When a scientific poll of Californians asked whether Barack Obama was born in the United States, fully one-third of respondents said either no or that they didn't know.
How did the press play that story?
The Sacramento Bee, Obama boosters to the core, reported that Californians are pretty sure he was born in the U.S.
If the poll is accurate, it suggests some 11.5 million residents of the most populous and liberal state in the union still don't know whether Obama is even eligible to be president.
Yet, for the Sacramento Bee, the capital voice of the state, the fact that two-thirds of the population thinks he was born in the United States represents something of a mandate.
The fact that there are such widespread doubts about Obama's eligibility one year into his administration is something of a scandal, evidence of a total breakdown in our electoral system and proof that many, even in the friendly environs of California, suspect the man occupying the White House is hiding something by not releasing his long-form birth certificate.
Let the world know you stand with the Constitution and transparency. Display the "Where's the Birth Certificate?" magnetic bumper sticker.
The headline on the Bee story reads: "Tea-party allies include Obama birth site skeptics." A more accurate headline might be, "Democrats include Obama birth site skeptics," as fully 15 percent of those registered to the president's own party report either total disbelief that Obama was born in the United States or are not sure.
Of course, the Bee goes on to explain, "More than a dozen unsuccessful lawsuits have been filed challenging Obama's assertion -- backed by a birth certificate and other evidence -- that he was born in Hawaii.
Birth certificate?
What birth certificate?
Other evidence?
What other evidence?
No explanation is offered by the Bee – just these assertions.
Of course, with reporting like this, which is typical of all California media, it's even more surprising that 33 percent of the state still has doubts.
Isn't it?
Where did that 33 percent of Californians get the idea that there were doubts about Obama's birthplace – or, at least, no conclusive evidence offered to substantiate his claims?
No exploration of that question is offered.
The closest the report comes to explaining the phenomenon is with this statement: "Doubts about whether Obama was born outside U.S. soil, and thus constitutionally ineligible to be president, arose during the 2008 campaign, and have been propagated since then by a 'birther movement.'"
In other words, the doubts just arose out of thin air.
The doubts don't have anything to do with Obama's steadfast refusal to show the public his long-form birth certificate, the only document that could possibly establish his actual birthplace.
The doubts don't have anything to do with the fact that no hospital in Hawaii will claim to be the birthplace of the first black president of the United States.
The doubts don't have anything to do with Obama's unwillingness to release his student records, his college records, his travel records, his health records.
They're just unfounded doubts propagated by a "birther movement."
No wonder newspapers across the country are facing extinction.
And it's not just newspapers. Television is worse.
Even most of the Obama critics have eschewed questions about Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president. Often to make themselves seem more mainstream and in an effort to be more widely accepted, they have chosen to ridicule the idea that any serious questions about Obama's birthplace and his parentage remain.
Of course, that's just not true.
There are questions – questions that have never been answered nor adequately investigated.
And that's why the doubts remain.
No amount of papering over those doubts will change that. No amount of wishful thinking will change that. No amount of propaganda will change that. No amount of ridicule will change that.