Barack Obama's can not account for how he paid his way through Harvard.
A question that should be asked of Obama is who paid for the trip? Why did you go? Why did you transfer to Columbia upon your return? Obama has yet to answer these questions.
Upon his return, Obama moved to New York where he attended Columbia. Here we don’t have much history, because Obama, unlike the other candidates, past and present, won’t release his transcripts. The only thing we know is he graduated in 1983. He did not graduate with honors and his transcript is sealed. We do know that upon his graduation he replied to help wanted ad for “community organizers” and subsequently moved to Chicago to take the job offered to him by Jerry Kellman (a direct disciple of Saul Alinsky).
In or around 1988 as a young “community organizer”, living off of $12,000 a year and a modest car allowance, he applied to Harvard. This young community organizer, two years out of Columbia, managed to attract the attention, for some reason, of financier, and advisor to the Saudis, Dr. Khalid al-Mansour who began championing him to prominent political insiders like Percy Sutton.
Watch this video from Inside City Hall featuring Percy Sutton describing in his own words how Saudi Adviser Khalid al-Mansour introduced him to the “genius that was going to be available” Barack Hussein Obama:
Ben LaBolt, Obama spokesman, said that Percy Sutton’s account was “bogus” and a “fabrication that has been retracted by a spokesman for the Sutton family.” LaBolt continued to claim that, “Al Mansour doesn't’ know Obama” and “The letter…the ‘payments for loans” – all of it, not true.” The alleged “spokesman” for the Sutton family, Kevin Wardally, who in fact works for Bill Lynch Associates, a Harlem political consulting firm, has not been retained by the family, has never been retained by the family and when questioned about the assertions by Kevin Wardally, the family asserts that Mr. Sutton stands by his comments in the original interview. (1)
To further complicate matters, Khalid al-Mansour, in an interview with Newsmax, admitted to knowing Obama and deliberately avoiding contact with him so as not to create a Rev. Jeremiah Wright problem for him. Khalid al-Mansour, would not comment on Percy Sutton’s allegations, confirm or deny them according to Newsmax. (1)
“Any statement that I make would only further the activity which is not in the interest of Barack, not in the interest of Percy, not in the interest of anyone,” Al Mansour said. (1)
Obama continues to assert that he, just like every other middle-class kid trying to go to college, paid his way through school with hard work and student loans. So lets look at the money that Obama can’t account for. In 1988 it cost between $18,000 and $25,000 in tuition to attend Harvard (2) ($18K is for undergraduate work, post graduate studies are more expensive, but lets use the smaller number). Obama had no job other than the volunteer position at the Harvard Law Review, which did not provide any form of remuneration. Obama’s campaign asserts that he took out student loans totaling $43,000 dollars. So by his own campaign’s admission, Obama had to raise a minimum of $21,000 to a maximum of $32,000 (2) in tuition over the three years he attended Harvard! That does not include living expenses during that time.
Where did the money come from? Even if you slept on friend’s couch and dined on the charity of the same friends, you would still need to find a way to raise over $20,000 just for your tuition expenses! According to Harvard’s Mike Armini , Obama did not receive any Harvard grant or scholarship funds, so where did the money come from? (1)
If, as Percy Sutton claims, Khalid al-Mansour was raising money for Obama - to help this bright young man get through Harvard Law, why not just admit that? Is there any shame in finding a benefactor who believes in what you are doing and can muster the personal financial means to help you achieve your dreams?
But a better question, why would a radical Muslim with extensive connections to the Saudi’s be raising money for an unknown Chicago community organizer?
Checkout this Newsmax Video. I combines the above Percy Sutton interview with some clips of Dr. Khalid al-Mansour’s giving some speeches.
Might be noted that Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, once named Donald Warden, was the mentor to Huey Newton, the founder of the Black Panther Party, another radical leftist group (3) . Read up on the Wikipedia page referenced. There is no point in exposing al-Mansour, as he has done plenty on his own. Go to YouTube, search, watch, make your own call.
Now I am not trying to impugn any Muslim-Americans. I am not asserting that having ancestral ties to the Middle East or Muslim countries in anyway disqualifies you from participation in the American Political system, nor does it diminish you in anyway from all the other wonderful benefits the United States has to offer her citizens. I am saying that in a world where Islamic Radicalism is the number one threat to the safety and security of freedom loving people, that Obama’s history and associations should come under some heavy scrutiny as he makes his bid to be leader of the most powerful nation on Earth.
When Obama chooses to distance himself from these associations or diminish them as inconsequential, when he chooses to omit them from his multiple memoirs and only reveal them in stages as investigative journalist bring them to light, then there is a problem. When he tries to deflect criticism by blaming his opponents for "distracting" Americans and "refusing to talk about the issues" he is being disingenuous. There is a character problem, a candor problem, a problem of an elitist man believing he is above full disclosure.
Barack Obama knows the depth, the breadth and the height of his ideological kinship with these radical leftists. Somewhere in his brilliant mind, he has determined that these associations are detrimental to his political career.
We want to know why?
__________
Additional Citations not linked in story
1. www.newsmax.com/timmerman/obama_harvard_/2008/09/23/133199.html
2. www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=346606
3. http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/16864
Frankly, I think Obama treats this nonsense the way he should and, no offense, it's those digging for scandal who are being disingenuous. I mean, really, is there any answer that would satisfy you? I'm gonna step out on a limb and say the answer is a definitive "Hell, no!" And if it weren't this, it'd be something else. Would he truly have benefited by going through the laundry list of people he's know who might offend you and/or revealing in detail his interactions with them? The answer might be "maybe" but I don't think it's a grand conspiracy; I just think it was an editorial and, yes, political choice. Big deal.
The truth is that these "issues" are a diversion and cheap ad hominem attackd, evidence of which is the fact that they have heated up as Obama's lead in the polls has increased and McCain's supporters grow increasingly desperate. You practically admit there's nothing there by stretching out the potential connections and undiscovered implications and pointing to the loaded insinuations.
The terms "candor" and "character" and "elitist" in this context are transparently overblown political catch phrases whose relevance has less to do with the actual facts than with desired impact. I'll be honest with you, the epithet "elitist" is so readily and recklessly lobbed at folks with any level of education or sophistication that I'm to the point that I want to embrace it (as Reagan convinced me I should "liberal"). Bring on the elitists, I say. In many cases, I'd much rather an "elitist" than the alternative. Should it bother me that Obama graduated magna cum laude? Should I be excited that McCain graduated fifth from the bottom of his class at Annapolis and that Palin barely eked out a Bachelor's degree? No education isn't everything, but it's something.
And "character" cuts such a broad swath, as a blunt instrument of accusation on the one hand and a nebulous podium of praise on the other.
Reply to this
That is the main problem with those on the left who have made up their mind. They refuse to question his amazing rise to power and the people behind it. As the accusations fly "no answer would satisfy you" the one making the charge should look firmly in the mirror and ask themselves, "is they any thing I could read or hear that would change my mind about Obama?" I would venture to guess that there is nothing. In the end the aggressor most often makes the charge of which he is most guilty. In this case that would be having ones eyes closed and ones ears sealed shut to anything that would impugn Barack. I have yet to read or hear any refutation of the charges against Barack Obama. I have only relieved renewed charges against the messenger, not the message.
There is nothing "cheap" in the attacks only in the answer to the charges. Barack Obama has not been fully vetted.
If McCain had a radical right-wing racist funding his college education it would be a major issue. If McCain as much as misspoke about his relationships with his fund raisers there would be no hearing the end of it. If McCain spent twenty years under the spiritual mentorship of a Anglo-centric racist hate monger, it would be a legitimate issue in his fitness for the Presidency. Barack Obama is getting a "pass" and has secured the media's "get out of jail free card."
If one hides his past, lies to cover it up and then points the finger at those who question him as "distracting" then you have an issue of man who lacks Character.
If character is nothing but an assortment of "overblown political catch phrases", then by what standards do we judge a candidate today?
If it is not a lack of "candor" when one does not fully answer questions and tells misleading stories to obfuscate the truth, then what it it? Is veracity is no longer a requirement for Presidential office?
Is no Obama supporter unhappy with a candidate that they really know so little about?
Reply to this
I would agree with Tony.
Reply to this
You have eloquently identified liberal tactics. If you can't win the argument with facts, shout your opponent down. If that doesn't work, attack them personally. Look what they are doing to "Joe the Plumber". Obama exposed himself for the nation to see, when he mentioned spreading the wealth around. And the left attacks a guy who just asked an honest question and was mistakenly (or at least carelessly) given an honest answer.
Reply to this
I agree. And I'm not a McCain supporter. Or an Obama Supporter.
BOB BARR 2008
Reply to this