What is more troubling than any particular label that one could ascribe to it, is that Obama, having been a member of the New Party, distanced himself from it during the campaign, having his campaign disavow his membership, and leaving it out of his official bio. Was he ashamed of it, or did he believe that he would never have won an election for President if he admitted to it?
Based on the scan of a photocopy of a newsletter that was proof-read by whom, Denise? High-schools have better fact-checkers than most local political party newsletters. They're at least under faculty supervision.
Was there a fact checker here. I mentioned a diving platform once in a poem, "a 16 meter tower." The magazine came back wanting to change the spelling of meter to "metre" and told me that there was no such thing as a diving platform at that height in competitive diving.
I'd had no idea; it was a mistake on my part. When they asked me if I wanted to change it, I said, "no." I don't remember what I said about "metre."
Simply because it's in print, doesn't make it true. If this weren't something where an affectionately held dislike weren't being confirmed for you, I would hope that you would hold out for a more stringent standard of proof yourself. Especially when there are other sources that speak of Obama as being endorsed by, and not as being a member of the party, even prior sources quoted by the same New Zealand author, if you check his references listed in the article itself, and not merely the article on the second page of the same newsletter that is made reference to in the discussion of the blog on the same page as the reference you quoted.
The author of the response on the blog to having had this anomaly pointed out was to suggest that one might endorse a member. This suggests that he thought that Obama had a secret membership in The New Party, which brings us back to that Joseph McCarthy thinking again, doesn't it, Denise? Prior mentions of Obama that the writer of the article says he published, however, make mention of of endorsement and not membership, which suggests error rather than cover-up. Occam's Razor; I fear you have been deafened by the sound of a stampede of thundering zebras, here, as are all of us from time to time.
As seems usually the case though, Denise, you have been burned by taking your sources from dubious sources. This one, apparently published in October, was reportedly forwarded to Fox News and apparently died there. Fox News apparently decided they didn't want to go with it.
As a suggestion — one you may have already followed up on, for all I know — why not write or e-mail Fox News and ask why they didn't go with this particular bit of information. Perhaps they didn't get it? Being a Liberal myself, and loathe to conceal that fact, I fear they would not take the e-mail from me at all seriously, but I would be interested in hearing what they said to you.
If they haven't heard, I'm sure they'd love the tip. If they have heard, perhaps you'll get an answer about why they didn't go with the report.
Sincerely, Bob Kaven