Tag: Obama


Before he was the 44th POTUS and Michelle’s husband, Barack Obama was a regular sex machine — so good that a gal pal wrote poems about their lovemaking, a new biography claims.

“B. That’s for you. F’s for all the ­f—ing that we do,” gushed Genevieve Cook, an Australian-born woman who hopped in the sack with the then-22-year-old Obama after their very first date in Manhattan.

“We went and talked in his bedroom. And then I spent the night. It all felt very inevitable,” Cook wrote in the diary, which was revealed in the biography, “Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama.”

Obama had just graduated from Occidental College in LA and was working in Manhattan in 1983 when he met Cook, the well-traveled daughter of an Aussie spy and diplomat who was three years Obama’s senior.


“All this f—ing was so much more than lust,” the book quotes a passage from her diary, according to the Daily Mail. “Making love with Barack, so warm and flowing and soft but deep — relaxed and loving — opening up more.”

Their first night spent together came after they had dinner in his apartment on West 114th Street, according to Cook.

“The thing that connected us is that we both came from nowhere — we really didn’t belong,” she recalled. “Sexually he really wasn’t very imaginative but he was comfortable. He was no kind of shrinking ‘can’t handle it. This is invasive’ or ‘I’m timid’ in any way; he was quite earthy.”

During their relationship, the two enjoyed cocaine together, the book claims — though Obama was not that into it. “For every five lines that somebody did, he would have done half,” Cook said.

The book also details the live-in lover whose hand in marriage Obama asked for twice — and with whom he cheated on Michelle in the early days of their relationship.


The first refusal from Sheila Miyoshi Jager, who is now an Oberlin College associate professor, came because her mom thought she and Obama — who were 23 and 25, respectively — were too young.

But her second refusal came as the Harvard-bound Obama wrestled with his political and romantic aspirations — and what he saw as the advantages of marrying a black woman if he was to someday ascend to the presidency.

Jager is of Dutch and Japanese heritage. “He felt trapped between the woman he loved and the destiny he knew was his,” biographer David Garrow writes.

Obama and Jager kept seeing each other, even as Obama began a new relationship with the woman he’d take all the way to the White House, Michelle Robinson, the book says.

Sheila-Miyoshii-Jager-home.oberlin.edu-1-800x430 (1)

“I always felt bad about it,” Jager said of their continuing to see each other, off and on, as his romance with Michelle blossomed.

Ultimately, while still in his mid-20s, Obama broke it off with Jager entirely.

Obama realized “he had to fully identify as African-American,” Garrow writes of the then-community organizer mulling his first high-profile political run.

“For black politicians in Chicago, [Garrow] writes, a non-African-American spouse could be a liability,” the Washington Post review notes of Obama’s reasoning.

“If I am going out with a white woman, I have no standing here,” Garrow says Obama told a friend at the time.

It was a damningly calculated trade-off, Garrow writes.

“While the crucible of self-creation had produced an ironclad will,” he writes, “the vessel was hollow at its core.”

Despite her huge role in his 20s, Jager would be almost entirely omitted from Obama’s own memoir, “Dreams from My Father.”

While at Harvard Law School, Obama gained a reputation as an annoyingly compulsive orator, says Garrow, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his biography of Martin Luther King Jr. In his late 20s, Obama had the irksome habit of summarizing other people’s arguments for them, the book reveals.

“In law school, the only thing I would have voted for Obama to do would have been to shut up,” one student told Garrow.

Classmates created an “Obamanometer,” to rank “how pretentious someone’s remarks are in class,” Garrow writes.

The 1,078-page book is set to be released on May 9.

Among the more shocking revelations, according to Garrow, was that Obama briefly considered pursuing a relationship with a much-admired professor at Occidental.

It was the winter of 1980, and Lawrence Goldyn, a Ph.D. and political science instructor, had “made a huge impact on Barry Obama,” Garrow writes, according to the Mail.

The professor — who was considered fun and engaging by the students in Obama’s class — was one of the first openly gay people that the future president ever met in his life, and their friendship “helped to educate me,” Obama once said, according to Garrow’s reporting.

Obama would later confide to a girlfriend that “he had thought about and considered gayness but ultimately decided that a same-sex relationship would be less challenging and demanding than developing one with the opposite sex,” Garrow writes.



Lest we forget.

“Former President Goodluck Jonathan, reflecting on his electoral defeat two years ago, shunned deep introspection and remorse for his five-year reign of impunity. What comes out from him from excerpts of a new book is a potpourri of falsehoods, hypocrisy, lame excuses and blame for everyone but himself. But before Nigerians fall once more for his favourite tactic of playing the victim, they would do well to remember the devastating impact of his bad government.
Words attributed to him in a book, Against the Run of Play, by Olusegun Adeniyi, a well-known journalist, and billed for public presentation in Lagos on Friday, were vintage Jonathan. Posing yet again as the perpetual victim, he blamed former world leaders − Barack Obama of the United States, Britain’s David Cameron, and French president, Francois Hollande − for desperately wanting a change of government in Nigeria. He blamed Attahiru Jega, the former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, for allegedly working with the Americans by insisting on the initial February 2015 date set for the presidential election; he blamed his own former party chairman, Adamu Mu’azu, whom he accused of working against him, and he carpeted the press and civil society for highlighting the pervasive corruption that flourished on his watch.



Jonathan blamed Muazu, former PDP Chairman, Former INEC Chairman, Attahiru Jega, French President Francois Hollande, Former American President Barak Obama and former British Prime Minister David Cameron for various reasons



First, the context: As he left a limping economy and widescale corruption behind, Jonathan’s five years at the helm were an unmitigated disaster for Nigeria, the effects of which 170 million Nigerians are experiencing today. He ran the economy aground, failing like his predecessors to diversify effectively and entrenching what The Economist of London labelled “a rentier state.” His government despoiled all fiscal buffers − foreign reserves hardly rose despite persistently high oil prices until August 2014.

In its defence, his finance minister claimed that it was $43.13 billion that was inherited, yet, despite oil prices averaging $90-$103 per barrel up till mid-2014, reserves moved barely perceptively, while the Excess Crude Account had crashed from $22 billion to only $2.2 billion when Muhammadu Buhari took over by mid-2015.

Jonathan left no major new signature infrastructure project; only inflated repair projects which are mired in controversy.

Arguably his greatest disservice that ought to have been his major triumph was the badly managed privatisation of power assets that transferred most of the generation and distribution companies to untested, incompetent domestic consortia that have saddled Nigeria with a legal quagmire.

But it is in the areas of corruption and security that Nigerians were mostly badly done in by that terrible government. Jonathan’s denial that he dismissed corruption allegations as “mere stealing” is false. He declared this on local and international TV. Corruption ran riot on his watch, as attested to by the latest scandals involving his wife, the suspended spy chief who stashed away $43 million in a Lagos apartment, the missing oil receipts being probed in parliament, as well as the $2.1 billion arms purchase fund that ended up in private hands.


Invest in Prime Property at Lekki, Lagos. Visit www.woodbury-estate.com

While he is whining that Obama and other world leaders, civil society, the media and the opposition alleged corruption “without proof,” the world is still aghast at a sprawling corruption scandal centred on the abuse of N2.53 trillion petrol subsidy in 2011 when only N248 billion was approved in the budget. His government also signed away N603 billion in less than a year for dubious import duty waivers, exemptions and concessions, according to Customs.

The fraud associated with oil swap agreements is still unfolding. Hypocritically, he claimed to have dropped Stella Oduah as Aviation minister when evidence emerged, but said he retained Diezani Alison-Madueke as oil minister “because there was no foolproof evidence.”


This same ex-minister is alleged to have withdrawn millions of dollars to finance his re-election bid for which she and many others, including electoral officials, are being tried.

He disingenuously discredited the Nuhu Ribadu panel report on the grounds of disagreement among some members, but failed to say that he had appointed Steve Oronsaye and Bernard Otti to the board of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation in an obvious move of brinksmanship.
It is not too late for Jonathan to grow up. He may think Nigerians have forgotten and that it is time to move on. This is fantasy. All the colossal scandals that defined his time in government will live on in the minds of the people who bear the burdens of his misrule. Former president Olusegun Obasanjo, who broke all party rules to make him deputy to the late President Umaru Yar’Adua, is quoted in the same book as admitting that from his first days in office, “…he showed that he was too small for the office.” He demonstrated this in his mishandling of the Boko Haram terrorist insurgency. Boko Haram has killed over 25,000 people, displaced over two million and once held 27 local government areas as its “caliphate.”


Rather than take full charge, he allowed his generals to turn it into a gold mine for corrupt enrichment, an ATM, according to Obasanjo, for taking money from the treasury.

The influential The Economist once declared that Jonathan ran the most corrupt, most clueless government in Nigeria’s history. We can’t agree more. Indeed, we hold him and his corrupt generals responsible for the failure to rescue the 276 Chibok girls in 2014.

His false narrative that he did try to rescue them contradicts reports that he failed to act when initially informed, continuing to view terrorism as a personal conspiracy against him.
Surprisingly, Jonathan has not changed, falsely asserting and boorishly claiming that Boko Haram is being defeated because Buhari is a Muslim, not viewed as an “infidel’’ like he was. But salafist militants view all existing governments as infidels to be violently overthrown. They target the Muslim leaders of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Chechnya, Algeria and Bahrain.

Boko Haram has killed emirs and has vowed to kill Buhari, the Emir of Kano and the Sultan of Sokoto, the nominal head of Nigerian Muslims.
Jonathan incorrigibly blamed the media for his electoral defeat. We insist he lost the election because he was a total failure. He cites high figures of votes for Buhari in Kano, but was silent on equally suspicious figures for him from the South-South states, from Rivers or from Akwa Ibom and Delta states where votes recorded for him doubled the number of accredited voters.

But we hold President Muhammadu Buhari and the Nigerian people culpable for providing the leeway for Jonathan to trample on our collective memory. While the Buhari government has demonstrated lack of courage to bring Jonathan to justice, many Nigerians celebrate, instead of rising against corruption. Across the world, people of conscience are marching in their thousands to protest against corruption; in broken, dysfunctional Nigeria, hundreds are, for a few wads of naira, marching, vandalising property, and preaching hate in defence of the corrupt. The officials on trial who have claimed to have been obeying Jonathan’s orders by collecting and distributing public funds provide enough grounds to put him also on trial.

The anti-corruption war cannot go far unless Jonathan is confronted in court with his misdeeds. Past rulers who break the law are put in the dock. South Korea, Guatemala, Brazil, Peru, Zambia, Italy, France are ready examples. No one should be above the law.
Buhari should save his reputation by pulling out all the stops in the war on graft. Far too many ex-Presidents have demonstrated this belief that they are above the law.

Sponsored link 

Jonathan failed to bring corrupt past leaders to justice, but Buhari must bust the myth. Nigerians should realise that corruption has ruined their present and rendered the future gloomy for their children and rise up against corrupt leaders − past and present.

As for Jonathan, he should be reminded that the history of his administration is already being written and it is neither flattering nor can he remodel it with falsehood and whining hypocrisy.”



That didn’t take long. From no-drama Obama to all-trauma Trump: the shift has been seismic, leaving millions in this country and abroad frightened and struggling to make sense of America’s new political landscape.

Some of the upheaval appears to be the consequence of incompetence, the predictable result of an under-qualified real estate mogul struggling to master the most powerful and demanding job on the planet.

But not so with the travel ban. In this case, upheaval was the intent – not to the degree we have seen; that clearly caught the administration off guard. But it was upheaval nonetheless.

As we now know, the drafting and rollout of the travel ban was largely the work of Steve Bannon, the president’s chief political strategist. It was Bannon who reportedly overruled the proposal to exempt green card holders from the ban.


And it was Bannon who pushed the order through without consulting experts at the Department of Homeland Security or at the state department.

The Nacht und Nebel quality of the ban’s announcement makes clear that the president’s chief strategist wanted to send tremors through the world. Here was bold proof that the portentous accents of Trump’s inaugural address, also Bannon’s work, was not mere rhetoric.


Now the world would know what “America First” means – not first in democracy or human rights; not first in recognizing an obligation to victims of humanitarian crisis (some of which we have helped create). No, this was America first in pugilism, parochialism and misplaced protectionism.

Some insist that all this is simply Bannon throwing meat to the president’s base, plucking a page from Karl Rove’s playbook. Rove, the chief strategist for George W Bush (for whom many are now feeling a once inconceivable nostalgia), famously sought to consolidate his boss’s power not by tacking toward the middle but by feeding the base.

Only it would be wrong to see Bannon as Rove 2.0. At his heart, Rove was a consummate political operator, for whom ideology was a tool, not an article of belief. Rove was a careerist and an opportunist, whose principal goal was the preservation and expansion of Republican political power.


Bannon is an altogether different creature. Listen to his early speeches. Bannon is a crusader, fighting to redeem a corrupt country betrayed by its feckless and greedy leaders. He once described himself as a “Leninist”, intent on destroying “all of today’s establishment”.

For Bannon, America is engaged in a pitched struggle against threats from within and without. It is a battle that will last years, and requires iron resolve and steely determination. If the free press, a bastion of democratic self-governance, does not grasp these elusive truths, then it should “keep its mouth shut”, he says.




But Bannon, in contrast to the president, is not easily distracted. He is intelligent, articulate, focused in his ideology and dedicated to the struggle. And he has now been catapulted by an undisciplined president to the inner precincts of the National Security Council and its principals’ committee, assuming a position senior to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the director of national intelligence.

Unvetted, unconfirmed but immensely powerful, Bannon may just be the most dangerous man in America.




Sponsored Ads