Auntie Zeituni and the Obama campaign

On Thursday, the Times ran a story about having found Barack truth about enzyte Obama's "Auntie Zeituni" living in Boston, which included this observation and quote:
Aunt Zeituni is now also living in Boston, and recently made a $260 campaign contribution to her nephew's presidential bid from a work address in the city.

Speaking outside her home in Flaherty Way, South Boston, on Tuesday, Ms [Zeituni] Onyango, 56, confirmed she was the “Auntie Zeituni” in Mr Obama’s memoir. She declined to answer most other questions about her relationship with the presidential contender until after the November 4 election. “I can’t talk about it, I just pray for him, that’s all,” she said, adding: “After the 4th, I can talk to anyone."
It was an interesting comment for her to make because it left people wondering just what it was she could not say now, but could say once election day was out of the way. Who had instructed her to keep quiet? It would almost certainly be the Obama campaign - as no one else would have any reason for this old woman to say nothing. This is where things become interesting.

If the Obama campaign knew Auntie Zeituni was living in Boston and had asked her to keep quiet, it would defy belief that Obama did not know the Aunt he had written about fondly in his book 'Dreams from My Father' was there (after all, Obama's team showed how effectively it can uncover information when it set its sights on Joe the Plumber for daring to ask a difficult question that exposed Obama's agenda for wealth redistribution and taxation). But that is exactly the line being taken by Obama's team now it has emerged that Auntie Zeituni is allegedly an illegal immigrant who was supposed to have left the US four years ago when her asylum application was turned down. It seems that once again Obama's credibility and honesty are being called into question.

What this also shows is that checks on donations to the Obama campaign fund are simply ineffective. Zeituni Onyango, as a non-US citizen and living in the country illegally, is not allowed to make a campaign donation but has stated clearly she has made one. It will be interesting to see if the US media decides to investigate this story - for there is a story here - or if it will circle the wagons again to protect the electoral chances of their chosen messiah candidate yet again. Just like the LA Times has done by refusing to release a video showing Barack Obama praising a friend of his, former PLO activist Rashid Khalid, because it shows Obama was closer to him than he has admitted to.

Posted by Tony Sharp at 16:49 0 comments Links to this post

Labels: Barack Obama, Deception, Presidential Race, Spin, Trust, USA

Thursday, 30 October 2008
£1,384,615

So the BBC has decided to suspend Jonathan Ross from the corporation for three months without pay as punishment for his involvement in the offensive messages incident. I believe he should have been sacked for his behaviour, but there you are. Ross is in the middle of a three-year contract with the BBC worth £18m. His suspension will therefore cost him somewhere in the region of £1,384,615. With Russell Brand having resigned that will hopefully draw a line under the matter, allowing the media to focus on more important issues.

In the media's case that probably equates to Madonna and Guy Ritchie's divorce battle, or tension between Posh and Becks as David heads to Milan in January. If we look really hard we might be lucky and find a column inch or two on the recession, the economic crisis, rising unemployment, home repossessions, interest rate movements and bank liquidity. But do not hold your breath because all that stuff is far too grown up and confusing for the Socratic wonder that is the bulk of the UK media.

Posted by Tony Sharp at 20:47 4 comments Links to this post

Labels: BBC, Broken Britain, Celebrity, Jonathan Ross, Journalism, Media

By their friends shall ye know them

It might be too late for the John McCain Presidential campaign to overhaul the lead Barack Obama seems to have in opinion polling. But just maybe some undecided voters may be swayed by the revelations emerging from a Pennsylvania court house about the tactics of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and further evidence of links between that group and Barack Obama's campaign.

Following on from this blog's previous quick glance at the ACORN-Obama relationship, it has come to light that the FBI is now investigating ACORN's voter registration efforts in several states, amid allegations that almost a third of the 1.3 million registration cards it has turned in are invalid. As for that relationship between the group and Obama and his team, the Wall Street Journal reports:
The Obama campaign denies it "has any ties" to Acorn, but Mr. Obama's ties are extensive. In 1992 he headed a registration effort for Project Vote, an Acorn partner at the time. He did so well that he was made a top trainer for Acorn's Chicago conferences. In 1995, he represented Acorn in a key case upholding the constitutionality of the new Motor Voter Act -- the first law passed by the Clinton administration -- which created the mandated, nationwide postcard voter registration system that Acorn workers are using to flood election offices with bogus registrations.
Any politician who actively encourages and solicits material support from a group that encourages bogus voter registrations and runs what is effectively a protection racket, in this case ACORN's "Money for Muscle" activity, should be viewed with suspicion. ACORN is supposedly doing nothing more than signing up people as part of a voter registration drive. But not only has it declared for Obama, it has also taken (through the guise of its umbrella group, Citizens Consulting Inc.) $832,000 from the Obama campaign for a large scale get-out-the-vote effort in key primary states. As Rick Moran, writing in American Thinker sums up:
The Obama campaign gave more than $800,000 to ACORN this election cycle and then tried to hide the payments by claiming they were for services rendered. Eventually, they had to amend their FEC reports but the connections are clear; Obama and ACORN are joined at the hip and any nonsense to the contrary is just plain lying.

It's good to see ACORN's thuggery outside of the election process exposed as well. Judging by the actions ACORN has taken against its enemies in the past, I hope Ms. MonCrief [the witness in the court case] has some protection.
These are the sort of people Obama has surrounded himself with. His personal association with ACORN and efforts to hide the fact once again raises questions about Obama's judgment and character and does not bode well for the Presidency if he goes on to win the election that takes place next Tuesday. Another curious question is why Obama's aunt, who lives in Boston having apparently moved there from Kenya eight years ago, cannot talk about Obama until after election day. Yet more secrecy surrounding his past and elements of his present. McCain is not a person I would particularly like to see as President, but I would choose him over the mendacious and evasive Obama every time. It looks unlikely, but I hope the American people feel the same way on Tuesday.

Posted by Tony Sharp at 17:10 3 comments Links to this post

Labels: Barack Obama, Deception, John McCain, Presidential Race, Sleaze

Europe responds, then backs down again

Last weekend this blog commented on the desire of new Defence Secretary, John Hutton, to see Britain participate in a European Army concept. Believing such a force would be a duplicate and counterfeit version of NATO, I nonetheless noted at the time from a British perspective:
The EU likes the idea of having a military toy of its own so it can feel like a large federal nation, but we cannot rely on it if it is needed to do anything arduous such as fighting. Siding with an 'alliance' that does not supply men and material when needed, and which is planned to be an alternative to NATO with duplicate structures would be strategic lunacy.
How prophetic. Just days later a European rapid reaction has been put forward as the heroic entity that would rush to the Democratic Republic of Congo to reinforce the overstretched UN peacekeeping mission there. The always excellent EU Referendum explains what has transpired - you really need to read the whole posting to do it justice, but here is a flavour:
With the United Nations Security Council in emergency session Ban Ki-moon calling for "more troops", the French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said that up to 1,500 men could be deployed "in Europe's name within eight to 10 days".

No sooner said, however, than it was unsaid. After a meeting in Paris with his Australian counterpart, Kouchner admitted that EU member states had discussed a possible deployment but "a certain number of countries refused."

"It's very difficult to say what we can do outside of diplomatic efforts, efforts at persuasion, and efforts so that peace can be achieved by leaning on the two countries, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda," he added, offering no further details.
Who would have thunk it? The mighty European military machine, confident and capable and a symbol of this powerful supranational entity or member states, cannot even be mustered from its barracks. Quelle shock! Maybe the soldiers have been grounded because they have not swept out their blocks or bulled their boots to a perfect shine. Anything but send them to intervene in what is basically a genocide. Men, women and children are being slaughtered once again in Africa and Europe's response is hand wringing and talk. Is this John Hutton's vision of "the best way to project power, strength and conviction around the world"?

The clenched fist of Europe, taut with righteous indigantion and outrage, will now not so much smash down on the fighters who are killing, raping and burning people in the DRC, as smash down on a table as part of "diplomatic efforts" where they will be "leaning on" the DRC and Rwanda. After years of talking and promises of carrots the consequences for the warring parties are clear. Failure to stop the violence will result in a heady mix of yet more talk and perhaps some bigger carrots. That should do it, monsieur! Once again the paper tiger has given the illusion of being roused, quivered in a gentle breeze, then folded itself