Anyone who’s been reading this blog for a while knows that I reject the proposition that the birther movement is nothing more than a cover for racism. However, Mario Apuzzo wrote, republished at The Free Republic:
Dr. Conspiracy likes to give the appearance of being an unbiased scholar in pursuit of the truth regarding whether putative President Barack Obama is a “natural born Citizen.” He has also created an internet persona of being a champion of civil rights. He has even gone as far as to take the unabashed position that most people who question Obama’s “natural born Citizen” status are racists. To date, he has made no apologies for his outlandish position.
I’m not going to apologize for Mr. Apuzzo’s imagination. He likes to pick a simple idea and use it to define something or someone, ignoring a body of work and the context. (His legal arguments about citizenship work the same way.) Apuzzo aside, I suppose it might be a good time to review what I’ve written about racism and birtherism.
One of the first articles (December, 2008) I wrote here was titled, The Genesis of Obama Conspiracy Theories. In it I said what I have been saying, more or less, for the past three years:
The smears persist thanks to several interest groups including pro-Israel, anti-Muslim, white racist, anti-abortion, PUMA (pro-Hillary), anti-federalism, pro-gun and right-wingers in general. How much cooperation there is; beyond cutting and pasting each others’ material, I don’t know.
I later expanded that list considerably in my article, O-Bots, Nobama, and Truthers.
In the second month of this blogs publication I wrote an article, Yes, Virginia, there are racists against Obama that highlighted a lawsuit brought against Obama, The Church of Jesus Christ/Aryan Nations of Missouri et al v. Obama et al that describes the defendant:
Defendant, u$ Senator Barack Hussein Obama is ’employed’ as a professional politician whom the extremely idiotic whiggers of Illinois selected to be their u$ Senator and who the even more idiotic ZOGland whigger ass-clowns, sundry muds and jew cruds are about to (s)elect as president of the u$/ZOG/Babylon as the Democratic Party nominee, but NOT if Plaintiffs have anything to say about it. This Genesis 1:24-25 and 2:19 Sixth-Day mamzer-Beast of the Field has been tracked to its lair at: 713 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510.
A significant legal underpinning for Apuzzo’s arguments on presidential eligibility come from the US Supreme Court in the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, widely held to be one of the worst decisions in the history of the Court. I was frankly surprised that anyone these days would embrace the blatantly racist Dred Scott decision, but he did. I wrote about this in my article, Racism and Dred Scott:
We have bantered about some on the question of racism and whether it plays a role in Obama denialism and the denialist views on citizenship. Whether that is so or not, Justice Taney’s decision in Dred Scott v Sandford [sic] was a clearly racially motivated decision, because it said that Negroes could not be citizens and white people could. It was as much racist as the laws (such as the Act of 1790) which said that only “free whites” could be naturalized as citizens. Taney tried to justify excluding a class from citizenship using criteria solely aligned with race.
In my February, 2009, article, Natural Law v. Common Law, I introduced a theme that has continued in my thinking and that is the role of anti-immigrant sentiment in the birther movement. I wrote:
When I come across an argument about citizenship that is based on natural law, I expect to find an undercurrent of racism and prejudice. (When I say “racism” I don’t necessarily mean white racism against blacks, but rather any generalized distrust or stereotyping of any group that is racially, ethnically or nationally different.) Whether it was the Irish, the Chinese, the Puerto Ricans, the Mexicans, the Jews or the Africans, Americans have a sorry history when it comes to color-blindness in the community. The Chinese Exclusion Act and slavery are two examples from history, and it wasn’t so long ago that I saw a sign in a local restaurant: “we don’t serve Iranians”.
In June, I highlighted a Terry Gross interview with Chip Berlet on his paper Toxic to Democracy: Conspiracy Theories, Demonization, and Scapegoating, what I consider to be one of the most important papers for understanding the birther movement.
Chip Berlet shows that the development of modern conspiracism is rooted in bigotry and that the conspiracist analytical model itself encourages demonization and scapegoating of blameless persons and groups. In so doing, conspiracism also serves to distract society and its would-be agents of change away from ongoing, structural causes of social and economic injustices.
In my February, 2010, article, Reaping the whirlwind, I said that I felt that racism couldn’t be the key factor in the birther movement, writing:
Now I for one hesitate to isolate racism as the key factor. I personally think racism is on the way out, as soon as the majority of the racists die off. I think the issue is more of “me vs. them.” They want to protect people like them, their jobs, their freedom, their way of life from what they fear is an onslaught of change and dominance by strangers they don’t understand.
In October of 2010, I repeated my view that birtherism is complex, writing:
The “crisis” is an engineered one, started and fanned by right-wing media types and pro-Israel operatives, finding resonance with racists, disaffected Hillary Clinton Supporters, right-wing partisans and folks who generally don’t believe anything the government says. If it weren’t the birth certificate, it would be something else.
In May of 2011, I again addressed the subject in my article Birthers and racism. In that article I criticized Salon.com for saying that racism explains birtherism and rejected simplistic explanations, writing:
As we have seen from the comments of psychologists on conspiracy theories, any kind of bias can lead someone to select one piece of information as reliable and another as unreliable. I think that we should be mindful of the fact that birtherism has from the beginning been a theory in search of evidence. It is the tar baby of ideas, and any story that’s negative about Obama sticks. Whether a person is an arch-supporter of Israel, a white racist or a right winger who hates everything liberal, they all have a disposition to believe anything bad about Obama and once they start believing, they become more and more invested in that belief, accepting more and more implausible stories that snowball even to the point of developing false memories of what they were taught in Civics class.
I guess what I am trying to say is that we cannot look at a particular birther belief and a particular birther and derive that birther’s racism from the belief. The individual birther believes all of it because they have invested great psychological energy building up their views, and have come to the point of shutting out anything that contradicts their construction, even it if seems racist to the outside observer.
If I wanted to push one particular view, I could pile up anecdotal evidence that birthers are racist. Look at the Momma E radio show that welcomed Mario Apuzzo and the National Membership Director of the Ku Klux Klan within 4 days of each other. I could point to white supremacist birther, James W. von Brunn. I could point to the geographic correlation between the birther movement and the states of the Confederacy. Even Apuzzo trying to damn me as a “champion of civil rights” is a transparent play to the racist crowd. Modern racists have learned how to hide their taboo beliefs well and the fact is that I don’t have the data to conclude that birtherism is just a politically correct skin for racism.
I know several open, proud birthers. Every one of them is also an open, proud bigot. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.
“that’s just a coincidence”
the only birther I know is a flat out racist, coincidence?
Some very nasty racial comments were made about Roscoe’s BBQ, the black owner had a white wife. My birther buddy complained about that plus some very nasty signs popped up at Roscoe’s (maybe my birther buddy was one of them)
.
The entire community rallied behind Roscoe, their biggest night was the day of the nasty signs, it has become a popular night spot featuring blues and jazz and great ribs. I went for dinner with my black neighbor, we had a great time. Roscoe’s is in Phoenix, Oregon (just out side of Medford), their jazz schedule is highlighted at :http://www.ashlandlivemusic.com/
Just search for “Roscoe” (the night we went they had Karen Lovely, a jazz singer, a great jazz singer.)
“champion of civil rights”?
Well, when you got nothing, you can make something up, or admit you got nothing. Resistance to admitting error is a definite contributor to birtherism. As is racism. Not all obstinate people are birthers, not all racists are birthers. Heck, neither are all Republicans birthers, or racists, or obstiniticians. Just a lot of overlappin’ circles in an unhappy venn diagram.
I’ve never met a racist who believed he was a racist. Every racist believes they have good, honest, solid reasons for what they believe.
While I agree there is not enough objective evidence to draw a causative link between racism and birtherism, there is certainly enough anecdotal and circumstantial evidence to make the connection.
One question I often ask birthers, but never get a straight answer to is… “What is the one thing that is different about Obama that makes you demand to see from him what you never demanded, never even cared to ask about, for every other President in history?”
Methinks the Meretricious One protests too much.
Typical Republican projection: accuse your enemies of your own sins.
i would argue that while not every birfer is a racist nor is birfoonery fundamentally racist, it is certainly fundamentally bigoted. what else is “me vs. them” but tribalism? tribalism and racism are just a subsets of bigotry and we’ve seen birfers parade bigotry of just about every sort. it’s all they’ve got. there isn’t a rationale for birfoonery that escapes the charge. we’ve heard it all.
racism: “dredd scott!” “14th amendment citizen!” “affirmative action president!” “arab!” “reptillian!”
nativism: “he’s kenyan!” “indonesian!” “british!” “hawaiian!” “vattel!”
tribalism: “marxist!” “communist!” “socialist!” “fascist!” “democrat!” “liberal!”
sexism: “stanley ann could not pass nbc status to obama!” “stanley ann was a whore!” “he’s illegitimate, a bastard!”
classism, up and down the spectrum: “he’s a community organizer!” “chicago thug!” “harvard elite!”
religion: “muslim!” “christian-hater!” “antichrist!”
homophobia: “homosexual!” “bisexual!” “hermaphrodite!”
birfoonery is the expression of frustration that “me” or “we” lost another round to “them”.
who “they” are depends on which birfer you ask.
A good story. Let’s keep birtherism and racism in perspective. Do they exist? Certainly. Are they linked? No doubt. But it needs to be said that in a country of 300 million people even a small percentage with strongly held views can make a lot of noise and seem more significant than they are. The fact remains that the US, a majority white country, elected a half-black, half-white man who self-identifies as black, as their leader. No other majority white country has ever elected a non-white, nor has any majority black country ever elected a white or an Asian. Despite the birthers and racists and internet screamers, President Obama is still personally very popular. His job approval ratings are pretty much evenly divided, which is amazingly good considering the after-effects of the financial crisis. He is still more likely than not to win re-election (56% on Intrade) and has been steadily improving since September.
So, we should not lose sight of the forest of good people over some bad trees.
Yeah, there is no “good” reason for their demands. Since he did spend time overseas, it’s not surpirising that some would clamor for a citizenship check. It’s politics. Someone, somewhere, was gonna ask. But to keep pushing it after his campaign published his BC back on June of ’08, indicates a deeper motive, something beyond politics. A birther may just be dabbling with/tapping into racist / xenophobic memes as a means of radical mudslinging, but if so, how are others to judge whether the mudslinger is a believer, or merely a user? Oh, he’s just a casual racist. Riiiiiiight.
A small point: Apuzzo didn’t write this at Free Republic, he wrote it at his own blog and somebody else cut and pasted it to Free Republic.
I’ve always considered that if it has feathers, a flat bill, webbed feet, swims on water, and quacks, there’s a high probability it’s a duck. Mario seems to be saying that I’m looking at geese instead, but somehow, I keep coming back to “it’s a duck.” I’d be willing to say there might be a goose or two in there, but overall, the “honking” a goose makes is being drowned out by the quacking.
I agree with what Dr. C and everyone here has posted on this issue so far. I’ve only copied a few of all the good responses here to reinforce and echo what they’ve already said.
I don’t know how many times we can state to these people that not ALL Birtherism is racism / xenophobia / bigotry / tribalism, but that there certainly is a very strong undercurrent of that that keeps bubbling to the surface.
Part of me thinks that some of these folks have such limited binary thinking skills that they can’t comprehend how Venn Diagrams work to explain overlaps and relationships between different elements in a bigger picture. We seem to see a lot of that same type of limited thinking take place in many of their discussions of what makes someone an NBC and how they assume if someone with 2 NBC parents = NBC then that must be the *only* type of NBC that exists. *SIGH*
But I also think that some of this is clearly guilty people upset at being called out on their bad behavior – something we’ve also seen constantly in the prevalent childish entitlement mindset out there. Many modern day racists clearly take the greatest offense to being outed as racist.
So I’m not sorry nor impressed anytime I hear these idiots try to oversimplify and use this as a strawman defense. If anything, their focus on playing victim and obsessing about race and charges of racism (when they are usually the ones bringing the topic back up in the first place), comes across only more damning of them and their true motives.
Further, it is outrageous to deny that there is a lot of clear and blatent, nasty racism at play here and directly connected to a lot of the ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) reactions we see.
All anyone has to do is take a current look at places like
viletweets.com
I find it very disturbing that in 2012, the N-WORD can be openly bandied about in written form on public tweets, particularly in reference to the President and his family. I find it even more disturbing that so many death threats and open calls for assassination are being made too. Read through those examples and you’ll notice all sorts of other forms of bigotry and xenophobia being slung about by these ODS sufferers.
So sorry, but the cesspool of hate driven memes out there is rife with clear, blatant racism and bigotry. To deny that is absurd!
While I realize that it is anecdotal, I judge race relations by lunch. In the heart of the Confederacy, I see lots of mixed-race lunch groups at working-class restaurants. I see black and white kids walking to school together. I see mix-raced couples in the mall.
That is a fundamental change from the way things were 20 years ago.
Excellent analogy! WELL SAID!
Thanks for the correction.
Researchers Dr. Karen Douglas and Dr. Robbie Sutton have found that promulgating conspiracy views is an effective means to change people’s views about the subject of the conspiracy without their conscious realization. If you’re the slightest bit smart or devious, you understand that a conspiracy can be an effective propaganda tool masked as a fringe social movement. In other words, unscrupulous persons may promote a conspiracy theory as a means to sway public opinion. (Hello, World Net Daily!)
In their paper titled, “Does it take one to know one? Endorsement of conspiracy theories is influenced by personal willingness to conspire”, Douglas and Sutton note, among their conclusions, that
“…one reason some people endorse conspiracy theories is because is they project their own moral tendencies onto the supposed conspirators.”
In short, many of the people promoting the idea that Obama lied, cheated and stole his way into the Presidency is because they would be willing to perform such acts themselves.
I believe the point made by Chip Berlet (that conspiracism is rooted in bigotry) is an important one. Like Doc Conspiracy, I think that racism is one of many factors motivating various people to endorse and promote the birther conspiracy. Racism is one form of bigotry, and from my admittedly anecdotal experience, I do believe that bigotry of various sorts is the primary motivation for most of the birthers. How can it be otherwise, when they so swiftly careen away from the alleged facts and begin spouting invective?
Unlike Doc Conspiracy and many others, I don’t think racism is going to substantially diminish as a social force with the passing of the current (boomers and older) generations. People have been expecting that since the Civil War, yet every generation produces its own crop of racists. What has changed, for the time being at least, is that expressing racism meets with social disapproval. Racists now get busy denying that they’re racists, and/or using code words to give themselves a means of denying their racism when they are called on it.
If anything, Obama’s election gave fresh life to racism, as it gave those people a brand new giant target to attack.
Not all birthers are racists. Not all racists are birthers – but I expect that all racists find the birther movement to be very useful for their purposes.
Not all Birthers are racists- I accept that but honestly I cannot prove that.
However I can prove that some Birthers are racists. Frankly over the course of a long exchanges of posts over at PF, some pop out un-expectedly, others just happen to start both Birther threads and racist threads.
One who called himself Apuzzo indignantly denied any racism, and then one day he post a tirade against jews. Another current poster has posted his quaint views that 95% of blacks are racists and that black and American Indians are stupider than Europeans because they didn’t invent a writing system (I kid you not). Others call the President ‘monkey’ or ‘ape’ or some other code word for ‘n…..r’.
I think Doc’s description as Birthers being motivated by a variety of things is probably true- but for all of them- opposition to Obama came first- questioning his eligibility is just part of their opposition. Which is why Birthers never question anyone else’s eligibility.
I like this post, Scientist…….every word of it.
Racist in what sense of the word? In the famous words of Holder – it depends on the ‘intent’.
My perception from this blog is that yes, Dr. C and most of the group thinkers here want and need desperately to believe birthers are racists.
This blog has done it’s fair share along with the media to redefine the word racist to mean one who disagrees with Obama politically. I wouldn’t be surprised if that definition is actually included in the next edition of Webster.
I don’t consider myself to be a birther, because I actually do and have all along believed Obama was born in Hawaii. He said he was and I have no reason to think he is lying. I also believe him when he said he was born with dual citizenship. In my opinion, that would preclude him from being a NBC. Maybe this blog would consider me a birther – not sure and don’t care.
But I am a 100% confessed pure racist in the sense of the word being that I 100% disagree with Obama politically. But as far as being prejudiced against him for his ethnicity or even the fact that he gravitates toward his father’s ethnicity over his mother’s is totally irrelevant to me. I happen to like my mother’s ethnicity better than my father’s, but I’m sure no one else cares about that either.
“In short, many of the people promoting the idea that Obama lied, cheated and stole his way into the Presidency is because they would be willing to perform such acts themselves.”
What a load of bull dung. Such reasoning would also state that many of those who believe someone is a murderer are himself/herself willing to murder.
Please.
I’ve heard birther defenses saying they’re not racists and it’s that Obama is a democrat, wants to make friends with our enemies and all that, then support Hillary Clinton.
Hmmm…she’s democrat and is actually going to these other countries “making friends”, but somehow they support her.
Lupin got it right: they proteth too much and it’s so obvious.
You know, I have a friend who, when told something truthful yet not what they want to hear, always replies “Well I don’t know anything about that.”
I then reply “well, I’m telling you now” and the cycle repeats endlessly. People that make up their mind about anything are very hard to sway. Obama could walk on water, give everyone a billion dollars and still many would find something derogatory to say.
Tarp suddenly becomes Obama’s baby, while finding Bin Laden was all of Bush’s work.
They’ll always believe whatever it is they want to.
Right now I’m still laughing at Orly screaming how she “won.”
In a few days, she’ll be a loser again and this too will be Obama’s fault, not her lack of understanding law.
This is all one big, pathetic comedy.
Try and convince an anti-semite that he doesn’t have polio today thanks to a Jew and you’ll hear all the same bull.
And some Obama supporters are racists too! The two do not go hand in hand. I know that my next door neighbor loves Obama – POLITICALLY…but she is so torn on the fact that he wants to identify himself as black. She is outraged by the fact that he married a very pretty black woman. She keeps saying how she wished he had married a white woman, as that would make him ‘seem’ more white. Just galls me every time I hear her say that. Of course, I tell her repeatedly not to vote for him again since she doesn’t like the fact that he is black. She rolls her eyes and says – she’ll over look it because she thinks he is doing a good job as POTUS. I laugh and go back in my house. BWT – I love my next door neighbor who happens to be black – we get along very well.
Some birthers are racists.
Some Obama supporters are racists.
Some Jockey’s are racists
Some football players are racists.
But just because you are a birther, supporter, jockey, or football player doesn’t automatically make you a racist! And if you think so – then I’m thinking maybe you are a racist – meaning you think one human race is superior to another.
As far as questioning any one else’s eligibility: Neither Jindal nor Rubio are eligible. Also I questioned Santorum and Romney – too bad they are both NBC’s. So – you would be wrong.
BINGO! And the evidence of this in play is all around. The examples of Birthers who come here and are obviously just PROJECTING their own mental state are too numerous to count. It happens so frequently that it almost goes without saying. It is like having to point out that water is wet.
AGREED! Well said.
I agree that society has changed. However not all the individuals in society have changed.
The KKK has lost sway but it still exists.
Birthers are a fringe minority, like the KKK, and do not reflect the attitudes of society, IMHO. Like most fringe minorities, however, their volume outstrips their actual numbers.
I suspect that if it could conclusively be shown that every birther was a racist, that still would not change the perception of society as a whole. There are just too few birthers to make an appreciable effect.
My view is close to yours on this… but with a subtle difference – I *do* think there are certain types of generational levels of racism that tend to get weeded out over time. Sure, within racist families, there will be a stronger opportunity to imprint those views on their children and keep the meme alive…but overall, some views do pass from social norms once the world has moved on from that generation and its influence.
Case in point – Biracial marriage is overall, a much bigger visceral taboo to those who lived through Pre-Civil Rights era times. As you go through Gen X, Y & Millennials it becomes more and more accepted and viewed as normal. Take that to the other extreme and go all the way back to the generations that lived in pre-Civil War times and the very concept would be scathingly scandalous…and even considered illegal by many – even those who wanted slavery to end.
So I agree with you that there will always be a certain amount of racists, bigots and xenophobes and that each generation will have its own unique factors that either highten or lessen certain forms of bigotry amongst the population (i.e., like how 9/11 has scarred many in this nation to develop various degrees of anti-Muslim bigotry).
But overall, many of the pre-Civil Rights views of the issue are hang ups and scars that are still carried around by the Baby Boomers and those from generations prior to them that still live. Not as much of that (in that form) has held and passed through to the generations below them, where the enivornment is different and doesn’t help to reinforce such views.
So yes, I do think that as a certain extent of this animus and angst in these particular manifestations of bigotry will go away once the Baby Boomers are gone.
“I do believe that bigotry of various sorts is the primary motivation for most of the birthers.”
Since ‘birthers’ are not likely amongst those with whom you associate, what you believe is based upon your speculation, isn’t it?
I fully agree! I felt these particular points you made are too often overlooked and ignored.
What you just said speaks to the biggest truths of what is actually happening out there today. It bears emphasis and repeating. Kudos.
Agreed on all points! Well said!
Especially your last point, which bears repeating and particular emphasis. Although I do want to point out that some of the Birthers clearly have taken hold of their “2 parent citizen nonsense” and want to apply the most stringent exclusionary definition to everyone. Which is why you see that particular segment now going after Rubio, Jindal and even Romney. Whether that is just another type of cover excuse to profess “legitimacy” or a legitimate manifestation of rigidity that arose as a result… I don’t know. I suspect there is a bit of both happening there. Regardless, such rigid requirements and restrictive views of NBC are still a form of anti-immigrant xenophobia, period.
I would also like to repeat that viletweets.com demonstrates that an alarming uptick in open use of the N-WORD. So that is out and out racism that is now boiling up to the surface and on full display. There is NO question that true racism is a serious undercurrent happening here at all.
That analysis lacks mathematical rigor, because it ignores statistically significant correlations. Suppose I said most football players are larger than average. In fact, that is true. There are a few exceptions, like Wes Welker of the Patriots, but 99% of football players are significantly larger than average. Similarly almost all jockeys are smaller than average (there may actually be no exceptions in this case). So while there is no correlation between racism and playing football or being a jockey (they would probably be less racist than the average, not more,due to their working closely with people of other races) there absolutely is one between birthers and racists. Not all birthers are racists, but the % of birthers who are racists is significantly higher than among non-birthers.
So if you are a non-racist birther, you have to ask yourself whether you really want to be associating with so many racists and risking tarnishing your reputation. If that concerns you, you would have to consider consider giving up birtherism. You don’t have to adopt the position that Obama is eligible. A simple, “I don’t care whether he is or not, since I don’t plan to run against him” would suffice.
What utter BS! You are so full of it, Sally Hill.
Sorry, but FAIL again. YOU are making connections which don’t exist. I don’t see any charges of racism applied to areas of political disagreement.
Quite the opposite.
There are repeated calls on here and other places for opponents of Obama to simply oppose him on LEGITIMATE areas of policy or ideological differerence and to keep all the irrelevant and made-up bogeyman smear nonsense out of it.
But you really know that, you disingenuous troll.
Sorry, but if anyone is trying to make false arguments associating racism to where there is none… well, right now that is YOU.
Here, read just this site and try to explain all the use of the N-WORD in describing Obama to me. Please, I dare you – try to claim this isn’t racism on full display:
viletweets.com
Oh Sally, you are not fooling anyone here. Most of us remember when you originally came here under the handle of “Scott Brown”. Your argument was doubting Obama’s HI birth certificate as legitmate back then.
So YES, you are a Birther and you always have been. You may not like the stink of that title…but you’ve always earned it.
Sorry, but you’re attempts to re-write your own past and deny who and what you are will not fly here. Please stop being such a disingenous liar. You are not fooling anyone and not doing yourself any favors in the process.
Oh, puh-lease. Spare me!
I’ve yet to hear anything from you that falls under the category of being an actual legitimate POLITICAL argument against Obama.
The only thing you got correct here is that no one really cares about your family’s ethnicity either. After all, what relevancy would that have? None, from any legitmate, non bigotry-based perspective at all.
Your personal protestations of false victimhood and fixation on race only convey to others that you protest too much…
Sorry to burst your bubble there Annie, but Projection is quite a real and common psychological manifestion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
That you are so defensively in denial about such realities says more about you than anything else.
Sorry, but most people can clearly see through propogandists and their intent. Projection is often an element that manifests in such, which reveals the true motives at play. That is why you folks are simply not as clever in your lame Trolling attempts as you think you are and why you fail to gain much traction once you leave your safe Cult-reinforcing hidey-holes.
Sorry, but your analogy to murder is a failed false-logic strawman distraction as it does not represent the same type of direct correlation as what we’ve clearly described. Your example is so utterly uncorrelative that it might as well be a non-sequitur.
The problem here is that WE have been saying the very same argument you are just trying to make. That has been our point ALL ALONG.
*DUH*
However, you seem to get hung up on the racist part when everyone else clearly states that not ALL birthers are racist…and seem to always take it personally.
Why is that, Sally Hill? The only rational explanation for such gut-defensiveness from you on the topic is that you somehow identify with the charges personally…. hmmmm….
*DUH*
What part of “I do believe” did you not grasp?
Sorry, but a basic understanding of how the english language works should have immediately clued you in to a direct expression of speculative opinion right off the bat and you wouldn’t have to ask such obvious questions.
See, that’s the difference between rational, normal folks and the blowhard crowd. Rational people can express informed opinions and be open and honest in labelling their speculation.
Blowhards fail and only damage their own credibility, because they always use excessively matter-of-fact language to express pure speculation and pass it off as fact. Hence, why they fail and are rightly called out as liars.
If you can’t grasp and distinguish between the two and know how to use the english language to convey and express the difference properly… than the fault for that is on YOU.
EXACTLY!!!
You should be! You and your crowd display it all the time and this site is full of examples of the Birtheristani putting their projection on full display here.
The difference is, when it occurs, we are quick to specifically call attention to it AND specifically explain why a particular utterance is such an invocation.
You however, can only reference such things in defensively-reflexive guilt and throw around the term as a mere ad-hominem, without being able to point to any specific basis to back it up.
You are such a liar. There is no way a black woman says she will overlook the fact that President Obama is black because he is doing a good job as POTUS. That’s doesn’t make any sense and black folks – the ones who voted for Obama, as you say this woman did – would never say that. Also, a black woman would never say Obama should have married a white girl. You’re just lying. Why I can’t discern from yoru post, but there is no way that any of what you say in this post is true re: this neighbor of yours.
And you are a birther because all that crap about dual citizenship and Jindal and Rubio not being natural born is just more ridiculus birther bs. Let me tell you this. IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE UNITED STATES (and not a diplomat or invading army person), YOU ARE A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. I know that you birthers don’t like that, but in all 100000 birther cases or arguments you have tried to make, YOU LOST!!!
So please…….go tell your fantasies somewhere else……here………YOU’RE JUST LYING!
Why do birthers come here and think they can turn everyone to their side? Or are they just here to “grief” the readers for thier own entertainment. It is proabably a bit of both.
That is one thing I do not get with conspiracy nuts. If I do not buy into the conspiracy, I am part of it. The birthers are quick to call anyone an “O-Bot” for not agreeing with them. I aslo have some friends that think anytrhig anti-obama is racist.
The reality is somwhere in the middle.
But looking at all the evidence, there is a very high probability that BHO is eligible to be POTUS.
“Hope in reality is the worst of all evils, because it prolongs the torments of man.” (Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche)
There is good reason not to believe any personal anecdote that “Sally Hill” comes up with.
The reason she earned such overwhelming condemnation and ire here was due to being caught and outed for making up personal stories that never happened.
She originally posted here a few years back as “Scott Brown” and concocted a very elaborate personal story to defend her positions on birth certificates. As with all lies, maintaing the detail and lie quickly became too much and her story quickly unravelled and she was forced to admit that she made it all up.
So yes, we are dealing with someone here with a proven history of being an intentional and willful LIAR in order to push their agenda. She has ZERO credibility for well deserved reasons of her own doing.
I had a friend of mines wife make up a 911 story about her father being killed in one of the towers. Well, that tale crumbled when her father rang his doorbell looking for his daughter…who stopped contacting him. You would think people would not be so dumb…
It has become quite evident over these years that many of these folks do not focus on facts or reality and instead operate on a “faith-based” mentality… where they value simply saying something repeatedly will somehow make it true…
I know…it sounds crazy to the rest of us, but that is exactly how their minds work. So most of their nonsense here is a futile attempt at mere propaganda.
They simply think they can “persuade” and brainwash others…because they themselves respond to brainwashing and are succeptible to mere persuasion. They are completely incapable of realizing that a good portion of the rest of the world doesn’t arrive at conclusions that way and hence, why they fail to grasp how futile their efforts are and why, at this point, they are reduced to pretty much just preaching to their own existing choirs.
Those susceptible to their tactics already converted and bought into them long ago… or eventually saw through them and became immune.
Their lame efforts and assigning over-import to sites like this as some sort of propoganda war to “sway” the next election are simply misguided and futile excercises of their own insular and narrow-minded stupidity.
That is why you see the same small die-hard group of Birther propagandists scramble to cr@p all over the comments section of any online news story that references the topic. Many of them simply imagine themselves to be Karl Roves of the internet and hold the foolhearted notion that they are “swaying hearts and minds” and able to impact the next election.
For many of them, that is really what this is about. They are more low-level con artists playing an intentional game, regardless of whether they themselves actually believe the nonsense they are spewing or not.
Although we all know that some of the true hard-core “believers” out there will be screaming “any..day…now” on this nuttery for the rest of their lives, I do believe that a good chunk of the propoganda arm of this completely loses its steam if Obama is re-elected.
They have been persistant over these past 4 years, because the only thing worse to them than Obama’s initial election …was the deep fear that he could be re-elected. As Presidents are limited to 2 terms, most of that true motivation is rendered moot once you get past the inaugeration date of his re-election.
Might we see a few months of further sour grapes grumbling and fantasy attempts to call for secession as a result? Certainly. But I think their movement really goes the way of the PUMAs after that. …Just a few bitter die-hard haters muttering to themselves in the dark abysses of the internet and with not enough to be newsworthy for anyone else, even us, to pay them much attention.
So I do predict that this site will have to find other things to focus on 18 months from now… as Birtherism will become as stale an issue as covering the Flat Earth Society or monitoring the remaining PUMA sites… That being said, I’m sure some new conspiracy paranoia will emerge in its wake to take its place and there is a good chance that we’ll have reason to switch over to following that.
I think it’s self validation. They engage the enemy and find some basis to justify a win in their own minds. “See, I dumped my stuff and they couldn’t answer half of it. All they did was hurl insults.”
Good analogy.
Of course, the only people “so dumb” here are the liars themselves…and those who are enough like them to be gullible enough to go along with or fall for their nonsense.
I always think of the more extreme manifestations of such intentional and elaborate lies, which can rise to the level of trying to pull-off and maintain an elaborate hoax.
Ashley Todd and her self-carved “backwards B” on her face comes immediately to mind… particularly when thinking about the ODS crowd:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Todd_mugging_hoax
Well then Scott is a real idiot because saying that some black woman said that she wished Obama had married a white girl as this would make him seem more white” is the most ridiculous statement I’ve heard a bigot attribute to a black person in a very long time.
Thanks……I was not aware that this fool was such a big and utter fool!!! I shall adjust my thinking re: his posts accordingly.
Definitely some of that at play. I think it is a mix between what you described (which really just an action that manifests out of trying to compensate for fragile ego driven insecurities) and a futile agenda of intentional propaganda pushing.
You’re welcome. I think most of us long-term posters here owe it to everyone else to let them know the broader history of some of these Birthers.
Folks like “Sally Hill” aka “Scott Brown” simply disappear for a short time after being caught and then try to re-emerge, hoping that folks have short memories or won’t recognize them…. They simply think they can go back to pulling the same tricks and con games and nobody will be the wiser…
It is very similar to why we’ve seen so many long-debunked Birther themes try to re-emerge every few months…. or we see certain folks use various “sock puppets”.. It is all intentional. The folks behind know darn well what they are trying to pull. These disingenuous liars and con artists simply think they can pull stunts like this and not get caught.
We are, after all creatures of habit. When they re-post under another alias, they will resume these writing habits, and that is when they get outed. Habits betray them.
As far as this massive conspiracy of BC coverup goes…After all these years, someone in the “Know” would have blown the whistle (Deliberately or Mistakenly)
“No mortal can keep a secret. If his lips are silent, he chatters with his fingertips. Betrayal oozes out of him at every pore.” Sigmund Freud
Well I tend to disagree.
IMO most birthers are racists; the rest of them are idiots. Of course, many of them are both racists and idiots.
I can diagram this, if anyone wishes. LOL
I understand your view. I think it is more complex than that. In fact, I think some of them are just opportunisitc sociopaths… That group doesn’t mind manipulating and pandering to bigots…but it doesn’t necessarily share their views either. But I can understand those who say “lay down with dogs and you get fleas”…
After all, when there is such a prevalance of something to a movement, guilt by association obtains a certain validity as a charge. It would be different if the non-racists in the movement took steps to distance themselves from the racist & bigoted elements amongst them. Not only do they NOT do that… but they seem to cover for them and act like defensive denialists about the whole issue.
So yeah, protecting racists & bigots IMO is deserved guilt by association. By doing so, they lose the right to cry foul about being painted with too broad a brush…
While I think racist beliefs will never die, despite small numbers still existing, it’s that larger opposition that rarely lets them grow again.
That is, despite a few bad guys still around, that many more good ones will come along.
Being a neo-nazi in Germany is a good example.
The last thing most Germans want is for history to repeat itself.
Um, the “I have black friends” routine is considered to be a lame way of deflecting some inherent racism, or trying to excuse it.
Unfortunately for you, as has been re-hashed many times, the Supreme Court doesn’t agree with your “two citizen parent” justification. There’s a string of decisions since Wong Kim Ark all saying the same thing. So, when you have that record rebutting your belief, the probability approaches certainty are that your belief is not correct. Both Rubio and Jindal are indeed NBC’s.
Nor did I say that Sally- I pointed out that it is clear that some Birthers are racists by the very remarks they make, and I gave examples. I have no way to prove that the other Birthers are not racists, but I accept that not all Birthers are Birthers because they are racists, but it is my opinion that there is a certain component that certainly is- based upon their own comments.
How exactly did you question Santorum or Romney? Have you demanded that their campaigns prove that they are natural born citizens? Have you demanded the same degree of proof that you demand of Barack Obama? If you have…well kudo’s for you….you would be the first Birther I have encountered to make that claim.
Oh good point- that reminds me. In a Birther thread over in PF, one of the resident anti-semites used the opportunity to spew Jew Hate and link Obama to the Jews. While several people denounced his post…..not one Birther did.
Not one.
And they never do. Here is the thing- it doesn’t matter how racially offensive a Birther post is, no other Birthers ever slap them down, or make it clear that is not their point of view. That doesn’t mean they are racists…but it does mean that they are comfortable enough with racism that they don’t feel any urge to oppose it.
Oh Doc that reminds me of another set of posts. A birther is busy doing a happy dance because he believes an ‘Obot” lied about Hawaii being able to legally produce the ‘long form” BC…..while completely ignoring that Hawaii doing so proves again that President Obama was born in Hawaii.
…And if they are “comfortable” enough with it to give it a free pass, then they deserve to be tarred with it as well. As I said before, there are some actions or lack of action that deservedly earn guilt-by-association. What you illustrated is such an example.
Or that Obama had to ask for a special exemption….
So they pull a Santorum 😉
There is a mindset out there that’s very non-confrontational, particularly in group settings. I recall seeing it in social groups, church services, public meetings, everywhere really. All too often, people say the craziest things, and no one calls them on it. The group just lets it slip by. For it to happen online, where everyone is safely tucked behind a keyboard, is eaither disappointing, or a dead giveaway.
I hope everyone is taking a stand against stupid in their offline lives, should they be unfortunate enough to encounter any. No need to be a jerk about it, we can all use gentle correction from time to time.
Yes, I always do. I actually find it much easier to do in person than over the internet.