Obama's 'Dreams From My Father' - a whole lot of FICTION

"Dreams From My Father' .... Lots of fiction .. and yet schools across this country teach it as 'fact' and have it on their reading lists. And gullible people around the world believe the garbage it.

Obama's American Story Faces Fresh Scrutiny

By some counts, The Story presents more than three-dozen instances of material discrepancy where Dreams fails to align with the facts as Maraniss reports them. Case in point: Maraniss confirmed that Mr. Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, left his father, Barack Obama, Sr., a volatile bigamist, and not the other way around, as related in Dreams.

Dreams also related the tale of Obama's paternal grandfather, Hussein Onyango, who was said to have been detained and tortured in a prison outside Nairobi for six months because of his brave defiance of British colonialists. But after a half-dozen interviews and other research, Maraniss deemed the tale "unlikely." ...

David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker magazine and author of a previous biography, The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama, published in 2010, judged Dreams to be "a mixture of verifiable fact, recollection, recreation, invention, and artful shaping." Remnick concluded that Author Obama wanted his life story to fit into a long tradition of African-American literature: a "narrative of ascent" discernible in early slave memoirs right up through contemporary classics like Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man (1952) and The Autobiography of Malcolm X (1965).

But Obama's early life, while sad in many respects, was too marked by privilege -- recreational drug use, a Hawaii upbringing with financially comfortable white parents, enrollment in elite private schools and universities -- to mesh neatly with the aggrieved black literature in which the young author was so well read and conversant. "Obama seems to sense this problem and, at the very start of his book, darkens his canvas as well as he can," Remnick wrote

Inventions, eh? Another word for LIES and MANIPULATIONS. We shouldn't be surprised. He lied all through the election ... claiming a relative that liberated the Jews in WWII ... claiming that the civil rights march (and the Kennedys) are how his parents got together .... etc etc. His book should NOT be on the required reading list at the schools. (and it is ... at least around here it is). It's nothing more than propaganda.

Autobiography is rarely completely true.

This is a good explanation of what I mean by author, Robert Stone:

Source

Question: Can memoirists ever avoid fictionalizing themselves?

Robert Stone: No, I don't think they can, because as soon as you change something from life to language, you're changing it. You're changing it in this ineluctable way. It isn't the same. It's something different. And when you put it into language. Even if memory didn't distort, which memory does, you're still changing it. You can't help it.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Autobiography is rarely completely true.

Which is why I don't like them used as 'required reading' in the schools. They are self promoting .. especially if they are written by politicians or aspiring politicians. And unfortunately they don't have a special designation. They should have this on each one (like a warning label on cigarettes) ...

Autobiography * DISCLAIMER/WARNING ... the information in this book was not been verified or vetted. If written by a politician you can not trust what you see between the covers. Read at your own risk.

"Artful Shaping" That's a new one on me. I've been picking apart his book since I first read it years ago. Comparing "details"/"inventions" in his book to known facts about him or his family don't add up. Nothing adds up in his contrived composite that was partially written by Bill Ayers (allegedly).

That's why the story always changes when Barack or Michelle utter an unfortunate "misspeak". Oopsy Poopsy!

Yet that book we were originally told was supposed to be "THE" source for all Obama facts. Until NOW. As the truth of Obama's Composite creations, embellishments and bald face lies continue to surface.

The whole book was written to create and interesting character where none previously existed. He tells a tell of a deprived upbringing yet was privileged enough to attend on of the most exclusive schools in Hawaii and then went on to attend 3 exclusive and expensive institutions afterwards.

The only truth that can be gleaned from his "story" is that he is an elitist.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Fox News is a credible website. Fox News is fair and balanced. Fox News it not biased. Do not question the OP's source for this information because it's credible in all regards.

Stay tuned for more factual information about politics from Fox News. That is all.

My favorite Michelle statement is also the statement that said it all regarding Obama's fable. The truth certainly lies in this statement during a prepared speaking engagement on the campaign trail in 2008.

In context

Obama used the roundtable audience, as she did yesterday, to describe her husband's understanding of women's issues through the prism of the strong -- but sometimes struggling -- women in his life.

His own mother, she said at the beginning of her remarks, was "very young and very single when she had him." And, Obama added, he has observed his wife's attempts to reconcile motherhood with her career aspirations.

Certainly contradicts many assorted details in "Dreams..." Did Michelle simply make this up to paint Obama as one who understands women or was she revealing the truth. What's the LIE and what is the truth or does it vary according to the audience??

firstread.msnbc.msn.com...

reply to post by brianmg5




Read the link

That process has now reached a kind of zenith, with the publication last month of Barack Obama: The Story, a deeply researched, 600-page study of the president's ancestry and early life by Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and Washington Post editor David Maraniss.

It's a book put out by a Pulitzer Prize winning historian who works at the Washington Post.
Do you dispute his findings? The research in the book shows Obama LIED. A LOT.
Can you prove Obama told the truth and didn't lie? No? Didn't think so.

reply to post by FlyersFan


I read the article before I found your post. I wasn't criticizing the content of your story I was criticizing your source. You come attempting to deliver information to an audience (some of which already agree with you, some of which don't) in order to show them all what you found and you use Fox News as your source? Good luck reaching anyone who doesn't agree with you as your source has zero credibility as the political spinning arm of Rupert Murdoch.

Anyone with half a brain isn't going to read what you've posted because they'll assume it's just more lies or bias from Fox News.

Originally posted by brianmg5
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

I read the article before I found your post. I wasn't criticizing the content of your story I was criticizing your source. You come attempting to deliver information to an audience (some of which already agree with you, some of which don't) in order to show them all what you found and you use Fox News as your source? Good luck reaching anyone who doesn't agree with you as your source has zero credibility as the political spinning arm of Rupert Murdoch.

Anyone with half a brain isn't going to read what you've posted because they'll assume it's just more lies or bias from Fox News.

You do realize that Fox is just reporting the information from trusted sources as you read in the article. You could easily read the same article from Reuters if they had the balls to publish it.

Have you read "Dreams"?

Did you read about Obama admitting to the creation of composite girlfriends in his book?

Attacking Fox just to attack Fox is a child's game. Attack the information that they are conveying. Prove that they are wrong. Better yet prove that Obama is not a liar.

Just go watch MSNBC and you'll be just fine BTW I quoted them regarding Michelle's major revelation just to appeal to the "faux news" haters.

Too Funny!!

Originally posted by jibeho

Originally posted by brianmg5
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

I read the article before I found your post. I wasn't criticizing the content of your story I was criticizing your source. You come attempting to deliver information to an audience (some of which already agree with you, some of which don't) in order to show them all what you found and you use Fox News as your source? Good luck reaching anyone who doesn't agree with you as your source has zero credibility as the political spinning arm of Rupert Murdoch.

Anyone with half a brain isn't going to read what you've posted because they'll assume it's just more lies or bias from Fox News.

You do realize that Fox is just reporting the information from trusted sources as you read in the article. You could easily read the same article from Reuters if they had the balls to publish it.

Have you read "Dreams"?

Did you read about Obama admitting to the creation of composite girlfriends in his book?

Attacking Fox just to attack Fox is a child's game. Attack the information that they are conveying. Prove that they are wrong. Better yet prove that Obama is not a liar.

Just go watch MSNBC and you'll be just fine

BTW I quoted them regarding Michelle's major revelation just to appeal to the "faux news" haters.

Too Funny!!

Not attacking fox, just saying they're not a credible source of info. It doesn't matter if the material is true or not, no one can really know because it's from Fox. I would say the same thing if it was quoted from CNN or MSNBC.

Prove that Obama is not a liar? Prove that any politician throughout history isn't a liar... Politicians lying is not news, it's the norm. Name one president throughout our history who hasn't lied.

So you're saying that you posted information from fox news to frustrate a specific section of your audience? Why are you trying to frustrate your audience? Or are you here for stars, slaps on the back, and confirmation of your beliefs instead of honest debate? Maybe you're just here to make political jabs, aka trolling?

Who's being childish here?

reply to post by brianmg5

Prove that Obama is not a liar? Prove that any politician throughout history isn't a liar... Politicians lying is not news, it's the norm. Name one president throughout our history who hasn't lied.

Yes politicians lie and Obama lies with the best of them. In this instance regarding the OP and his book. Obama has lied about basic biographical information of his personal history. Not sure how many presidents have been caught lying about the basic of all basic information. Or been caught "misspeaking" about said information. or wives caught contradicting the "approved story" etc etc

reply to post by jibeho

Originally posted by jibeho
Have you read "Dreams"?

I have.

Did you read about Obama admitting to the creation of composite girlfriends in his book?

You're kidding! You mean, all I had invested in his girlfriend information being correct is WRONG!?!?!?! Oh! The humanity! :cry:

Look. People are aware that everything they read isn't 100% true. If you read ANY autobiography and believe it 100%, you're naive. Putting a life on paper, not even considering incorrect memories, is going to result in something that's not exactly as it was. This is a given.

Until someone can show me that a lie in "Dreams" affects what he's doing today as our president, I'm not going to lose any sleep nit-picking everything about it.

Better yet prove that Obama is not a liar.

Every president we've had is a liar. They're politicians, remember? Why do you hold Obama to different standards than every other president before him?

So, what if his parents were never married? So what? So what if he lied about being a bastard? It wouldn't be the first time. And it has ZERO to do with his presidency. It's not like he has supporters who CARE if his parents were actually married or not.

What biographical information did he lie about?

"Autobiographies are not really good sources if you're looking for absolute complete factual accounts of someone's life," agreed Professor Early. "Autobiographies serve another kind of purpose for the person writing the book. I don't think it much matters whether Barack Obama has told the absolute truth in Dreams From My Father. What's important is how he wanted to construct his life."

Read more: www.foxnews.com...

Why single Obama out? Why not admit that his autobiography is no more untrue than any other president's autobiography/memoirs?

Many of Bush's literary misdemeanors exemplify pedestrian sloth, but others are higher crimes against the craft of memoir. In one prime instance, Bush relates a poignant meeting between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and a Tajik warlord on Karzai's Inauguration Day. It's the kind of scene that offers a glimpse of a hopeful future for the beleaguered nation. Witnessing such an exchange could color a president's outlook, could explain perhaps Bush's more optimistic outlook and give insight into his future decisions. Except Bush didn't witness it. Because, as he himself writes later in the book, he wasn't at Karzai's inauguration.

www.huffingtonpost.com... &utm_content=FullStory&utm_term=Daily+Brief#s180911&title=Tommy_Franks

In possibly the greatest advance in literary criticism since the invention of papyrus, former president Jimmy Carter has been slapped with a $5 million law suit over alleged inaccuracies in his controversial 2006 book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid

.

flcenterlitarts.wordpress.com...

Clinton's former advisor Dick Morris wrote a rebuttal named Because He Could, criticizing My Life. In the book, Morris presented what he believed to be factual inaccuracies of different events depicted in My Life.[4]

en.wikipedia.org...

I could go on and on....

Originally posted by brianmg5
your source has zero credibility

The ultimate source is a Pulitzer Prize winning author at the Washington Post.
It's HIS information .. not FOX 's.

Originally posted by brianmg5
Not attacking fox, just saying they're not a credible source of info.

THAT is an attack on Fox.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Look. People are aware that everything they read isn't 100% true.

You give people too much credit. The O-Bots buy everything that comes from Obama.
His autobiography has been quoted many, many times as a credible source of info.
But the truth is .... it's not.

BTW .. IMHO his lies about his upbringing and college years matter VERY much. It goes to his character. It goes to his honesty. It goes to TRANSPARENCY. It goes to the fact that he made himself out to be something that he wasn't in order to gain sympathy votes .. instead of votes for him for his (alleged) abilities.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Why single Obama out?

Because that is what the article was about. if you wish to post information showing how Obama is just like the rest of the liar politicians in this regards ... feel free.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Originally posted by FlyersFan
You give people too much credit. The O-Bots buy everything that comes from Obama.

Not the O-bot thing again! Please. Oh, well, there's only a few more months to endure it. I guess I can handle it. I can't wait to hear people having deep political discussions about "Rom-bots"...

Anyway, I don't know who these "O-bots" are... Sometimes I think conservatives made it up... I've NEVER heard anyone worship Obama, but the conservatives claim they're everywhere... But if these O-bots want to believe Obama is something he's not, then it's not my place to educate them. I don't really care if they buy every word, hook, line and sinker... Obama said plenty of unflattering things about himself in that book. Fortunately, I'm not looking for a savior. Never have been.

Keep spreading the truth to the O-bots.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And it has ZERO to do with his presidency.

Question ... On this thread you took Romney to task for supposedly telling lies. Romney left Bain; kept his money invested in the company; and then later the company invested in transport of medical waste. Which is all legal and above board. Somehow you said that equates a lie on his part (which it wasn't) and was a big deal in regards to him being a POTUS. But here we actually have Obama telling lie after lie after lie. Real lies that are verified. And you say it has ZERO to do with his presidency.

Could you explain to us, in your opinion, how Romney having an investment in a company that later invested in LEGAL transport of medical waste is a lie and something that has to do with his potential as POTUS .. but Obama being caught in a bunch more REAL lies is unimportant?

(they need a popcorn eating smilie here! )

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Oh, well, there's only a few more months to endure it. I guess I can handle it. I can't wait to hear people having deep political discussions about "Rom-bots"...

Won't happen. Romney won't be elected.

Anyway, I don't know who these "O-bots" are...

MSNBC. You can start there.

I've NEVER heard anyone worship Obama,

Yes you have. You just forgot. Here ...
quotes made by some of his most luv'n followers

Keep spreading the truth to the O-bots.

They are VERY real. Beware!
Keep your doors and windows locked tight!
Keep your TVs off NBC ... BOOOOOO!

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I can't wait to hear people having deep political discussions about "Rom-bots"...

Just because it's too dang hot outside to do anything and I'm bored .... I'll pretend Romney has a chance to win in November and I'll see if I can come up with some Rom-Bots ... It'll be hard because most people I know who are voting for the guy are doing so while holding their noses. He isn't exactly hard core conservative arm candy ya' know ...

Lets see .. I googled up Rom-bots and hard core Romney supporters etc etc ... General chatroom discussion is that Rom-bots may be found in the Mormon camp. Most say that Rom-bots .. or even true Romney supporters in general .. are an endangered species. Most Romney voters are really anti-Obama voters. Even at FOX news. At least .. that's what I'm finding on google and in the chatrooms.

More investigation is required into the missing Rom-Bots ...

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Why single Obama out?

Because that is what the article was about. if you wish to post information showing how Obama is just like the rest of the liar politicians in this regards ... feel free.

I believe I did just that. Did you not read my entire post?

I would wonder how much in "lobbing" bribe money was involved in the whole Obama book deals with public schools.

It seems to have started right away.

It is extremely important that parents be made aware of this, and make sure they teach their kids the real truths.

We already know the school systems won't (for the most part).

We all know by now that Obama ain't no "Honest Abe" either


(article from May 20, 2009 -- American thinker)

Obama may earn millions from taxpayer-funded schools in his new book deal.

Five days before taking the oath of office, President-elect Barack Obama signed a book deal with Crown Publishing Group to publish a version of his best-selling book, "Dreams from My Father", aimed at middle school and young adult age groups. Obama would receive a $500,000 advance payment against royalties, plus ongoing royalty payments. Some in the media have questioned the propriety of this deal from the angle that the President might be unduly influenced by Bertelsmann AG, the German based media publishing empire which owns Random House, which is the parent company of Crown Publishing.
Obama may earn Millions from Schools in Book Deal

a more recent article - March 6, 2012 -- The Foundry

In his newly published book Obama’s Education Takeover, The Pacific Research Institute’s Lance Izumi illustrates how Obama’s education policies – particularly his push to impose national education standards and tests – create significant costs for states and are unlikely to improve outcomes for children. “As seen so far, the national standards are costly, academically questionable, and deficient, contra-legal, and contra-constitutional. There is more than enough reason for the public, especially parents, to want change. Yet they are unlikely to get it given the byzantine centralized nationalization process created by the Obama Administration,” said Izumi.

Obama’s 2009 ”stimulus” granted nearly $100 billion in additional federal money to the U.S. Department of Education, yet, as Izumi notes, “the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that instead of funding reforms and raising student achievement, the education stimulus money simply went to “retaining staff and current education programs”— i.e. preserving the status quo.”

And while the significant amount of money gifted to the Department of Education has served to prop up the status quo, it was also used to carve out the administration’s Race to the Top program. RTT dangled $4.35 billion before cash-strapped states to incentivize them to adopt national standards and tests, a move which will cost them in terms of liberty and dollars down the road. “The Common Core standards would further burden already overstrained state budgets. Developing and overhauling state accountability systems will be far more costly and of questionable value during a time of budget shortfalls nationwide,” warned Heritage education analyst Lindsey Burke.
Book Review: “Obama’s Education Takeover”