My personal endorsement of Ted Cruz for president this week set off a firestorm of protest from WND readers, most of whom fell into two categories – Donald Trump zealots or those who believe Cruz is constitutionally ineligible for the office.
As to the first group, I would point out that I did not criticize Trump in any way. In fact, I made clear I would support him in the general election should he win the GOP nomination. I also extolled Trump’s campaign for bringing excitement and energy to the race, confounding the Republican establishment and standing up courageously against Stalinist-style “political correctness” in our culture. In other words, I merely expressed my opinion that Ted Cruz was my personal preference.
As to the second group, they seemed certain that Cruz does not meet the “natural born citizen” constitutional requirement for the presidency. I knew this would be an issue in future elections as far back as 2008 when Barack Obama, who had previously claimed to be Kenyan-born when it suited him, deliberately withheld his birth certificate and virtually all other records that could shed light on his personal history.
For the next seven years, I made it a personal mission to do two things:
- Investigate Obama’s background as to his constitutional eligibility; and
- Prompt an informed and intelligent national debate about the meaning of the constitutional phrase “natural born citizen.”
Carrying out that mission involved great personal, professional and corporate cost.
I was caricatured as a “conspiracy theorist,” a “birther” and vilified as a racist hatemonger. The man who founded the first independent online news agency, a lifelong journalist who had won awards for investigative reporting, my work as a foreign correspondent and achievements running daily newspapers in major metropolitan markets, was systematically marginalized. My personal tax returns were suddenly being audited every year. Television news shows that had previously sought my opinions dropped me like a hot potato.
Still, I persisted – along with my intrepid staff.
In 2011, I published “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” by Jerome Corsi, which instantly became the No. 1 best-selling book in the country. Within days, Obama dispatched aides to Hawaii to retrieve his “long-form birth certificate” – releasing an image that satisfied every single so-called “mainstream” media organization in the U.S. An Esquire magazine columnist wrote a column claiming falsely that I was withdrawing the book from the marketplace, setting off a frenzy by retailers to return tens of thousands of copies. We sued Esquire unsuccessfully for restraint of trade and defamation, but the process ended with split decision at the U.S. Court of Appeals level, one step below the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, WND actually investigated the suspicious document Obama released, which only served to raise more questions than it answered. The only law enforcement investigation of the document found it to be fraudulent.
Where did it all lead? Nowhere. Nobody cared – not in Washington, not in New York media circles, not in the courts and especially not among Republican political leaders. More importantly, we couldn’t even have a serious and meaningful national dialogue or debate on the issue of constitutional eligibility. Anyone who raised the issue was derided, mocked, ridiculed.
I can honestly say no one paid a more severe price than Jerry Corsi and I for pursuing this issue with a vengeance for seven years.
Then we moved closer to the 2016 election cycle, and I raised the issue again and again – with the hope of getting another chance at a national debate on the issue of eligibility before the campaigns began.
Again, no one really seemed to care. No one seemed interested in defining the criteria for who could run for president. Left undefined and unsettled, the resultant chaos and confusion was predictable.
As for me, I have studied the matter closely. But I do not pretend to be the last word. I have my opinions about the original intent of the founders. I have my opinions about what should be the standard definition. But I would be fooling myself if I thought anyone cared.
Anyway, the election was now upon us. I had a choice: I could make the election all about constitutional eligibility, or I could look at the candidates and determine for myself who would be the best president. Either way, my decision would not likely determine the outcome of the election.
I looked at all the records of all the candidates running and found Ted Cruz to be the one who, if elected, would most likely return our country to a foundation of liberty, the rule of law, equal justice and limited government. His entire life has been dedicated to advancing those principles.
If I were convinced he was not constitutionally eligible, I could not support him. But I am not the last word on such matters. That’s for every voter to decide for himself or herself – since neither government, the courts, nor the dominant media culture have any interest in doing so.
Those sincerely convinced a candidate is constitutionally ineligible have a moral obligation not to support him. I respect that. As for me, I am not persuaded Cruz is ineligible. I am, however, convinced he is the best candidate running for president.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].
|
