Accuracy in Media

When Rudolph Giuliani mentioned that President Barack Obama, as a young man, was under the influence of Communist Party member and suspected Soviet espionage agent Frank Marshall Davis, Giuliani struck a nerve. In contrast to his claim that Obama didn’t love America, his remarks about the Davis-Obama relationship were not opinion, but fact. That is why a Washington Post fact-checker has been assigned to investigate Giuliani’s claim. We shall see whether the Post, at this late date, covers a story that could have been Pulitzer Prize-winning material more than seven years ago.

As the former New York City mayor noted, Obama’s grandfather turned him over to Davis for mentoring. His black father had taken off and his mother was mostly spending her time elsewhere. But the question remains: what kind of influence are we talking about? Paul Kengor’s book, The Communist: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor, explains Davis’s influence on Obama’s economic views. Rusty Weiss and I quoted Kengor in a piece we did on how Davis’s anti-white racism also influenced Obama.

Less well-known is how Obama adopted Davis’s outlook on sexual matters.

Davis, who died in 1987, was a heavy drinker and marijuana user who wrote a pornographic novel, Sex Rebel, disclosing that he had sex with children, including a 13-year-old girl.

The Davis view, according to his friend, Kathryn Waddell Takara, incorporated a “world of sexual pleasures, multiple partners, and erotica.” Takara writes about the Davis obsession with bizarre sexual practices and pornography in her book, Frank Marshall Davis: The Fire and the Phoenix.

Davis mentored Obama for as many as eight years of his young life, before Obama left Hawaii to attend college. Obama, however, only referred to Davis as “Frank” in his book, Dreams from My Father. Obama refers to “Frank” giving him advice on subjects such as race relations, but not sex.

However, Takara confirms that Davis wrote a pornographic novel, Sex Rebel, which was “largely autobiographical,” and that he became “anti-Christian,” even writing a poem speaking of Christ irreverently as a “nigger.” An atheist, Davis “exposed the irony and hypocrisy of Christianity,” she said.

Davis was a pornographer himself and specialized in photographs of nude women. Some of these are still on display in the Frank Marshall Davis Collection at Washington University in St. Louis.  Takara writes about Davis having “an ample supply of African American women models” for his work. However, the FBI took note of his habits when agents found him taking photographs of the Hawaii coastline, apparently for espionage purposes. This development is mentioned in Davis’s 600-page FBI file. Davis was on the FBI’s “security index” and was considered a potential national security threat.

Much controversy over the years concerned a poem Obama wrote about “Pop.” Sympathetic Obama biographer David Maraniss noted its strange lines about stains and smells on shorts, and confirmed that the subject was Davis. Writer Jack Cashill says the poem has definite “sexual overtones.”

Whatever the ultimate truth about Obama’s own sexual proclivities and inappropriate personal relationship with Davis, it cannot be denied that the President’s “fundamental transformation” of America has also occurred in the sexual realm. And even the Pentagon has not gone unscathed.

Defense Department officials have said that hormone treatment for gender reassignment has been approved for Bradley/Chelsea Manning, the former Army intelligence analyst convicted of espionage for sending classified documents to WikiLeaks.

Almost three years ago, in our May 14, 2012 column, “How Our ‘Gay President’ Learned About Sex,” we noted that the media’s love affair with Obama had been heightened by his embrace of same-sex marriage. Rather than resist, important figures in the media, including the conservative media, have embraced the Obama/Davis revolution.

As traditional conservatives prepare to “March for Marriage” on April 25, within days of the Supreme Court debating cases that will decide the legal status of marriage, the news broke this week that billionaire David Koch, who pours millions of dollars into conservative and libertarian groups, is backing a legal challenge to state laws that protect traditional marriage.

Jennifer Rubin, who writes the Right Turn blog for The Washington Post, has already embraced the Obama position and hopes that the Supreme Court will “put the issue to rest as a legal matter.”

Joining Rubin in the surrender to the Obama/Davis cultural transformation of America is Ana Navarro, a CNN political commentator who says she is joining the brief before the court. Navarro was the National Hispanic Co-Chair for Senator John McCain’s Presidential Campaign in 2008.

Other signatories from the media world on the pro-homosexual brief include:

  • David Frum, a senior editor at The Atlantic
  • Richard Grenell, an openly homosexual Fox News contributor
  • Alex Castellanos, a Republican media advisor and CNN contributor
  • Margaret Hoover, a self-described gay rights activist and CNN contributor
  • Nicolle Wallace, the so-called “conservative” on ABC’s “The View”

he National Organization for Marriage disagrees, saying, “One thing the U.S. Supreme Court won’t be able to do is redefine marriage, because marriage was created by God himself as the union of one man and one woman, and no judge or politician has the power to change it.”

Concerned Women for America continues to affirm that “marriage consists of one man and one woman,” and that “We seek to protect and support the Biblical design of marriage and the gift of children.” The group objects to the “disrespect for family and for the unique contribution of fathers and mothers,” and the “attempt to eliminate natural distinctions between men and women.”

Conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly, the founder of Eagle Forum, told a Huffington Post writer during the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) that the battle for the traditional family will continue. She said, “I’m extremely disappointed that the Republican Party, the conservative movement, even the Democratic Party and the churches, have been saying, ‘Well soon the court will decide, and that will be it.’ But a lot of people thought that about Roe v. Wade, and we’ve seen the whole abortion issue turned around in the last ten years.”

Schlafly’s latest book, Who Killed the American Family?, laments how advocates of traditional marriage “retreated into ominous silence” after the Supreme Court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act in the 2013 case of United States v. Windsor.

One possible factor in a coming backlash to the homosexual rights movement was highlighted in a CPAC speech by Phil Robertson of the “Duck Dynasty” television show. Describing the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases, which affect homosexual men more than any other group, he said, “You want a godly, biblical, medically safe option? One man, one woman—married for life.”

Robertson was presented at CPAC with the Second Annual Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award by Citizens United and the Breitbart News Network. Homosexual militants and their “progressive” allies tried to force his “Duck Dynasty” show off the air after Robertson made comments affirming traditional values and describing homosexuality as unnatural.

Citizens United President David Bossie said, “Having Phil Robertson and his family as a part of American culture has changed this nation for the better. Week after week, millions of Americans see a family living out their faith and their values boldly and without reservation. Despite the best attempts of the mainstream media and Hollywood liberals, the Robertson patriarch and his family are still on television and they are as popular as ever.”

Matt Schlapp, Chairman of the American Conservative Union, the main sponsor of CPAC, said, “Robertson personifies the importance of holding tight to that which gives our lives meaning. For Phil Robertson, that includes his family, the Lord above, and of course creating havoc in the Louisiana countryside. We are honored to have him at this year’s CPAC.”

It appears that there is resistance to the Frank Marshall Davis “vision” of America. But how long will CPAC and the traditional conservatives be able to resist?

One fact is certain: the major cable channels, including Fox News and CNN, are dominated by “conservatives” who embrace the Obama/Davis sexual revolution.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


  • Mark Davis

    Perhaps the WaPo fact-checker will discover the depth of the disinformation campaign against the Davis-Obama relationship, instigated by your “Obama’s Communist Mentor” article. See

    Typical of this disinformation was your misrepresentation of Frank Marshall Davis’s encounter with the Honolulu Branch of the NAACP in 1949. In this case, rookie Honolulu NAACP board member Edward Berman’s Congressional testimony was misrepresented by conflicting AIM reports. See

    “Falsehoods not only disagree with truths, but usually quarrel among themselves.” – – Daniel Webster, American, Statesman Quotes

  • John Cunningham

    Great Article and spot on. Many people, even the ones who don’t like Obama and his policies, don’t know much about him. I liken him to a robot that was programed for every moment in his life. Why else would he hide his transcripts with his education?

    His entire life has been laid out like a blue print I doubt serious he has ever had an original thought. Being that he was a young handsome black man Americans especially the ones with Liberal views and a bad conscious, embraced him with ear plugs blinders and tape over their mouth.

    They remained that way through two voting periods and now, America teeters on the brink. God help the stupid people because I won’t. America and the World, is in a great deal of trouble. Just think if this jerk was president when Nazi’s roamed the Earth?

    Actually, the World is in just as dangerous a time. The Middle East is a tinder box, and Putin is going to try to recreate the old Soviet Union. China quietly is going to take over the Pacific Rim. America and the World by extension is in a situation that might require Nuclear Weapons from which their will be no winners.

  • LEE

    If every thing these people are writing is true and we know it is true WHY IS BARRY STILL IN OUR WHITE HOUSE ???????????????????????????

  • Ted

    What a bunch of bu**sh**!

    “Communism” is no more a threat to the continued well-being and effective governance of this country than are the nincompoop rightwing nutcases that have totally infected the Republican Party.

    And … the New Feudalism in this country, where the vast majority of the workers have to continually kiss the a**es of the fatcats, is certainly no better than communism.

    And … Pres. Obama was elected president twice … so however the rightwing nutcases want to describe him and whatever ostensible perceived shortcomings they want to assign to him … the electorate has spoken otherwise.

  • Ted

    Who’s yo’ daddy?

    Joe McCarthy?

    Dr. Strangelove?


    TEDDIE-YOU SEEM to fit the “Profile” of the very wise voice that said,
    “None are sooooo Blind as those who will not see!”
    When someone sees no threat to moronic Communism, one might also
    posit that the Millions, and Millions, and Millions who were Starved, Gassed, Frozen, beheaded, Poisoned, and murdered in every conceivable way, saw no threat to Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Castro,Socialist Hitler,

  • stlouisix

    The nutcases are the reflections in the mirror of those who evidently see nothing wrong with communism’s legacy of millions of dead in the purges of Stalin, Mao, the killing fields of Cambodia, the genocide of over 20 million in the Ukraine alone starved to death by Stalin, and in the gulags of the former soviets who still are. Reference The Gulag Archipelago of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn about the Soviet forced labor camp system.

    Solzhenitsyn had a warning for what’s left of a free America, in particular the libertarian hijacking of the conservative movement where an “anything goes mentality” reduces to a belief in nothing – damn the disintegration of the moral order with the lessons of history showing this as the precursor to the deaths of civilizations.

    It is to be recognized that there is a distinct difference between genuine rights claims rooted in a natural rights or natural law foundation, and those that aren’t. The former is needed, for example, to protect the claims of religion from unwarranted state intrusion, to protect vulnerable members of society, and to influence public policy for the common good. The latter is a function of rights discourse based on assumptions about human nature and the moral order that run contrary to the very things that are to be protected – assumptions involving unbounded freedom, unlimited free speech, or an individualist conception of the political order where each man possesses a universe of rights unto himself, defined solely for his convenience with no thought to the consequences for his neighbor or society as a whole. This is the caution that Solzhenitsyn was alerting Americans to – specifically, the confusion of authentic freedom, doing what you ought with a duty to your fellow man, with license, doing what you want selfishly and to heck with your fellow man. Solzhenitsyn was onto something. He saw that America was constructing its own politically correct gulags that allowed for no opposition. He saw that America was making itself slaves to its own appetites in the skewed name of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness with no thought at all to violations of nature’s law and an obedience owed to its Author for the sake of the common good. He saw no difference with his gulags and those of a modern hypocritical America that had forgotten the real meaning of its founding documents, or what at least, should have been their real meaning, not in a Lockean sense where Locke tried to make Hobbes’s Leviathan palatable, but rather in a sense of a pressing need for a sound philosophy of human rights rooted in nature and nature’s Author.

    Such a sound philosophy of human rights has as its core the realization that rights possess a strict correlative duty, and are not dominions over things to use as one pleases. It rejects completely any premise that human freedom is the fundamental moral fact, not virtue, or divine command. It does not lower the goal and mission of the temporal order away from the inculcation of virtue and the defense of the faith to the sole protection of the temporal welfare of its citizens. It does not put a premium on natural self-preservation at the expense of the supernatural. It allows for no confusion in this regard. It is not ambivalent in that it gives the appearances of a theistic tradition while underwriting a model of radical human autonomy in which unlimited freedom dominates the moral order. It does not lower the goal of the state to a merely neutral position, imposing a minimal obligation of non-harm, thereby ultimately encouraging self-interest – the legacy of Locke. In short, per Jacques Maritain, it is theocentric as opposed to anthropocentric where rights are rooted in the natural law and its Author instead of man’s will and freedom – the latter allowing for escaping every objective measure, and denying every limitation imposed upon the claims of the ego, a concern of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

  • FedUpWithWelfareStates

    So, Obama was Frank Marshall Davis’ batcha boy for 8-years? That in itself tells me everything I need to know about this pathetic man-child & explains many of his actions since he has illegally occupied the white house…

  • Gringo_Cracker

    More like Washington and Churchill.

  • John Cunningham

    I’m yo daddy!

  • Gringo_Cracker

    The new national religion: Political Correctness.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    Obama, Jr., bears more likeness to Davis than to Obama, Sr., which suggests Komrad Frank stained the shorts of more than one Dunham family member.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    Step back from the crack-pipe, Ted. You’ve lost too many brain cells already.

  • LEE

    You are just like most of the GRINGO’S you don’t have much knowledge about things like this.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    Apologies for not being more clear, Lee. In answer to your previous question, political correctness is the reason Dear Leader still occupies the White House. Political correctness is to Republicans what kryptonite is to Superman.

  • Roberto Enrique Benitez

    What’s the matter? Is the truth so difficult for you that you need to resort to an ad hominem attack rather than cogent debate?

    By the way, Sen. McCarthy was proven right.

  • wyatt81

    Amazing how brainwashed and in the tank some of Obama’s worshippers are. Completely enamored of him and everything he does. Reminds you of Hitler and the adoring crowds who felt he could do no wrong and were ready to turn you in to the Gestapo in a heartbeat for disloyalty.

  • Roberto Enrique Benitez

    So what you’re saying is that Mr. (intentional) Obama IS the legitimate president of the USSA, oops, USA and a Natural Born Citizen?

  • Roberto Enrique Benitez

    Ted, how is the guiding principle of progressivism/socialism/communism of a central NATIONAL government not a threat to a democratic (small d) Republic under the rule of true constitutional law and the concept of federalism? Do you even understand what type government the Framers and Ratifiers established or is it that like Mr. Obama you hold it in disdain?

    I’ll also bet you don’t believe that radical Islamic terrorism is an existential threat to the US and Western Civilization. Do you realize what progressives and Islamists share in common concerning governance? Do you understand that fascims and socialism are two sides of the same coin?

    However, I do see your need to resort to ad hominem attacks since you’re unable to engage in a rational debate.

  • LEE

    Gringo if you know your DEAR LEADER is not a CITIZEN and you don’t tell someone you have broken the RICO ACT and are subject to going to jail like a lot of other people. And that is why DEAR LEADER is going when EGYPT get’s him

  • ItsJo

    Mr. Kincaid, thank you Again, for putting your article about Frank Marshall Davis out there-I wish you had it in even MORE places, to inform the people who may Not know about Obama and Davis. Guess you got my email?

  • ItsJo

    Think what they want to say is that Obama who Does dislike this Republic, was mentored for 10 yrs. by the America-Hater, Communist-Frank Marhshall Davis, and Where he was born is secondary-

  • ItsJo

    Ah, Another “Obama Bootlicker”…..geez what a shock!

  • bruce101

    only a fool or a traitor would vote for a negro commie who plans to destroy us.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    If my supposition regarding Davis is correct, then, yes, Obamao would be a natural born citizen. I’m not certain that confers legitimacy upon him in all respects, however. His biological parentage concerns me much less than his ideological heritage.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    I don’t know he’s not a citizen. Refer to my reply to FedUpWithWelfareStates below.

  • Roberto Enrique Benitez

    My belief is that his father was Obama Sr which raises concerns about eligibility. If it was Davis then Obama is eligible to be president no matter how one slices it. Qualified however is an entirely different matter as you imply.

    From birth his ideological heritage is extremely troubling. His parents were socialists, his 2 fathers Muslims, his mentors like Davis was communist, and other Muslim extremists. His friends were communists, Muslim radicals, and Marxists. He was friends with domestic terrorists and got his start with their help in the New Party, a Chicago communist party.

  • Roberto Enrique Benitez

    If I might disagree. Gringo was definitely implying that Davis was Obama’s father. If so, it doesn’t matter where Obama was born. But if his father was Obama Sr, then if he wasn’t born in HA he’s not eligible to hold the office of the presidency period.

    To me the Constitution does matter. If Obama was born outside of the US then he was born a British citizen and should be impeached, convicted, removed, and tried for high treason with the attendant punishment.

  • LEE

    Gringo: If you don’t know BARRY is not a citizen you must be blind or can’t read all you have to know that he was adopted by LOLO SOETORO.

  • Because a nation of 300 million cannot muster even 3-5 million ‘men’ to do what will be required:

  • LEE

    How do you know if we don’t try things are different NOW

  • Gringo_Cracker

    I’m not aware being adopted by a foreign national require renouncing one’s citizenship. Do you know that to be the case?

  • LEE

    Gringo: That is how BARRY got his citizenship and it looks like you don’t know who FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS was he was a communist that the FBI watched for 18 YRS he even had a number and he was BARRY’S mentor in HAWAII now do you still love him if you do you are as sick as the other people that voted for him TWICE when he was not even eligble to even run. Prove that i am wrong or stop what you keep writing about that you don’t know what you are writing about.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    You’re welcome to check my hundreds of comments on Disqus, none of which is the least bit favorable toward Lord Obamao. Your willingness to jump to unjustified conclusions and impute views I neither hold nor have ever espoused is proof you, sir, are a half-baked loon. Quit while your behind and find other windmills to tilt with, Don Quixote.

  • LEE

    Gringo: You have a very short memory span you forgot DEAR LEADER does that mean to you that you hate him?

  • Gringo_Cracker

    “Dear Leader” is how the North Korean despotic dictatorial Kim family insists they be addressed by their subjects. By calling Obamao (get it? Obama+Mao?) “Dear Leader,” I’m mocking him by comparing him to them, you moron.

  • Impeach Barry Davis Now

    The lawless Left love hateful, thieving, wreckers like Barry Davis, because that’s exactly what they themselves are at heart, and will attack anyone who tells the truth about the treasonous, criminal bastards they elect to office.

  • lgcamp

    Because communism won.

  • lgcamp

    Political correctness is LYING.

  • lgcamp

    You got THAT right !!!! But America is not known for smart people. Just look at the number of Demwits there are now compared to the number of Repugnants.

  • Gringo_Cracker

    Political correctness is the belief it’s possible to handle a turd by the clean end. If that’s considered to be lying, then yes, political correctness IS lying.

  • Mark Davis

    The Washington Post Fact Checker, whom you referenced above, has assessed your “Obama’s Communist Mentor” disinformation campaign THREE “Pinocchios”! See

    Perhaps FOUR Pinocchios would have been more appropriate, as you seem to flout the Code Of Ethics, of the Society Of Professional Journalists, with impunity.

    “If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don’t have integrity, nothing
    else matters.” – Alan Simpson