- BIG NEWS:
- Fox News
- |
- Glenn Beck
- |
- CBS
- |
- Oprah
- |
If you believe Philip Berg, Barack Obama is unfit to be President of the United States; his candidacy is nothing more than a dangerously specious house of cards that will almost surely collapse if allowed to continue.
According to Berg, Barack Obama harbors a secret which disqualifies him outright from running for the office of president -- and it's only a matter of time before the truth comes to light and the resulting embarrassing debacle leaves the entire Democratic Party in chaos.
See, If you believe Philip Berg, Barack Obama isn't a U.S. citizen.
Last Thursday, Berg -- a Philadelphia attorney who's something of a notorious presence within that city's legal community -- filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Eastern Pennsylvania demanding that an injunction be issued against the official nomination of Obama. The suit charges that the Illinois senator is constitutionally ineligible to become president on the grounds that he has yet to produce a valid U.S. birth certificate -- Berg claiming that the current one on file from Hawaii is a forgery, proven so by "three forensic experts" -- and that he maintains an unresolved dual-citizenship and owes allegiances to both Kenya and Indonesia, where his father was born and where he lived as a child, respectively. Berg says that he has access to copies of Obama's Jakartan school records which show the candidate registered under the surname of his mother's 2nd husband, Lolo Soetoro, and listed as an Indonesian citizen; as if to hedge his bet, he insists that even if Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate is indeed shown to be authentic, the school registry should be enough to keep the candidate out of the White House.
If these allegations sound familiar, they should; in one form or another, each of them has been bandied about the internet or bullhorned across conservative radio for months now in an ongoing effort to paint Barack Obama as "different."
Oh yeah, and they're all basically bullshit.
A couple of weeks back, the Annenberg Political Fact Check -- an organization whose credentials are pretty much bulletproof -- set out to settle once and for all the debate over Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate. The word "debate" deserves no small amount of qualification because, in reality, there never was a legitimate claim to be made that the document was phony -- simply a lot of fantastical conspiracy theorist innuendo, perpetuated and amplified at lightning speed by a million far-right dolts with computers and delusions of Sherlock Holmesian cleverness. Annenberg dispatched staffers to examine the birth certificate and ruled, to the surprise of no one with a modicum of common sense and two brain cells to rub together, that it's 100% legit: Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. As for the claim that Obama holds a dual citizenship or is in any other way beholden to a foreign country -- that was exposed as nonsense months ago.
And yet Philip Berg filed his lawsuit anyway. He filed it knowing full-well, one would have to imagine, that most of its claims are bogus -- that they already had been or easily could be debunked.
So why? What the hell would possess someone to willfully propagate claims that are tenuous at best and outright false at worst -- even going so far as to do it in court?
Because these days, when it comes to politics particularly, the truth is negotiable -- and there's value in the lie.
Whereas once there were a select few sources of information, and those sources were generally deemed credible by all but those on the furthest fringes of the public, now anyone can be his or her own news source. And while -- as sites like this one, ironically, have advanced -- the rise of citizen journalism and hyper-connectivity has been good for the ethics of media as a whole, it's also created a treacherous wasteland of journalistic mini-fiefdoms, each spouting its own version of reality and together making it impossible, at times, to tell honest, well-researched fact from made-up crap conjured out of thin air to further an agenda. Whether the message comes in the form of an e-mail forwarded to your inbox by that paranoid uncle with the survival bunker in his basement who you're always hoping skips Thanksgiving, or as a bitter flamewar on every news aggregation outlet across the blogosphere, the internet has replaced television as the most effective and least regulated tool for political propaganda in America.
Which is why, ironically, it's now become the partial responsibility of television to help keep the corruption in check. It's too bad the good folks in the TV news media are usually unwilling to do it.
Mainstream media managers, as a whole, subscribe fully to the notion that bloggers and their internet realm are of an inferior journalistic stock; they see them as pests constantly circling the carrion of stories already broken by TV, radio and print; they condescend to them, dismissively painting their ilk as pasty, overweight losers, futilely raging against the machine from the comfort of a Middle-American basement, hopped up on Red Bull and basking in the post-orgasmic bliss of an afternoon spent masturbating to Asian porn. Those who adhere to the Mega-Media ethos believe that when a blogger does break a story, the quality of that piece of information can be judged by whether or not it rises to the level of inclusion in a mainstream broadcast, newspaper or magazine. In other words, only those above the radar can make the decision as to what's worth pulling up from under the radar. The problem is, the good stuff -- the powerful investigation, the sometimes penetrating insight -- gets passed over by the larger media outlets because it's, well, boring. It doesn't make for good TV or a quick, sharp read. Meanwhile, unfortunately, the garbage -- the rumor, conjecture, and misdirection -- is often picked up and elevated to the level of "real news" simply because it's so damn juicy and such a sure-fire ratings or circulation enhancer. A crap story thrown out by a few official-sounding blogs -- like the story of Obama's "phony" birth certificate -- can suddenly be granted validation simply by virtue of the fact that the "controversy" surrounding it is being discussed on national television. The lie is amplified inside the 24/7 cable news echo-chamber and, presto, it's suddenly palatable and worthy of serious consideration by 90% of the population.
It would be one thing if mainstream media outlets faced this kind of bullshit head-on and said, "No, this story isn't true, and if you believe it you're a lunatic." But it's better for ratings and revenue to instead ask, "A lot of folks are saying (insert spurious assertion here), but is it true?" (For the record, nobody does this vaguely referenced end-run on responsibility better than Fox News; see "Terrorist Fist Jab.") It goes without saying that this is how political propaganda is perpetuated; by reporting the rumor as its own story -- without sharply and decisively denouncing it -- you're validating it, giving new life to it, and ensuring that enough people will believe it that the very future of the country could wind up eventually hinging on it.
Ask yourself this: How many people still believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim?
Or this: How many people still believe that Iraq was connected to 9/11?
Very few within the mainstream media came right out and unequivocally shot down these ludicrous rumors before they could take root within the consciousness of the masses -- or at the very least, the minds of those who wanted nothing more than to have their preconceived biases confirmed.
There are thousands of Americans who will still claim that they "don't trust" Obama -- and yet they'll base this lack of trust on their willingness to trust an e-mail that got forwarded to them by a friend of a friend of a friend of some guy somewhere.
It's the responsibility of respectable news media everywhere to bring truth to propaganda and refute the fiction proffered for the sole purpose of sowing discord and confusing the electorate. It's incumbent upon the mainstream media, particularly if they value their stature as strongly as they claim, to shine a bright light on the lies, rather than fueling the fire by debating the merits of a story that they know perfectly well has no merits.
Should you believe Philip Berg?
It's a question that doesn't need to be asked, because it's already been answered.
Follow Chez Pazienza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/chezpazienza
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Philip Berg filed his lawsuit anyway."
So why doesn't Obama sue Berg for slander, and make Berg PAY for his lies?
...what is even more astounding to me (if anything could beat this b.s.) is people who believe it!...
...that HRC supporter/demonstrator who was claiming "unequivocally" -to Chris Mathews-that Sen. Obama was registered as a Muslim while in school in Indonesia-comes to mind...
...what is WRONG with people??...
.
She turned out to be a right-wing nut whose husband had set up a website using Hillary's first name. Neither this woman nor her husband have ever been affiliated with Hillary Clinton or the Democrats.
From what I read, the website they set up contains anti-Obama and anti-Dem material and provides the link to other right wing sites. One site was set up by the McCain billionaire who is financing the multi-million dollar "Ayers" swiftboating campaign.
The REAL issue here is that McCain WAS born in PANAMA, making him a Panamanian by birth!
Does HE qualify to be President of theses United States of America?? NO, HE DOESNT!!
McCain was not born on any of the 50 states. Suggest he investigates that!
True - but the Canal Zone was grandfathered in as acceptible for a citizen's birth being US back many years ago.
So - that one is bunk as well. Face it, whether we want McCain to be eligible - he is too.
Funny, if any candidate should be questioned on his constitutuional requirements for presidency it is mCCain, who wasn't born in the US and whose qualifications for president, while coming down to a technicality in law, are likely not valid
Yeah, I heard Burger or bugger, or whatever he is called on a right wing radio show in Mississippi yesterday morning and the host of the show was eating it up. And callers to the show were believing and adding to it, but of course it IS Mississippi, ... There is an old axom that goes something like this, "Tell a little lie and no one believes it. Tell a big lie to a lot of people and it will be believed."
wasn't mccain born int he canal in the 30's?
The media will continue their laissez fair attitude until some one launches a serious challenge to the McCain mythology. How about floating transcripts of his confession in film clips for the commies. Or a lawsuit and/or FOIA request for an in depth look at McCains medical and mental health records? We need to see what medication he is taking for his Post Traumtic Stress Disorder.
Berg better kiss any thought of a politcal future in Pa goodbye........I will til my last breath make sure he never gets elected.
Under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, attorney Berg is facing sanctions, which could be just monetary (the most common) to disbarment from the District Court.
when people feel threatened they get extreme. question: what is he in fear of or feel threatened about?
He, like many other Americans are afraid of the Dark.
Today's Republican party is built on the corrupt principal of racism, pure and simple. When the dinosaurs pass on, progress will be made.
I'm so glad to see someone finally talking about the value of lies in today's political culture. Announce a lie and let it get repeated loudly and strongly. Why? Because the truth RARELY gets as much amplification - no fun repeating over and over "we proved it wrong." This is a corruption of the good faith of the American people and dang it - we absolutely have to find a way to defeat it.
-"This is a corruption of the good faith of the American people and dang it - we absolutely have to find a way to defeat it."-
AMEN QueenTiye!
The press used to be credible long ago. We used to think, "They wouldn't say it if it weren't true" back when the original anchors were around. Now every media outlet has changed that tune and in an effort to report fast, they report on rumors and innuendo. What they must realize is that once the word/accusation is out it's impossible to reel back in. That is why integrity left the business so long ago.
But let's face it, as the weekly world news (a rag based on fiction) taught us that integrity doesn't sell - ratings do. Talk to PBS and CSPAN about that. I see it speeding up, continuing out of control before it gets any better.
Many (and possibly most) of the US population are pitifully susceptible to political propaganda. Between TV sound bites, ludicrously slanderous emails, FoxPropTV, and distorted, highly edited, out-of-context videos on YouTube and other sites, the American people are proving themselves to be an unbelievable bunch of suckers. Truth is immaterial. Lazy belief in comfortable lies is the way of the day. Bash your opponent all day long--the only thing that matters is winning.
The current administration has shown how effective the Big Lie is, especially when surrounded by a never-ending mass of Smaller Lies. They've gotten away with it for more than eight years, if you count the 2000 presidential race. Why should McCain throw away what's been a winning strategy just because it makes him and his handlers a pack of unrepentant, unregenerate liars?
I despair for my country. Whoever wins, the slandermongers of the right are going to continue to lie, lie, and lie some more about their opposition, and the willfully blind will lap it up. If Obama's elected, the slams and slander will never let up. If McCain wins, the right will continue to run roughshod over all opposition, and constitutional government will continue to decline.
This country is divided like I've not seen since the days of the Vietnam War. And like with Vietnam, it's divided between the suckers (well-meaning though they may be), and the more clear-sighted. It's a testimony to the decades-long decline in critical thinking skills.
Of course this is nonsense. Even if Obama had been born in Timbuktu (just as McCain was born in the Canal Zone), Obama's mother was an American, so he is, too (or is Berg claiming that Mom came from outer space?). Those who've commented that Berg should be disbarred have the right idea.
Berg claims that she automatically forfeited her American citizenship (and her son's) when she married her second husband and moved to Indonesia. Unfortunately, the average Joe on the street doesn't know enough about citizenship and immigration law to dismiss this as utter crap.
I wonder if this is the "injunction" that the PUMA in the Chris Matthews video was referring to? As far as the tie between Iraq and Al Queda is concerned, people believed it because Bush and his regime repeated it. But it was still the job of the press to call BS, even if the lie came from our own government.
Most definitely, it was the "injunction" she referred to. A search on the name she had plastered on her sign leads to its website, and from there it's a quick link to the actual text of this filing. Interesting read, chock-full of circular logic. I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tinfoil hat out there in Denver.
This is most definitely the "proof" she claimed to have, but would not identify. Her website was referenced on the poster she was holding. I went to it out of curiosity, and sure enough, it contains a link to the text of this ridiculous lawsuit. Interesting read, chock-full of circular logic. So much hamster-litter, or birdcage liner.
I could swear I saw a bit of a tinfoil hat, peeking out from her blonde hair.
The speed of lies is second only to the strength of ignorance.
Good one ... may I borrow this(will credit author)
of course the ones spreading the lies count on our ignorance.
...will be plagiarizing this in the future, just FYI... :)
.
As a LICENSED ATTORNEY, why cannot this man be brought up before the Bar for the filing of frivolous, defamatory and LIBELOUS lawsuits?
Isn't there some sort of ETHICS charge Mr. Berg can be brought up on?
And WHY DOESN'T the OBAMA TEAM start some Libel lawsuits?
These OUTRIGHT LIES have been very publicly debunked, yet people are allowed to write books, articles, and now even file lawsuits based upon these discredited lies...
Whatever happened to defamation and libel? Does it not apply to political individuals?
research a Florida supreme court ruling that said (roughly): "the media is not required to tell the truth". I'm paraphrasing, but it's from a lawsuit brought against FOXNEWS in FL.
I've read through this case you mentioned and it was absolutely unbelievable that a US court would rule that way. How are we to have an informed citizenry if our news sources lie to us. here's a link to it.
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:xOiKaGSkbc8J:www.publictruth.org/index2.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26do_pdf%3D1%26id%3D72+fox+news+florida+court+media+truth&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us
I was going to call this frivolous as well even though I don't have your legal background. This is just a farce. And supposedly frivolous lawsuit hating Republicans should be outraged, but you know they will sit on their hands on this one or invite this guy on their shows to fulminate his horsecrap.
what is really being hidden? why are they going to such lengths to stop Obama? is there more going on in the white house than we know?
The Bush war criminals are scared spitless. There is a real possiblity that the International War Crimes Court in the Hague can try them in absentia if they refuse to show up. And they can arrest them if they can catch them. Provided that Obama reinstitutes our agreement with the International Court and makes it retroactive. Kind of like the reverse of the Telecom legislation.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with