Posted by
reasonmclucus on Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:16:08 PM
There once was a time when the refusal of a politician to release a
document would provoke editorials demanding that the document be made
public. Journalists were suspicious of politicians who kept
secrets. Journalists were concerned that politicians who
kept secrets might be covering up scandalous behavior.
So why no editorials about President-elect Barack Obama's refusal
to release a copy of his original birth certificate or at
least allow a representative group of journalists examine it?
Would journalists be as trusting of a Republican politician? Have
they forgotten William "I never had sexual relations with that
woman" Clinton?
Obama is from Illinois, a state with bipartisan corruption. The
current governor, a Democrat, seems destined to join his Republican
predecessor in jail for selling favors.
Real journalists should be naturally suspicious of all
politicians, because con artists can sometimes sound more
convincing than those who are telling the truth.
Ordinary citizens have to provide copies of birth certificates to
apply for Social Security or even renew drivers' licenses
they have had for decades. Why is it unreasonable to require
someone wanting to be president to provide something more than a vague
Hawaiian "Certification of Live Birth" to prove he is a citizen?
No one is going to use the information to steal his identity.
Hawaiin officials will only confirm that he has a birth certificate on
file, but not that it indicates he was born in Hawaii. Hawaii
allows parents who are Hawaiian residents to register the births of
children born elsewhere.
Real journalists would be asking what Obama is covering up instead of
supporting his secrecy. Real journalists wouldn't be surprised
that many suspect Obama is covering up a major problem such as the
possibility he wasn't born in the U.S..
After all why else would he want to keep the document secret?
He's already been elected and any embarassing information contained in
it cannot change the election results. Releasing the document
won't compromise national security -- the reason often given for
wanting to keep foreign policy related documents, such as the Pentagon
Papers,
secret.
I don't know if Obama was born in the U.S. or not,
but I know he could easily have eliminated doubts by
allowing Hannity and Colmes or some other journalists to examine his
original birth certificate.
By allowing Obama to keep his birth records secret, the media may
cause Obama to think he can get away with refusing to release other
documents that might contain damaging information.
Are those who call themselves journalists refusing to challenge Obama
because they are afraid if they look behind the curtain that they
will discover their "wonderful wizard of oz" isn't a wonderful
wizard after all.