- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Joe Arpaio, sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, is portrayed by the Marxstream news media as being nothing more than a redneck Republican with a thirst for self-publicity. This catastrophic misrepresentation may yet come back to bite them.
Notwithstanding the near-unanimous failure of the media to give any coverage at all to Sheriff Joe’s investigation of the question whether the Mickey Mouse “birth certificate” Mr. Obama personally endorsed as his own and posted at the White House website is genuine, the opinion polls show that two Americans in five have doubts about it.
And this figure was achieved even though the pollsters did their best to skew the results in favor of Mr. Obama by bracketing their question about his eligibility to hold the office of president with questions about various dopey conspiracy theories such as the Roswell “alien spaceship crash” and the “President Bush ordered the Twin Towers blown up cover-up.”
Some 40 percent of those questioned were willing to express doubts about Mr. Obama’s origins even though the news media have barely (and then only sneeringly) covered the controversy, and even though the pollsters were in effect suggesting that anyone who suspected that the “birth certificate” was a forgery was a conspiracy-theory nut-job.
On any view, that is a remarkable result. And it is a tribute to Sheriff Joe, who has the one vital quality that is as essential to good detective work as it is to good politics: persistence.
Despite the sneers, despite a bogus Justice Department investigation of him, Sheriff Arpaio has refused to let go of the birth certificate question.
When I had the honor to meet him some years ago in his office high above Phoenix, his trophy wall was covered with citations and commendations. This is a much-decorated, hard-nosed cop. He is uninterested in playing politics. His job, he told me, is to investigate crimes.
When 250 tea party citizens approached him with their concerns about the genuineness of the “birth certificate,” he told them he did not want to get involved in a political squabble. When they persisted, he said he would refer the “birth certificate” to his cold-case posse. The posse, after some weeks, reported that they were themselves unhappy with the document and wanted to investigate further.
Six months later, he went public and said there was probable cause to suggest the White House document was a forgery. Yet his press conference, apart from a very brief item on CNN, got virtually no major news coverage.
However, neither he nor his posse have given in. They have had insufficient support from the state’s attorney general, who seems to prefer a quiet life. Any AG worth his salt would by now have gone straight to the federal district court and asked for orders requiring the state of Hawaii to hand over the original “birth certificate” and related documents for forensic examination. There is more than enough evidence to justify such an application, but the AG sits comfortably in his air-conditioned office and looks the other way.
The sheriff, however, remains undeterred. In a recent interview with WND’s Jerry Corsi, he said he was not concerned about where Obama was born. He was concerned, however, that a prominent government document had been forged, and that it was necessary to track down and prosecute those responsible for or complicit in the forgery.
He has already raised $4.5 million for his next re-election campaign as sheriff and has made it plain that he does not intend to desert his post or his team until this important investigation (and a fascinating related investigation) has been completed.
The opinion poll, reported here by Bob Unruh with his customary attention to detail, shows that Republican supporters are very much more likely to question the validity of the “birth certificate” than “Democrats.” Yet the question whether the “birth certificate” is genuine is not a political question. The sheriff has been meticulous in making that point clear at every stage. He has no interest at all in playing politics with his office, or with that of the president.
Why, then, the political divide on whether the document is genuine? The main reason is that the news media have simply not given this surely interesting story anything like the attention it deserves. They have not reported in any detail the reasons why it is known that the document on the White House website is a rather obvious forgery.
In this respect, the debate about the “birth certificate” is similar to the debate about the climate. As with the “birth certificate,” so with the climate, the left have sullenly adopted a preconceived notion, and since they overwhelmingly control the news media, they are unwilling to allow any fact to be published if that fact runs counter to the Party Line.
So the voters are not given a fair selection of the facts on the climate, on the “birth certificate” or on many other subjects where the “liberal” majority in the news media simply refuses to keep them briefed. Herein lies a grave danger to democracy. For if the news media, whatever their opinion, will not report the facts on both sides of a question, how can the voters obtain enough information to reach a fair decision on the basis of the evidence?
That is one of many reasons why I hope that Sheriff Joe will persist in his investigation until he leaves the attorney general of Arizona no option but to do the right thing. If Sheriff Joe eventually succeeds in proving before a jury that the “birth certificate” is a forgery, the voters will rightly be furious that – unless they had been fortunate enough to read WND – they had not previously been given any of the key facts behind the investigation.
Then, perhaps, they will realize that news media controlled by the left can no longer be trusted. They will cease to subscribe to those media that have become most clearly prejudiced. And, by withdrawing their custom, they will drive those media out of business.
To some extent, the hard-left media are already suffering. In the U.K., our two communist daily newspapers, The Guardian and The Independent, are both in financial difficulty. The Guardian is backed by a wealthy leftist trust and is heavily subsidized by public-sector job ads, but the Independent may soon be driven out of business.
In the end, the news media – like Mr. Obama – have an obligation to tell the truth. If they persistently fail in that obligation, then they deserve to be driven out of business. We, their audience, want the truth about the “birth certificate,” and, whether they like it or not, we are going to get it. Joe Arpaio will see to that.
Media wishing to interview Christopher Monckton, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.