At first I thought this was a spoof but no, apparently a group of Birthers have demanded that California confirm Mitt’s eligibility for office because, well…
So at least it’s not just a race thing with them, I suppose.
Some of my great-grandparents might have owned slaves, so what? Are we going to hold people responsible for things their grandparents did? And, anyway, running over the border simply to keep your four wives that you’ve already got has a romantic quality to it, ISTM. Loves them all, can’t decide which ones to put away, vamonos!
How do they get from that to him not being an American citizen? Fucking crackpots.
With those ones, I guess not. Are we going to have to deal with this braindead bullshit every presidential election from now on? I guess it will become easier to tune out over time…
Stupidity knows no skin color.
I can already hear the conspiracy theories: “This so-called ‘birth certificate’ was obviously forged on an Etch a Sketch…” 
It never was.
[[Five pages of prolonged debate on the precise nature of the fucktardery these people on practicing.]]
Well yes. Once you cut through all the layers, the heart of the issue is 24-karat Stupid.
The mixture of racism, partisanship, and just plain rock-bottom stupidity varies from birther to birther, though few if any are completely lacking in any of the three.
Absurd. Birtherism is totally about race. But in this case, the same segment that hates Obama with a passion, also hates Romney.
Go to the freepers and watch how they talk about him. They hate Romney so much it’s comical. What has happened, is the same group of racist cocksuckers who are the core constituency of the Birther movement see the ability to use their panoply of nonsense attacks against another guy they hate.
I mean, a racist can lynch a white dude. He already owns the rope.
Anyway, George Romney (Mitt’s Dad) was born in Mexico, but both his parents were U.S. citizens, born in Utah*, and monogamous, and happened to settle at a Mormon colony in Mexico.
(However you do that.)
- But before it was a state (1896), let’s see if they touch that . . .
Sure it was. You don’t call bigotry against Mornons racism but its still bigotry. bigotry against blacks is a form of racism.
I find myself wondering how much of this particular manifestatio of stupidity is based on bigotry against Mexicans.
He terk er jerbs!
In the later episodes of the “regular” Birther’s lunacy, such as the Georgia ballot case, there has arisen the notion that the President’s natural-born-citizen status can be questioned on the basis that it’s not the same thing as born-a-citizen, and that it requires a further set of entirely contrived hoop-jumping conditions that have never been raised in the past 220 years
:rolleyes:
Birtherism of course is based on lies. The lies in original birtherism were that Obama was not born in the USA and had lived under other citizenships. (BTW am I the only one who sees in it also a thinly disguised race-mixing-slut-shaming of his mother for marrying Mr. Obama and Mr. Soetoro?)
One of the fundamental lies in at least one version of “NatCit-not-equal-to-BornCit” neo-Birtherism is that somehow NBC requires that both your parents be citizens and not even eligible for any other citizenship, even if you’re born on Plymouth Rock itself. This of course would nuke every candidate born to immigrant parents in the past but don’t confuse the poor darlings…
That would then in turn be the basis for a subordinate lie in anti-Romney bitherism, NOT that George Romney was born in Mexico to American expats, which is indisputable, but rather: that he and his progeny are tainted with being the issue of a polygamous marriage entered by people who fled the USA to maintain that lifestyle. The intent is to create the impression that (a) The Romneys come from a lineage of polygamist-fringe LDS groups, (b) George Romney’s parents somehow renounced or forfeited citizenship and (c) he was not the issue of a legitimate marriage.
And yes, I suppose it includes elements of anti-Mormon and anti-Mexican bigotry alike. Though Mr. Santorum may want to throw up at evoking JFK, it all harkens back to spreading the notion that Romney or Obama or whatever candidate may have an “ulterior loyalty” in the spiritual or family realm to someone or something “alien” to “Real America” (which is traditionalist-Christian, exclusively Anglophone, western-European in descent), a historical bugaboo of many reactionaries. Birtherism just tries to disguise that under the cover of that they just believe the candidates in question don’t comply with an imaginary technicality of law.
I’ve yet to see any explanation other than race for why the birthers went after Obama but not McCain.
Partisanship?
When it became a rightwing issue, McCain was the Republican candidate, so they may not have liked him, but he was the best they were going to get. They’re doing it now because they’re really hoping against Romney getting nominated, but I imagine if/when he does, it’ll go away. It’s the same reason we had the musical chairs of leading conservative candidates until they ended up with only Santorum remaining.
I’m sure race is part of it for some birthers, but I imagine we’d still have seen the whole birther thing even if Obama was white, just maybe not quite to the same degree. I’d guess it’ll now become part of the standard political playbook whenever there’s even the tiniest possible shred that could be twisted into a story.
Technically, only one of them was Romney’s great-grandmother.
Unless… :eek: