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?
Well obviously this should have done BEFORE the election. But just because we were failed by by the media and the persons who had the responsibility to look into this does not need the issue should be dropped. The poor hounded victim of whom you speak promised to have the most transparent administration in history yet he refuses to release even the most basic documents. A huge portion of the electorate is suspicious as to why this is being done.
If McCain had won, and the left had pulled this kind of stuff, we would be incensed.
Do you actually read what is posted about McCain around here? Despite tha fact that very few of us can stand him, he released everything that has been asked of Obama BEFORE the election. Your arguments remind me of a few we had with our daughter when she was a teenager. Basically it came down to... I got away with it so why are you bringing it up now? Getting away with it does not make it right and does not mean the action cannot be corrected even if it is inconvenient.
Particularly when the issues (Birtherism) are lame to the point of foolishness.
First the term (Birtherism) is offensive. We have a man who has been given the ability to destroy our country and the rest of the world who has chosen to keep his past an unverifiable mystery. You don't find this suspicious? You think it is lame to demand that he produces the documents that traditionally other presidents have released? I think you need to look a little more closely into what is being asked and why.
This is a more reasonable explanation. Blindly following him is probably even a more accurate description.
Yep, thats exactly what I’m saying.
Its kook theory and a waste of time. JMHO.
And it gives Owe-bama a chance to plead ‘victim’ when he will need it most.
Dumb politics.
lol
Do you really care what the left thinks of you? I don’t think you do.
WRONG!
FYI, in this instance birth place is not the issue, indigenous Hawaiian ancestry is.
“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”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Naw, they’re not covering up.
They are not covering up how much they love the man that causes all those “tingles” up their posteriors.
History will make a laughingstock of these media clowns.
STE=Q
Hey, you buy a pig in a poke, you got a pig in a poke. Live with it. You want a do-over! The country elected him. You don’t like the results? You don’t think you know enough about him? Tough luck. He’s the president.
So what do you do? Raise hell the next 3 years over “pre-election” stuff. It’s a free country. Knock yourself out. I’m a lot more concerned about him sleeping with Wall Street in 2010 and 2011 and 2012, than I am about his college book reports on The Lord of the Flies and Wuthering Heights. Or, the nefarious Kindergarten Papers of Barack Hussein Obama.
parsy, who says the Birth Suspicious Persons (is that PC enough ?) remind him of Al Gore and the Florida election thingie
FYI, in this instance birth place is not the issue, indigenous Hawaiian ancestry is.
You're kidding, right? A COLB says exactly NOTHING. They can be amended and changed. An original BC cannot.
Do you ever think things through before spouting off?
No, I don’t. However, I do care that this ridiculous theory will be turned upon the GOP in 2012, and help Owe-bama when he’s going to need it the most.
He’s a failed one term President if the wild eye’d conspiracy theory types are ignored by the party.
Badeye, the man lies about everything. We should believe him when he claims he's eligible? Nope. If we don't defend the Constitution, then we don't deserve it.
Watching the kneepadders defend their obamessiah placemarker
“If McCain had won, and the left had pulled this kind of stuff, we would be incensed.” No Parsi. Nice try though ... we would have Sarah Palin as sitting President by now if McCain had won and the left had exposed factual evidence that McCain was ineligibile according to Constitutional qualifications. Why do you continue to defend this affriramtive action liar?
As you can see with lucysmom and Parsifal, they don’t just accept without question, they go out fo their way to defend the liar-in-chief and ridicule those who seek the facts of this affirmative action hire.
"What evidence do you have from a credible source that Obama campaigned for Odinga?
Why, The Washington Times, of course:
"Initially, Mr. Odinga was not the favored opposition candidate to stand in the 2007 election against President Mwai Kibaki, who was seeking his second term. However, he received a tremendous boost when Sen. Barack Obama arrived in Kenya in August 2006 to campaign on his behalf. Mr. Obama denies that supporting Mr. Odinga was the intention of his trip, but his actions and local media reports tell otherwise.
Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama were nearly inseparable throughout Mr. Obama's six-day stay. The two traveled together throughout Kenya and Mr. Obama spoke on behalf of Mr. Odinga at numerous rallies. In contrast, Mr. Obama had only criticism for Kibaki. He lashed out against the Kenyan government shortly after meeting with the president on Aug. 25. "The [Kenyan] people have to suffer over corruption perpetrated by government officials," Mr. Obama announced.
"Kenyans are now yearning for change," he declared. The intent of Mr. Obama's remarks and actions was transparent to Kenyans - he was firmly behind Mr. Odinga. "
And, here is some glorious documentary video footage of Obama campaigning with Odinga:
Obama and Odinga Campaign in Kenya
Is that "credible" enough for you, or do you expect me to soil myself with the New York Times? Because, I can...
Now, can you truly say that you have the utmost confidence in Obama's ability to not side with Kenya and metaphorically push that red button if the Kenyan government were to "go nuclear" on America?
If so, then congratulations, you are calling Obama a heartless b****rd who will kill his own brothers and sisters without hesitation because of the actions of his own buddies in the Kenyan government---whom he helped put into power, all without the official blessings of the United States government.
Cheers
That depends on your definition of "without demand."
The St. Petersburg Times requested Obama's birth certificate in April 2008, but was denied by the campaign (fourth paragraph from the bottom). In June 2008, the campaign released the COLB.
One can argue that the St. Pete Times request was not a demand, but the Obama campaign was asked and did refuse to release the birth certificate several months before the COLB was released.
-PJ
Those votes you cite were not about Obama being on the ballot, campaigning for reelection. They were a referendum on the administration and congress in part, no denying it.
But this absurd ‘birther’ crap will be used to portray Owe-bama as a ‘victim’ just as the ‘Clinton Arkancide’ nonsense was trotted out in the 1990’s. How’d that work out?
My point is its a distraction, when there are very real issues that will make Owe-Bama a one term failure ala Jimmy Carter.
This isn’t ‘defending the Constitution’. Its kook theory thats no different than ‘Bush Knew’. JMHO.
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.