Conspiracy Theories rarely make sense and the reasons people hold to them rarely make sense outside the arena of psychological pathology. Claiming that the issue must be racism because only racism explains it fails on the fact that while many Birthers are racist, many are not–so how are the non-racist Birthers being sucked into the vortex? Claiming that any particular explanation is needed beyond that of the typical mindset of CT adherents fails on a lack of support; CT adherents don’t need reasons.
Clinton was hated/feared by a certain segment of the population, so the haters dreamed up massive conspiracies of murder, fueled by a couple of random incidents such as the Foster suicide. GW Bush was hated by a certain segment of the population, so they latched onto claims of stupidity and Cheney-sock-puppetry despite the fact that Bush was an Ivy league graduate with moderwtely good grades and he and Cheney publicly differed on several issues. Obama is hated/feared by a certain segment of the poulation and they happened to have stumbled onto his “birth” as a cause to champion.
In each case, the cause of the hatred probably has far more to do with antipathy to policies, (or to perceived policies), than to the actual character (or birth) of the person hated.
Um.. yes. The statement is self-0evidently true, since taxes are not a race issue. They are race-neutral. There is no racial component to the collecting or owing of taxes.
Yes, it does. Both tax protesters and birthers exhibit irrational beliefs and a strong unwillingness to listen to reason. Tax protesters are not motivated by racism, because there’s no racial component to taxation. Therefore, we know that exhibiting irrational beliefs and a strong unwillingness to listen to reason can be motivated by something other than racism.
Really?
There was a serious question about Herbert Hoover and if he was eligible for the presidency based on the 14 year residency requirement. The general concensus is that lacking any other wording, the Constitution counts any 14 years in their life to meet the residence requirement. Cite.
And don’t forget, there was a major issue that John McCain was not a NBC because he was born in the Canal Zone and not in the U.S. Cite.
I have always heard that Barry Goldwater was questionable about being an NBC but an older Doper woul have to say if it were an election issue or not.
Herbert Hoover? Seriously? That’s…not relevant to the discussion about today’s situation more than 90 years later, now, is it?
And while there was MENTION of McCain’s birth situation in some arenas, that quickly passed as the reality of McCain’s birth situation was made clear. Whereas the idiocy regarding Obama’s birth situation has only grown and mutated since the facts were made clear.
That argument is irrelevant to this case, because there is no obvious way in which the one conspiracy theory’s motive (tax protestors want to keep more money in their pockets) would translate to the other conspiracy theory’s adherents, unless somebody out there is paying Birthers to promulgate their nonsense.
It passed for McCain because he didn’t win. There’s still enough room for CTer “doubt”, that if he’d won, you’d be hearing the same nuttery about him, just from different nutters. It didn’t stick for him, only because there’s no reason for the nutters to care, anymore.
Why not? The claim was that somehow there is a different standard for white and black candidates. Hoover was white and his eligibility to run for President was questioned. What is the time limit on relevance?
He lost (like Goldwater) therefore there is no reason to continue the discussion. Had he won, there would have been Birther Dems on this board claiming via the Insular Cases that McCain is ineligible to be president.
And therefore the motive for THAT conspiracy theory would be different than the motive for the CURRENT conspiracy theory. As has been stated, not all CT nutbags have the same motivation.
Oh, I don’t know, maybe something that’s relevant to the discussion, like the situation currently under discussion? I mean, this is like the people who continue to want to use Abraham Lincoln as an example of the Republican Party’s stance on racial relationships.
I repeat: And therefore the motive for THAT conspiracy theory would be different than the motive for the CURRENT conspiracy theory. As has been stated, not all CT nutbags have the same motivation.
Look, I’m not saying all birthers are sitting around saying “Hurr durr, I hate black people so I’m going to claim that Obama’s not an NBC because I’m a racist.” I do continue to believe, however, that a large percentage of birthers have an unconscious racial motivation underneath their stated motivations. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.
Claim: racism is the only possible motivation that could cause people to be so irrational about the subject.
Rebuttal: no, because tax protesters are also irrational and their motive clearly is not racism.
Now, you’re turning my claim around. I’m NOT saying that birthers are motivated by financial concerns. I’m saying that the claim of “Racism is the only possible explanation for such irrational behavior,” is wrong.
If A, then B.
This does not imply: If B, then A. In fact, that’s the converse of “If A, then B.” A statement and its converse are not logically equivalent. A statement and its contrapositive are logically equivalent: If not B, then not A.
The tax protestor thing is a non-sequitur. You know, and I know and the American people know that this birth certificate thing would never be an issue for white President.
There’s a whole forum for shared your opinions when those opinions are unsupported by citation to reliable evidence.
But in the context of debate, it’s not sufficient to simply announce your belief. As my high school debate teacher was fond of repeating caustically when one of us would do that in competition, “A gratuitous assertion may be equally gratuitously denied.”
Without supporting evidence, yours is simply a gratuitous assertion.
Is it just a coincidence, then, that this is the first time in US history any segment of the public has demanded that a Presdient produce his original, archived birth certificate?
I’ve told you my supporting evidence. Rhetoric from the birthers themselves. Coded messages (dog-whistles) in their messages to their listeners. Actual statements made to me from birthers that I personally know.
You want to deny the meaning behind those messages, because for you in this debate, the only acceptable evidence is if every single last one of the birthers comes out and says, out loud, “we’re doing this because he’s black,” and that’s fine. That’s your right in a debate. But if that’s the level of evidence you’re requiring, I’d ONCE AGAIN remind you that we are debating in a public forum, not in a court of law. In these kinds of debates, absolutely and undeniable verifiable evidence backed up with DNA evidence, video tapes, and a note from someone’s mother saying “Please know that Jimmy is saying these things because he’s a racist” aren’t necessary.
So my claim that had McCain won, there would be Dem birthers on the board was immediately met with two posts objecting to the hypothetical but this statement gets no reaction.
Well, we have the Hoover question, where there really was an issue with his time out of the country. I don’t recall a similar birther issuer back then, but to be honest, there may have been one. And, Saint Cad’s statement that it was no longer an issue since he lost doesn’t address the fact that Hoover won the first time he ran. That’s when you would expect the birther movement, right?
Regarding McCain, he actually wasn’t born in this country, so maybe there is a technical issue regarding natural born citizen. In any case, he lost, so no birther movement.
The difference for Obama, of course, is that there really is no underlying issue. He wasn’t born outside the country and he didn’t spend too much time away, and he had lived for a long enough time in this country to meet all the requirements.
So you have no birther movement when Hoover won, even though there was a real question. Maybe a birther movement when McCain won – I doubt it, but you never know, I suppose, even though there was a real question. With Obama, there is a birther movement, even though there really is no question about eligibility.