Barack Obama’s Secretive Nature

October 12th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:



Now, that person, Berg, is not exactly the most reliable source in the world. He is, for instance, a Truther. As such, I consider it highly likely that the issue will proven to be utterly false.

The issue raised about Obama living in Indonesia and going to school there, by the way, is interesting. The records show that Obama went to school there as Barry Saturo, that his official religion was Islam and that his nationality was Indonesia. This indicates, according to Berg, that his stepfather adopted or acknowledged him, which would have greater ramifications. True, or not? Again, as far as I am concerned there are some interesting questions about this affair, questions that should be raised and that would teach us more about Obama’s life and past (simply an interesting subject because this man will be America’s next president), but it seems unlikely to me that Obama is not a natural born citizen, etc. The fraud would have to be too big and… Obama would have known that he could not become president, which would, it seems to me, automatically cause him not to aim for it nonetheless. The possibility, then, of Obama not being a natural born citizen is, as far as I am concerned, close to nihil.

It does appeal to a bigger issue, however, and that is Obama’s secrecy. He has refused to release his college records, medical records, and so on. He has not released information, or records, that other candidates have released. Even when Berg went to court over this issue, the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee refused to release Obama’s birth certificate and other records that would prove Berg’s claims to be false. Assuming Obama has those records, and I think it’s likely he does, not releasing them makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

This does not mean he is hiding something significant. Rather, it is a sign of his character to me; this man could very well become the most secretive president since Richard Nixon when he takes office in January 2009.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. C Stanley
    October 12th, 2008 at 18:38
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Even if Berg were right or credible, I don’t think McCain or his supporters should go anywhere near this story.

    I do agree about the overall pattern of secrecy and deflection from questions. The rabbithole phenomenon of webpages disappearing is the most troubling aspect of that IMO. I mean, I know that Obama’s supporters worry that eventually he can’t keep up the pattern of dismissing criticism, then denying associations, then denying that he knew bad things about his associates, and then finally having to throw them under the bus when he can’t keep denying- but preempting that by removing embarrassing paper trails before his opponents catch up to them is really over the top.

  2. J. Anne Baker
    October 12th, 2008 at 18:46
    Reply | Quote | #2

    I appreciate your statements, but ask if you have read  Sen. Obama’s books? How can  he be ‘called secretive’  when he clearly has pointed out that he did drugs, and explained other problems he overcame?  He has been frank enough. Did you know that Cindy McCain became a drug addict and was convicted of stealing addictive drugs when she was a nurse?  That was the end of her nursing career. There’s much, much more about the McCains that Sen. Obama’s people could bring up, but they have chosen a somewhat higher road, such as not bringing up theembarrassing lapses of memory and speech Sen. McCain has shown us (e.g. addressing  a crowd as ‘my fellow prisoners.’ — the kind of verbal slip that’s becoming terrible common to McCain, which must embarrass him.  Sen. Obama has avoided mocking the foibles of old age.  Nor has he brought up Mccain’s gambling, which I know, as I lived in Arizona — and Mccain hasn;t reported his winningson his tax returns, which is unlawful (it would show what a big spender he is!) There are security risks for Sen. Obama’s family in war-torn Kenya that are unique – one reason some of his records are being kept private, but no candidate comes this far without such records having been inspected carefully.  Constant misreporting of his Kenyan relative, Mr. Dinga (sp?),  as some kind of terrorist, by gossipers, belie the photos of Dinga with Secy. Rice and other Bush Adminstration officials supporting his political activities. en. Mccain did not a,low doctors, only reporters, to look at his massive pile of medical reports (though CNN’s Gupta is both doctor and reporter — and Gupta said he didn’t see anything about Mccain’s mental health).  Mccain allowed no photographing of those records, and reporters in general didn;t have much of an idea what they were looking at.  So much for transparency on Mcain’s part.  Indeed, we need to focus on issues. Both men have earned the right to compete. This is the first race I’ve ever written to people about, please forgive any typos, I’m a retired white female, age 65 English teacher with failing eyesight. Tanks.

  3. C Stanley
    October 12th, 2008 at 19:09
    Reply | Quote | #3

    J. Anne, don’t you think it’s rather easy for Obama to keep his hands clean of mudslinging when the press does the dirty work for him? Why do you act as though people probably haven’t heard about Cindy McCain’s past drug addiction problem when major publications like the Washington Post and Newsweek have done full length stories about this?

    And I don’t think we’ve seen Obama’s medical records, nor Biden’s. Do you think we should, as you apparently believe for McCain? Biden has a history of a potentially fatal condition, brain aneurysm- for which he once had to undergo emergency surgery. Is that a valid issue? Should we know how often he’s screened, or have doctor’s poring over his medical records?

  4. C Stanley
    October 12th, 2008 at 19:17
    Reply | Quote | #4

    A couple more points, JA-

    Verbal gaffes indicate McCain’s senility, in your opinion? Then what is Obama’s excuse for saying there are 57 states, or getting their relative location mixed up, or talking about being in "New Pennsylvania" (presumably that’s one of the lost states.) Or how about introducing Biden as the next president of the United States!

    And finally, I’m just so tired of hearing how McCain’s attacks on Obama distract from the issues. If that’s the case, then why are Obama, Biden and his supporters talking about nothing except McCain attacking him, instead of talking about the um, issues?
    McCain hasn’t talked enough about his positive message- I totally agree with that. He needs to articulate ideas about the economy, but at least I give him credit for actually talking about it at all. For instance, he announced that one of the VERY first things we should do is to suspend the rules on IRA’s so that senior citizens aren’t forced to draw out of their accounts at the very time when their holdings have taken such a hit. Doesn’t that sound logical?? Obama responded by saying he’d support this too, but it was McCain who realized this obvious step that needs to be taken immediately to prevent massive losses for retirees. So who is it again that has his eye off the main issues of the campaign?

  5. Michael Merritt
    October 12th, 2008 at 20:51
    Reply | Quote | #5

    <!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –> The citizenship thing again?  Even after it’s been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, they’re still going after it?  I think Obama should have been quicker to release his birth certificate, too, but he did.  Case closed.

    McCain and Obama were both born here, and the naysayers on each side just have to deal with it.

  6. Michael van der Galien
    October 12th, 2008 at 20:56
    Reply | Quote | #6

    No he didn’t actually Michael. He released a different document. Watch the documentary.

    And i agree he problably is an American born citizen, but the secretive attitude, that’s the real problem.

  7. OldGaDawg
    October 12th, 2008 at 21:01
    Reply | Quote | #7

    These documents are to satisfy the U.S. Constitution. If these documents will not be released then the candidate Obama must be denied the nomination of his party’s to run for the office of President. We can not afford an illegitimate candidate to hold this position if won. For it will place this country’s security at a vulnerable state. This truly needs resolving now before election.

  8. JoeE
    October 12th, 2008 at 23:21
    Reply | Quote | #8

    For so many people who are patently ripe for a dose of fascism, it seems that The One can do no wrong, needs no vetting, need have no specifics about anything, and need not even concern himself with the Rule of Law. The only thing that we have in this country, that has been admired by the rest of the world, is some paper that is known as The Constitution of the United States.  Without the Rule of Law, that paper is as worthless as any piece of trash you see in the street. 

  9. OldGaDawg
    October 13th, 2008 at 18:35
    Reply | Quote | #9

    For JOEE ….. If you don’t like it here …. LEAVE…..
    Too many servicemen and women have sacrificed there lives for keeping this document and others in tact so we “including yourself” free and able to enjoy the freedoms that Americans have that other countries do not have.
    I would like to ask you to please walk up to any of our servicemen or women and express you comments above and let us know as to what is said or done to you there-aft.
    This Old Ga. Dawg

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.