Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:15 PM Jun 2012

I don't get the rationale of these Birther people

So, now Rubio is not a "natural born citizen" either, because of his parents birth. Ok, putting that aside, I read some say that even though his mother had become a naturalized citizen before his birth, his father hadn't and because his FATHER was not a citizen, he is not eligible. Same they say with Obama and his American mother and Kenyan Father.

Ok, Welcome to the 21st Century, or as that saying goes, Who's your Daddy? I mean that literally as in DNA. Maybe I have watched too many Maury shows, but absent a DNA test, is a certain man REALLY the father. Much easier for a woman to prove she is the mother.

In today's world, we now have many single Moms, IVF, Sperm Donors, and besides, sealed Adoptions. Why are these people insisting it is the FATHER of the child to determine eligibilty? Maybe in the 18th Century it might have made sense, but certainly not in this century.

I know, I know, they are all very wrong, but I am just trying to debunk this aspect of what they are saying. At any rate, I suppose they forgot about Henry Kissenger, who was born in Germany himself, and was still in line for the Presidency as Secretary of State.

28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I don't get the rationale of these Birther people (Original Post) HockeyMom Jun 2012 OP
simple Blue_Tires Jun 2012 #1
re: I don't get the rationale of these Birther people clang1 Jun 2012 #2
You don't have to be a crackhead to be batshit crazy. chemenger Jun 2012 #28
You have to remove the "rational" from "rationale" JHB Jun 2012 #3
Is there a rationale to racism? mmonk Jun 2012 #4
kissenger was secretary of state but was never in line for the presidency. unblock Jun 2012 #5
Secretary of State is fourth in line for succeeding the president Thinkingabout Jun 2012 #18
had it come to it, they would have had to skip over him because he's not constitutionally qualified. unblock Jun 2012 #23
Could be old folks ODing on pressure pills! madashelltoo Jun 2012 #6
The rationale is: Rubio isn't black. Oh, and Kissinger was never technically in line for the kestrel91316 Jun 2012 #7
One of the 247 reasons I don't believe Romney when he says they are vetting Rubio for the VP slot MiniMe Jun 2012 #8
Stop it, MiniMe!!!!!!! madashelltoo Jun 2012 #10
Wait-- the're saying Rubio isn't really a citizen? Marr Jun 2012 #9
These people (Freepers) are saying that a person's father HockeyMom Jun 2012 #11
Obviously, you did not get your memo madashelltoo Jun 2012 #12
Ah, but my point is HockeyMom Jun 2012 #16
You know you just confused the hell out of them, don't you? madashelltoo Jun 2012 #22
That was the law....in 1790 jeff47 Jun 2012 #27
All you need to know: proud2BlibKansan Jun 2012 #13
Kissenger was not really in line for the Presidency. hughee99 Jun 2012 #14
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the VP doesn't have to be a "natural born citizen" IndyPragmatist123 Jun 2012 #15
12th amendment says the VP has to be qualified to be president. Orangepeel Jun 2012 #20
Both those running for president and vice president Thinkingabout Jun 2012 #21
There is no rationale, just rationalization Orangepeel Jun 2012 #17
They don't like brown people GarroHorus Jun 2012 #19
If POTUS is declared a non citizen. Inkfreak Jun 2012 #24
You can't reason with the stupid nt maryellen99 Jun 2012 #25
Just remind them the 14th amendment exists jeff47 Jun 2012 #26
 

clang1

(884 posts)
2. re: I don't get the rationale of these Birther people
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:16 PM
Jun 2012

They are mostly batshit crazy crackheads. What's not to understand?

JHB

(37,162 posts)
3. You have to remove the "rational" from "rationale"
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:32 PM
Jun 2012

Once you recognize "rational" has nothing to do with what they claim they believe, figuring it out becomes much easier.

unblock

(52,328 posts)
23. had it come to it, they would have had to skip over him because he's not constitutionally qualified.
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:02 PM
Jun 2012

the order of succession does not trump the other constitutional requirements for the office of the president.

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
7. The rationale is: Rubio isn't black. Oh, and Kissinger was never technically in line for the
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:46 PM
Jun 2012

presidency because he was NOT a natural-born but rather a naturalized citizen.

MiniMe

(21,718 posts)
8. One of the 247 reasons I don't believe Romney when he says they are vetting Rubio for the VP slot
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:53 PM
Jun 2012

Of course, I don't believe much that Romney says about anything

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
9. Wait-- the're saying Rubio isn't really a citizen?
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:01 PM
Jun 2012

And they're basing that on a claim that *one* of his parents wasn't a citizen when he was born? Do I have that right?

I wouldn't even know where to begin. Even if you accept their accusations as true, it wouldn't effect Rubio's status or eligibility for the post. It's just asinine.

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
11. These people (Freepers) are saying that a person's father
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:33 PM
Jun 2012

must have been born in the US. Well, so far, they aren't disputing that Rubio was born in the US, but saying he is ineligible because his father was Cuban. Mothers don't count.

madashelltoo

(1,699 posts)
12. Obviously, you did not get your memo
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 04:47 PM
Jun 2012

Hell no, women don't count. His mama could Betsy Fuckin' Ross and it wouldn't make one bit of a difference. Yet, the very people they turn their noses up at hold the same view. The rights of a child follow the lineage of the father. Africa, the Middle East, etc.

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
16. Ah, but my point is
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 06:30 PM
Jun 2012

WHO is the father? Just because a woman says he is? Again, Maury Show. DNA testing for Presidents to prove paternity? As I said in my post, what about IVF and Sperm Donors? It makes more sense to me that the MOTHER, far more easily proved, should be the citizen. I know how they feel about women, but they will just assume fatherhood? Suppose a couple has IVF and uses a sperm donor. The BC will list the "husband's" name as the father, but he is not the biological father of the child. The real biological father could be anybody, and a non-citizen.

That is the point I was making. Very patriarchal viewpoint. and will eventually come back to haunt them in today's world.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
14. Kissenger was not really in line for the Presidency.
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 04:50 PM
Jun 2012

His office (SoS) was, but he would have been skipped over as "ineligible".

15. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the VP doesn't have to be a "natural born citizen"
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 04:52 PM
Jun 2012

Correct?

Obviously, if the President dies or steps down, the VP couldn't be President, but he could still legally serve as VP.

Orangepeel

(13,933 posts)
20. 12th amendment says the VP has to be qualified to be president.
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 06:44 PM
Jun 2012

There really isn't much point to a VP who can't become president.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
21. Both those running for president and vice president
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 06:50 PM
Jun 2012

Are both to be natural born citizens with at least one parent being a citizen at the time of birth. US Code Title 8, Section 1401 explains requirements for a person to run for president and vice president. This section does not define one parent as being the father. There have been 7 presidents who had only one parent as a citizen of the USA.

Orangepeel

(13,933 posts)
17. There is no rationale, just rationalization
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 06:39 PM
Jun 2012

If Obama's father had been a citizen and his mother not, they'd be saying the opposite.

"he was born in Kenya!"
"The state of Hawaii says he was born there"
"well, it's a conspiracy. And even if he was born in Hawaii he father wasn't!"
"not that it matters because he was born in the US, but even if he hadn't been, his mother was a citizen."
"she wasn't old enough!"

Feh.

 

GarroHorus

(1,055 posts)
19. They don't like brown people
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 06:40 PM
Jun 2012

According to them, Obama, Jindal, and Rubio are all ineligible even though all three were born in America.

If you recall, though, not a word about the eligibility of Michael Dukakis was spoken even though he was the son of Greek immigrants. Spiro Agnew was Veep and he was the son of Greek immigrants, too. Agnew's father became a naturalized citizen two years after Spiro's birth.

Chester Alan Arthur's father was Irish and was not naturalized at the time of Arthur's birth.

So what's the difference here? The white men who fail to meet the new definition for natural born citizen were candidates, veeps, or even president while white. The others are brown.

Pretty simple answer if you ask me.

Inkfreak

(1,695 posts)
24. If POTUS is declared a non citizen.
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 08:31 AM
Jun 2012

Then any & all legislation is considered null & void. This is the mindset of these birthers. I know this cause I confronted a family member who is one. I love this person with all my heart but they are completely absurd. It saddens me greatly.

maryellen99

(3,789 posts)
25. You can't reason with the stupid nt
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 08:35 AM
Jun 2012

I don't discuss anything politics with Birthers what's the point?

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
26. Just remind them the 14th amendment exists
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 09:08 AM
Jun 2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_Clause

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.


When they claim citizenship derives from fathers, they're referring to the Naturalization act of 1790
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

This law has been superseded many times, and the 14th amendment completely annihilates it.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I don't get the rationale...