story with that trip to Pakistan?  And yes, for whom has he unzipped?  I don’t pretend to know the answers to these questions, but they are basic questions that all competent foreign intelligence services became intensely interested in as soon as Barack became a senator.
    I don’t know how many of his abominable decisions are due to explicit or implicit blackmail, but I’d be very surprised if the answer were zero.  I mean, if this clown walked into an Air Force recruiting office and tried to sign up as an E-4 intel analyst whose job was to look at satellite photos of garbage dumps in the Syrian desert, the security folks would look at his (mostly blank) background and laugh themselves silly while thumping a great big “REJECTED” stamp on the application.  He’s a security nightmare.  But the voters, with no questions asked, bypassed all of that and handed him the keys to the kingdom anyway.
    For the sake of gossip, I don’t much care which way his compass points, or who has paid his way, or any of that.  But for the sake of understanding the character and verifying the integrity of our single most important employee, who holds the fate of the world in his hands, it matters, and we are right to ask a few questions.

  • Libby

    I agree with others that Obama’s sexuality alone is not that important. However, this mysteriously empty past of his is alarming for the reasons that Spartacus mentioned above – who is he beholden to for keeping his secrets? It’s alarming because it seems to indicate that a lot of people have been involved in keeping so much of his life a secret. While I imagine some have complied voluntarily, how many people have been pressured or paid off to remain silent? How many records have been lost or doctored? Who is benefiting from all of this subterfuge? I’ve never been one to entertain conspiracy theories, but his tabula rasa has made even the wildest claims seem possible (if not always plausible).

  • Pingback: Blogpost Blogpost on the Wall |()

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Why Obama’s secret past — assuming there is one — matters()

  • Mike Devx

    > I agree with others that Obama’s sexuality alone is not that important. 

    I agree.  And it’s been fun pointing out all the hefty rumors and anonymous allegations surrounding Obama’s sexuality.   For me the key is that accusers of Republicans are lauded as heros and heroines, and the Republican is guilty until proven innocent.   Accusers of Democrats are treated with extreme viciousness and are torn apart by the media and the Democrat machine – or simply ignored and silenced if at all possible.

    If you ignore the media hyperbole and just look at the substance, and compare it to the substance of the rumors swirling around Obama, you see there was so much more there for an Obama scandal than for a Cain scandal.  Yet which got coverage (wall to wall coverage!)

    I still don’t know what’s true and what isn’t.  Wait and see.  Keep your powder dry.

  • Pingback: Watcher Council Nominations |

  • Pingback: » Blog Archive » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Kettle Calling The Pot Black Edition()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Kettle Calling The Pot Black Edition |

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Kettle Calling The Pot Black Edition()

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watchers Council Results()

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watchers Council Results - 11-11-2011 | Virginia Right!()

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results |

  • Pingback: » Blog Archive » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watchers Council Results 11/11/11()

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watchers Council Results 11/11/11()

  • Pingback: ¡Landslide! |()

  • Pingback: Rhymes With Right()

  • JudyNM

    This thread seems so weird to me.  When the Herman Cain women came out, I noted to my husband that BHO has never known a female prior to meeting Michelle, apparently.  His personal life, to include his years in college are totally redacted and we know nothing about the man other than his ties to Ayers and Wright.  I seems to me he is totally a Manchurian candidate and the worst part – the American citizenry does not seem to care.

  • Ymarsakar

    As always, the Left is the source of the problem and everybody else, Barack included, is only a symptom of the disease.

  • Pingback: Weasel Watchers & Some Great Articles | Independent Sentinel()