Doing the right thing is not easy. In fact, sometimes people lose their jobs, their reputations, their families, their possessions, elections, and even their lives, by choosing to walk the path of seeking or speaking the truth. And that is because, when it really comes down to it, you may think you have friends in your profession or workplace – but on the day that you take a strong stand on an unpopular issue, most people will turn their backs and walk away from you. They just don’t have the courage to do the right thing if it’s going to cost them.
What am I getting at here, you’re asking? I’m beyond astonished at how many Americans still have no idea that a foundation-cracking Constitutional crisis of unprecedented proprtions is simmering on the back burner and it’s about to boil over. The very eligibility of the sitting President of the United States to hold his office is seriously in question. And no one who should be interested seems to be the least bit interested. The American Press Corps has died and begun its journey into the fires of journalistic Hell, if such a place exists. In 2008, the corporate news moguls became so enamored with this Chicago based smooth talking, attractive man of African extraction that they prevented their lieutenants from issuing the usual journalist’s marching orders to check into Barack Obama’s origins and history – while his meteoric rise from political nowhere to the highest office in the world was in progress. Plenty of red flags were waving in the wind. And the bigtime news men chose to ignore them, because, ideologically speaking, Obama was their guy. Truth took a back seat to political agenda. The ends would surely justify the means.
Now, however, cracks, in the form of serious questions about veracity, are beginning to appear in this fariy tale we were fed in Dreams From My Father – questions about who Barack Obama really is and from whence came he. But we’re so far down the path and the big media so blindly jumped in with him from the beginning that they will not do anything to halt the immense Obama charade that is slowly, oh, so very slowly, coming to the light of truth in the alternative media. The chaos, Constitutional, political, and social (as in riots), that could very well result from an expsure of the fraud are possibilities that the Congress, The Courts and the American Press Corps are apparently not willing to risk by demanding a full-scale investigation into Obama’s credentials. In short, while blustering and puffing out their chests as they speak of justice, truth and the American way, the men who are in positions to actually do something and investigate the problem are really nothing more than cowards.
All of which brings me to my friend Diana West, who in my opinion is one of the most brilliant and courageous writers this nation has seen for a long time. While she’s never shared any of it with me, I can pretty safely guess that with the questions she’s asking about Obama’s credentials and her calls for an investigation, she’s lost the support of some friends (and editors) in her profession. Here’s her latest blog post, which speaks to the most recent piece of hard evidence in this national disaster that no one in the news or government has the guts to stop in its tracks by demanding a Congressional inquiry:
Written by Diana West – May 18, 2012
Again — as in the case of yesterday’s breaking news from Breitbart News that Obama’s literary agency bio described him as “born in Kenya” — the equally fascinating story is the media relationship with this new piece of evidence.
To be sure, the appearance of the “born in Kenya” bio raises more questions than it answers. Who provided the original information? Was it all a “simple mistake,” as the agency’s booklet editor Miriam Goderich now claims? Was it even a mistake?
We have no idea — yet. With Breitbart following the story today, however, we now know from a fellow client of the agency, Steve Boman, that he was asked to provide his own bio; we also now know through Internet archives that this Obama “born in Kenya” bio stood in the agency website and client list for 16 years — until two months after Obama declared himself a candidate for president in in 2007. Suddenly, “born in Kenya” changed to “born in Hawaii.”
Again, these reports leave multiple questions unanswered — questions the media have long proven themselves unwilling to ask or even entertain. Since Barack Obama himself has failed to be forthcoming in any way with bona fide paper documents attesting to his basic identity — sorry, the manipulated computer imagery he has posted at the White House website is evidence only of fraud — what is required is a Congressional committee with the necessary subpoena power to prove the President’s origins and eligibility once and for all.
Brietbart News, meanwhile, needs to allow its better news judgment, which drove it to publish the report in the first place, to steady itself. Breitbart has released a report on a piece of evidence — a report on a physical 1991 document which came into their hands — that only bolsters the claims that this president’s eligibility is in doubt. Breitbart is simply not responsible for protecting this president’s eligibility; News organizations are responsible only to pursue the facts. This should be obvious; but our media, Left and Right, have for so long become captive to ideology that they no longer see their overriding professional responsibility.
Which is why Breitbart editors are still attaching disclaimers to their own news reports, rather than simply presenting the story only and simply so far as it is supported by the facts.
The real mystery is not where Obama was born–which has long been settled–but why Goddard failed to ask her agent a single relevant follow-up question about how the ‘fact checking error’ occurred in the first place.
Settled by what? Unelected websites? By whom? A selected reporter who tweeted that she ran her finger over the seal? Frankly, we still may not even know what the “real mystery” is. I think it’s safe to say, however, there remains a “real mystery.” It doesn’t behoove any journalist to cling to the Narrative of Authority even as facts emerge which seem to undermine it.
Meanwhile, there seems to be some dire human need for a happy outcome, for a good alibi, for a perfectly rational explanation, otherwise we wouldn’t see such exertions to make the few facts we know fit all best or at least better case scenarios. We seem to want more than anything else that this president be no more than a Barnum-esque exaggerator, an image manipulator, a liar, even — but not, please-oh-Lord, ineligible. Across the pond at the Telegraph Blogs, the mindset is expressed by Tim Stanley, who is described as a “historian of the United States.” Taking on the “born in Kenya” bio, Stanley writes:
Today, the President has satisfied all right-minded folk that he was in fact born in Hawaii.
For support, he actually links to the “right-minded folk” at CNN! He continues:
Breitbart.com itself has always rejected the absurd cult of birtherism.
Pat on head for Breitbart. Now, pivot:
In fact, this story is really the opposite of birtherism – Breitbart infers that in the past Obama encouraged people to think that he was born abroad in order to establish an identity as an authentic, exotic voice in the debate on racial politics.
Given that the “born in Kenya” bio raises more questions than it answers, given that it substantiates the distress of those of us who are not satisfied by dodgy computer imagery to establish the i.d. of the POTUS (especially when it is so ridiculously easy for him to produce the physical documents for verification and be done with it) Breitbart isn’t just “inferring” (and with Stanley’s approval), Breitbart is choosing. It is choosing a narrative into which to plug this new fact. This isn’t journalism. It’s politics.
And what of “Birtherism”? It is a purposefully nasty-sounding term that functions, as “McCarthyism” does, to shut down not just debate but thought itself. I think we should open our eyes and realize “Birtherism” describes curiosity, undergirded by a genuine concern for rule of law, for the Constitution, for the republic itself. As a society, we have permitted such curiosity and concern to be caricatured and, in effect, taken from us by the use of a bad, bad word.
Not a good sign for liberty’s future.