An Issue the Media Ought to Cover

Earlier this evening, I spoke with someone on the phone about Obama’s birth certificate.

One of the things mentioned in the conversation was my position on the media coverage of this issue — which has been virtually nonexistent.

Since when have we had an issue believed by this many Americans — especially about a major political figure — that wasn’t well-covered by the media?

Allegations are made about Herman Cain and women. Bam. It’s all over the news, night and day.

Sarah Palin wears (gasp) some clothes paid for by the Republican party. Bam. Wow. Now that’s a major national issue.

On the other hand… millions of Americans are fully convinced that the President of the United States has a forged birth certificate and has perpetrated a major fraud. Not only that, but there are an awful lot of analyses out there showing some really suspicious-looking stuff in regard to the birth certificate.

The allegations are deemed credible enough that the Sheriff of a major American county launches an investigation to try and find out the truth of the matter.

And we hear absolutely nothing from the media… only the sound of crickets chirping.

This is a topic that doesn’t show any immediate signs of going away, and it’s one that the major media ought to cover, and try to bring to rest.

So why don’t they? A lot of people believe it’s because of their bias towards Obama. In essence, they’re “covering” for him. And I must confess, that’s about the only reason I can think of.

The media ought to cover this, and really investigate it — if only to establish clarity in the public mind of what’s correct, and what’s hogwash. Some may claim that clarity already exists. From the folks I’ve talked to, I don’t think it does.

This entry was posted in What's Happening. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to An Issue the Media Ought to Cover

  1. the media behavior has always been the biggest red flag and part of the big mystery.

    it’s always been the biggest indicator that something is wrong.

  2. Pingback: obama birth certificate theory. - Page 8

  3. Slartibartfast says:

    If it required more than the investigation skills of an 8-year-old to determine that the birther claims lack merit, I might agree with you, but “President Obama is a natural born citizen” is an open and shut case, while “Herman Cain isn’t a womanizer” is not nearly so clear… Remember, the media covered the story when Trump brought attention to it–and they once again discovered (as have all but the conspiracy theorists) that there’s no “there” there…

    • bob says:

      Agreed; there is no there there. Which is why law enforcement and the media aren’t expending resources on the pursuit of untamed fowl.

      Let’s take FOX, which, shall we say, has an unfavorable opinion of President Obama. It may occasionally fan the birther flames (to better its audience), but has done no research. Does it lack the will? The money?

      Yet, when this point is made, a birther will inevitably spin a conspiracy fantasy that includes FOX as being in on the effort to support President Obama.

    • John Woodman says:

      Ah, but I disagree on the amount of investigation (and also on the amount of skill) it takes to really determine that the birther claims lack merit.

      There was plenty there in terms of allegations to keep me occupied on the birth certificate alone for 3 whole months. Granted, some of if was darned silly. But other allegations, claims and questions were more difficult to immediately dismiss.

      As for level of expertise, we have plenty of folks around with considerable knowledge and skill in various areas who still contend the birth certificate is an obvious forgery. I don’t want to just lightly dismiss their expertise in programming, graphics, scanners, or their experience with typography, etc.

      Keep dropping by here over the next month or two. There’s an interesting dynamic or two going on in the background. ;-)

      • bob says:


        While I do appreciate your efforts, the basic problem with the forgery claims is that the State of Hawaii has expressly said President Obama was born there. In essence, those who make the decision whether to investigate such claims are immediately confronted with going down a rabbit hole involving a conspiracy at the highest levels of a state’s government (and the White House). And the bona fides of those making these claims are questionable, at best.

        It is a world of scarce resources, and those who are paid to exercise their discretion in the allotment of these resources have learned to ferret out what merits further investigation, and what does not. (And, as you have proven, these claims were meritless.)

  4. John Woodman says:

    April 2012: Having reached firm conclusions on the birther movement, I’m moving on, and closing comment sections of this blog as I do so.

    If you feel you have a comment to some post here that’s really, REALLY important and ought to be added to a post on this site, email me. If I agree, I’ll add it.


    John Woodman

Comments are closed.