Wednesday, July 29, 2009

An Addendum to Wingnut Wrapup

I mentioned in Wingnut Wrapup yesterday that, all of a sudden, in a single day, many right wing websites that have been supporting the birther idiocy suddenly turned against it. I talked to someone who asked for some examples, so here are eight web posts since yesterday. I thought that was enough to make my point, although I am sure I could have found more:

Red State: "Taking Down the Birthers"

Town Hall: "Close Encounters of the Absurd Kind"

Don Surber, via Instapundit: "I call them birfers. Like 9/11 troofers only dumber. Others call them birthers. They are the people who believe that President Obama was born outside the United States and therefore is constitutionally barred from being president."

Confederate Yankee: "And the Obama Birth Wars Continue..."

Gateway Pundit, "Forms of Madness"

Matt C. Abbott, Renew America: "Obama 'birthgate' ain't goin' nowhere"

Joel B. Pollack, American Thinker: "The political alchemy of Birtherism"

The Editors, National Review Online: "Born in the U.S.A."

Once again, I would like to suggest that you think about how it happens that these guys all turn on a dime at the same time.

Note: I'm not going to bother linking to any of this junk. They are all major websites, and you can find them easily enough by yourself if you are so inclined.


Arlen Williams said...

Thought I'd let you know about a response I wrote to Pollack's sad, political-playah article.

The Political Alchemy of Pollack, in American Thinker

Beware of fear of man in the place of fear of God (thus, adherence to principle>). Constitutional justice is much more important than anyone's political embarrassment (and political animals need to get over themselves).

For reality and reason about Obama's apparent ineligibility to be Commander in Chief, I suggest the following two articles:

Sam Sewell: The Obama Birth Certificate

The Donofrio "Natural Born Citizen" Challenge

Green Eagle said...


First of all, the issue of Obama's birth is not in question. His Hawaiian birth certificate is absolutely legitimate, and only an utter fool, or a person that will never accept a black man as president would think otherwise.

Now, as to the term, "natural born." As you may know, the Supreme Court receives thousands of cases for review every year, and can only examine a few hundred. Because of that, it has long been Supreme Court procedure that no case will be considered unless real damages are involved. The court will simply not take speculative cases. As the issue of what is meant by the term "natural born" has never risen to that standard, there is no established precedent regarding its meaning; i.e. no one has ever officially decided what it really means. Thus, we are never going to see the Supreme Court disqualify a person who won a clear majority of the popular and electoral votes, based on this term. To argue otherwise is to be simply tendentious.

Sam Sewell repeats much of the long discredited nonsense about the birth certificate, which deserves no repetition of the clear facts at this point, and Donofrio is a lunatic whose case was rejected out of hand both at the trial and appellate level.

I am happy to have you post here, and happy to reply to you; however, I do have a limited toleration for the repetition of allegations that were patent nonsense from the beginning.