We Know More About Jesus’s Birth Than Obama’s

American Thinker

A  few years back, the Harvard-educated Paul Mirecki, then head of the Religious  Studies Department at Kansas University, proposed a new  class.

His  goal, as he told his cohorts in an atheist and agnostic chat room, was to give  “fundies” — i.e., orthodox Christians — “a nice slap in their big fat face by  teaching [intelligent design] as a religious studies class under the category  ‘mythology.'”

Mirecki  did not expect any pushback from KU. “The majority of my colleagues here in the  dept [sic] are agnostics or atheists, or they just don’t care,” wrote Mirecki.   “If any of them are theists, it hasn’t been obvious to me in the 15 years  I’ve been here.”

Unwittingly,  Mirecki opened a window on the world of religious scholarship.  At least  since Darwin, cynics like Mirecki have been working to subvert Christianity  under the guise of religious studies.  The notorious, 150-scholar strong  “Jesus Seminar” would seem to have no higher  calling.

As  the record will show, however, the  subversives have not succeeded.  The  story of Jesus’s birth, as well as his death, remains as rooted in the  historical record as it was before these researchers began their unholy  labors.

We  know where Jesus was born, to whom, and more or less when.  Were Jesus  politically minded, it would not have been hard to establish his status as a  citizen of Roman Judaea or to confirm it 2,000 years after his birth.  (To  be sure, the “natural born” part might prove a little  tricky.)

No  such luck with our president, Barack Obama.  The most visible man in the  world’s most transparent society remains as much an enigma as he was four years  ago.  If the faithless in the media and academia investigate Jesus, only  the faithful in those same quarters have been allowed to investigate  Obama.  Were there an “Obama Seminar,” its members would be booted from  every faculty lounge and newsroom in America, FOX News  included.

In  April 2011, Obama famously told us what we were allowed to know about his  origins.  Said he, “Every news outlet that has investigated this, confirm  that, yes, in fact, I was born in Hawaii, August 4, 1961, in Kapiolani  Hospital.”

This,  however, was inaccurate on two counts. For one, up until January 2009, the  Obama-friendly websites, including Snopes and Obama’s own campaign website, had  been listing Honolulu’s Queens Hospital as the site of his birth.  For  another, the reporters who had been doing real research — including at least  one from the Boston Globe and another from the New York Times — had failed to confirm any of the story.

As  the world knows, Mary and Joseph were compelled to leave Nazareth shortly before  Jesus was born to register for the census in Joseph’s hometown of  Bethlehem.  There, Jesus was born in a stable, a birth witnessed by Joseph  and Mary, local shepherds, and eventually the magi.  No birth was better  documented for the next eighteen or so hundred years.

Despite  Obama’s birth just 50 years ago, in the most information rich place and time in  world history, no one seems to know anything about his parents’ presumed  marriage or the whereabouts of his mother in the six months prior to her son’s  birth.  The two recent mainstream biographies of Obama’s parents — Janny  Scott’s A Singular Woman and Sally Jacobs’ The Other Barack — tell us close to nothing.

Although  Scott, a New York Times reporter, spent more than two years researching  her book, she can say only than that Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr.  “reportedly” wed on the island of Maui. “Reportedly” is not a comforting word  from a definitive biographer.  Equally troubling, Scott fails to comment on  Ann’s doings from the apocryphal wedding in February 1961 to Obama’s birth in  August 1961. Not a single word.

As  to the birth, Scott provides no details other than those available on the  disputed short form certification of live birth.  There are no baby  pictures, no tales of worried grandparents, no accounts of frantic drives to  Kapiolani Hospital or Queens or wherever. Jacobs of the Boston Globe  likewise tells us nothing about Ann’s comings and goings for the six months  prior to the birth or about the birth itself, the most historically critical  period in Ann or Obama Sr.’s life.

To  avoid the wrath of a paranoid King Herod, Mary and Joseph fled with the baby  Jesus to Egypt and returned to Nazareth only after Herod’s death.  This  flight is documented in Matthew 2:16-2:18 and generally tracks with the  historical record.

Likely  to avoid the profound indifference of Barack Obama Sr., Ann and baby Obama made  their own trek to Washington State.  How or when they got there, or where  they came from, remains unknown.

It  was in Seattle, however, in late August 1961, that we have the first confirmed  sightings of young Barry Obama.  We also have ample evidence that Ann and  the baby lived there for about a year while Obama Sr. remained in Hawaii during  that same time.  He would leave for Harvard before Ann and the baby  returned to Hawaii.

Unlike  Matthew, however, Obama chroniclers have chosen to conceal or obfuscate the  flight of their messiah.  Worse, those who have tried to shed light on the  early movements of young Obama are ignored or scorned as  “birthers.”

Conservative  bloggers were chronicling Ann’s Seattle hegira by the summer of 2008, but not  one of the four book-length biographies I consulted for my book, Deconstructing Obama, placed Dunham anywhere other than Hawaii during  Obama’s first two years. The same holds true for the magazine bios I researched  including a lengthy one pre-election by the Washington Post’s Pulitzer  Prize-winning David Maraniss.

This  is not an incidental detail. The mother’s exile to Washington state means no  less than that the famed multicultural marriage, the rock on which Obama built  his political career, was pure sand.

New  Yorker editor David Remnick was the first of the orthodox scribes to break  the silence, sort of, with the 2010 publication of his Obama bio, The  Bridge.  Remnick buffers the news, however, by claiming that Ann may  have taken “extension courses” at the University of Washington in the fall, but  he implies that she did not arrive in Seattle until the spring  semester.

Scott,  too, concedes Dunham did go to Seattle but, like Remnick, she plays games with  the timeline. “In the spring quarter of 1962, as Obama was embarking on his  final semester in Hawaii, Ann was enrolled at the University of Washington in  Seattle,” Scott writes.

As  in Remnick’s case, this is borderline fraud. Scott conceals the well-documented  truth that Ann had already been at the university for months.  Jacobs does  much the same. “Dunham would, in fact, enroll at U-Dub [the University of  Washington] the following spring,” writes Jacobs, ignoring Dunham’s attendance  in the fall.

The  biographers finesse the timeline to preserve the illusion of an actual Obama  family.  As late as Father’s Day 2011, Obama was saying of Obama Sr., “He  left when I was 2 years old.”  No, as Obama Sr.’s INS documents now  confirm, he never lived with Ann Dunham or her son.

All  three of these biographers concede that Ann visited Seattle with the baby in  August 1961 — there are multiple witnesses — but, to preserve the fabled Obama  marriage narrative, they spin wobbly rationales for the  visit.

Jacobs,  for instance, posits that Ann “was coming through Seattle on her way to Boston  to look into job possibilities for herself.”  Remember, this was 1961, the  pioneer days of jet travel.  The baby was weeks old, and Ann had no  money.  The chronically broke Obama Sr. would not enroll in Harvard for  another year.  In 1961, he had no idea that he would or could.  So why  Boston?

Even  if there were no constitutional issues involved in Obama’s origin story, the  collective failure of the media to tell it truthfully now augurs poorly for  later histories.  Unlike the writers of the gospels, the allegiance to the  truth of progressive evangelists has  become more and more suspect.

As  a case in point, in the way of postscript, days after the story of Paul  Mirecki’s anti-ID course broke, Mirecki told the local police that two white men  stalked him, drove his car off the road in the pre-dawn dark, hectored him about  ID, and struck him about the upper body with their fists and perhaps “a metal  object.”

Other  than the Daily Kos — “Thugs beat up evolution supporter” — almost no one  believed Mirecki’s convoluted story, especially not the police.  Two days  later, Mirecki stepped down as chair of the Religious Department.  He still  teaches there.  Something tells me he supports Obama  uncritically.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/we_know_more_about_jesuss_birth_than_obamas.html#ixzz1hYiffVMm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s