Thursday, April 22, 2010

Why I Love Conservative On Twitter



Arizona State Rep. Cecil Ash (R) posted this comedy masterpiece on his Twitter page. Ash voted for the birther bill that would require all presidential candidates to provide their birth certificate to Arizona.

Ash appeared on Anderson Cooper's show to defend his vote. Ash maintains he voted for the bill because his constituents are concerned about the internet conspiracy theories about President Obama's citizenship. If that is to be taken at face value: then Ash shows a lack of intellectual curiosity and lack of seriousness in governing.

A mind-boggling exchange between Cooper and Ash.


Cooper: So why vote for something which perpetuates these false Internet rumors?

Ash: Well Anderson I think there’s been a lot of controversy over the issue. It’s created a division among a lot of people in the United States and for better or worse many people don’t believe he’s a U.S. citizen. They believe he has loyalties… ah… divided loyalties I suppose you could say.

Cooper: But those people are wrong. He is a U.S. citizen.

Ash: Well, you’re telling me that he’s wrong. I’ve never investigated that. If he is then he has nothing to fear.

Cooper: But I mean, the information is out there. It has been released. It has been shown. There are some people who don’t believe it, but there are also some people who believe that the moon is made out of cheese and you can say you’ve never investigated it but I think you would probably say to them the moon is not made out of cheese.

Ash: Well, I certainly would but the reason I spoke up on this bill is simply because there is a lot of division in the country and I believe this would put an end to any future controversy about a President’s qualifications.

Cooper: You told our producer you voted for this because you get a lot of calls from constituents who have questions based on things they read on the Internet. I mean isn’t it your job as a leader to actually lead; to not just throw up your hands and say well who knows what’s real or not on the Internet, to actually say well, actually Hawaii has released this information and it’s factually correct?

Ash: Well as I said I haven’t personally investigated that but I think that if…

Cooper: But I mean there’s plenty of things you believe that are not personally investigated? Why this you’re holding on to?


I don't believe Ash is stupid enough to deny that Obama was born in the United States. Ash takes pains to say to say that Obama was born in the United States. Ash then proceeds to cast doubt on Obama's citizenship.

Cooper informed Ash that Obama's birth certificate is on the internet. Ash responded, "You can't believe everything you see on the internet." Ash also said, "Many people don’t believe he’s a U.S. citizen." The current Republican Party panders to the worse factions of America. Cecil Ash is the latest example of this practice.

Labels: , , ,

6 Comments:

At April 22, 2010 11:22 PM , Blogger Dave said...

My button has been pushed!

Obama's birth certificate is not on the Internet. The certification of birth (a copy) not the document produced on the day of his birth is what is on the Internet.

I'm not a birther. I think this whole thing is about race. I think that the information that Obama has presented is sufficient and all that is required by law. And, I think other evidence corroborates his birth in Hawaii, and his US citizenship.

But, I'm appalled by the willful ignorance of my tribe (lefties) on this issue. The PolitiFact debunking of the birther conspiracy is a deeply embarrassing bit of reporting. If a student of mine turned in something so horribly argued I'd give them an F.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/

"At PolitiFact.com, we're all about original sources." And then she (the reporter) slips into a non sequitur and never mentions that the original document produced on the day of his birth has never been seen. Someone went to the vaults, looked at it, and came back up and said it exists. Hearsay.

While I understand the left's desire that this was a non-issue, it would be nice if they at least spoke accurately about the facts. This willful ignorance makes it look like there's something to hide. (whew)

/petpeeve

 
At April 22, 2010 11:37 PM , Blogger Michael Hussey said...

You take issue with a "certificate of birth" not being a birth certificate. That is my pet peeve about the silly birther issue. And no, I don't you you are a birther Dave.

 
At April 23, 2010 10:49 AM , Blogger Dave said...

Just to clarify. Are you asserting that the document created on the day of his birth is the document reproduced on the Internet?

 
At April 23, 2010 11:11 AM , Blogger Dave said...

and also - ouch! Why the ad hominem attack? Why not a response rebutting my argument, or demonstrating that my facts are in error? Why not some evidence to prove me wrong?

We're talking about a specific fact that can be proven correct or incorrect, so why the name-calling?

 
At April 23, 2010 2:03 PM , Blogger Michael Hussey said...

Just to clarify. Are you asserting that the document created on the day of his birth is the document reproduced on the Internet?

Yes.

and also - ouch! Why the ad hominem attack?

There was no hominem attack. I stated a don't believe you are a birther. You later comments make me wonder.

 
At April 23, 2010 2:57 PM , Blogger Dave said...

ok, thx. :) there's a "not" missing so i just saw - "you are a birther Dave," but i see that i should have picked it up out of context.

This USA Today article backs up my point about the original document -http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-07-27-obama-hawaii_N.htm

And this AP article clarifies further that the document produced on the day of his birth is not the document on the Internet. http://www.kxnet.com/custom404.asp?404;http://www.kxnet.com/News/Politics/291624.asp

And read through the PolitFact/FactCheck I linked to above as if it was your ideological opponent writing it.

Snopes reprints the Fukino memo but doesn't clarify the difference between the two documents, and then points to the PolitiFact article linking the word "examined" suggesting that PolitiFact actually saw the original document (which they did not).

I readily concede that this a BS conspiracy theory and should be a non-issue. But, the ham-fisted way it has been handled drives me crazy. Dancing around the criticism instead of meeting it head on is self-aggrandizing and makes it look like there is something to hide.

Sorry if I sounded as if I were ranting. I probably really need to let this go.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home