by Sharon Rondeau

(May 29, 2016) — Following Barack Hussein Obama’s visit and speech at Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park on Friday, several writers and pundits declared his remarks, a clear reference to the United States’ dropping of two atomic bombs to end World War II in August 1945, to be “repulsive,” containing “maudlin sentimentality,” “anti-American,” and deserving of congressional censure,

In fact, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich had predicted two weeks prior to Obama’s visit that his speech in Hiroshima would “have some kind of mindless anti-American apology.”

“Why does he keep going to other countries to slam America?” asked one blogger.

So visceral was the reaction of Breitbart’s John Hayward that he penned an editorial, replete with vivid pictorial evidence, describing the horrors of the Imperial Japanese Army wrought against Americans, Filipinos, Chinese, Australians, the people of Hong Kong and thousands of others over the course of more than seven years.  “They used some of the exact same methods ISIS does, including burning captives alive, beheading them, and burying them alive in slaughter pits,” Hayward wrote of Japanese aggression.

“Barack Obama treats the bombing of Hiroshima as a unique ‘evil.’ No, sir. It was the end of an evil,” Hayward opined.

Ben Shapiro of The Daily Wire, formerly of Breitbart, began his reactionary piece by stating:

The White House assured us last week that President Obama’s visit to Hiroshima would not be an apology photo-op.

They lied.

But is it any surprise that “they lied?”

Barack Obama and all of those surrounding him have been lying since the very beginning, a painful concept for those who ridiculed any American questioning Obama’s identity, origins, allegiance, and worldview beginning in 2007.

Many of those who did the ridiculing are so-called “conservatives” who say that they believe in limited government, the principles of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, the U.S. military and American traditions.  But when it came to vetting Obama, the topic was off-limits and only fodder for “conspiracy theorists.”

After reading articles which appeared well-sourced dating back to Obama’s U.S. Senate run reporting him to have been “born in Kenya” and not Hawaii, as he later claimed, thousands of U.S. citizens became concerned that he was ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

Other reports placed Obama’s birthplace in Indonesia, which presented the same constitutional challenge to Obama’s “natural born Citizen” status required for the president in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution.  It was always understood that the President and commander-in-chief of the U.S. military must be born here.

As Obama’s 2008 campaign ramped up, some Americans became concerned to the point that they wrote to their respective congressmen and U.S. Senators asking that Congress confirm his eligibility.  In response, members of Congress repeatedly sent out form letters in an effete attempt to convince their constituents, who were more intuitive than they, that Obama possessed all of the qualifications necessary to serve should he win.

But they relied on statements which were all lies.

Doubts persisted that a person constitutionally unqualified with possible foreign allegiances would gain access to the White House and all of its accompanying responsibilities.  “Conservative” writers, petrified of the ramifications if they should dare to investigate Obama’s background, pretended that all was well, that they could score more points challenging his policies and ideology.

Eight years later, what are they now saying?

Many Americans appeared shocked when Obama placed his first phone call to Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority and later, when he snubbed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a meeting at the White House.

As Obama made his April 2009 “world apology tour” to Islamic nations, speaking Arabic with a “first-rate accent,” bending to kiss the ring of Saudi Arabia’s king and chiding America for her failure to recognize the importance of Islam in its history — the recognition of which would have been based on a lie — many Americans gasped in disbelief.

“Had Obama spent his childhood entirely in the United States, he probably would have known that real Americans don’t bow.  Unfortunately, since that’s a lesson Obama hasn’t learned, Americans have had to endure their President humiliating himself and by extension, the rest of the country, by servilely bowing to foreign leaders,” opined a blogger who has compiled a long list of Obama’s perfidious and denigrating behavior.

The political left cheered as its hero, eligible or not, began his “fundamental change” of the United States of America in the areas of education, health care, banking, marriage, the military, race relations, and the dismantling of the Bill of Rights.  He sidled up to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and later, the Castros’ communist Cuba, thrilling the wealthy ideologues and closet communists who helped place him in power, however deceivingly.

The “conservatives” began to scratch their heads and wonder if Obama were not accommodating Islamics possessing no loyalty to the United States and perhaps wishing America harm by hiring shady individuals associated with terrorist groups and changing the oath of allegiance for new citizens.

The only public figure to seriously raise the question of Obama’s birthplace and eligibility was current Republican presumptive presidential nominee, businessman Donald Trump. Unafraid of ridicule, Trump placed enough public pressure on the White House for it to release an image which it claimed to be Obama’s “long-form birth certificate” to prove that he was born in the United States and was presumably eligible to serve.

Within a day of its publication, the image was declared a poorly-crafted forgery by several experts.

Congress was unconcerned.  Who would question the authenticity of the documents presented by a sitting president?

The media was more than willing to chronicle what it portrayed as the outrageous claims of a growing number of “birthers.”

When Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio called upon his Cold Case Posse to investigate the origins of the long-form birth certificate, a virtual media blackout ensued. On March 1, 2012, lead investigator Mike Zullo and Arpaio announced that the birth certificate and Obama’s Selective Service registration form were found to be “computer-generated forgeries,” but the media, which always knew better, scoffed at the findings.

The presentation of more evidence later that year did not compel Congress to launch its own investigation into the crime or crimes committed by the posting of an image “with the intent to deceive” the American people.

“Conservatives,” with everything we have seen over the last eight years from the current White House, do you understand why millions of us were concerned about the constitutional eligibility of a man whose past was unknown?

Can you see why we wrote to Congress, to members of the Electoral College, to our governors, attorneys general, local and federal judges, state representatives, and police departments?

In December of last year, Deborah C. Tyler at American Thinker wrote, in an article titled, “Why People Can’t Face the Truth about Obama:”

America is Barack Obama’s prey. He is tearing America apart and feeding the pieces of her life to his foreign and domestic fellow travelers. He is not transforming the nation but terminating it. Even the most transformational administrations haven’t enabled the murder of Americans by declared enemies, weakened the national defense, mocked the concerns, and dimmed the hopes of average Americans as this president has.

Could a lie explain why Obama has consistently, over the last eight years, favored illegal aliens, “refugees,” immigrants and other foreigners over U.S. citizens?  Could the “fake issue” claimed by Obama’s staffer on April 27, 2011, the day the forgery was posted, actually be real?

What say you, all of you “conservatives” who were above a serious discussion of the usurpation of the presidency of the United States because you thought it would harm your image or decrease your readership?

Even if Obama were born in Hawaii, as he claimed, his foreign-citizen father was enough to disqualify him. Being born in the United States is not enough; the person occupying the office of the nation’s chief executive must have no foreign allegiances whatsoever. It makes sense that our Founders were wise enough to foresee that a usurper such as Obama would lie, cheat and steal to attain the office of a country which became, through much bloodshed, sweat and tears, the most powerful force for good on the face of this planet.

In light of Obama’s anti-Americanism which “conservatives” have excoriated, his destruction of the military, perverted thinking, partiality for foreigners and unvetted Syrian “refugees,” his disdain for the veterans who risked their lives under his faux command, can you understand why your fellow Americans expressed concern before he was allowed to enter the Oval Office?

Are you truly unable to connect the dots?

Will you one day admit that “the birthers” were right after all?

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.