The Birther movement is much akin to a 'faith cult', so that's my excuse to FB topic purists :)

This was an interesting little opinionoid (yuh, I made up that word) on Newsweek's site.

Are There John McCain Birthers, Too? Ben Adler

Yesterday, Public Policy Polling released results of a poll showing that 42 percent of Republicans nationwide do not believe Barack Obama was born in the United States. This sort of statistic has become old news by now. Despite overwhelming evidence that the president was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born citizen, a core of Americans remain convinced he was born overseas.

But with pollsters frantically trying to get in on the birther action, has anyone stopped to ask whether Sen. John McCain was born in the United States? McCain was actually born in Panama, but is considered a natural-born citizen, since he was born to an American military family stationed on a U.S. base. And, except for perhaps a small fringe, no one has questioned whether he would have been constitutionally qualified to be president.

We've poked around a bit and been unable to find any professional poll that asked Americans whether they believed McCain was born in the U.S. The fact that he was physically born outside the U.S. should have had no bearing on his own legitimacy, real or perceived, had he been elected president. But it would be interesting to see how many of the people who believe, incorrectly, that Obama was born outside the U.S. realize that McCain actually was not.

". Despite overwhelming evidence that the president was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born citizen, a core of Americans remain convinced he was born overseas."

His gramma says he was born in Kenya, which is the root of the Birther Movement.

"But with pollsters frantically trying to get in on the birther action, has anyone stopped to ask whether Sen. John McCain was born in the United States?"

Tens of thousands of times, at least. He was born in Panama, on an American military base, to two American parents. If he had won, the Hopieheads would be the Birthers.

Yes, the "Hopieheads" would... if such creatures existed. Not only does the use of such terminology cause you to sometimes appear adolescent -- your refusal to acknowledge that such tactics are almost exclusively used by right-wing fanatics also causes you to appear much more partisan than you are willing to admit.

"Yes, the "Hopieheads" would... if such creatures existed."

They exist, but denial is a hallmark of Bushieheads and their left-handed brothers. Strange, but I remember no grief from the libbie Dems for using Bushieheads, although the pseudo-cons whined and cried like bitches at the term.

"Not only does the use of such terminology cause you to sometimes appear adolescent --"

Opinions vary. Do you prefer Obama Lovers? Same folks who now back an administration carrying on the Bush administration while making excuses for Obama's Senate votes and his consistent administration.

"your refusal to acknowledge that such tactics are almost exclusively used by right-wing fanatics also causes you to appear much more partisan than you are willing to admit."

I'm extremely partisan, thinking that Obama should hang on the same gallows as Bush for treason for their aid and comfort to Iran.

His gramma says he was born in Kenya, which is the root of the Birther Movement.

******************************­******************************­******************************­***************

Hardly 'says', tsedek :)

One interview, through a translator, where she initially said something that was translated as 'being present at his birth", and then when interviewer asked for clarification, she said no she wasn't 'physically present' since he was born in USA. (Dunno about Kenyan language, but in many Indian languages, to be 'present' at something and to be 'appraised' or 'aware' of something are interchangeable, and very easily mangled in translation).

So rather a weak reed there for birthers to base their movement on. Somehow I suspect that the stronger force behind it all is the combination of skin color, funny-sounding name, immigrant daddy, and spending chunk of childhood abroad (and non-Western nation at that).

I doubt that Hopiehaeds would have gone the 'birther' route with McCain. Of course, speculating about 'alternate universe' scenarios are a bit fruitless, since one can imagine anything. But IMO his VP (had he won) would probably be ammo enough to 'McCain presidency is a complete disaster' movement ! Maybe I'm projecting from my own feelings, but much as I liked Obama, I felt I could have survived a McCain presidency with an occasional holding of nose with far less mental agony than the Bush presidency.........till the day he announced his veep pick!

I don't doubt that there are highly partisan Obama supporters. It is the need to resort to name calling that sometimes makes you appear childish. This is especially true when you whip this card out against anyone who merely agrees with one or more of Obama's political positions. I sometimes agreed with George Bush's policy positions, but that certainly didn't qualify me as a 'Bushiehead'.

You still don't get it do you ? America is the greatest threat to World peace and global warming and ........ not Iran, they are just showing defiance against The American Empire. You fear them because of your love for Isreal but there are more than two angles from which too view the situation.

Why do you so hate Obama ? Oh I have asked you that before ! :)

So you have defected to face book heh ? I prefere this 'no face' book my self.

"I doubt that Hopiehaeds would have gone the 'birther' route with McCain."

I had lots of doubts as to what Hopieheads would do, also, but they have shown that their love for party and petit messiah is much greater than commitment to any issues.

tsedek:

"I doubt that Hopiehaeds would have gone the 'birther' route with McCain."

I had lots of doubts as to what Hopieheads would do, also, but they have shown that their love for party and petit messiah is much greater than commitment to any issues.

They don't have much of a choice, since there doesn't seem to be a viable candidate who is firmly to the left of Obama.

I was extremely irritated with the ideological idiots who voted for Ralph Nader because 'Gore was not leftist enough' and as a result gave the WH to Bush.....but I suppose insofar as they felt that Bush and Gore ought to be hanged on the same gallows, they were actually acting upon their conscience and you at least admire them.

Personally, I think being over-idealistic in politics is for wide-eyed fluffy-heads. I tend to go by the philosophy that I will vote for/support the less hopeless of the candidates, and then let myself be pleasantly surprised if they live up to even half their campaign promises...............

"They don't have much of a choice, since there doesn't seem to be a viable candidate who is firmly to the left of Obama."

Just the inverse of what the Bushieheads said about their Beloved Leader.

Look at 2000 and all the Dems that said the SC stole the election and gave it to GWB.

This is my GUESS: If McCain had one AND the GOP had a majority in Congress about the same percent of Dems would be saying McCain wasn't legit.

Note the key to my GUESS; Majority in Congress. To me a lot of the insane, over the top crap from the GOP is because they are such BIG loser. In other words, Dems or the GOP, can handled defeat, BUT, when they lost BOTH the Congress and the White House than they act like crazy fools.

I also believe this explains SOME of the racist BS we have seen. In other words if the GOP still had a majority in either the Senate or House, there wouldn't be so much hate and BS.

Just my guess. Of course one might say it is wishful thinking because I really don't wish to believe so many of my fellow Americans are SICK!

"I prefere this 'no face' book my self."

Me too. It's much more interesting and serendipitous this way...and seems a whole lot less self-centred to me also. I'd rather meet people that I'd be unlikely to meet based on some strange personal criteria I may feel compelled to put up somewhere, instead of meet people who think they might share the same interests as me based on those same strange criteria. I wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have me...

(I mean really, what could I possibly put up somewhere that would attract intellectuals of all stripes, pseudo-intellectuals of all stripes, persons of average intelligence, interesting and entertaining dumb-asses, just plain old annoying dumb-asses, holy rollers, disgruntled ex-catholics/born agains/atheists/other, enthusiastic catholics/christians/buddhists­/pagans/atheists/others, somewhat non-committal religionists and agnostics, dancers, prostitutes, polygamists/polyamourists, academics, artists, actors farmers, wine/beer makers, computer geeks, musicians etc. ad nauseum. I certainly wouldn't get that sort of variety on my own, that's for sure! ;))

tsedek:

"They don't have much of a choice, since there doesn't seem to be a viable candidate who is firmly to the left of Obama."

Just the inverse of what the Bushieheads said about their Beloved Leader.

Well, yes, I am sure there were GOP-ers who voted for Bush even though he wasn't 'right enough' in their opinion. What did you expect them to do -- vote for Kerry who was LEFT of Bush instead ?

Kerry's hope was to be able to draw folks from the center who thought Bush was TOO right. He didn't get enough. So if any GOP-er wants to defeat Obama in 2012, their best hope is to steal the folks who think Obama is TOO liberal, I don't think they can really expect to win the people who think Obama isn't liberal ENOUGH !

Look at 2000 and all the Dems that said the SC stole the election and gave it to GWB.

******************************­******************************­******************************­********************

That wasn't a legit gripe ? I for one was pissed as hell when the Florida recount was halted !

Of course, the thing that REALLY gave it to Bush was the butterfly ballots. On such little things do the fate of countries (and not just the country doing the voting) depend!

"Well, yes, I am sure there were GOP-ers who voted for Bush even though he wasn't 'right enough' in their opinion. What did you expect them to do -- vote for Kerry who was LEFT of Bush instead ?"

My point, and exactly what Obama is counting on as he back stabs his base by continuing the wars and doing a craven, cynical sell out to Big Pharma and Big Insurance.

"So if any GOP-er wants to defeat Obama in 2012, their best hope is to steal the folks who think Obama is TOO liberal, I don't think they can really expect to win the people who think Obama isn't liberal ENOUGH !"

GOP probably can't, so the best hope of the liberals is Mike Bloomberg third party. I see Obama as an odd conflation of both the left and right fringes and oppose him because he governs like a Bushiehead, which many liberal Democrats are starting to notice on a range of issues. Sen. Franken challenged one of Obama's stooges on the 4th Amendment recently. Hardly a Conservative or Libertarian.