Jake Tapper's (ABC) recently wrote a blog about Le Monde's interview with Barack and Michelle Obama. Le Monde (French for the world) is France's evening paper and is consistently liberal like most US major newspapers. The interview didn't take place in 2004 after Obama's US Senate Victory. It didn't take place in 2007 as he was readying himself for the race. It didn't even happen when he was the candidate or the representative of the Office of the President Elect. It happened in 1996 when he was a political nobody. He wasn't even an Illinois State Senator favoring infanticide. What would spark Le Monde's interest to interview the Obama's in 1996.
According to a timeline I researched, Obama was a nobody. He had written Dream of My Father, but the book didn't receive national appeal until much later. He was just getting ready to run for the Illinois State Senate, so he wasn't a national figure. Obama who?
Of course, Jake Tapper doesn't ask the obvious question. He continues to take us down the road of how "Dr. Cliff and Claire Huxtable" became mainstream. Barry and Michelle had only been married a few years.So Jake, why do you continue to present the Cosby Show without asking why Le Monde interviewed them. After all, a snooty paper like Le Monde tends to look down on Americans. Just ask Lance Armstrong.
The real question is what was Obama doing in the world that he gained the attention of Le Monde. Once again journalism fails. We don't need the story of the Huxtables Mr. Tapper. We watched the Huxtable family grow up on our TV, and many grew up with them. We want to know why Le Monde felt the need to interview Obama, just a community organizer from the south side. Surely, the elite French weren't vacationing near the South Side and just so happened to notice the community organizer and a book that doesn't exist and believed they could sell more papers. Did they see he was the messiah in '96? Maybe, we should be concerned what generated the interest of the liberal French rag.
I guess we will never know. Just more Obamagasms from the media. If I were to uncover an interview from a paper like Le Monde that took place before Obama became a household name, I would ask why? Your blog is a joke Jake. The conservative media found so many holes in Obama's story. One appears right in front of your eyes, and you give us The Cosby Show.
(Please note I generated 35 g of Google-based carbon dioxide writing this blog. Obama is increasing the world's carbon footprint.)
Posts
6 comments:
Great job Clay
False assertion after false assertion. The interview wasn't conducted by Le Monde. It was conducted by an author who sold it to Le Monde just recently. Obama got national notice as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review and the two were known as up and comers.
First off, Tapper isn't clear where the interivew came from. As for prominance, Obama didn't rise to national notice because he was the first black Presidnet of the Harvard Law Review, most American started to discover Obama as he spoke at the 2004 DNC.
Considering you claim he was the President of the Harvard law review, that doesn't make him an expert in marriage. In fact, you could argue Obama was rather inexperienced in the world of vows when the interview was conducted.
Here's what Tapper said about the origin of the interview:
The interview, entitled "An Intimate Conversation with Michelle and Barack Obama," was conducted for a book about American marriages and was never published before today. The story was noticed in Le Monde by Tom McCarthy at the ABC News desk and translated from the French by Maeva Bambuck and Jean Fievet in ABC News' London bureau. (When assessing the precise accuracy of the quotes below, keep in mind they have now been translated from English to French to English.)
You claim it was sold to Le Monde, but no where in Tapper's blog does it say that. It just says the original interview was in English. Shouldn't Obama speak French? He seemed awfully enraged by the fact that Americans don't speak enough foreign languages a few months ago, but that's a different story. This is just more Obama fluff, that hides he doesn't have a real plan while trying to show him as the good family man.
They may have been known as up and comers at Harvard, but that doesn't make them national figures.
By the way, is there anything Obama isn't an expert on? He's an expert on marriage now, but there is not book. He's an expert on the economy, but he is asking others for a plan. Sounds like a familiar theme in the life of Obama.
Great post and insights, Clay, as usual! I see Anon beat me to it, because I was going to say that the only argument that I have seen to explain why Barry and Michelle would have been interviewed back then, is that he had supposedly gained national attention as the first black editor of Harvard Law review. Although, you've done an excellent job of debunking that one.
You're right, most Americans still had never heard of The Obamessiah back in 1996 even after he launched his run for the Illinois Senate. This interview was supposedly done earlier that year and it was for a book about marriage? That just makes no sense whatsoever! How did Barack come to the attention of some author and who really cares what he and Michelle had to say after only four years of marriage?
This is just yet another puff piece attempt to get the Obamamania ramped up. The liberal blogosphere is positively gushing over Barack and Michelle and what a "great relationship" they have, amd how "cute" they are. Oh please, don't make me puke!
Something's rotten in the State of Denm.... France!
(NJ-Woman)
Well, when you consider that G. Soros has gone after Norm Coleman after the Senator took it to the corruption leaders at the UN, that Soros had already engineered two national/global economic crises, that America is the one force standing in the way of the global socialist agenda that Soros and his buds promote, then a decade-old conspiracy to get this clown elected starts to seem more likely.
Post a Comment
Name calling and off-color comments will not be tolerated.