The "birther" movement: racist? total crap?

Al68

Yep, that was the conclusion of the Senate hearing on it: it's too boring to pay attention to.

russ_watters

Why not? When you have a major media outlet saying the crackpots are credible, I'd think that would be a pretty big deal. Don't you?

lisab

Did you read the link? What exactly are the unresolved issues that you have?

lisab

No one outside of the media gave or gives a rat sass that McCain was born in Panama, it is a complete non issue.

Compare that to the passion and numbers of people who follow the birther movement. It was this one issue that catapulted one play-candidate - Donald Trump, no less - from dabbling with the idea to becoming an actual candidate! That is one powerful issue!

Again: there is *no comparison* between the the McCain "controversy" and the birther movement. Not even close!

KingNothing

Everything that can be produced as evidence has been produced. It's not really fair to say that a birth certificate isn't an acceptable proof of birth.

I think the fact that you see political mud-flinging as a party-specific issue has more to do with you than with the parties themselves.

KingNothing

Again, like I said, I don't believe that it was only brought up because of race. But I would contend that Obama's race is a factor in why it has gained so much momentum.

Al68

Yes, I read the link. I had already read that exact page before I posted in this thread. It makes a lot of assertions, and shows the same scan of the "certification of live birth" that everyone knows about. That link doesn't resolve anything that wasn't already known.

And I've already mentioned a couple of unresolved issues, but you can find more with a little research on the issue.

russ_watters

That is just so not true. As I said before, I'm not going to start linking crackpots, but you really should have a look. There are tons of websites out there still displaying that story. Google it. Please.

KingNothing

I think what lisa is saying, is that the percentage of people who bought into that theory was a lot less than the percentage buying into this theory.

Al68

So you're saying the original (long form) certificate of birth cannot be produced?One can argue semantics all day, but the document provided is a different document from the one being referred to as unprovided, despite a similar sounding name. I actually have both for myself, but have never used the term "birth certificate" to refer to the short computer printout you can get them to print up at your local state building. Some do, but most are fully aware that it's not the same thing.

But one thing that some birthers are wrong about is the claim that "you can't get into kindergarten with that thing, much less a drivers license". That's simply false. You don't need an actual birth certificate to get a drivers license, a "certification of live birth" printout is fine for that purpose. The reason is simple: it's easy for them to print out from database info, and not everyone's birth is registered at the time. Not having your birth registered immediately doesn't disqualify one from obtaining a drivers license, or running for President. But it means that no actual birth certificate exists, so a certification of live birth is printed up from data provided to the state later, sometimes many years after birth.Nope, it's the Democratic Party itself. And I wasn't referring to political mud-flinging.

russ_watters

The story wasn't active long enough for anyone to even take a poll on it - it happened during the election. Then he lost, so it died. But that still means you have no basis for your claim that the percentage of people who bought into it was a lot less. All we can really say for sure is that it got substantial media attention.

Energystrom

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/22/us...irthermovement

Link to another poll citing 40%+ Republicans still thinking that Barack was not born in the United States. Quote "New York Times/CBS news poll"; I don't think this is the same poll as the one referred to earlier. Wanted to bring this in if anybody was interested.

Office_Shredder

I know there was a Senate resolution, but I don't know how much effort went into investigating this issue when it was passed. If you have a link you'd like to present that shows there was a serious effort in the Senate to settle the issue I'd appreciate it. Heck, the House passed a resolution which states that Obama was born in Hawaii

Al68

There wasn't much effort to settle it because it didn't need much effort. Being born on U.S. territory is "natural born", even if not in one of the states. There was no other issue in dispute.Whether Obama was born in Hawaii is a factual, not a legal, issue. The McCain issue was a legal, not a factual, issue. The facts were not in dispute, obviously negating the need for an investigation of facts.

KingNothing

You know, it's pretty frustrating when I can't try to clarify what another member is saying without being "called out". I didn't make any such claim, and I don't appreciate the accusation that I did.

Office_Shredder

A legal question on what the definition of natural born is requires researching and discussing what the definition of the words are. There are people who say that even if Obama was born in Kenya, he's a natural born citizen by being born to an American citizen. It seems to me that the McCain question is much harder to settle than the Obama one in principle

KingNothing

I personally believe that both instances were just pathetic political maneuvers and nothing more. I think John McCain and Barack Obama both had every right to become president.

The point of this thread was to discuss whether or not racism plays some part in this. I believe it does. It is a lot easier to accuse a part-black man with a foreign-sounding name of such a thing than a white-skinned man with a more American name, and to have the accusation gain momentum.