Posted on 02/22/2010 12:37:24 PM PST by Kaslin
As President Obama's approval numbers continue to spiral downward, the left has purposefully tried to tie the increasingly popular small government conservative movement to the largely fringe "birthers". In the spirit of full disclosure, I am not a birther. I happen to believe that President Obama was born in Hawaii and was therefore eligible to be sworn in as President of the United States on inauguration day. That being said, I can't help but feel a little bit of sympathy for the birthers. Ultimately, the rise of the birther movement is the fault of a deficit of curiosity about Barack Obama on the part of the media.
As a result of his lack of experience in both the private and public sectors, coupled with his relative youth, President Obama's personal records are extremely thin. There are huge gaps in what we know about Barack Obama, whereas previous presidents have been open books. The media normally seems to revel in uncovering the seedy and controversial side of every political figure, but they have never exhibited the same interest in President Obama. Every president has had embarrassing issues arise from their past, but President Obama's level of secrecy, meant to maintain his squeaky clean veneer, only serves to fuel speculation.
Since day one Barack Obama has maintained an extreme amount of control over his image. One of the most important elements of that image has been the narrative of his past. To this end Mr. Obama has written two book that serve as the primary basis for this narrative. The media, whose very purpose is to be inquisitive, seems all too willing to accept it without question. Both Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of hope received scant scrutiny or fact checking. For comparison, the Associated Press devoted 11 reporters to pore over every word of Sarah Palin's Going Rogue.
Another example of the difference in inquisitiveness that the media has shown for this president as opposed to previous ones can be seen by the 2004 investigation of President George W. Bush's military records. The search for dirt on President Bush was so fevered that some seemed willing to throw journalistic standards to the wind in pursuit of something that would stick. Distinguished careers were destroyed in the attempt to uncover details about President Bush’s past.
At the time Bush began his stint in the Air National Guard, he was 22 years old. When Obama was 22, he was still a student at Columbia University. An investigation along the same lines as the Bush Air National Guard investigation would be impossible because Obama has not allowed the release of his college records. Unfortunately, the media seems to be perfectly content with this lack of access to key events in our presidents past and for all intents and purposes considers the matter to be a non-issue.
The birthers are naturally being drawn to and are fueled by the alternative media because nearly all of the negative press Barack Obama has received, including his controversial associations from his past, has originated with these sources. While most of the media treated us to puff pieces during the 2008 election, investigations into Obama associates like Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers percolated and exploded almost exclusively out of traditionally conservative outlets and the blogosphere. Mainstream sources on the other hand fiercely fought to discredit these stories, even when these controversies deserved scrutiny and provided a rare insight into candidate Obama.
President Obama's secrecy about his past and the media's apparent lack of interest in it does not assume that they are colluding to cover something up, but it does leave plenty of room for people who are conspiratorially inclined to fill in the blanks. Seeing as the left increasingly sees the birther movement as an albatross to tie around the neck of their enemies on the right, we can most likely chalk up the media’s lack of curiosity to good old-fashioned left wing bias. But even if bias is to blame, it's only natural that some would confuse their lack of investigation to be evidence of malfeasance.
Presuming the media’s love affair with President Obama continues, we can assume that their lack of curiosity will as well. For those who profess such admiration for the President but don’t seem to care much about whom he was prior to his emergence on the public stage though the question remains: Are you scared of what you'll find?
I gave you the link to the Great Mother of All Natural Born Citizen Quotes, didn’t I?
And I told you what was wrong with your logic.
parsy, who has been helpful
You gave me a link to a lefty site.
So? The cases either say what they purport to say or not. You will not get cooties. I swear.
parsy, who bets they do
This is common sense. Do you REALLY believe that the Founders would have suffered all they did only to allow someone with divided loyalties as a President? That's not logical.
"As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government…
"Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests…".
He had them in his day and pegged them quite well.
Court decisions are court decisions. If they are accurate, then they are accurate. Don’t be so persnickety. I promise the site won’t rub off on you. C’mon now, man up! Go there and look up some of that stuff.
parsy, who will exorcise you if you do get infected by demons while there
Give a cite. Where's a link?
They are very foolish citizens. They are not interested in preserving the Constitution or our nation. Obamabots are tools and traitors.
No. I will NOT go to a leftist site. Give them hits all you like. I WILL not. Use generic sites. I do.
An important note to remember when folks start complaining about Sarah Palin's experience vs. that of Obama. We actually know very LITTLE about Obama, while Sarah's life has been laid bare for all to see.
“I happen to believe that President Obama was born in Hawaii and was therefore eligible to be sworn in as President of the United States on inauguration day.”
Do you also happen to believe in the US Constitutional requirements for the POTUS? Even if BHO was born in HI, that doesn’t mean that he necessarily qualified to be sworn in. That at least should trouble you.
Good night.
Her life is practically an open book
“this nonsense”
Do you mean by that the US Constitution and the SCOTUS rulings pertaining to Article II, Section I requirements for the POTUS/VPOTUS?
I don’t consider the USC ‘nonsense’ - do you? If get attacked for trying to defend the Constitution, then I’m in good company - thank you very much.
I happen to agree w. Bad Jack Bauer, that nothing will probably come of this. However, until the SCOTUS makes a definitive ruling on the meaning of the NBC clause in Article II, Section I, it is up to all of us to continue to uphold the law of the land.
And that’s not ‘nonsense.’
“Could be true. One thing is for certain: Obama uses lawyers to fight the release of his Long Form Birth Certificate. Over and over and over again.
But, we’re assured there is nothing to hide.”
Right - doesn’t pass the sniff test. The MAO-bama team is concerned that if we ponder too much info, like that his father was British, we’ll realize MAO-bama’s unConstitutional.
“Had the liberal media properly vetted this dude”
Now there’s a pipe dream...:)
Right. The disdain for the Constitution in this nation goes far beyond the disdain for birthers and NBCers (of which I am one.) It's goes to anyone that dares stand for the Constitutional rule of law, strict Constitutional interpretation from the SCOTUS and other benches, etc.
The birther mockery, and by extension the NBC mockery of Article II, Section I, is just a fulcrum used to upend the entire respect for the Constitutional rule of law.
They are using the Alinsky ‘ridicule’ rule to achieve that end.
And most cannot stand that heat.
So the take away here is that we must either create requirements for future proof of NBC status, or the SCOTUS must rule else wise on the meaning of NBC. Anything else eviscerates the Constitutional rule of law. That is probably exactly what the RAT/Commies want.
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:enderwiggins/index?tab=comments;brevity=full;options=no-change
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.