General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat Birthers Believe: Review
Since this thing will never die, let's review what it is the birthers actually believe. (On South Park there would ba a flashing "Birthers actually believe this."
In 1961 Barack Obama's mother gave birth to him in Kenya. Why this American white lady was in Kenya we don't know.
Since she was an American citizen Barack was an American citizen even if he was born on the moon. So that is settled. He was an American citizen. Period.
But for some reason Barack Obama's mother figured out that for Barack to be president he would need to be born in the United States. He was already an American citizen, mind you. The only possible benefit of him being born in the USA was in order to become president.
Now, if his parents were so concerned about him becoming president it is odd they didn't name him Charles Reilly Obama, but they decided Barack Hussein was a sure fire name for a future president.
Of course, this was all happening in 1961. The Obama's marriage was illegal in many US states. Black people couldn't vote in many places. The Voting rights act and Civil Rights acts were years in the future.
But since the Obama's just knew their black son they chose to name Barack Hussein would surely be running for president in a country that wouldn't even let him vote they bribed some people in Hawaii (from Kenya, mind you) to place false birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers.
Yes, Birthers actually believe this.
lamp_shade
(14,836 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)maggiesfarmer
(297 posts)SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)There can't be an augment that he is not a citizen. As you said born on the moon he would still be an American citizen because he was born to an American.
But, the thing is the "natural" born. I assume, the argument is that this means the birth must take place on U.S. soil.
But, lets play Devil's Advocate.
I don't think the Constitution defines natural born.
I think all agree that natural born is not a person who was a citizen of the U.K. or France who becomes naturalized.
Who says it means born on U.S. soil?
Who says it doesn't mean born to a U.S. citizen no matter where the birth occurred?
Why can't it mean child passed through the birth canal? What about all of those C-Sections?
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)The fact that born in the US only comes up in one very odd instance, the qualifications for the Presidency, utterly demolishes all birther conspiracies. It was funny watching Chris Matthews get that... you could almost see him "get it" during one of his shows and he has been a fierce anti-birther ever since.
As to the meaning of natural born, I do think it means born within the US. But a lot of folks have argued it different ways.
When the Constitution was written there were people whose families were of the new world and people who had been here five years.
Britain wanted to reclaim the colonies. (We fought another war in 1812) If the USA got off to a rocky start we wouldn't want some British prince with a big box of gold showing up announcing his run for the presidency. Half the voters had been loyal servants of the crown in recent memory.
It makes sense to me that the founders were drawing a distinction between second generation Americans and new immigrants as an indicator of loyalty.
And it took months to cross the ocean. It's not like they would be thinking in terms of someone being born on a layover at a foreign airport.
Was that a valid indicator of loyalty? Who knows. Were they thinking through what would happen if Jefferson's wife gave birth while in Paris? Beats me. (As ambassador, his residence might have been US soil. Beats me.)
It is surely out-moded, but I am willing to accept that the language was supposed to mean born on US soil.
DavidDvorkin
(19,479 posts)It includes anyone born abroad, one of whose parents is a US citizen who has lived in the US for at least 10 (I think that's the number) years.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Actually, that one is kinda cool. I wish it was true. Sigh.
You also have left out the communist angle, whose devils whose devious minds can accomplish the wildest conspiracies. Combine the red menace with the red sands of Mars and it's the most entertaining fiction available. I suspect their gullibility is due to years of science fiction and quasi-historical movies and television shows. Falls in the 'But I want to believe' category. And they wonder why we don't take them seriously.
Don't worry, I won't post the 'What Birthers Believe' video here and I'm not making light of your thread, but they have their own reality and will not be denied the pleasure of indulging themselves in it. The more you try to take their baby rattle away, the more they kick and holler. Or in their case, they vote for wackjobs and threaten to shoot people...
TrogL
(32,822 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Fiction is fiction. I know baggers who are into science fiction are also birthers. If you're trying to make a narrow point, fine.
TrogL
(32,822 posts)>baggers who are into science fiction are also birthers
If you're trying to say "I know baggers who are into science fiction that are also birthers", that's one thing.
If you're trying to say "I know that all baggers who are into science fiction are birthers as well", I think that's fallacy of the undivided middle.
>I suspect their gullibility is due to years of science fiction
I read lots of science fiction. I'm hardly gullible.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)I'm not sure why you seem to regard this as an attack on science fiction fans of which I am, and not baggers which is what this is about. Part of what I read in older science fiction, is not really fiction anymore, exploration into outer space, nanobots, wireless, etc.
Everyone I know has been into science fiction most of our lives. But some of them are baggers. It's not the fault of the genre, but the media, and some is used in conspiracy theory propaganda.
What makes it difficult for them to separate the real world fact that a lot of things that were once considered safely left confined in the realm of science fiction, are now part of our world today and we think nothing of it.
For me the best science fiction took into account the technological advances that people once thought were magic, or prophetic. When I was reading Revelations as a kid, that stuff smacked of supernatural origin and now it's nothing.
That is part of the mixture of the most successful CT, that it pulls together past writings that some people blindly accepted as beyond the ability of human beings to ever create, but now it's going on before our eyes. There are physicists who argue that time and space are an illusion, and by the time we've got that into common thinking, anything is possible for some people.
Some baggers even believe Obama has been transported to Mars through a stargate and is not really a human being. Or that he's part of a race of beings that reincarnate here on Earth and have an anti-human agenda. That's using the power of science fiction CT on people brought up on that genre. I can't talk to them anymore, although I found it entertaining.
I'm sure you don't fall into that category. Frankly, I wouldn't care if it was true, because humans are now exploring realms of knowledge former generations never had the advantage of having. And It's a great time to be alive, I think.
Too bad some are using these tales to create a quasi-religion against Obama, which I find no more convincing than baggers who go the prophetic route to say he is the real anti-Christ here to destroy us all! IMHO, they crossed the line drawn between the desert religion of their childhood days and gone straight into science fiction and CT Crazyland. Obama is not the center of the universe, really, but they think so.
Please don't try to read more into a casual post on this message board than I intend. And I don't do the fallacy, etc. This is not a course in college Logic, which I passed many years ago. This world is an exciting and interesting place full of emotional experiences that are only barely touched on by logic. Many people have faith in things that don't exist or they don't understand.
Are we cool, or do you want to argue a point?
I don't have a big stake in this, but referred to real life people, who unfortunately do vote on the fiction that Obama is a Muslim or Kenyan, or has a diabolical purpose beyond understanding.
So let's have a nice day, as we intend, because I'm sure that neither of us want to have a day where our favorite news source, DU, sucks.
TrogL
(32,822 posts)I haven't stumbled on much of the SF stuff in their CT's other than reptilian theory - I see more of the religious stuff (eg. Antichrist) but that's often because I go looking for it.
I think they find it frightening that they live in a science fiction world (where's my flying car) so they lash out and Obama's a convenient target.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)who ascended into heaven. Teh stoopid runs true and deep in these people.
Shampoobra
(423 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Because back then the law was that the US citizen had to have been in the US for five years after the age of 14 in order to pass on their citizenship to their children born abroad. Ann was only 18 when she gave birth. So had she done so in Kenya, she could not have passed her citizenship on to him. (She could easily have obtained him a green card and returned to the US and had him naturalized after that).
And it would have been somewhat reasonable for a white lady to be in Kenya, had she just married a Kenyan.
But it's still just as irrational as it ever was, because of the birth certificate, birth announcement, and the fact that a Kenyan/American couple who met and married in Hawaii and lived there would hardly go to Kenya for the birth, given the difference in medical facilities. And absent some explanation that he had just gotten a job there or some reason to take his wife there or some real evidence they were actually there.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)I can easily believe that about a naturalized citizen, but I have trouble believing that was ever the law for a citizen born in the US to citizen parents.
(Not that my difficulty believing something is evidence.)
I can see that transfer of citizenship being limited in a case where a Danish tourist gave birth in New York and returned to Denmark... it wouldn't make sense for that American born Dane to then produce generations of American citizens in Denmark. (Eventually Denmark would be majority American.)
But in the case of a woman born in the US with no dual citizenship that rule would create potential "men with no country"
There are probably nations where a baby born there to someone who is just passing through is not a citizen, so an American woman could potentially give birth there to a child that is a citizen of no nation.
Does seem like that could have been the case.
I may be wrong. Just noting the conundrum and questioning whether that law applied to non-naturalized citizens.
treestar
(82,383 posts)finding this was the law at the time. He was rabid against Obama's positions on the issues, but rational enough to tell birthers to argue those, not the absurdity of birtherism.
Nowadays, the five years I think does not have to extend past the age of 14. The law is set up to say you can pass it on basically only if you are attached enough to the US, mainly by having lived here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law
See the "Birth Abroad to one citizen parent" there.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)thanks for the information. I had no odea.
Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)
Post removed
Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)
Post removed
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)So we were going to have an alien president elected in 2008 no matter what! OH. YOUR. GOD!
treestar
(82,383 posts)If they did, they'd have been shocked. What excuses could they have had for McCain being born in Panama. According to their own primitive standard on natural born citizenry, McCain should have been disqualified.
Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)
Post removed
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Sunday morning fun! I actually get to see this go down.
Swede
(33,258 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Maybe he thought Sunday morning was a good time to troll. Note to TheSmokinGun and his dimwit buddies: We never sleep. We never rest. Expect us.
spanone
(135,846 posts)goclark
(30,404 posts)Rethugs are puppets ...manchurian candidates
Their leaders show them the queen of hearts and some $$$$ and the teaparty is drugged.
The Donald is in it for the publicity and the chance to be seen.
Democrats are thinkers with care genes.