• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michael Medved smacks down birfers

I look at birthers, like truthers, moon hoax believers, etc, as more of a scathing indictment of ours and other nation's education systems.

It is a subject for another thread, but I'm just not sure that you are right. It seems to be the nature of humans that a percentage of us are fairly susceptible to forming beliefs in things wildly unlikely to be true if they are consistent with our biases and it is true of all of us humans that we tend to form at least some views largely driven by our biases. An educational system might be able to address some of this but mostly I suspect people are going to believe what makes them happy regardless of the underlying facts and any kind of educational system is unlikely to have a huge impact on that.

I just watched the full video... wow, just... wow. As soon as that woman started going on her rant, you could just see everyone on the stage wishing they were somewhere else.

And the fact that so many people in the audience cheered her on... wow :nope:

If this sort of thing keeps up, the GOP's going to have some real trouble on its hands.

Also, a topic for another thread, but I have wondered about the same thing. Increasingly the GOP seems to be depending on various propaganda techniques to sustain what remains of their base. I have not seen any efforts to address their disastrous governance over the last eight years by anybody in the party elite. I think their view is that the path to reelection is to build up the base support with organized partisan attacks repeated over and over that are often created without any significant substance.

I guess from the standpoint of a lot of Democrats this is what the Republican Party always was and those of us who believe in small government and free markets were just a bunch of idiots anyway.
 
Well, if I told you that one Congress Critter blocked a resolution on Hawaii's 50th anniversary of statehood because it contained an affirmation that Obama was born there, would you have any doubt which one?



What an embarrassment!
She's within the rules to postpone. She did vote for the resolution in the end.

For the record I do not live in her district.
 
Yes, she did a quorum call, perfectly within the normal process in the House - in fact, expected in regular order. I don't think she mentioned a reason why other than that.

But I don't believe she was doing the quorum calls on the resolutions, etc., before this one came up. And somehow she managed to get up to the podium and send this one to a recorded vote. :D However, she did vote in affirmation of it.
 
Good call, guys; I went with Think Progress' take on this because I distrust Bachmann, but apparently the vote for the resolution was unanimous.

This time, though, Bachmann was being criticized unfairly. She did indeed block a vote on the resolution, noting the absence of a quorum, but that move wasn't about Abercrombie's resolution specifically. She was just playing her part. The House had already decided to postpone the votes on all of the resolutions being considered under a suspension of the rules until Monday evening. Bachmann noted the absence of a quorum for several other non-controversial pieces of legislation so that those votes, too, could be postponed until the scheduled time.

In fact, as a spokeswoman for Bachmann told Salon -- and C-SPAN video of the congresswoman's remarks on the House floor confirmed -- Bachmann supports the resolution.

After the postponement, on Monday evening the resolution passed -- unanimously. Bachmann was one of the "yea" votes.

I hate to say that I'm thrilled that no Republican voted against the bill, but I really am. I think perhaps we have to accept that Crazy Eileen video was sort of the equivalent of planting several truthers in an audience to applaud when one of their fellow nutbars makes his speech.
 
Medved was also doing birther bashing yesterday morning in the first hour of On Point on NPR. They did have Orly Taitz on there for a couple minutes, she was sounding as incoherent/ranty as ever.
 
Medved was also doing birther bashing yesterday morning in the first hour of On Point on NPR. They did have Orly Taitz on there for a couple minutes, she was sounding as incoherent/ranty as ever.

My gosh, Orly can't even explain her own argument but she did take time to call her critics "brown shirts".
 
In the same NPR program Medved calls Orly "Constitutionally illiterate" and Republicans who support the birthers "sleezy" but then says the whole mess was started by Democrats (Phil Berg).

Medved seems so flustered that his political party is being stolen out from under him.
 
Last edited:
Is there any evidence that Berg was 'the first' to bring up Obama's birth certificate nonsense? I suppose evidence would have to be shown that others brought it up prior to Berg's lawsuit but I don't want my brain to explode if I go down that rabbit hole.
 
Well, if I told you that one Congress Critter blocked a resolution on Hawaii's 50th anniversary of statehood because it contained an affirmation that Obama was born there, would you have any doubt which one?



What an embarrassment!

Actually, several liberal commentators have pointed out that Bachman (and they're no fans) wasn't trying to obstruct for the purpose of killing the resolution, just part of normal floor manouvers and that she hasn't indicated any particular sympathy for the Birther cause....
 
Good call, guys; I went with Think Progress' take on this because I distrust Bachmann, but apparently the vote for the resolution was unanimous.


Think Progress replies to Koppelman:

Salon's Alex Koppelman says TP attacked Bachmann unfairly in our previous post because Bachmann was simply "playing her part" because "the House had already decided to postpone the votes on all of the resolutions being considered under a suspension of the rules until Monday evening." But the Hawaii resolution was only one of three resolutions that the GOP forced a vote on. Approximately 20 measures were considered today, most of which passed by voice vote.

I could be misreading the reply but Bachmann's admittedly crazy anyway so the fact she voted in favor of it is a plus on her part.
 
Question

Do birthers deny that Obama's mother was a U.S. citizen? Because if she were a citizen, then even if he were born in Kenya, doesn't that mean that at worst he would have dual U.S./Kenyan citizenship? And he would only lose U.S. citizenship if he renounced it to take up full Kenyan citizenship, right?

(At least, that's how it seemed to work for my friend, a U.S. citizen, who had a baby in Mexico with her husband, a Mexican citizen.)
 
Do birthers deny that Obama's mother was a U.S. citizen? Because if she were a citizen, then even if he were born in Kenya, doesn't that mean that at worst he would have dual U.S./Kenyan citizenship? And he would only lose U.S. citizenship if he renounced it to take up full Kenyan citizenship, right?

(At least, that's how it seemed to work for my friend, a U.S. citizen, who had a baby in Mexico with her husband, a Mexican citizen.)

They argue that since Ann Dunham, Obama's mother, did not give birth to Barack after the full five years past her 14th birthday that she could not confer citizenship on him when he was (not) born in Kenya.

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
Source
 
Do birthers deny that Obama's mother was a U.S. citizen? Because if she were a citizen, then even if he were born in Kenya, doesn't that mean that at worst he would have dual U.S./Kenyan citizenship? And he would only lose U.S. citizenship if he renounced it to take up full Kenyan citizenship, right?

This is my understanding of it: There was a law on the books in 1961 that said if a child was born outside of the U.S. to an American citizen that parent could only convey citizenship on the child if the parent had been residing in the U.S. for 10 years, 5 of those being after age 14. Their argument is that since Obama's mother was only 18 when she gave birth to him, she was too young to convey citizenship upon him.

Here's the lie: The law doesn't say 5 years after age 14, it says 2 years after age 14. Therefore it doesn't matter if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya or on Luke Skywalker's home planet Tatooine, he's still a natural born citizen of the U.S.
 
Here's the lie: The law doesn't say 5 years after age 14, it says 2 years after age 14. Therefore it doesn't matter if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya or on Luke Skywalker's home planet Tatooine, he's still a natural born citizen of the U.S.

Not true (look at my previous post for the law), unless I am misunderstanding you.
 
How would Birthers feel if Arnie made a case for a law-change allowing him to make a presidential bid?
 
How would Birthers feel if Arnie made a case for a law-change allowing him to make a presidential bid?

I'm no fan of Arnold's politics (for the most part) but if the law change was done appropriately I don't see the problem. Also, he's white.
 
Not true (look at my previous post for the law), unless I am misunderstanding you.

No, you are right, I stand corrected. :)

So the only hope the birthers have is to "prove" a Kenyan birth. I did see an Obama Kenyan birth certificate for sale on ebay, maybe that will help them out.
 
How would Birthers feel if Arnie made a case for a law-change allowing him to make a presidential bid?

Can't do it by legislation, but by constitutional amendment, which is exceedingly hard. And I'm sure they'd object that it was an end run to make Obama's presidency legitimate.
 

Back
Top Bottom