'A slippery character': President Obama's father was a serial womaniser who was warned to stop 'playboy ways'

Aren't our children supposed to better us?

Let’s talk about a Republikan womanizer like Gingrich.

From another post with excerpts from actual INS and School sources, I got the distinct impression the objections to the "playboy" ways, were actually objections to a black African interacting with white coeds. Now, you can accuse me of playing the race card, but go back and find the post from yesterday with the actual sources. And then remember, that Obama Sr. was together with Stanley Ann Dunham at a time where mixed race marriages were illegal in many states. Anyone remember 1961? (Actually, my earliest memories are from around '63 but I do remember people pointing at mixed race couples, and a mass exodus to private schools of students from my elementary school in '65 when "colored" children were allowed in.)

Look!!!!! Squirrel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMG

lulz

Really, who cares what he dad did? Are we now onto judging people by the actions of the adults in their lives? Actions they could not control?

HeelsnHairMetal

Really, who cares what he dad did? Are we now onto judging people by the actions of the adults in their lives? Actions they could not control?

Actually since his dad skipped out pretty early, he wasn't even part of Obama's life.

I agree, Obama's father has nothing to do with the Obama the son. Unlike some cultures, we do not hold children responsible for the actions of their family.

Dear Seeder,

The following are the 3 slippery characters that you should be worried about:

John Boehner admits to giving bribes from Big Tobacco on the House floor...Why does the media consider him credible?

.......................................

http://www.grist.org/article/koch-brothers-tea-party-connections-confirmed-video

cmlawyer #1.3:

Actually what you point out was true at the time. I am considerably older than you & I remember it well. Not only were interracial marriages illegal in some mostly Southern States ( Not the one I grew up in here in the North), but interracial dating was SOCIALLY forbidden here in the North, as well. I went to an integrated school & frankly, I still think fondly of a guy I liked, but would never have had the permission to date. Probably he wouldn't either. Prejudice swings both ways.

And yes, there were "exoduses" to private, mostly Christian Schools in the South well after Desegregation. I learned that when I lived in Atlanta in 82-83.

But what you are missing is that during that time, ALL society was more conservative. The comments made by INS & Schools seem normal. "Moral Turpitude" was more than a phrase first heard in "Porky's." My mother told me a bout it being a reason to fire a teacher & was in her 1st. teaching contract. B.O. Sr., being married, alone would have engendered such comments. Race would have been secondary.

It was SO conservative, that even State Unis. had dress codes. When I began college, I had to wear either a dress or a skirt. No kidding!

Different Times!

Thank you, virginia. There is some truth in journalism. . .

as long as Virginia knows that Obama, Sr. was singled out for womanizing with white women

btw, this same information corroborates the birth date, birth time, and birth place of his newborn son, Barack. in Hawaii

truly b!tching, ain't it?

WTF. I don't know of any college student that didn't play the multiple women game. So now someone's opinion of what's right or wrong is a violation of visa satus? Please.....................................

Really jmorris - unbelievable. So now President Obama is at fault because of his father's wrongdoing.

No level is too low for the teabaggers to stoop when it comes to smearing President Obama.

Did this slime bucket have any children that he didnt abandon, or a wife that he didnt cheat on? What a POS.

Did this slime bucket have any children that he didnt abandon, or a wife that he didnt cheat on? What a POS.

Yeah, let's all heap a bunch of insults on a dead man who has literally nothing to do with current events. Stay classy Steve.

Yes Steve, .. Gingrich, Giuliani & the GOTP, are all such slimy hypocritical POS & despicable scumbuckets.

Tessy

Really jmorris - unbelievable. So now President Obama is at fault because of his father's wrongdoing.

No level is too low for the teabaggers to stoop when it comes to smearing President Obama.

Wow, can I ask you to go back and re-read what I wrote. Because I think something got missed.

Can we talk about Clinton's dad next? How about Reagan's dad? (hell how about Reagan as a father). Maybe we could next go into the fathers of the GOP maybe-Candidates?

Sure, it happened anyway and people talked about it during their era's so why not talk about Obama's?

This is a troll and run article, notice how the seeder is M.I.A.

Im sorry, I thought we were talking about Obamas old man and what a piece of crap he was. I dont blame Obama for his father being a POS, but thats exactly what he was. What kind of man abandons his children?

But you keep missing the point that much worse than a man who cheats on his wife and neglects his kids, are the POS dads who take bribes to kill American kids.

Did you check out my link in 1.8 of Boehner admitting to handing out tobacco lobbyists' bribes on the House floor just before a vote?

What kind of man abandons his children?

apparently lots of them steven

http://www.scribd.com/doc/11815375/Broken-Families-in-America

According to the link you provided EE.. Blacks are over 2x as likely to be single parents or abandon the family then any other group in this nation. My question is.. why is that? Is it a cultural thing?

Also.. single parents in this nation have sky rocketed in the past decades, whereas it isn't as common place as say in other nations like Europe for example.

As of today.. 1 in 4 kids are raised in this nation by a single parent. When our parents married, there was a sense that you were marrying for life. That sense is not as prevalent in today's America.

I don't believe I said anything about race in my comments. I believe I was talking about numbers. You might want to correlate that with socioeconomic factors and see what you get.

This seed is nonsensical.

What exactly is the point? (Oh, aside from a very lame attempt to disparage Obama because of his "father's" actions 40 years ago?

And where IS that seeder?

trolling is busy work...

Golly GEE Simplistic Reality I am in my fifties and I didn't grow up with a sense that my parents were married for life. In fact I was abanded by my father before my birth and I was a child of divorce even after that. That good old conservative family and its values sorta failed me and many others. In fact many of my friend's parents divorced, it was rampant in the sixties and seventies. It was the beginning of the ME generation for parents. They left a wake of distruction in their path. I might even hold some of it accountable for the family oriented 80s, kids grew up and wanted a different path for their kids...hmmm???

I suppose I can never be president without controversy. ;)

However I have been married for 25 years, and my kids got liberal parents, go figure.

Just more trash talk.

Just more RACIST trash talk.

Nailed it Ggap.

Yup, this story has extra legs round these here parts when you start a pondering that the feller was from that Keenyah country and was having his way with our white women. Feller was lucky to get his behind back to Keenyah, in mah humblest opinion.

Walk'n Dead

If I become president you can add my dad to the list.

and as much as i love my late father i'd have to add him also

How freakin' sleazy can someone get to drudge up this kind of crap that is 50 years old???

The right has nothing--no jobs as promised, no plan or policy, and no viable candidates, (the best they can offer is a half-term quitter ex-governor and a carnival barker), so they are going to serve up crap about the current president's birth father.

Geez, how much lower can the disgusting right slide??? It's pretty tough to tell at this point!

and as much as i love my late father i'd have to add him also

Well I guess all that is left for us to do is run for president to see if we can have stories about our dads show up in the news.

I love my dad but he is not in my life. He wanted to teach my kids racism and scared the crap out of them a few times in one of his tirades so I let him go. The press would have a great time with him.

7.5 Thanks for sharing that uncomfortable yet informative post.

It must've been a difficult decision for you.

It must've been a difficult decision for you.

Nope. When my kids came running in my room scared at the ages of 4 and 7 it was real easy. I answered the door at 2am and calmly told him I cannot have anymore to do with him. I grew up with that but my kids do not have to.

We do not always have to be a product of our past if we learn there are choices to be as we wish to be. It is no different for Obama.

They are out of ammunition and have to find something else. Throw some s**t against the wall and see what sticks.

I imagine he would either be very proud of himself, or sick to his stomach right about now.

Hey DBE928 - who's your daddy? LOL.

No kidding, its not like there are a shortage of REAL issues to take this president to task on. Personal hit pieces like this only make those that oppose the President's policies look callous and despicable. Way to depreciate my political view's relevance with this trash.

I would like to congratulate the authors of both the seed and the original article. You have forced me to fervently agree with even the most hardcore progressives on a topic.

They are callous and despicable.

They're traitorous, spreading division during the time the world needs unity more than ever.

And, they are many, many.

Traitorous? That is just rediculous. The ability to express a dissenting opinion is why America works. I will go along with you as far as this a waste of bandwidth and destroys any credibility the author may have had, but to say this is a crime that deserves capital punishment is just as laughable as the premise of the article.

As for the world needing unity, I'm sorry but America is the great country it is thanks to competing interests. There is unrivaled danger in lock step unity. To stop questioning is to stop growing and evolving.

Just think Tesla, the more your beloved repugs waste time on this hype, the more you become disillusioned with the party. Leave it. Got a feeling, many will!

You really think these people are growing and evolving?

Nope, my comment was in response to your suggestion that we need unity. I believe I have stated well enough my feelings about the lack of integrity by the author and seeder of this article.

In regards to the idea that we need unity, I disagree. It is competition of ideas that breed evolution and growth. Of which, this article clearly has none. No ideas, no evolution, and no growth. Does that clarify?

Unity doesn't depend on having the same ideas friend. It is something that either is in your soul, or not.

Unity and competition are very compatible bedfellows. There are ideas, then there are transcendent ideals.

Hey jbird I am not a slave to either bankrupt ideology thank you. My "beloved repugs...", and I wonder why the media spends so much effort/time on this juvenile sh..!

clarke ong, I fear we are arguing semantics. I would say that there has been a recent bastardization of the word division to mean that Americans are divided on ideals rather than ideas. Perhaps I wrongfully included you in that group re-defining division?

I think we can agree that both the right and the left have the same goal in mind for this country less fringe elements on both sides of course. Both desire for this country to be a place where the most people have the greatest lives. And I don't mean this as in the definition of utilitarianism. The means of achieving this are completely different on both sides. On the left it is this end product of equality we strive for. On the right it is the equality of rules we strive for and each achieves his own ends.

I disagree with the idea that we are divided in this new sense described. It is the ideas that compete, not the goals, as they are the same.

I pretty much agree. I would just ask you, as it pertains to equality of people as opposed to equality of rules, are people made for rules, or are rules made for people?

I hold to the premise that individuality is sacrosanct, and that it's highest protection is achieved by an overall healthy society. Some, through no fault of themselves due to family history, educational oportunities, health issues or even geography are not able to grasp opportunities that others may. Do we as a Society, have a responsibility to these people or not?

I really don't believe you can seperate the individual from the larger society, and be left with anything that really resembles society.

Is it better for everybody to be for everybody else, or for everybody to be for themselves? If the latter, then why does society even exist?

clarke:Are we helping them and then robbing them? Or are we just robbing them?

You know I had this thought walking home yesterday(yes that was smoke you smelled) I am a black and white person, I see things in strictly that way almost on all counts. I feel as if you see the shades of grey. And I got to thinking that we are necessary for one another in politics and social issues because the one completes and at the time balances the other.

Nice! I love leading questions, especially when worded so cleverly! Rules are made for people, but when the rules favor one person over another in order to promote equality of people we lose the equality of rules. Two choices, equality of rules or equality of people.

No, I'm not a cold heartless bastard as many on the left may believe. I believe that, albeit slightly, the rules cannot be entirely equal, we do need to provide saftey nets for the unfortunate. But I would take it a step further into individuality. I am for safety nets by the government, but beyond the safety nets for those that cannot provide for themselves should not be the federal government's responsibility. It is the community's responsibility, it is individually speaking, my personal responsibility and yours as well. This is why I am a huge proponent of the private, non-profit sector.

Had The Founders found no need for unity, our soldiers would still be saluting The Union Jack...

The United States of America

E Pluribus Unum

These have no meaning to the right anymore?

Or the left... If you are gonna go that way.....perhaps all the way would be better.

Where have I stated I was not in favor of unity?

"These have no meaning to the right anymore"

Has no meaning to any of the foaming at the mouths political hounds who are merely in it for the fight these days.

Sharp.... why are you arguing semantics in a discussion that already had that element of the discussion clarified? Obviously you didn't read the comments you are responding to, but congratulations on looking foolish.

Tesla

Thats the way I see it. I get this view from looking at the natural world and the truth of the interconnectedness of all things.

Rational conversation is so refreshing you guys.

I see it like this: The Society depends on the individual who depends on the Society. I don't mean to get metaphysical, but this concept is analogous to the "circle of life".

There are advantaged and disadvantaged in society, the one should help the other for their own good, but I am in total agreement that slackers need not apply. It seems to me that this social program or that social program isn't really the problem, the problem is seperating the sheep from the goats, and how to administer without creating permanent dependency. So, the problems are structural more than ideological in reality.

The Society depends on the individual who depends on the Society.

I completely agree, but I would imagine I see the second part of that statement a bit differently. Or at least the means to achieve the ends of a society one can depend on.

problems are structural more than ideological in reality.

Again I agree, it seems as though we agree on the ends but not on the means to achieving them. This is why I do not understand the vitriol on both sides. How can people be so angry with someone they essentially agree with?

You know I had to do this right clarke????

"It is time Simba"

Hakuna matatta.

Well, we need a balance there too peapod. How can any one rigid view deal with an organic thing? I am ALL about a balanced checkbook. I am also ALL about innovation and humanitarianism. What has happened is a polarization. One extreme says we must only use a hammer. The other says, no, hammers are evil, we must use a screwdriver only. It seems obvious to me that we need ALL the tools available. Sometimes a hammer is just the ticket, but not when you want to remove screws.

I truly believe that an honest and educated view of how the planet actually works (again, the lesson from nature) would go a long way to bringing the type of Unity I am thinking of. The one thing we should be able to all agree on is that all life, and all economy is built and depends on the physical health of the planet. I think this is an undeniable truth and should be the main focus of all of us. We could unite across political lines if we focused on the foundational as opposed to the particulars.

It means no worries.

Going back to nature. Yes, rigid rules can deal with organic situations. We have entire sciences devoted to this study. Mathematics, physics, engineering, plant sciences, etc., all have been developed with rigid rules to understand, anticipate, regulate the organic world we live in. I have no idea where I am going with that thought, but to be honest I really am not smart enough to comprehend your point anyway. Ah yes, as I was saying, I'm a stubborn and obstinant man. To your hammer analogy, through the rigid rules of finance we see that our position is unsustainable, not a little unsustainable but alot. I find it a little passive agressive when we are in this situation and are handed a scalpel by one side.(I like medical equipment more than construction, makes me feel more upscale(I'm kidding!)). But that is a debate for another thread.

FR sent to continue unrelated discussions on other threads. :P

As a classicist you've lost me with that one. Something about an abbott's trial (falsehood)?

I think its a fallacy involving the trials of the father? A sort of punishing the son for the sins of the father. That's my random guess!