Making Things Up

It was posted like a news flash in the middle of the comments section of a local news story:

One Voice
11:43 am on Thursday, March 7, 2013
In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group "Americans for Freedom of Information" has Released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College… Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California.
The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim.

Within the hour the accusation was reposted in the comments of an unrelated story:

Steve
12:05 am on Thursday, March 7, 2013
I just received this in an email, i'm not sharing the entire email but some may find this interesting and can conduct further research if needed.
In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group "Americans for Freedom of Information" has Released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College… Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. There was more to his article.

There were only two problems. First, this “news” was not new. Snopes.com had collected an e-mail with this “information” almost four years ago. Second, it is completely false. At the time that the e-mail started circulating, a group called Americans for Freedom of Information did not exist. President Obama did not attend Occidental College under the name Barry Soetoro, nor had has his college records been released. Fulbright scholarships are not even given for undergraduate studies.

The people who posted these accusations did not even seem to realize that Indonesia and Kenya are on two different continents. Contrary to the conclusion of each post, had this story been true it would have disproven the case of the birther movement. If the President was from Indonesia (the home of his stepfather), he could not have also been from Kenya.

Not that the birther allegations needed any assistance in being disproven. No matter where he was born, Obama would have been granted American citizenship based on the fact that his mother was a citizen of the United States. The only difference between naturally born citizens and those that are naturalized is the ability to serve as President. Are we really supposed to believe that his family was so concerned that this newborn might someday run for President that they fraudulently listed his birth announcement in the Hawaiian newspapers?

Unfortunately, these poorly conceived lies are not limited to the Internet. Last week at the CPAC convention, Congresswoman and former Presidential candidate Michele Bachmann let loose with an entire barrage of accusations against the President. This included the following:

“A new book is out talking about the perks and the excess of the $1.4-billion-a-year presidency that we’re paying for. And this is a lifestyle that is one of excess. Now we find out that there are five chefs on Air Force One. There are two projectionists who operate the White House movie theater. They regularly sleep at the White House in order to be readily available in case the first family wants a really, really late show. And I don’t mean to be petty here, but can’t they just push the play button? We are also the ones who are paying for someone to walk the president’s dog, paying for someone to walk the president’s dog? Now, why are we doing that when we can’t even get a disabled veteran into the White House for a White House tour? That isn’t caring!”

In reality, Obama’s White House budget is smaller than his predecessor’s. About half of this expense is related to security. It also includes the costs for the staff that is involved in policy making. The White House dog walker has performed this task since the Nixon administration and has other duties - like “caring for more than 18 acres of lawns, trees and gardens.”

When confronted by CNN’s Dana Bash about her false accusations, the Congresswoman dodged the questions. She thought the important issue was Benghazi and complained that “you want to talk about dog handlers,and there is four Americans killed. That’s an insult to...these Americans.” Perhaps because she brought up the subject?

I do not think that I have ever typed these words before, but Bill O’Reilly said it best in his assessment of the Bachmann's speech. He suggested that “this would be much ado about nothing if not for the fact that trivial attacks on President Obama [are] obscuring serious problems in this country.” He went on to accuse the President of not seeing “the big economic picture” and being “too far left” as Commander in Chief. I do not agree with these assessments, but think that it would be more productive to debate differences in opinion than made up “facts.”