Static

July 27th, 2009 By: Arvak | Tags:

staticdischarge_312Politico is reporting how the “birther” movement is causing trouble for Republicans in getting their message out. The denial of reality seems a powerful draw at both political extremes. Fantastically conspiratorial obsessions with the Bush administration led to the diagnosis of “Bush Derangement Syndrome” and have stunted political debate on a variety of foreign policy issues among many liberals for over 8 years now. The “birther” obsessions with bizarre theories about the time and place of President Obama’s birth are now serving to hijack conservatives’ criticisms of Obama’s policy initiatives. Instead of focusing their fire on the profligate spending and political payoffs of initiatives from health care to labor relations, Republican representatives are forced to deal with hysterical nutcases waving their birth certificates in plastic baggies.

The resulting noise functions as political static, corrupting the clarity of an emerging conservative critique of the Obama administration and of an increasingly arrogant and extremist Congressional Democratic leadership with an incoherent babble of nonsense. The “Ron Paul effect” has morphed into the “birther” movement (there is extensive interminging between the two groups), bringing conspiracy theorists to fore and drowning out more serious analysis. And we all lose in the end when we are forced to deal with the substandard policies that get implemented during the distraction.

UPDATE: One of the factors feeding this ridiculous story is the far left, elements of which are putting together agent provocateur campaigns to try to feed the fiction that the entire Republican Party has been captured by this conspiracy scenario. The more that legitimate conservatives try to exterminate this conspiracy theory, the harder that some of the more dishonest elements of the far left will try to build it up. Yet when the parties in power and opposition are reversed, these are the same folks who lectured us endlessly about dishonesty and misrepresentation. Ha.

Also, Josh Marshall apparently thinks we’ve joined the ranks of “the Left” simply by virtue of our criticism of the birther whackiness. This revelation will come as a great surprise to the ranks of liberal bloggers and commenters that have grown to hate us. :)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Patrick Glenn
    July 28th, 2009 at 14:50
    Reply | Quote | #2

    I suspect that many of the birthers are also truthers. Like that nutjob van Brunn, these folks are often not really in the same ballpark ideologically as conservatives and classical liberals, although some might think of themselves (in large part falsely) as libertarians. The paranoid types simultaneously place too little and way too much faith in government. On the latter score, they seem to think that folks who bring us FEMA can pull off paractically impossible conspiracies. The truth is both more mundane and more worrisome: we are moving in a statist direction in response to the everyday demands of large segments of citizens, organizations, etc.

    After you peel away the crazies and the agent provocateurs, I suspect that birther Republicans would be a very small number. I will say, however, that it is unseemly that Obama’s entire history seems to be a closed book. Forget the (semi-private) birth certificate. What happened to the past record of his PUBLIC words and actions?

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.