Main Menu

Are birthers fascists?

The question is prompted by a commenter here in reference to an article from 1995 by Umberto Eco, titled Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt.

Before addressing the titular question, I caution the reader and myself of the pitfalls of diagnosis. Presented a list of class characteristics (such as those of a fascist) and a list of personal characteristics (such as observed behavior of birthers) is is very easy to fall victim to confirmation bias – finding matching characteristics significant and non-matching characteristics insignificant. In fact, there is the larger question of whether birthers themselves are similar enough to be categorized.

I think it is fair to characterize birthers as nationalists. This is exhibited in their interpretation of the phrase “natural born citizen” to demand both jus soli and jus sanguinis as a requirement for presidential eligibility (Blut und Boden in Nazi parlance). Birthers are also frequently tied to anti-immigrant activism. One birther cites Senator Cowan’s speech about the 14th Amendment raising the specter of California being overrun by Chinese, as part of an argument to deny citizenship too the children of aliens.

Another characteristic of birthers is disdain for recognized expertise, whether it be judicial or scientific. This is most evident in the demonization of federal judges and the rise of crank volunteer imaging experts. Cort Wrotnowski’s diatribe against New Hampshire Secretary of State Gardner reminds me of Eco’s remark: “In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.”

While America is what it is today partially because of its diversity and tolerance of diversity, some birthers (and it is not clear to me just how many) are clearly racist, with along with nationalism mentioned preceding, fits birther rhetoric.

Eco’s comment, “Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak,” was particularly insightful to me. On the one hand birthers believe that Obama is cowering in the White House and forced to use an inept document forger to make his long-form birth certificate for fear of exposure, while that the same time the entire Congress, large portions of the Federal Judiciary, the Media and the State of Hawaii are scared stiff of Obama to the point of being willing to lie and cover up for him.

Finally, the most telling statement from Umberto Eco against birthers is this:

Because of its qualitative populism, Ur-Fascism must be against "rotten" parliamentary governments. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

Compare that with this from the Obama Ballot Challenge web site: “… the political ruling class has failed to uphold the law regarding Obama’s usurpation” and the frequent use of the phase “we the people” birthers use to describe themselves.

So are birthers fascists? All I can say is that they seem to share some of the same motivations.

Print Friendly

,

79 Responses to Are birthers fascists?

  1. avatar
    J. Potter December 19, 2011 at 2:48 pm #

    Fascism is a very slippery concept. However, the adherence to a central belief, the demand for loyalty to that belief, and the willingness to revise on the fly in in order to support that belief …. attempts at reality control are, to me, fascist. The correlation to IngSoc-style spin control.

    Beyond the central disorder, Obama Denial, they’re quite the bag of mixed nuts. So many sizes, shapes, and flavors. As a whole, looking beyond birtherism, a pretty relaxed group of fascists. But on that topic, virulent, rabid, to be handled with care.

  2. avatar
    Feinne December 19, 2011 at 3:06 pm #

    Yeah, to me the most worryingly fascist element of some in the birther movement is their refusal to trust in the political processes laid out in the Constitution to redress their disagreements with their opponents. If as they say the will of the people is that Obama should not be President, then they should trust that the election next year will bear this out instead of calling for the military to illegally remove him and ‘restore’ some bizzarre version of the Constitution that has really only ever existed in their minds.

  3. avatar
    Bob December 19, 2011 at 3:48 pm #

    The scariest thing is their happy embrace of 14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. The Birtherstani have developed a pattern of group behavior (a sort of unspoken agreement) to repeat and repeat known lies and long debunked theories with Oscar-worthy performances.

    In public discourse, there is nothing lower than repeating known lies and that’s all the Birthers have been doing since Obama’s eligibility question was answered when the COLB was released. A Birther’s role in life is to spew insults disguised as questions.

  4. avatar
    Jim F December 19, 2011 at 4:09 pm #

    I have, reluctantly, come around to the notion that some fairly drastic solution will have to be found to the increasing hysteria of the supporters of the idea that Obama is not a legitimate president. it almost seems like giving in but I believe that the Supreme Court must take a stand.

    I am aware that there are levels of lower courts that have to give decisions before cases arrive at the top table but there must be precedent somewhere which would get a case like this straight in. The SC should ask the main antagonists and the AG to put a case together which contains all of the questions regarding birth, citizenship, social security numbers and anything else they can think of . They can be fully argued and pronounced upon. I am aware that if the Birther side loses then the will claim that the 9 judges have been bought or intimidated but on the other hand ALL cases in the lower courts will cease and can never be re-argued .

  5. avatar
    G December 19, 2011 at 4:25 pm #

    I agree.

    I agree with Doc & your intent that we should be careful about labelling anyone (particularly followers of a powerless movement) as outright fascists.

    It is more accurate to simply say that they exhibit various behaviors found to be in common with Ur-Fascist thinking patterns.

    From a number of statements that a certain amount of their keyboard commando’s advocate, the comparison to how they envision the world should work if they were in charge is disturbing… I have little doubt that if like minded people got in power, they would tend towards an Ur-Fascist dystopian control model… or at least a banana republic shaped towards enforcing their own ideology…

    J. Potter: Fascism is a very slippery concept. However, the adherence to a central belief, the demand for loyalty to that belief, and the willingness to revise on the fly in in order to support that belief …. attempts at reality control are, to me, fascist. The correlation to IngSoc-style spin control. Beyond the central disorder, Obama Denial, they’re quite the bag of mixed nuts. So many sizes, shapes, and flavors. As a whole, looking beyond birtherism, a pretty relaxed group of fascists. But on that topic, virulent, rabid, to be handled with care.

  6. avatar
    G December 19, 2011 at 4:26 pm #

    Well said! I completely agree.

    Bob: In public discourse, there is nothing lower than repeating known lies and that’s all the Birthers have been doing since Obama’s eligibility question was answered when the COLB was released. A Birther’s role in life is to spew insults disguised as questions.

  7. avatar
    G December 19, 2011 at 4:34 pm #

    I totally disagree.

    What you are asking for is yet more “appeasement” that is rooted merely in being tired of putting up with their bullying antics and is not rooted at all in the clear history of how their movement has reacted in utter denial to every court ruling and official document or statement that has come forward to settle the issue to date.

    You already answered yourself at the end when you mentioned you are aware they will scream that the judges were “bought off”, etc.

    The COLB is legally definitive. The electoral college & congressional votes to appoint the president (without a single voice of dissent) is legally definitive. Every HI official statement, LFBC, court ruling, Congressional report on the topic, etc. is also definitive, as these ARE the authorities with the ability to have an educated and accountable say on the matter. Same with the FFAC clause of the Constitution. Etc. Etc. Etc.

    If you honestly think that a Supreme Court ruling on the definition would make a difference to these hard-core dead-enders, then you are being wishfully naive in your hopes.

    Face it, they will NOT accept anything from any authority that doesn’t give them the results they want. That is simply the bottom line at what is really going on here.

    Jim F: I have, reluctantly, come around to the notion that some fairly drastic solution will have to be found to the increasing hysteria of the supporters of the idea that Obama is not a legitimate president. it almost seems like giving in but I believe that the Supreme Court must take a stand.I am aware that there are levels of lower courts that have to give decisions before cases arrive at the top table but there must be precedent somewhere which would get a case like this straight in. The SC should ask the main antagonists and the AG to put a case together which contains all of the questions regarding birth, citizenship, social security numbers and anything else they can think of . They can be fully argued and pronounced upon. I am aware that if the Birther side loses then the will claim that the 9 judges have been bought or intimidated but on the other hand ALL cases in the lower courts will cease and can never be re-argued .

  8. avatar
    J. Potter December 19, 2011 at 4:42 pm #

    If there are any open questions regarding citizenship and presidential eligibility, I’d love to see the SC hear them. It’s a very important issue, the selection of our chief exec. 2 big but’s tho:

    1. Several cases have been sent, the SC passed on all, as not worthy of a hearing, indicating the cases brought nothing new, highlighted no questions not already settled.
    2. The idea that a case could be formulated that would cover all eventualities and settle all aspect of Presidential eligibility for all time is completely fanciful.

    Until a case comes up that makes the justices say, “gosh, hadn’t thought of that one, let’s have a chat on it”, then there’s no point. just stamp the paperwork and move the birthers on. Along with the thousands (millions?) of other pointless litigations taken to courts every year. They aren’t the only ones wasting bench time out there!

  9. avatar
    Keith December 19, 2011 at 5:31 pm #

    G: I totally disagree.

    I agree with your disagreement.

    Using unConstitutional methods to appeasing the the numbskulls who scoff at the Constitution while trying to force end run after end run around that Constitution does not help anything except spin the country down the plug hole.

  10. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 19, 2011 at 5:59 pm #

    I am not sure I agree that the birther movement is increasing or gaining traction, or that anything is worse than it was a year ago. I don’t have any good data to go on. As I commented elsewhere, it’s easy to make a movement appear to be growing with just a few people proliferating web sites under different branding.

    However, as to your second point, the 2012 election does offer some opportunity for judicial review of birther questions in the context of ballot challenges. I point you to Professor Gordon’s paper that speculates exactly how this might be accomplished.

    http://www.law.umaryland.edu/academics/journals/mdlr/print/articles/mllr28.pdf

    Jim F: I have, reluctantly, come around to the notion that some fairly drastic solution will have to be found to the increasing hysteria of the supporters of the idea that Obama is not a legitimate president. it almost seems like giving in but I believe that the Supreme Court must take a stand.

  11. avatar
    Sef December 19, 2011 at 6:30 pm #

    Jim F:
    I have, reluctantly, come around to the notion that some fairly drastic solution will have to be found to the increasing hysteria of the supporters of the idea that Obama is not a legitimate president. it almost seems like giving in but I believe that the Supreme Court must take a stand.

    I am aware that there are levels of lower courts that have to give decisions before cases arrive at the top table but there must be precedent somewhere which would get a case like this straight in. The SC should ask the main antagonists and the AG to put a case together which contains all of the questions regarding birth, citizenship, social security numbers and anything else they can think of . They can be fully argued and pronounced upon. I am aware that if the Birther side loses then the will claim that the 9 judges have been bought or intimidated but on the other hand ALL cases in the lower courts will cease and can never be re-argued .

    I will add my vote in disagreement. As I and others have pointed out numerous times the Constitution provides that the Congress is the definitive arbiter or Presidential eligibility. Even if they would say that someone like Arnold S. is eligible, even though he is not NBC, he would be eligible and only a subsequent Congress could say otherwise. There is no Constitutional way for SCOTUS to get involved. Even if they did, Congress could just tell them to pound salt.

  12. avatar
    aarrgghh December 19, 2011 at 6:53 pm #

    birfer “queen” orly taitz is a particularly apt case study of the birfer as fascist. while she decries the totalitarianism that dominated her alleged upbringing in moldavia, her crusade, with its utter disregard for the law and her literal cries of “death to all who oppose us!”, by now makes it crystal clear that her only complaint against the regime is that she wasn’t in charge.

  13. avatar
    Tarrant December 19, 2011 at 7:26 pm #

    The reality is every time a decision or opinion, whether it be from a court, elected official, a pundit on Fox News, a prominent conservative columnist, or anything in between, goes against what the birthers desperately want to be true, they simply add them to the conspiracy and move onward.

    Even if the Supreme Court were to come in and decide 9-0 that Wong Kim Ark is the controlling law here (and that is probably exactly what they’d do, given that it was what the Ankeny state court decision used, and while birthers are quick to dismiss that as “Just a state court case, wrongly decided”, it’s interesting that it’s one of the few that made a definitive statement on the matter, and one of the few that the birthers involved didn’t appeal to the Supreme Court), they would simply say the Supreme Court got it wrong and that the case is as much a travesty as Dred Scott was (ignoring the fact that birthers actually love citing Dred Scott as it actually agrees with some of their claims) and that someday their position will come out on top.

    And even were the Supreme Court to decide such a thing 9-0, birthers would continue to file their cases, and it would take the exact same Motion to Dismiss that is being filed for now, because they’d still be “entitled to their day in court”, so there would be no change from what we have now. They’d just be madder.

    I look at birthers like OPOVV (who, while one of the most outspoken, gets a lot of “Yeah!”s and “Just what I was thinking!” from the birthers in comment threads about his posts) who talks about the “Post-Tea Party World” where “Muslims, communists, Marxists, liberals, and progressives” are all banished from the United States, and you’re free to vote for any candidate you like, as long as it’s the one that he has already selected for you, and realize that these people simply can’t handle a world where they aren’t in charge. Whether that’s because of race, or simply because you have a group of people that are seeing their seeming WASP-y “control” and the “America of Yesteryear” slipping away, America is moving onward and they can’t handle being a part of it, and would rather throw away everything that made America, America, rather than realize that it’s a new age.

  14. avatar
    Bob December 19, 2011 at 7:34 pm #

    Forming a coherent movement based on something as stupid as Birtherism and whose adherents are paranoids is an uphill battle.

  15. avatar
    G December 19, 2011 at 7:41 pm #

    I agree. Well said & an excellent example illustrating the ur-Fascist types of behaviors of the Birthers.

    Tarrant: I look at birthers like OPOVV (who, while one of the most outspoken, gets a lot of “Yeah!”s and “Just what I was thinking!” from the birthers in comment threads about his posts) who talks about the “Post-Tea Party World” where “Muslims, communists, Marxists, liberals, and progressives” are all banished from the United States, and you’re free to vote for any candidate you like, as long as it’s the one that he has already selected for you, and realize that these people simply can’t handle a world where they aren’t in charge. Whether that’s because of race, or simply because you have a group of people that are seeing their seeming WASP-y “control” and the “America of Yesteryear” slipping away, America is moving onward and they can’t handle being a part of it, and would rather throw away everything that made America, America, rather than realize that it’s a new age.

  16. avatar
    misha December 19, 2011 at 7:54 pm #

    Anyone is free to disagree with me.

    The opposite of communism is fascism, which puts Orly and her ilk in that circle.

    I’ve written this before: Israel is filled with refuseniks, and a significant number sound like her. See Avigdor Lieberman, the former bouncer. There are RWNJ in Israel, funded by American evangelicals, who literally want to expel all Arabs from Israel, not just the West Bank. I don’t have to list the physical attacks on Arabs, not just Palestinian Arabs, in Israel proper. The attacks on Arabs in the West Bank, have been well documented. There are a significant number of Settlers and their politicians, who relish ethnic cleansing.

    Classic fascists.

  17. avatar
    misha December 19, 2011 at 8:27 pm #

    Are birthers fascists?

    Plenty of Israelis are fed up:

    Why are Israelis moving to Germany?

    Thousands of Israelis, among them many artists, have chosen to live in Berlin because of its relaxed atmosphere and relatively low cost of living, even if it means living in a country with a fraught history.

    http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/why-are-israelis-moving-to-germany-1.384831

  18. avatar
    Daniel December 19, 2011 at 11:41 pm #

    While I would agree that many fascists and birthers have much in common, I don’t think birthers could really qualify as fascists, if for no other reason than there’s no way they could get coordinated enough to make the trains run on time.

  19. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 12:12 am #

    LOL! Point well taken ;)

    Daniel: While I would agree that many fascists and birthers have much in common, I don’t think birthers could really qualify as fascists, if for no other reason than there’s no way they could get coordinated enough to make the trains run on time.

  20. avatar
    Rickey December 20, 2011 at 1:03 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:

    However, as to your second point, the 2012 election does offer some opportunity for judicial review of birther questions in the context of ballot challenges. I point you to Professor Gordon’s paper that speculates exactly how this might be accomplished.

    http://www.law.umaryland.edu/academics/journals/mdlr/print/articles/mllr28.pdf

    Of course, Professor Gordon undoubtedly assumed that such a challenge would be brought by a competent attorney.

  21. avatar
    Keith December 20, 2011 at 2:08 am #

    Daniel:
    While I would agree that many fascists and birthers have much in common, I don’t think birthers could really qualify as fascists, if for no other reason than there’s no way they could get coordinated enough to make the trains run on time.

    Sure they could. All they would have to do is eliminate the schedule altogether.

  22. avatar
    The Magic M December 20, 2011 at 4:20 am #

    > Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

    I don’t agree with this particular statement by Eco; after all, there *are* historical cases of runaway parliaments that have lost all touch with reality.
    Fascism comes into play when such a reproach is made simply because parliament doesn’t bow to every whim of public opinion (such as “execute all child molesters” after a particularly horrifying case has just made the news, or “expel all Muslims” after 9/11).

    What also is borderline fascism is to elevate the radical views of one’s own small political movement to “the will of the people”. Which again is just a reformulation of “it is God’s will”.

  23. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 7:33 am #

    Yes, I agree that this is an important distinction. Well said.

    I totally agree about your points on parliaments as well. As you pointed out, there are legitmate possibilities of runaway parliaments (the Jacobins of the French Revolution come immediately to mind) where they have lost all touch with reality and they themselves have become the fascists and not those that oppose them. Some movements can start out well intended and then become quickly mired into their own bubble and spiral downward into themselves becoming that which they would have originally ardently opposed.

    The Magic M: What also is borderline fascism is to elevate the radical views of one’s own small political movement to “the will of the people”. Which again is just a reformulation of “it is God’s will”.

  24. avatar
    The Magic M December 20, 2011 at 8:44 am #

    G: becoming that which they would have originally ardently opposed

    Maybe a typical human trait. It’s like “when you’re young, you rebel against your parents; when you’re getting old, you become like them”.

    A typical fallacy for any government following a dictatorship is to think “we must make sure this never happens again”, leading to the same oppressive politics that they originally wanted to replace.

  25. avatar
    Lupin December 20, 2011 at 10:29 am #

    IMHO the birthers are to fascism what the acorn is to the oak; it is up to you to starve the beast before it can bite.

    My personal experience with real fascism was several trips to Spain in 1970 and 1971 when Franco was still very much in power; I also had a good friend in business school (1974-77) who was a Chilean teacher who had fled from Pinochet’s regime — a fact which likely saved his life — and had some remarkable, first-hand stories about what Chile was like when and after Pinochet seized power.

    I have no doubt that if an American Pinochet or Franco seized power — and by “seize” power, I include all legal and pseudo-legal means of doing so — both the Spanish and Chilean Courts were greatly helpful to the fascists, both beforehand and after the fact — you, my friends, all of you here who are not birthers, would be taken away, tortured, then “disappeared”.

    That is the stark truth.

  26. avatar
    J. Potter December 20, 2011 at 10:55 am #

    Speaking of runaway parliaments, Bob Schieffer proposed creating a replacement for our own, which certainly hasn’t runaway, but has accreted to a near-halt. his comments were amusing, check them out if you missed them:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7392052n

    Not sure how his idea would be made to work Constitutionally, unless Congress voluntarily decided to bypass itself. Yeah, right!

    ___________________________

    More on topic, after some more thought, I’d say we can all think of several birthers who appear to aspire to fascism, indulge in fascist fantaises, and we can see there are plenty of readers ready to flock to a demagogue’s banner and become full-blown fascist sheep …. but it’s only online. Birtherism alone is not enough to motivate many to get up from the keyboard for long. Birtherism itself just can’t get a crowd. Hard to have fascism without crowds.

    And have you seen their attempts at logo design? These proto-fascisti need to go to symbolism school!

    Now, roll birtherism up with other “socially conservative” political tripe, and you may get something. I’ll refrain from getting into wider politics here and just leave it at that.

  27. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett December 20, 2011 at 11:53 am #

    Well, I remember when the New Hampshire election board thing went down the people who were unhappy with their decision were accusing them of treason and saying there was going to be a reckoning. We should also remember that some of these Birthers are intent on arresting people for treason, not obeying the law, or what have you.

    I think threatening to take the law into your own hands is vigilantism. There’s a very fine line between being a vigilante and being a fascist. I think the difference is in scale of implementation. Batman waging a war on crime in gotham is vigilantism. Batman waging a war on crime across the state or nation is fascism.

    But yes, we should fear the coming of the Birther Cave

  28. avatar
    Sef December 20, 2011 at 12:40 pm #

    Lupin:
    IMHO the birthers are to fascism what the acorn is to the oak; it is up to you to starve the beast before it can bite.

    My personal experience with real fascism was several trips to Spain in 1970 and 1971 when Franco was still very much in power; I also had a good friend in business school (1974-77) who was a Chilean teacher who had fled from Pinochet’s regime — a fact which likely saved his life — and had some remarkable, first-hand stories about what Chile was like when and after Pinochet seized power.

    I have no doubt that if an American Pinochet or Franco seized power — and by “seize” power, I include all legal and pseudo-legal means of doing so — both the Spanish and Chilean Courts were greatly helpful to the fascists, both beforehand and after the fact — you, my friends, all of you here who are not birthers, would be taken away, tortured, then “disappeared”.

    That is the stark truth.

    Speaking of which, have you heard of the newt’s latest? http://wonkette.com/458471/newt-gingrich-wants-americas-judges-arrested-to-save-constitution Looks like someone has been doing too much out-of-the-box thinking lately.

  29. avatar
    J. Potter December 20, 2011 at 1:13 pm #

    J. Edward Tremlett: P>I think threatening to take the law into your own hands is vigilantism. There’s a very fine line between being a vigilante and being a fascist. I think the difference is in scale of implementation. Batman waging a war on crime in gotham is vigilantism. Batman waging a war on crime across the state or nation is fascism. But yes, we should fear the coming of the Birther Cave

    Can one man a fascism make? If so, there are many birthers aspiring to fascism. There are many birther-followers who sound willing to follow a demagogue right into fascism.
    But only so far. Birtherism itself can’t seem to draw a crowd. Attached to other issues, birtherism could be useful at motivational leverage in growing a movement into Lupin’s oak. But birtherism alone, while good at encouraging typing speeds, can’t seem to motivate anyone away from their keyboard. Fascism without group activity is hard to imagine. A movement gaining any sort of power in the offline world through online means alone is also (so far) hard to imagine. They may be fascist, but they’re not going anywhere in this birther-mobile!

    Besides, after some thoughts I am certain birthers don’t have what it takes to achieve full-blown fascism. Have you seen their attempts at logo design?

  30. avatar
    Sally HIll December 20, 2011 at 1:43 pm #

    I don’t really consider myself to be a birther, but then I do believe Obama is not eligible to be POTUS. I don’t consider myself to be a racist, but then I do believe Obama is not eligible to be POTUS. The two seem to go together according to most Obama followers. But then, I’m not really sure of the current and acceptable meaning of either birther or racist. I know what a racist used to mean, but currently I think it means one who oppose’s Obama.

    I guess I fit in the fascist category because I believe illegal immigrants are here illegally and should be deported. I don’t oppose immigrants at all, but I do believe in the rule of law. Perhaps the meaning of ‘illegal’ has also taken on a new meaning, such as the example I cited above with ‘racist’.

    I live in Texas and most of the illegals that I encounter are Mexican nationals. They truly are here to take back that which they believe was stole from them. They absolutely do not recognize that Texas won this land fair and square in a war. They refuse to speak English and insist that government conform to their language by presenting forms, notices, etc. in Spanish. They refuse to adopt or assimilate into our society. Personally, I feel if they want to come to America to reap the benefits of what this Nation has to offer, they should at least ‘try’ to assimilate, try to adapt and live within our laws. Believe me, having lived in El Paso, I know for a fact if I were to go to Mexico to live, no one, least of all the government, would be interested in speaking to me in English, providing me any assistance, or even welcoming my presence.

    So is it considered birther fascism to oppose illegal immigration but not legal immigration?

    Furthermore, I don’t believe Congress represents We The People, but it has little to do with Obama’s eligibility issues. They are the political elite, ruling class who are more interested in themselves than their country. They are more interested in getting and being re-elected than whether the Nation survives or it’s people are cared for. As far as Obama and Congress on his eligibility – I don’t see them as connected at all.

    Do I think Obama submitted a forged BC? Yes. Do I dismiss expert testimony that disagrees on this subject? No. I don’t dismiss expert testimony that supports it either – but it would seem that Dr. C does. I do have a brain and eyes. When I pull up the PDF and see that it has all these layers and obviously information has been imported into the document and then manipulated through re-sizing or rotation – I have to wonder why. I’m not saying he wasn’t born in Hawaii, I believe he was – because he says he was. I have no reason – at this point – to believe otherwise. But I also don’t believe the BC he released was a certified copy of the BC on file in Hawaii – even if both documents say the exact same thing….something just isn’t quite right with the document he released as his BC. Doesn’t mean the information he released wasn’t correct. He says it is, so I believe him.

    I don’t think Obama is worried or scared about anything – not a single issue. I think he is way too narcissistic for such. I also don’t think the Congress is scared or worried about Obama to the point they are covering for him. I think they are ALL too lazy and too pre-occupied to give two shlts about anything that doesn’t involve their profit and their re-election. It’s just not a priority, and it’s inconsequential to them. Nothing to get their panties in a wad over and cause a stink which might cause them to actually have to do something real and might cause controversy which would negatively effect them. It really is as simple as that…..I think all that conspiracy stuff Dr. C is spouting is just that – conspiracy on his part.

    So, having discussed the points presented, according to Dr. C, I guess I might be a birther, likely that I’m fascist, and most definitely a racist because I oppose Obama’s political agenda.

    Interesting article.

  31. avatar
    Majority Will December 20, 2011 at 1:50 pm #

    Sally HIll: I don’t really consider myself to be a birther, but then I do believe Obama is not eligible to be POTUS.

    You’re a poster child birther, Scott Brown.

  32. avatar
    sfjeff December 20, 2011 at 3:02 pm #

    Sally Hill:I live in Texas and most of the illegals that I encounter are Mexican nationals. They truly are here to take back that which they believe was stole from them. They absolutely do not recognize that Texas won this land fair and square in a war. They refuse to speak English and insist that government conform to their language by presenting forms, notices, etc. in Spanish. They refuse to adopt or assimilate into our society. Personally, I feel if they want to come to America to reap the benefits of what this Nation has to offer, they should at least try’ to assimilate, try to adapt and live within our laws. Believe me, having lived in El Paso, I know for a fact if I were to go to Mexico to live, no one, least of all the government, would be interested in speaking to me in English, providing me any assistance, or even welcoming my presence. <

    First of all- you are clearly a Birther.

    And your issue about Mexicans is totally un-related but I would just like to take issue with it. Do I think that there are Mexicans who advocate 'taking back Texas"? I imagine that they exist, but I have never met one. Every Mexican immigrant- legal or illegal- that I have met is here looking to make money. Usually to send home, often to take home. I have never met one who has any interest in politics other than how it will affect his or her ablity to earn a living and make it home to Mexico and back into the U.S. again.

    Some don't learn English- which is too bad for them- I also know a lot of Chinese immigrants who have never learned English- and they both suffer because of it.

    I personally am opposed to illegal immigration. I personally think that both Bush and Obama were and have been seriously remiss in securing our Southern border, and on leading immigration reform.

    I also think that the anti-Mexican xenophobes like yourself, are seriously deluded in how important illegal labor is to the United States and frankly to all of us.

  33. avatar
    bovril December 20, 2011 at 3:13 pm #

    I feel the use of “fascism” is itself a bit of a cop out and the real weltanschauung at play here is Totalitarianism of which Fascism is one political philosophical element.

    The Birthers, in their own words are nationalistic, isolationist, intolerant, many are racist and all “KNOW” (don’t think) they are right.

    They see the world and Obama in terms of both the Nazi’s “race struggle” and Marxism’s “class struggle” and in the President both drivers are combined and writ large, he is, in their minds the epitomy of the Outsider who steals from them.

    Eric Hoffer in his book The True Believer wrote that

    (they) had a common trait in picturing Western democracies and their values as decadent, with people “too soft, too pleasure-loving and too selfish” to sacrifice for a higher cause, which for them implies an inner moral and biological decay. He further claims that those movements offered the prospect of a glorious future to frustrated people, enabling them to find a refuge from the lack of personal accomplishments in their individual existence. The individual is then assimilated into a compact collective body and “fact-proof screens from reality” are established

    In their own words they want, nay demand, to control all aspects of society to conform to their world view and state (OPPOV and others passim) “Do what we say, or we’ll shoot you”.

    In fact with OPPOV, Dr K(H)ate and their ilk, the model for other types of “outsiders” such as illegal immigrants and Moslems tends to the “Do what we say AND we’ll shoot you”.

    IMO, Birthers are a vile cancer on the body politic and the utter antithesis of what this country and the Western Democracies at least aspire to.

  34. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 10:30 pm #

    Good points & analogies. Thanks!

    The Magic M: Maybe a typical human trait. It’s like “when you’re young, you rebel against your parents; when you’re getting old, you become like them”.A typical fallacy for any government following a dictatorship is to think “we must make sure this never happens again”, leading to the same oppressive politics that they originally wanted to replace.

  35. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 10:33 pm #

    Thank you for your examples, Lupin! Also, I really loved the analogy you came up with in the beginning…well said! As always, you provide a lot of good references that broaden and deepen perspective on an issue.

    Lupin: IMHO the birthers are to fascism what the acorn is to the oak; it is up to you to starve the beast before it can bite. My personal experience with real fascism was several trips to Spain in 1970 and 1971 when Franco was still very much in power; I also had a good friend in business school (1974-77) who was a Chilean teacher who had fled from Pinochet’s regime — a fact which likely saved his life — and had some remarkable, first-hand stories about what Chile was like when and after Pinochet seized power.I have no doubt that if an American Pinochet or Franco seized power — and by “seize” power, I include all legal and pseudo-legal means of doing so — both the Spanish and Chilean Courts were greatly helpful to the fascists, both beforehand and after the fact — you, my friends, all of you here who are not birthers, would be taken away, tortured, then “disappeared”.That is the stark truth.

  36. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 10:44 pm #

    All great points! A big LOL as well, because your point at the end is especially funny…because there is so much truth to it!

    J. Potter: Can one man a fascism make? If so, there are many birthers aspiring to fascism. There are many birther-followers who sound willing to follow a demagogue right into fascism.But only so far. Birtherism itself can’t seem to draw a crowd. Attached to other issues, birtherism could be useful at motivational leverage in growing a movement into Lupin’s oak. But birtherism alone, while good at encouraging typing speeds, can’t seem to motivate anyone away from their keyboard. Fascism without group activity is hard to imagine. A movement gaining any sort of power in the offline world through online means alone is also (so far) hard to imagine. They may be fascist, but they’re not going anywhere in this birther-mobile!Besides, after some thoughts I am certain birthers don’t have what it takes to achieve full-blown fascism. Have you seen their attempts at logo design?

  37. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 11:02 pm #

    I agree.

    bovril: In their own words they want, nay demand, to control all aspects of society to conform to their world view and state (OPPOV and others passim) “Do what we say, or we’ll shoot you”.
    In fact with OPPOV, Dr K(H)ate and their ilk, the model for other types of “outsiders” such as illegal immigrants and Moslems tends to the “Do what we say AND we’ll shoot you”.
    IMO, Birthers are a vile cancer on the body politic and the utter antithesis of what this country and the Western Democracies at least aspire to.

  38. avatar
    G December 20, 2011 at 11:26 pm #

    That is the basic definition of what a Birther is. So YES, you may not like being called out on it, but you are totally a Birther.

    Further, you’ve done nothing but concern troll and advocate for this nonsense for several years now and have been caught making up false stories in the process to push your Birther propaganda myths. You also have a long history of dodging debate and switching to various false straw man tropes or to distract when your myths are busted and disappearing from sight for a while when your lies are exposed or debunked, only to pop back up months later pulling the same tactics and spouting the same nonsense and hoping that nobody notices.

    I don’t know if you actually “believe” the Birtherism memes you spew, but your motives and statements betray that you clearly belief that spreading false smears and propaganda to dupe the gullible is a legitimate tactic for the mere sake of trying to “influence” an election.

    So maybe you don’t like to consider yourself to be an actual “birther” because you are not one of the truly “faithful” dupes, but instead merely one of the cynical and dishonest manipulators pushing unfounded smears merely because you lack personal integrity and think Orwellian tactics are justified. Hate to tell you, but that is one of the key types of hard core birthers out there and certainly one of the more despicable types.

    So yeah, you are definitely a die-hard Birther and nothing but a low-level Joseph Farah / Jerome Corsi wanna-be type of Birther to boot.

    Sally HIll:
    I don’t really consider myself to be a birther, but then I do believe Obama is not eligible to be POTUS.

  39. avatar
    G December 21, 2011 at 12:04 am #

    Ah, there you go, as predicted… immediately moving to try to play the victim card with the false straw-man “racism” meme and think you can get away with it… You know better, but you simply pull such tired and long deconstructed tactics because you are a dishonest and disingenuous person.

    As you’ve been repeatedly told, merely opposing Obama does not make one a racist, so just drop that BS right now.

    There are several apparent motivations for the myths of Birtherism…both in those that spread them and those that believe them. They do NOT all require a racist component to push this nonsense. Racism is only one of those motivators.

    It is clearly one of the stronger and more apparent motivators at play behind Birtherism and there is a plethora of clearly and openly racist Birther posts that out those particular individuals for having this as part of their motivation. To deny such clear racism is fairly evident amongst Birtherism is absurd.

    So yeah, there is definitely a connection between those two things specifically (racism & Birtherism), even if every Birther isn’t themselves racist, that it has a deservedly racist stigma to it.

    Those types of Birthers that are just cynical manipulators may or may not hold any personal “racist” views themselves, but they sure know their audience and how to dog-whistle to them and then try to play the victim card to pretend their hands are clean. Hey, there are many drug pushers out there that don’t do drugs themselves. But they are as much a part of the problem as the addicts they create and feed. Similarly, those that shamelessly push dog-whistle propaganda tactics are just as much (if not more) of the problem as the audience they knowingly feed. So yeah, lay down with dogs and you get fleas. Even more so if you supply the fleas to the dogs in the first place.

    Therefore, if you openly associate and support causes with a high correlation to racism and are unwilling to honestly acknowledge and denounce the racism within that movement and only try to dismiss the issue by playing a dodging victim card tactic, then YES, you deserve to be painted with the same broad brush, as you openly wear the apologist stink of association that goes with it.

    There are many legitimate concerns of opposition to Obama based on simple disagreements of policy, administrative decisions or even based merely on ideological worldview that have absolutely nothing to do with racism at all. Such types of opposition have nothing to do with the types of false claims and myths shamelessly peddled by Birtherism. Stop trying to play a dishonest shell game of distraction by pretending that those things are in any way the same.

    Sally HIll:
    I don’t consider myself to be a racist, but then I do believe Obama is not eligible to be POTUS. The two seem to go together according to most Obama followers. But then, I’m not really sure of the current and acceptable meaning of either birther or racist. I know what a racist used to mean, but currently I think it means one who oppose’s Obama.

  40. avatar
    G December 21, 2011 at 12:22 am #

    Well said SFJeff! I agree with all of your points here.

    This is just another clear example of the true motives and dishonesty of Sally Hill. She brings up a completely unrelated topic of illegal immigration, which has absolutely nothing to do with Birther claims about Obama and therefore is completely irrelevant to the actual topic…

    …Except for where it shows the actual basis and motivation for creating and pushing Birtherism myths from the Birther POV – as you said, xenophobia.

    Sally Hill is the one who came here and started playing the dishonest and sleazy “victim card” and ranting about the issues of first racism and then bringing up and going off on illegal immigration…

    This isn’t the first post Sally Hill made on this cite in the past few days.

    Nobody called her a “racist” in any of their responses to prompt her bizarre self-induced denials on the topic.

    Nobody was talking about illegal immigration at all… again, something utterly unrelated and irrelevant that SHE brings up and goes on at in length all on her own.

    It seems that the only one with hang-ups and obsessions on the issues of race and xenophobia in connection with Birtherism here is Sally Hill herself.

    That in itself is telling and a good cause to be suspicious of both her motives and her unsolicited denials…

    sfjeff: Sally Hill:I live in Texas and most of the illegals that I encounter are Mexican nationals. They truly are here to take back that which they believe was stole from them. They absolutely do not recognize that Texas won this land fair and square in a war. They refuse to speak English and insist that government conform to their language by presenting forms, notices, etc. in Spanish. They refuse to adopt or assimilate into our society. Personally, I feel if they want to come to America to reap the benefits of what this Nation has to offer, they should at least try’ to assimilate, try to adapt and live within our laws. Believe me, having lived in El Paso, I know for a fact if I were to go to Mexico to live, no one, least of all the government, would be interested in speaking to me in English, providing me any assistance, or even welcoming my presence. <First of all- you are clearly a Birther.And your issue about Mexicans is totally un-related but I would just like to take issue with it. Do I think that there are Mexicans who advocate ‘taking back Texas”? I imagine that they exist, but I have never met one. Every Mexican immigrant- legal or illegal- that I have met is here looking to make money. Usually to send home, often to take home. I have never met one who has any interest in politics other than how it will affect his or her ablity to earn a living and make it home to Mexico and back into the U.S. again. Some don’t learn English- which is too bad for them- I also know a lot of Chinese immigrants who have never learned English- and they both suffer because of it. I personally am opposed to illegal immigration. I personally think that both Bush and Obama were and have been seriously remiss in securing our Southern border, and on leading immigration reform.I also think that the anti-Mexican xenophobes like yourself, are seriously deluded in how important illegal labor is to the United States and frankly to all of us.

  41. avatar
    G December 21, 2011 at 12:47 am #

    On this topic, I generally agree with you. There is a significant problem, due to a structure that has become geared to requiring big money donors in order to get elected and subservience to special interests and lobbyists to stay in power or get anything done. That definitely encourages corruption as well as a focus on catering to only the concerns of a select and elite few over the broader population and incentivizes those motivated by greed or power to get into and play the game. It also severely hamstrings those politicians with honest intentions and goals or sincere desires to try to lead the country or represent their constituents from doing so in anything else but an extremely watered-down form that becomes twisted to serve instead the special interests that control the purse strings connected to their re-election or post-political future.

    In terms of Congress & Presidential eligibility issues, Congress is actually the correct branch that would handle the responsibility of approving and appointing a President (thereby confirming eligibility) or in removing a President, so the issue in theory does actually fall under their purview.

    That being said, as there is no validity or basis to Birtherism and there are no real issues with Obama’s eligibility (not to mention there was not a single voice of concern or dissent in approving his electoral college votes and appointing him to office), I do agree with the point that Congress is not going to waste any time dealing with this frivolous and fictitious issue.

    Nor does Birtherism have any real connection or impact as to whether this Nation survives. It is merely a propaganda based cynical sideshow smear tactic with no real world basis behind it. There is no “Constitutional Crisis” in relation to this issue, as many Birthers try to hysterically and hyperbolically claim.

    Furthermore, I don’t believe Congress represents We The People, but it has little to do with Obama’s eligibility issues. They are the political elite, ruling class who are more interested in themselves than their country. They are more interested in getting and being re-elected than whether the Nation survives or it’s people are cared for. As far as Obama and Congress on his eligibility – I don’t see them as connected at all.

  42. avatar
    G December 21, 2011 at 1:57 am #

    OOPS! This the block quote cite that my reply at December 21, 2011 at 12:47 am is referencing… (i.e. the last paragraph listed above). Something happened and I lost the formatting that disinguishes what I’m saying from what Sally Hill said, so sorry for any confusion above…

    Sally HIll: Furthermore, I don’t believe Congress represents We The People, but it has little to do with Obama’s eligibility issues. They are the political elite, ruling class who are more interested in themselves than their country. They are more interested in getting and being re-elected than whether the Nation survives or it’s people are cared for. As far as Obama and Congress on his eligibility – I don’t see them as connected at all.

  43. avatar
    G December 21, 2011 at 1:58 am #

    So tell us Sally Hill, as you seem to be the only one bringing it up and making these claims… what and where is there any connection between the Birther claims about Obama and issues of immigration whatsoever?

    Sally HIll:
    So is it considered birther fascism to oppose illegal immigration but not legal immigration?

    Of course you make this claim. You are a hard-core birther. No surprise here.

    Sally HIll:
    Do I think Obama submitted a forged BC? Yes.

    Oh really? Pray tell, specifically what expert testimony that disagrees with Birtherism are you not “dismissing”??? This I’d like to hear…

    Sounds like you not sincere here and just making another lame concern trolling attempt by thinking you can pull off setting up a false equivocation argument and not getting caught…

    Sally HIll:
    Do I dismiss expert testimony that disagrees on this subject? No.

    And pray tell, what actual “expert testimony” is there that supports it? You Birthers sure like to pretend that anyone, with no actual relevant “expert” qualifications who comes up with unsubstantiated claims that tell you what you want to hear is an “expert” in your book.

    Too bad that not a single person making such claims has a qualified background as a relevant “document examination” expert that could stand up to get accepted to take a witness stand in a real court. Funny how most of them also have a clear history of spouting Birtherism and even making pre-drawn conclusions that the document is “fake” before the LFBC was ever released. So all you have is a bunch of existing Birther advocates making up more Birtherism claims. All you’ve got is a circle-jerk going on and nothing close to any credible “experts” at all. Of course Dr. C, upon investigating these flimsy claims dismisses them. Any rational person would.

    Nor would any of these clowns and their claims be able to stack up to the ONLY relevant authority and therefore official experts on the matter – the HI DOH, which has clearly and repeatedly vouched for the documents. See also the Constitution itself and the principal of FFAC and how that applies to prima facie documents, such as the COLB (and in this particular case, the released LFBC as well). End of Story right there.

    Sally HIll:
    I don’t dismiss expert testimony that supports it either – but it would seem that Dr. C does.

    *yawn*. Ah, trying to dredge up the irrelevant and meaningless PDF arguments again are we? Of course, you Birthers just love to try to resurrect long dead horses over and over again. Sorry, won’t work and the subject has been covered extensively and debunked months ago. It is completely irrelevant what the PDF itself looks like or what inconsequential artifacts arise out of scanning. You are wasting time tilting at windmills railing about a scanned image.

    The actual document and any officially generated reprints issued by the HI DOH are all that matter and they and their chain of custody have been solidly vouched for by ALL authorities and officials that have any say and are of any consequence on the matter. As pointed out above, End of Story right there.

    Sally HIll:
    I do have a brain and eyes. When I pull up the PDF and see that it has all these layers and obviously information has been imported into the document and then manipulated through re-sizing or rotation – I have to wonder why.

    Yet you tirelessly work to pimp all these Birther meme that utterly rely on making the claim otherwise…

    Boy, you really don’t realize how obvious your talking out both sides of your mouth is, do you? You’ve been concern trolling for how many years now…and are still this blatantly bad at it… as the old saying goes, Obvious Troll is Obvious. Rarely have I encountered someone who was so transparently and consistently disingenuous…

    You should consider working for Mitt Romney’s campaign or Newt’s… Shameless yet glaringly obvious contradictions from one sentence to another is a rare trait that you all share.

    Sally HIll:
    I’m not saying he wasn’t born in Hawaii, I believe he was – because he says he was. I have no reason – at this point – to believe otherwise. But I also don’t believe the BC he released was a certified copy of the BC on file in Hawaii – even if both documents say the exact same thing….something just isn’t quite right with the document he released as his BC. Doesn’t mean the information he released wasn’t correct. He says it is, so I believe him.

    Obama has plenty of real concerns to worry about, both in terms of leading this nation and trying to get re-elected. Birtherism is not one of them. So you are angry at Obama and Congress and wish to view them in as negative a light as possible. You see what you project and wish to see. I don’t really care and none of that emotional anger has any relevance to the loopy charges that Birtherism makes.

    …But that really is at the heart of what drives you to sling such obvious poo and push Birther propaganda, isn’t it? People like you can’t simply be unhappy or dislike someone. You shamelessly think that your emotional state and enmity justifies coming up with made up rumors and false allegations and spreading such mud is a legitimate tactic for anyone you dislike. That really is what your pursuit of Birtherism and your long-term efforts of pushing this silly garbage has always been about, admit it. All Birtherism amounts to is a bunch of hot air and hollow charges by petty people with no personal integrity and no shame.

    Oh, and nice try of trying to play the Bizarro-verse reversal tactic and accuse this site of spouting “conspiracy”. LOL! Sorry, but we don’t create conspiracies or buy into them here. Only debunk and report on them. Trying to pass off night as day…how very transparently Orwellian of you, yet again. Keep that fail train rolling, concern troll.

    Sally HIll:
    I don’t think Obama is worried or scared about anything – not a single issue. I think he is way too narcissistic for such. I also don’t think the Congress is scared or worried about Obama to the point they are covering for him. I think they are ALL too lazy and too pre-occupied to give two shlts about anything that doesn’t involve their profit and their re-election. It’s just not a priority, and it’s inconsequential to them. Nothing to get their panties in a wad over and cause a stink which might cause them to actually have to do something real and might cause controversy which would negatively effect them. It really is as simple as that…..I think all that conspiracy stuff Dr. C is spouting is just that – conspiracy on his part.
    So, having discussed the points presented, according to Dr. C, I guess I might be a birther, likely that I’m fascist, and most definitely a racist because I oppose Obama’s political agenda.
    Interesting article.

  44. avatar
    misha December 21, 2011 at 2:17 am #

    “Are birthers fascists?”

    Birthers = Settlers = fascists. That’s also why Orly is the Birther train conductor, and the Settlers love her.

    Just as Birthers want a “pure” America, Settlers want a “pure” Israel, and therefore detest liberals – both American and Israeli.

    Vile people to their marrow.

  45. avatar
    Keith December 21, 2011 at 8:07 am #

    Sally HIll:

    When I pull up the PDF and see that it has all these layers and obviously information has been imported into the document and then manipulated through re-sizing or rotation – I have to wonder why.

    Why are you obsessed with the PDF image? EVERY PDF image is BY DEFINITION ‘manipulated’ by the software that creates it. The PDF image is NOT the Birth Certificate – it is an IMAGE of the Birth Certificate. Any software manipulation performed on the IMAGE during conversion of the scanned raw bit image to PDF is irrelevant. The image is not a forgery of the original, it is an image of the original (for clarity, the “original” here is the certified copy that was issued by the state of Hawai’i – not the archive document in Honolulu).

    I’m not saying he wasn’t born in Hawaii, I believe he was – because he says he was. I have no reason – at this point – to believe otherwise. But I also don’t believe the BC he released was a certified copy of the BC on file in Hawaii – even if both documents say the exact same thing.

    Then try refocusing your attention on the information on the document – that is what is important after all. You say you believe he was born in Hawai’i, because he said so, yet he has provided a Birth Certificate to substantiate his claim. So you are saying you take his word for it, but you don’t believe the documentary evidence. If both documents, the hypothetical ‘real’ BC and the alleged ‘forged’ BC say he was born in Hawai’i and you believe that that is so, why all the carry on?

    On the other hand, why would the State of Hawaii forge a birth certificate for him. He was born in Hawai’i, so Hawai’i has no need and no motivation to forge the birth certificate. And if the ‘real’ BC says he was born in Hawai’i and the allegedly forged BC says he was born in Hawai’i, what is the difference? If the State of Hawai’i creates a copy of the Birth Event Record from their vaults, certifies that the information on it is correct, and imprints that certification on the document according to State and Federal laws, then in what way can it possibly be said to be a forgery?

    ….something just isn’t quite right with the document he released as his BC. Doesn’t mean the information he released wasn’t correct. He says it is, so I believe him.

    Premise (1): IF the information on the document is correct,
    THEN Obama is Constitutionally eligible to hold the Office of POTUS.

    Premise (2): The information on the document is correct, (according to the State of Hawai’i)

    Conclusion:THEREFORE Obama is Constitutionally eligible to hold the Office of POTUS.

    That is all that counts, end of story.

    Imaginary butterflies found in bit maps produced by image optimization routines have no more meaning to the validity of the information on the document than imaginary horses head found in a cloud formation has to do with the amount of water vapor in that cloud.

  46. avatar
    Lupin December 21, 2011 at 8:38 am #

    Sally HIll: I don’t oppose immigrants at all, but I do believe in the rule of law.

    I always find it rather ironic that the same folks who claimed they believed in the “rule of law” were so keen to give the Bush/Cheney administration a pass for their numerous transgressions.

    @ Sally Hill:

    Anyone who believe your president to be illegitimate is: (a) a nut, (b) a gullible fool, (c) a bigot, in any combination thereof.

    Regarding documented vs undocumented immigrants, this is indeed a complex issue with human, cultural, legal, economic and political ramifications, where reasonable people can agree to disagree.

    You certainly need to rethink immigration policies (as we do in Europe), but unfortunately intelligent debate seems to be drowned by idiots and racists, leading to unintended (?) consequences such as crops rotting in the field in Alabama (?) or they arresting foreign auto executives. We have our share of that too, sadly.

    Finally, since Texas didn’t belong to you (anglo-saxon americans) in the first place, I find it rather ironic you worry about Mexico “taking it back”. For my part, I’d like the Louisiana Territory back, but I fear that boat has sailed.

  47. avatar
    Lupin December 21, 2011 at 8:41 am #

    G: Thank you for your examples, Lupin! Also, I really loved the analogy you came up with in the beginning…well said! As always, you provide a lot of good references that broaden and deepen perspective on an issue.

    Thank you, G. Some of us never forgave Kissinger for the part he played in the Pinochet coup (ironically, on September 11). He is regarded as a war criminal in most places around the world, not as an elderly, distinguished statesman.

  48. avatar
    roadburner December 21, 2011 at 9:46 am #

    I also think that the anti-Mexican xenophobes like yourself, are seriously deluded in how important illegal labor is to the United States and frankly to all of us.

    we learned that lesson here around 10 years ago.

    a lot of the more conservative types here in spain were constantly bitching about how morroccans and gitanos (gypsies) were taking spanish jobs down south working on the fruit and vegatable harvests on low wages. the partido popular (who just got elected again) clamped down an introduced legislation to make it harder for the farmers to hire cheap casual foreign labour for the harvests, and fines for those who didn´t follow the new regs.

    what happened was the farmers couldn´t get the workers even at double the wage the morroccans and gitanos were working for, and were desperately even offering paid holidays on the coast for spanish workers who stayed the whole season!

    bottom line – the price of fruit and veg shot up and people started pissing and moaning about that instead, with few realising that it was their complaints that laid the seeds for this.

    for some types of work, illegal immigrants are essential if you want to maintain the price of what you pay for.

    BTW, although the wages paid were low, compared to wages in morrocco they were a lot higher, so the morroccan workers were more than happy.to work for them.

  49. avatar
    Rickey December 21, 2011 at 10:23 am #

    roadburner: we learned that lesson here around 10 years ago.

    a lot of the more conservative types here in spain were constantly bitching about how morroccans and gitanos (gypsies) were taking spanish jobs down south working on the fruit and vegatable harvests on low wages. the partido popular (who just got elected again) clamped down an introduced legislation to make it harder for the farmers to hire cheap casual foreign labour for the harvests, and fines for those who didn´t follow the new regs.

    what happened was the farmers couldn´t get the workers even at double the wage the morroccans and gitanos were working for, and were desperately even offering paid holidays on the coast for spanish workers who stayed the whole season!

    bottom line – the price of fruit and veg shot up and people started pissing and moaning about that instead, with few realising that it was their complaints that laid the seeds for this.

    for some types of work, illegal immigrants are essential if you want to maintain the price of what you pay for.

    BTW, although the wages paid were low, compared to wages in morrocco they were a lot higher, so the morroccan workers were more than happy.to work for them.

    A similar situation has already occurred in Alabama, where the shortage of Mexican laborers has the state considering using prisoners to do farm work.

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/12/06/382852/alabama-agriculture-department-promoting-plan-to-replace-immigrants-with-prisoners-to-farmers/

  50. avatar
    Rickey December 21, 2011 at 10:39 am #

    Lupin:

    Finally, since Texas didn’t belong to you (anglo-saxon americans) in the first place, I find it rather ironic you worry about Mexico “taking it back”. For my part, I’d like the Louisiana Territory back, but I fear that boat has sailed.

    Mexicans call it invasión estadounidense de México, which is an apt description.

    That said, the belief that Mexico wants to “take back” Texas is just another example of the paranoia which possesses so many birthers. And if I were Mexican I’d rather take back California than Texas.

  51. avatar
    Majority Will December 21, 2011 at 10:52 am #

    “I’m not saying he wasn’t born in Hawaii, I believe he was – because he says he was. . . . He says it is, so I believe him.”

    Just like a birther to miss the point entirely.

    No one remembers his or her (or his and her in Scott/Sally’s case?) birth.

    The State of Hawaii is the relevant authority who vouches unequivocally for the President’s birth in Hawaii on August 4th, 1961 making him a natural born citizen of the United States according to our laws.

    It’s not a complicated concept for rational non-bigots to grasp.

  52. avatar
    J. Potter December 21, 2011 at 11:37 am #

    My only comment on “Sally Hill” … double-speak. The birtheriest excerpts read like a conversation, rather than explication.

    “I don’t really consider myself to be a birther, but then I do believe Obama is not eligible to be POTUS.”

    “Do I think Obama submitted a forged BC? Yes.”

    “I’m not saying he wasn’t born in Hawaii, I believe he was – because he says he was. I have no reason – at this point – to believe otherwise. But I also don’t believe the BC he released was a certified copy of the BC on file in Hawaii – even if both documents say the exact same thing….something just isn’t quite right with the document he released as his BC. Doesn’t mean the information he released wasn’t correct. He says it is, so I believe him.”

    Bonus intellectual dishonesty points for attempt to undermine proper use of terms “rascism” and “rascist”.

    Have to go brush my eye teeth now…

  53. avatar
    Keith December 21, 2011 at 4:41 pm #

    Rickey: And if I were Mexican I’d rather take back California than Texas.

    But then they might get into a territorial war with Russia.

  54. avatar
    The Magic M December 22, 2011 at 4:31 am #

    Keith: If both documents, the hypothetical real’ BC and the alleged forged’ BC say he was born in Hawai’i and you believe that that is so, why all the carry on?

    Unless Sally Hill is just another concern troll, the motivation is obviously the “he must be hiding something embarrassing” meme which, IMO, predates the “he wasn’t born here” and the “he isn’t eligible” memes.

    It’s possible Sally belongs to the (ever shrinking) minority of birthers who don’t think Obama is ineligible but simply hides something that (in their mind at least) would guarantee he won’t be re-elected. Which is where the “his real daddy was Malcolm X / F. M. Davis” crowd comes in.

    You could call these the most sane among the crazy. They are aware that all the talk of “forgeries” and “conspiracies” is total bull and that the vault document doesn’t say anything that would make Obama ineligible *legally* – but maybe ineligible to the masses. The “his BC says he’s a Muslim”, “his BC says he’s the son of a Marxist radical” or “his BC says he’s the son of a Hawaiian streetwalker” theory. Anything they hope would make enough people say “well, I’m not voting for *that* guy again”.

  55. avatar
    bernadine ayers December 22, 2011 at 10:54 am #

    you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ?? if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?

  56. avatar
    Majority Will December 22, 2011 at 11:09 am #

    “if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?”

    That’s only if there’s a ghost writer.

  57. avatar
    Daniel December 22, 2011 at 11:12 am #

    bernadine ayers:
    you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ??if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?

    It’s irrelevant.

  58. avatar
    sfjeff December 22, 2011 at 12:43 pm #

    bernadine ayers: you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ?? if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?

    this is WashingtonAmerica right?

    Only Birther i have seen that stubbornly is opposed to capitalization.

  59. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 22, 2011 at 1:11 pm #

    I don’t know that the question has been asked here before, at least not exactly this way.

    The problem is your assumption that the original birth certificate in the bound volume in Hawaii is on security paper. it isn’t. (I worked with vital records for decades in several states.) Security paper (the “background”) is there to prevent unauthorized copying. The original has to be copied in order to be issued, so it would be counterproductive to put it on security paper.

    Also, the birth certificate form in Hawaii is initiated by the Hospital, and it would be a nightmare to try to control security paper for every doctor, and birthing facility.

    If you look very closely at the President’s long form you can see that the certificate is curved near the margin (at the binding), but that the security background is not because there is no background on the book copy.

    bernadine ayers: you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ?? if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?

  60. avatar
    bernadine ayers December 22, 2011 at 8:38 pm #

    sfjeffDecember 22, 2011 at 12:43 pm (Quote)#

    bernadine ayers: you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ?? if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?

    this is WashingtonAmerica right?

    Only Birther i have seen that stubbornly is opposed to capitalization

    hi jeff, i figured you’d get it before the day was over…, how are you ? you live in texas now ?? good job amigo. when i saw your name earlier i knew i was busted.

    i hope i can still stay…

    merry christmas everybody…

  61. avatar
    bernadine ayers December 22, 2011 at 8:41 pm #

    Dr. ConspiracyDecember 22, 2011 at 1:11 pm (Quote)#

    I don’t know that the question has been asked here before, at least not exactly this way.

    The problem is your assumption that the original birth certificate in the bound volume in Hawaii is on security paper. it isn’t. (I worked with vital records for decades in several states.) Security paper (the “background”) is there to prevent unauthorized copying. The original has to be copied in order to be issued, so it would be counterproductive to put it on security paper.

    Also, the birth certificate form in Hawaii is initiated by the Hospital, and it would be a nightmare to try to control security paper for every doctor, and birthing facility.

    If you look very closely at the President’s long form you can see that the certificate is curved near the margin (at the binding), but that the security background is not because there is no background on the book copy.

    bernadine ayers: you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ?? if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?

    see, i ask good questions.

    it’s not a very good answer. have you talked to arduini about this one ? his version is quite different.

  62. avatar
    Majority Will December 22, 2011 at 8:45 pm #

    bernadine ayers:

    this is WashingtonAmerica right?

    Only Birther i have seen that stubbornly is opposed to capitalization

    hi jeff, i figured you’d get it before the day was over…, how are you ? you live in texas now ?? good job amigo. when i saw your name earlier i knew i was busted.
    merry christmas everybody…

    That’s one of the most unbelievably disturbing, incredibly vile and visually nauseating cesspools of a website I’ve ever had the misfortune of seeing:

    http://www.washingtonamerica.com/

    Wow. Just wow.

  63. avatar
    G December 22, 2011 at 8:49 pm #

    Bernadine, a helpful tip –

    Do you see that (quote)# option next to someone’s post, to the right of their handle & time stamp?

    Try it. It will help you distinguish your replies from the text you are attempting to reply to. Right now, your posts just run together, which just means that many people will not even bother to read your posts and start to ignore them altogether..

    If there is only a specific paragraph or sentence you wish to reply to, all you have to do is first highlight that text in the original, then click the quote button and it will appear in your reply box, with the proper formatting, so that it is distinguishable from your text, when you respond.

    I hope that helps.

    bernadine ayers: Dr. ConspiracyDecember 22, 2011 at 1:11 pm (Quote)#I don’t know that the question has been asked here before, at least not exactly this way.The problem is your assumption that the original birth certificate in the bound volume in Hawaii is on security paper. it isn’t. (I worked with vital records for decades in several states.) Security paper (the “background”) is there to prevent unauthorized copying. The original has to be copied in order to be issued, so it would be counterproductive to put it on security paper.Also, the birth certificate form in Hawaii is initiated by the Hospital, and it would be a nightmare to try to control security paper for every doctor, and birthing facility.If you look very closely at the President’s long form you can see that the certificate is curved near the margin (at the binding), but that the security background is not because there is no background on the book copy.bernadine ayers: you guys are probably sick of explaining this, but could you tell me what the physicallity of the left margin is ?? if it is a copy, where would be the binding of the boo?. i asked frank arduini one time but he couldn’t answer. if it is a copy from the book and it was printed again on the same exact paper, did all of the backgrounds match up that perfectly? is that possible ?see, i ask good questions.it’s not a very good answer. have you talked to arduini about this one ? his version is quite different.

  64. avatar
    G December 22, 2011 at 9:08 pm #

    I couldn’t get past the poor messy design chock full of different colors popping out all over and improperly sized graphics that require endless scrolling to see most of the site’s content.

    There are a lot of sites like this out on the net that fit that type of trainwreck pattern – when the site is run by someone with serious mental illness. I think that is pretty clear what we are dealing with here – someone who is deeply disturbed and “not all there”… and who uses their site and posting places like here to act out their compulsions when they are not properly medicated.

    I also noticed that his own site has a whole section from him titled “Can we reopen the ayers/dohrn murders case?”

    …yeah, this same poster, when we called him out for what he was trying to do with using the handle “bernadine ayers”, he doubled down on his lying and tried to play the “victim” game by posting some lame link to a different dead person with that same name… as if somehow that was his “clever” cover or excuse, instead of just further outing him as a disingenous fool.

    Well, being a pathological liar is probably part of whatever bag of psychosis he suffers for.

    Well, now part of me feels a moral quandary about bothering to respond to him further. I enjoy outing trolls and giving them a smackdown by eviscerating their nonsense…

    …but I do also have some compassion for those that are clinically ill and don’t want to beat up on the mentally challenged any more than I have to…

    Majority Will: That’s one of the most unbelievably disturbing, incredibly vile and visually nauseating cesspools of a website I’ve ever had the misfortune of seeing:http://www.washingtonamerica.com/Wow. Just wow.

  65. avatar
    Majority Will December 22, 2011 at 9:13 pm #

    G:
    I couldn’t get past the poor messy design chock full of different colors popping out all over and improperly sized graphics that require endless scrolling to see most of the site’s content.

    There are a lot of sites like this out on the net that fit that type of trainwreck pattern – when the site is run by someone with serious mental illness.I think that is pretty clear what we are dealing with here – someone who is deeply disturbed and “not all there”… and who uses their site and posting places like here to act out their compulsions when they are not properly medicated.

    I also noticed that his own site has a whole section from him titled “Can we reopen the ayers/dohrn murders case?”

    …yeah, this same poster, when we called him out for what he was trying to do with using the handle “bernadine ayers”, he doubled down on his lying and tried to play the “victim” game by posting some lame link to a different dead person with that same name… as if somehow that was his “clever” cover or excuse, instead of just further outing him as a disingenous fool.

    Well, being a pathological liar is probably part of whatever bag of psychosis he suffers for.

    Well, now part of me feels a moral quandary about bothering to respond to him further.I enjoy outing trolls and giving them a smackdown by eviscerating their nonsense…

    …but I do also have some compassion for those that are clinically ill and don’t want to beat up on the mentally challenged any more than I have to…

    Suddenly, Lucas looks slightly less psychotic.

  66. avatar
    G December 22, 2011 at 9:19 pm #

    Lucas isn’t psychotic. He’s simply allowed himself to become a product of his environment by becoming scarred from his past and not yet learning the right things from his past mistakes. He simply suffers from a lot of bad habits that he hasn’t been able to break and issues he hasn’t been able to reconcile and move on from… He’s also still fairly young, so there is always a chance he can stop being his own worst enemy and instead, learn to grow from his experiences some day…

    Majority Will: Suddenly, Lucas looks slightly less psychotic.

  67. avatar
    Majority Will December 22, 2011 at 9:27 pm #

    G:
    Lucas isn’t psychotic.He’s simply allowed himself to become a product of his environment by becoming scarred from his past and not yet learning the right things from his past mistakes.He simply suffers from a lot of bad habits that he hasn’t been able to break and issues he hasn’t been able to reconcile and move on from… He’s also still fairly young, so there is always a chance he can stop being his own worst enemy and instead, learn to grow from his experiences some day…

    Then is sociopath more fair?

  68. avatar
    JPotter December 22, 2011 at 9:43 pm #

    Re: has LFBC left margin/security paper been asked about before?

    Regardless of whether it was, it has been now.

    Here is one I know has been asked before, and now bears reiterating: are these people really that stupid? desperate enough to toss such weak seeds out onto the soil of the public consciousness? Obviously they are. Are there any patches of the public silly enough to incubate such seeds? this late in the game?

  69. avatar
    G December 22, 2011 at 9:55 pm #

    Possibly. The jury is definitely still out on that one. Some of the behaviorial traits fit the profile…

    See: Profile of a Sociopath

    http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

    Majority Will: Then is sociopath more fair?

  70. avatar
    bernadine ayers December 22, 2011 at 9:56 pm #

    JPotterDecember 22, 2011 at 9:43 pm (Quote)#

    Re: has LFBC left margin/security paper been asked about before?

    Regardless of whether it was, it has been now.

    Here is one I know has been asked before, and now bears reiterating: are these people really that stupid? desperate enough to toss such weak seeds out onto the soil of the public consciousness? Obviously they are. Are there any patches of the public silly enough to incubate such seeds? this late in the game?

    what do you mean this late in the game ?

  71. avatar
    G December 22, 2011 at 10:23 pm #

    You birthers have been peddling the same nonsense for over 3 years now. Some of your lies might be more recent than that, but still, they’ve all been covered and debunked for quite some time.

    Trying to push arguments that the LFBC isn’t “real”… yeah…you fools have been trying that since before it was even released. The “layers” and other silly arguments are so weak and stupid that they’ve gone nowhere. Corsi might be desperate to recoup some cash for all the books he can’t move, but that desperation doesn’t translate to anyone caring, other than you same crazy zealots who keep repeating the same nonsense and beating the same dead horses over and over and over again and just don’t get it.

    The rest of the world has moved on. All angles of the “fake LFBC” sideshow were hopeless the moment the LFBC was released – Hawaii’s legal letter attesting to the matter and the chain of custody pretty much kills it.

    You can cry “conspiracy” all you want, but when the ONLY official agencies with the authority to issue these certifcates and vouch for them does so, you’re dead in the water. This works the same way our US Dollars are legal tender, because the issuing authorities that vouch for them.

    That is why most of birtherism has shifted their goalposts to try to focus on “2 citizen parent” and silly SSN nonsense…because they realize that the LFBC attacks are a stretch too much of a lost cause, even for the movement that is the king of lost causes…

    Yet fools like you think you can reappear and just keep saying the same silly things and brainwash new people into your scams.

    Sorry, but there are probably not that many people who vote who haven’t heard anything about birther claims by now. Your susceptible dupes are already part of your small and meaningless following.

    Most people have rejected your claims and aren’t going to suddenly change their mind and treat you seriously, just because you approach them again spouting the same crazy stories they’ve already dismissed. There is a reason why Birthers are openly mocked and treated with derision. You are a small and failed movement with no credibility and no good sense to realize that you’ve got nothing and nowhere to go with it.

    The people you Concern Troll con artists are trying to appeal to and would have any hopes of reaching with your false doubts that you sow…guess what…those folks are either already birthers or not voting for Obama no matter what anyways. So great, you guys are quite the circle-jerk squad of preaching to the faithful, aren’t you? LMAO!

    bernadine ayers: what do you mean this late in the game ?

  72. avatar
    JPotter December 22, 2011 at 10:32 pm #

    Yup, that’s what G said! And what I meant.

    G: bernadine ayers: what do you mean this late in the game ?

    Somewhere else on OCT, I asked if anyone was aware of a chronology of birther goalpost positions … a dated clearinghouse of postulations and promises and deadlines and retrenchments and irrationalizations. A monumental undertaking to be sure.

    An attempt to visualize their collective web of mythos would be equally sidesplitting!

  73. avatar
    bernadine ayers December 22, 2011 at 10:44 pm #

    so it’s a dead issue ?

  74. avatar
    JPotter December 22, 2011 at 11:06 pm #

    bernadine ayers:
    so it’s a dead issue ?

    The central idea was a strawman from the beginning … it never had life. The persistence of its peddlers and the inventiveness of their pitches provide sporadic entertainment. Not nearly consistent enough for my liking … perhaps finally on the wane … but not yet gone, still limpin’ along.

    Maybe, just maybe, as they ever promise, they’ve gone away to work on something in secretsssss, yessss? Some new delicioussness for ussss, my pweciousss?

  75. avatar
    G December 22, 2011 at 11:08 pm #

    Dead to everyone BUT the die-hard birthers, yes.

    So yeah, if you want to accuse us of being zombie watchers, guilty as charged!

    bernadine ayers: so it’s a dead issue ?

  76. avatar
    Majority Will December 23, 2011 at 4:46 am #

    bernadine ayers: so it’s a dead issue ?

    Of course it’s a dead issue.

    But we will continue to watch birther zombies and thugs make complete idiots of themselves.

    We will continue to counter the ongoing spread of vicious birther lies.

    We will continue to expose vile and hate-filled birthers’ blatant and reprehensible disrespect of our laws and our multiculturalism.

    Birthers who make threats of violence are the most dangerous of all. Is that a dead issue or a death issue?

  77. avatar
    Lupin December 23, 2011 at 5:27 am #

    bernadine ayers: so it’s a dead issue ?

    The issue’s passed on! This issue is no more! It has ceased to be! It expired and gone to meet its maker! It’s a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! Pushing up the daisies! Its metabolic processes are now history! It’s off the twig! It’s kicked the bucket,shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-ISSUE!!

  78. avatar
    JPotter December 23, 2011 at 7:21 am #

    G:
    Dead to everyone BUT the die-hard birthers, yes.

    So yeah, if you want to accuse us of being zombie watchers, guilty as charged!

    Zombies are hot, y’know!

    New web-show, The Birthin’ Dead, anyone?

  79. avatar
    Keith December 23, 2011 at 7:25 am #

    Lupin: The issue’s passed on! This issue is no more! It has ceased to be! It expired and gone to meet its maker! It’s a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! Pushing up the daisies! Its metabolic processes are now history! It’s off the twig! It’s kicked the bucket,shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-ISSUE!!

    Nah. Its just pining for the fnords.