do Birthers suffer from advanced delusionary schizophrenia with involuntary narcissistic rage?

reply to post by schrodingers dog


non-related props: I love your profile picture! cute and salty! when will we learn to bring some heavy armor instead of flowers?

reply to post by capgrup


I never implied anything about YOUR birth certificate, hell I don't even care who you are, or if they are different, but the facts are that 95% of what Obama said are lies and you think we should shut up and believe the rest right? Like I said before HAHA good one.

If we are ever to change the way things are we must all have the dingle berries to stand up and challenge TPTB, if they can lie about killing 700,000 Iraqi's and displacing 2 million more (and this is just Iraq look at Viet Nam) then they can create and lie about anything, this would be nothing for them to pull off.

reply to post by Ridhya

Well, that is a pretty good example my friend because I have personally seen people say "I will bash ____ every chance I get" for various people/groups. But for one I take that as exaggeration and two I take it as fanaticism - it is perfectly possible to be fanatic with out it being a psychological disorder.

I don’t take it as an exaggeration, especially when they go into detail and explain how and when they do it. In addition, Millon would say these people are of the fanatic paranoid sub group, and that subgroup also exhibits narcissitic traits (which the op was correct in stating.) Now if you were to read the DSM IV TR (4th edition) and turn to the section pertaining to paranoid personality disorders, you will see this is far from simple fanaticism.

EVERYONE'S emotions get the better of them at least once in life, in Disorders there is a thing about norms and what extends it in to disorder - take for instance a man whose wife of 30 years dies. For months he can not sleep and is depressed feelings of loneliness or suicide etc...

So he experiences everything shown in The Kübler-Ross model. The problem with this is what you’re citing as an example has little to do with what is happening on ATS. These people, the birthers, are going bonkers, and it’s only a matter of time before one of them does something foolish.

Is it abnormal? No, some things may be 'detrimental' but not 'abnormal', everyone is very passionate about some thing and until it affects the way they live, relationships, impairs functioning (sleep) etc, it is 'normal'. There is normal 'everyday' depression and there is clinical, for example. One very normal the other not.

Have you not read what I typed? One of the birthers here has admitted that he lets his emotions get the best of him, that he bashing Obama on ATS helps him cope in the real world and that his constant threads about Obama is unhealthy. What is ‘normal’ about that? The fact he admits it and continues to do it?

Politics is intrinsically linked with psychology (in fact I take political psychology too!) and people enjoy feeling part of a group and one way to make your group feel better is to berate the opposing group, and exaggerate their defeats belittle their successes.

This is true in some aspects, but regardless of your stance, you’re always part of the in group or out group. The problem we’re having here is the birthers have taken things past the point of fanaticism and have resorted to berating Obama, and his family, in the form of racist slogans and images (refer to those posted by the OP), frivolous lawsuits and even threats (not here but in other places.)

For Obama yes there are racists yes there are fanatics and there are conspiracy theorists, people possibly suffering from disorders about it, and people like me. I originally loved him made my niddle name on facebook Hussein to illustrate how absurdly irrelevent that point is but after a while seeing how he is exactly a continuation of Bush, well I hate him. Not racist, just against new world orders and world leaders who are DECIDED to be in power in an illusory system of democracy where real decisions are made by the few rich and powerful and will only get in power if they can be exploited by these people.

[Bold emphasis added.]

The section in bold is what I’ve been explaining to the people here but they refuse to listen. If you look at the thread I referenced to another reader, you’ll see these people blatantly avoid the illusory system of democracy. When you ask them why they buy into it, or why they believe it, they skip town or throw insults to derail the discussion. When you show that he is a puppet, and continuation of every single president before him (yes, ever single one) they will spin the bottle and make it appear as if you’re attacking Bush, even though you said he is the same as all before him and that there is no difference.

In closing, while some of the birthers are highly logical, ask questions rooted in deductive and inductive reasoning, present cogent arguments and may refrain from insults, many are the exact opposite and need to be helped.


[edit on 3-2-2010 by EMPIRE]

Maybe those that believe Obama was born in Hawaii should be called, "after-birthers", or perhaps "anti-birthers", just so we have a level playing field.

There are two things that can be investigated.
First, the claim that a fire in (1972 destroyed OBAMA'S COPY OF THE) long form birth certificate. If this is true then it is stands to reason that it would not be possible for Obama to (PROVIDE IT.)

(Also, did Hawaii really destroy the original long form Birth certificate, only keeping the short forms?)

It seems that this could easily be verified. Did a fire really take place? Is there corroborative evidence? Has anyone else born, born in Hawaii, in the same year that Obama was born been able to request and receive a copy of their original Long Form Birth Certificate?

Second, did Obama ever claim dual citizenship? If so, this should be able to be verified by examining the records of other countries, like Britain, Indonesia, & Kenya.

I know this has all been beat to death in other threads, and few opinions have been changed.

I personally feel that Obama is enjoying the commotion and confusion that his lack of transparency is causing. This issue isolates and identifies his most vocal critics and the media has dutifully branded them as wingnuts. What does he have to lose by keeping his files sealed? Nothing, in my opinion.

I believe that there is a long form, but I think the information on it would be embarrassing to Obama, just like his college documents.

Edited comments shown in parenthesis


[edit on 2/3/2010 by Sparky63]

reply to post by Snarf


First, I'm not a Birther but I admit I found it interesting when we did not know whether or not they were right about Obama. Now, it is simply another topic, one of many, that I don't agree with.

I do not feel the need to be a school yard bully as you and some that are posting do. I don't feel the need to label people with defamatory titles like those in your title or the constant cry of Racist by Obama supporters every time someone dares to criticize Obama.

Lets turn this around for a moment and look at the rationality of your post.

A reasonable person in control of their emotions and with the capacity to act in an adult manner can simply choose not to participate in threads they don't agree with. You however don't posses that ability. You are so angered that they don't share your beliefs that you find it necessary to attack them like a rabid dog. Why is this?

You even go so far as to label them all as suffering from severe mental illness because if they don't agree with you, they must be crazy. Right?

Just look at the page one of this thread where the first cry of "Racist" rears its ugly head. Those who are so consumed with Obama that they believe anyone who does not support him must be Racist are your contemporaries.

Do you perhaps plan on going through ATS topic by topic and assigning mental disorders or defamatory labels to everyone who participates in a topic you don't agree with?

reply to post by rusethorcain


A lot of libertarians and lefties are on this topic too, not everyone that challenges a Republican or Democrat is necessarily on one side or the other, and a lot of us know both sides work together, slightly different ways of going about it but both the same. Maybe, just maybe they are after truth no matter who it is.

I’m glad you brought it up though, this is exactly what they want, and when you challenge them there must be an alterior motive other than just wanting the truth. At every turn its name calling or stereotyping which is all BS to hide the truth. If you believe only one side then you get fooled. If you believe neither then your left in the cold or you’re a threat to everyone who believes it. Its ancient knowledge how these people run the show, it’s just a matter of time before the sheep start looking through their own reflection and for once seeing the big picture outside that wasn’t meant for them.


[edit on 3-2-2010 by humilisunus]

[edit on 3-2-2010 by humilisunus]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. IF he could prove he was eligible, and IF he had nothing to hide. He would be in the position to absolutely destroy the republican party and the "birthers" (as you holier than thou refer to them as) by providing the proof. He would go down as the president who brought the republican party crumbling to the ground and the democrats would never ever have to worry about losing an election or achieving their agenda again. Honestly folks, think about that. From a pure political standpoint. It would be the biggest thing to happen to him and the democrats in the history of this country. But he can't do it. For 1 reason or another, he can't do it.

reply to post by awhispersecho


im willing to bet someone will come in here saying "he doesnt have to" or some strawman or another.

but yes, Obama could completely destroy the opposition by taking 10 minutes to air a special in which he displays all credentials that come with a birth on american soil.

but, as you say... he just wont....

why?

reply to post by Snarf


Racist, pure and simple.

These birthers will look for and latch on to any reason that supports their policy of not accepting a non W.A.S.P POTUS.

This is what happens when a country does not have a policy of eugenics.

(That last line is a joke).

The only thing you can really do is smile in their face, then ignore them.

That will annoy them so much there is a good chance they will have a stroke/heart attack.

which is eugenics by the back door

peace & good luck dealing with them.

reply to post by awhispersecho


It is pure insanity to believe that presenting a birth certificate will bring the republican party to the ground. Seriously, look at what you're saying here. You're making the claim that the other house of puppets would crumble if a piece of paper were shown. Friend, aside from some "god" coming to demolish them, the ONLY thing that can topple either party is the lack of big business, war economy and if TPTB are completely removed from the picture.

If that doesn't happen, you get the same thing over and over.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by EMPIRE]

reply to post by singularitybeta


so everyone who questions the legitimacy of our current POTUS is a racist?

reply to post by EMPIRE


***it is not only the Republican party who questions his legitimacy***

do you understand that?

this issue is beyond partisanship, at least at the political level.

Racist? I don't believe it is fair or honest to say that the term "racist", encompasses all who question Obama's eligibility to be POTUS. It may for some though.
There are blacks who would be called "birthers" by the Anti-birther crowd.

Pastor Manning, who describes Obama as a "Long Legged Mack Daddy" does not believe that he was born in the US.

Granted, Pastor manning might be a racist, but the object of his bigotry is not focused on black people. He seems to have real rage against Obama but it seems to be based more on religion & political ideology.
Here is a link to his rant against Obama. It is quite entertaining, in a "what did he just say" sort of way.

www.youtube.com...

I am not a racist, and I didn't vote Republican, but I still don't believe hardly anything Obama says, nor have I ever been enraged by the question of his birth place.


[edit on 2/3/2010 by Sparky63]

What you are missing here is that we are atleast told that the majority of "birthers" are republican or conservative. And just by the topic of this thread, we can see how birthers are looked at. If he could prove them wrong, He would indeed destroy the party in the sense that they would lose all credibility or whatever credibility they have left. Depending on where you stand. He would also even greater enpower the "believers" the supporters and the democratic party. The minute anyone ever doubted him or expressed a difference in opinion they would be laughed into hiding. Some people are just amazing and not in a good way. I haven't attacked anyone, haven't even stated where I stand on any specifics other than the importance of the issue. But at this point, if he could prove this, it would be the biggest boost to him and his party that they could ever imagine. And if I was a believer or a supporter, or if I was part of his administration, I would be begging and hoping for him to do that. If he was able to.

absolutely, and they have a few issues with being told lies too. Its nice to someone with a taste and a stomach to suck them right down.. your doing a good job of it... keep up the analair cuz, I cant stand the smell of it myself... it just makes we want to die for something I use to believe in.

reply to post by awhispersecho


asinine non-argument.

you assume he acts like you, but in fact, he's not playing some scummy political game with you loonies.

you were prolly one of those people screaming at folks for criticizing bush during a time of war.

such hypocrites...

here's Obama's two options:

Acknowledge birthers (a win for birthers), abuse his power by getting Hawaii to treat him differently then other citizens (a wing for birthers) and then have the birthers claim whatever he produces is fraudulent anyway...

OR

Engage the 80% of Americans that aren't looney tunes birthers, not abuse his power, not engage maniacs and let the birther movement destroy itself...


He's not as stupid as you guys so he's choosing option two...

[edit on 3-2-2010 by seethelight]

Originally posted by seethelight
reply to post by awhispersecho

 

asinine non-argument.

you assume he acts like you, but in fact, he's not playing some scummy political game with you loonies.

you were prolly one of those people screaming at folks for criticizing bush during a time of war.

such hypocrites...

here's Obama's two options:

Acknowledge birthers (a win for birthers), abuse his power by getting HI to treat him differently then other citizens (a wing for birthers) and then have the birthers claim whatever he produces is fraudulent anyway...

OR

Engage the 80% of Americans that aren't looney tunes birthers, not abuse his power, not engage maniacs and let the birther movement destroy itself...


He's not as stupid as you guys so he's choosing option two...

wow, your condescending nature certainly lends you much lofty self-importance. awhispersechos statement wasnt asinine or a non-argument. as for me, no i wasnt shouting anyone down during Bush's regime... i was criticizing him as well.

whether or not Obama "acknowledges birthers" they still exist. "abuse his powers".... THAt is an asinine non-argument.

he could put the baby to bed by providing the info himself, but he wont, and instead will fight it till his dying breath apparently.

i understand that you think very highly of yourself, judging by how you speak to others, but the simple fact that you base your strongly worded forum posts on assumptions about other people ("shouting at people for criticizing bush, assuming "birthers" will automatically discredit legit info, etc.) lets me know that you are nothing but a puny-minded keyboard commando.

saying that the best way for obama to deal with the situation is to ignore it and not "engage looney tune maniac birthers" (aka people that he is supposed to represent) is completely stupid....

which makes it a perfect statement for you to sugguest

Originally posted by awhispersecho
What you are missing here is that we are at least told that the majority of "Birthers" are republican or conservative.

I think you should consider this reasoning:
The majority of "Birthers" are Republicans, but the majority of Republicans are not "Birthers".

If you agree with that statement then I think you should agree that proving the "Birther" faction wrong, would have little effect on the Republican Party.

It seems obvious to me.....but then again, I usually tend to agree with myself.

[edit on 2/3/2010 by Sparky63]

As I said. This thread if proof of the problems with some people who actually consider themselves Americans. It's sad and we are doomed. What I'm curious about is if this was George Bush, giving terrorist American rights, Hiding everything in his past. Taking contributions from foreign countries that hate us, and destroying our economy while pushing scams and taking away freedoms. Would you want him to povide proof that he has a right to do that when up to that point he has purposely hid everything. Would you accept the fact that he must be special because unlike every other president before him, he does not have to release anything related to his past. I would imagine you (blind faithers) would all be calling for his head. By the way, you wouldn't happen to be Robert Gibbs would you? Just askin. Anyway folks enjoy the day and I hope that a year, 5 years , 50 years from now, we still live in a free country where we have the ability to have debates like this. Whether we agree or not.

reply to post by 814ck0u7


Maybe you should start reading instead of replying, and whoever gave you that star needs to heed the advice as well. This is what I was replying to. You need to pay attention and R-E-A-D it before you comment again, because you're shooting yourself in the foot.

Now pay attention, again, this is what I was replying to:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. IF he could prove he was eligible, and IF he had nothing to hide. He would be in the position to absolutely destroy the republican party and the "birthers" (as you holier than thou refer to them as)by providing the proof. He would go down as the president who brought the republican party crumbling to the ground and the democrats would never ever have to worry about losing an election or achieving their agenda again.

[all emphasis added]

[edit on 3-2-2010 by EMPIRE]