What the "Birthers" Aren't Saying
Published in El Mundo
(Spain) on 30 April 2011
by Ricard Gonzalez (link to original)
After more than two and a half years of the bizarre conspiracy theory that Obama was not born in the U.S., the president finally presented his birth certificate this week, which certifies that he was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii.
We hope this action will serve to turn the page on this bizarre unfounded rumor that claimed that Obama's parents had fabricated all kinds of false evidence so that approximately 45 years later their offspring could be U.S. president.
Conspiracy theories always have a hint of paranoia, but this takes the cake.
One issue that remains a mystery to many analysts is that even after most media outlets, including the ultra-conservative Fox News, did their investigations and exposed the unfounded rumor, about 20 percent of Americans still express doubts about Obama’s origin.
The figure is no less than 40 percent among Republican supporters.
How is it possible that the unfounded suspicions of many people are impervious to established facts? There are several possible answers to this question.
One says that because of the emergence of the internet as a source of information, with a crowded blogosphere plus a density of social networks, traditional media has lost the authority of old.
Many people today would give greater credibility to an email chain, than the host of a television network or a newspaper columnist.
Another response explains the persistence of the conspiracy theory as a hidden expression of latent racism in some sectors of American society. Since it is socially unacceptable to use racist epithets against the president, the "birther" movement is its substitute. According to this theory, if Obama were white, and his father born in Ireland, for example, instead of Kenya, the "birther" movement would never have stuck.
Finally, some analysts argue that most people in the survey that expressed doubts about Obama origin, deep down, know that the president in fact was born in the U.S. Their response in the polls would simply be a way of showing their deep opposition to the occupant of the White House by denying his legitimacy as president.
However, it must not be forgotten that the Constitution establishes as a requirement that one have been born in the U.S. in order to be president.
Chances are, as often happens in such cases, the three responses treasure a bit of truth. How much truth corresponds to each is harder to know, as yet there is no methodology to probe the hidden agendas of the soul.
We hope this action will serve to turn the page on this bizarre unfounded rumor that claimed that Obama's parents had fabricated all kinds of false evidence so that approximately 45 years later their offspring could be U.S. president.
Conspiracy theories always have a hint of paranoia, but this takes the cake.
One issue that remains a mystery to many analysts is that even after most media outlets, including the ultra-conservative Fox News, did their investigations and exposed the unfounded rumor, about 20 percent of Americans still express doubts about Obama’s origin.
The figure is no less than 40 percent among Republican supporters.
How is it possible that the unfounded suspicions of many people are impervious to established facts? There are several possible answers to this question.
One says that because of the emergence of the internet as a source of information, with a crowded blogosphere plus a density of social networks, traditional media has lost the authority of old.
Many people today would give greater credibility to an email chain, than the host of a television network or a newspaper columnist.
Another response explains the persistence of the conspiracy theory as a hidden expression of latent racism in some sectors of American society. Since it is socially unacceptable to use racist epithets against the president, the "birther" movement is its substitute. According to this theory, if Obama were white, and his father born in Ireland, for example, instead of Kenya, the "birther" movement would never have stuck.
Finally, some analysts argue that most people in the survey that expressed doubts about Obama origin, deep down, know that the president in fact was born in the U.S. Their response in the polls would simply be a way of showing their deep opposition to the occupant of the White House by denying his legitimacy as president.
However, it must not be forgotten that the Constitution establishes as a requirement that one have been born in the U.S. in order to be president.
Chances are, as often happens in such cases, the three responses treasure a bit of truth. How much truth corresponds to each is harder to know, as yet there is no methodology to probe the hidden agendas of the soul.
Next article![]( "Who Can Lead a Secret Service: The Portrait of a CIA Director")
