Patterico's Pontifications

8/26/2011

Slow Liberal Blogger Calls Fox News Liars… For Correctly Reporting on a Presidential Proclamation

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 2:21 pm



[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.  Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]

I try not to pay too much attention to Ken Ashford.  Indeed, he won’t even get the benefit of a link out of this, but this stupidity is something to behold.  The following is the entirety of a post at his stupid little blog:

Fox News Makes Stuff Up, Part 294

Fox News says:

President Obama has declared Aug. 26 — which marks the 91st anniversary of the constitutional amendment giving women the right to vote — to be “Women’s Equality Day.”

Wrong.  Congress decided that August 26th is Women’s Equality Day.  In 1971. Obama is merely following in the path of past presidents.

Now first, let’s say for the sake of argument that they got it wrong.  What of it?  Does this make him look bad?  There are very few people seething in anger that women are allowed to vote now, but I suppose the left thinks that the right is ready to repeal that amendment.  (Rolls eyes.)  But when two of the leading Republican Presidential contenders are women, its really hard to argue that mainstream conservatives want to run women out of political life.

But in fact if you go to the White House’s website, you see the whole thing.  It is styled as a “Presidential Proclamation–Women’s Equality Day.”  And it goes on as you would expect these things to go, until it says:

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim August 26, 2011, as Women’s Equality Day.

So here is the President purporting to “proclaim” it is Women’s Equality Day.  And if you go to Webster’s dictionary online and take a look at definition 1a for the word “proclaim” here is what it says:

to declare publicly, typically insistently, proudly, or defiantly and in either speech or writing

(emphasis added.)  And it would hardly surprise you to learn that if you switch over to their thesaurus, they list “declare” to be a synonym of “proclaim.”

So in fact he is angry at Fox news for saying that the President did something that the President himself purported to do, and I am willing to bet that every president has purported to do for decades.  Because in the end a declaration or a proclamation, can be nothing more than officially saying something.  Of course proclamations can (potentially) have important legal effects, the Emancipation Proclamation springing to mind, but many proclamations are just words—an example of the president using the bully pulpit.  The President is not, by the language of this proclamation, purporting to command us to do anything, just saying non-coercively, “hey, let’s celebrate this thing.”

And right on for Obama doing that in this case.  We should all celebrate the important milestone represented by the Nineteenth Amendment.

But it is really remarkable that what is basically a puff piece on a presidential proclamation becomes some kind of slander in the fever swamps of the left.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

65 Responses to “Slow Liberal Blogger Calls Fox News Liars… For Correctly Reporting on a Presidential Proclamation”

  1. Kman Makes Stuff Up, Part 627

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  2. Why are you so mean to me?

    Mrs Doubtfire (318f81)

  3. What’s another word for “thesaurus”?

    Professor Fate (8096f2)

  4. Before Ken Ashford cross dresses, he looks like me. Afterwards, Mrs Doubtfire. I’m so pretty, so so pretty …

    Colin Montgomerie (318f81)

  5. Arrogance combined with ignorance; stir in a generous portion of bile and there you have it: idiot soup

    Icy Texan (534223)

  6. What’s another word for “thesaurus”?
    Comment by Professor Fate — 8/26/2011 @ 2:34 pm

    — Word-choice book-thingy

    Icy Texan (534223)

  7. That was pretty funny, Aaron. And it makes me wonder: when will Mr. Ashford (no matter what name he uses on the Internet) admit that he…well…screwed up?

    Because he should. Because he often accuses others of doing what he just did!

    Funny.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  8. Note that the resolution he linked to is not a law. It’s a joint resolution by the House and Senate, and it doesn’t require the President to join in, but merely “authorizes and requests” him to issue a proclamation every year. This 0bama has done, and that’s what Fox reported on. I don’t know what’s remarkable about any of this.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  9. kmart has never admitted to any incorrect position, and probably never will, no matter how many times he is “schooled”.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (985f21)

  10. don’t know ’bout all that
    but colonel declare CHUBWA
    on Megyn Kelly

    ColonelHaiku (8211ab)

  11. There are very few people seething in anger that women are allowed to vote now

    I don’t think I’m “seething” but I do think it was a very poor decision.

    It’s not that I hate women, it’s that it is unfair to burden them with a responsibility they clearly don’t really want or need.

    Does anyone ever notice the fact that on pretty much all political oriented blogs and forums something like 90% of the commenters are men? Clearly the vast bulk of women do not express much interest in politics.

    This is entirely natural. Women (in general) don’t like to think in abstract, logic-oriented terms. They do not like the heated competitive environment that politics produces, similar in some ways to sports. It isn’t their fault, it’s simply not the way they evolved.

    Politics has always been a very dirty “man’s game”. I think it disrespects women to force them into a role they were not meant to play.

    Chris (b0fa47)

  12. It’s not that I hate women, it’s that it is unfair to burden them with a responsibility they clearly don’t really want or need.

    You may not be aware that in the USA voting is voluntary. If you don’t want to vote you don’t have to, and are free to ignore the election and eat some tasty lotus instead. Even if you’re a bloke. So how is it unfair to expand someone’s choices, even if they will never use the extra options you made available?

    But in any event, experience has refuted your premise, since about as many women as men do bother to vote; evidently women are as likely as men to want to vote.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  13. Aaron, I’m surprised you are paying attention to this screen licking stalker.

    He got attention, which is all he wanted, so I bet he throws more errors into his blogging in further hope of more corrections from the object of his constant attention.

    Dustin (b2fb78)

  14. Chris’s discriminatory behavior knows no bounds.

    One might wonder how he feels about black women (talk about your double-whammys!)

    Icy Texan (534223)

  15. chris

    Okay, seriously, you’re a moby, right? No one is that big of an idiot.

    First I can name several women who are probably more suited for the franchise than you. For instance, all of them would understand that giving women the right to vote does not FORCE them to do anything, but instead gives them the RIGHT to do it.

    I mean you have the right to vote. did anyone put a gun to your head to get you in the voting booth?

    if you are sincere, you are one seriously dim bulb.

    Aaron Worthing (73a7ea)

  16. Chris:

    Does anyone ever notice the fact that on pretty much all political oriented blogs and forums something like 90% of the commenters are men? Clearly the vast bulk of women do not express much interest in politics.

    Is that so?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  17. I was hoping you would fils that one, DRJ. I also hope MayBee, Elissa, Dana, SarahW, the chimperor, etal chime in as well.

    JD (318f81)

  18. That boy is a little slow out of the chute.
    And it can also be said of the President.

    Comanche Voter (0e06a9)

  19. Why was the Ninteenth Amendment necessary?

    Should not the Fourteenth Amendment have been sufficient to strike down laws prohibiting women, but not men, to vote?

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)

  20. Oh Chris, thank you so much for making it all so clear to me! Using devastating logic and your killer instincts about women, you have enlightened me like the Lightworker himself. Now since you know so much about the fairer sex, perhaps you can guide me to which pair of shoes I should wear to dinner tonight? I just can’t decide…

    Hurry Chris, I need your help!

    Dana (4eca6e)

  21. I think that, in order for Chris to talk with women, he has to give his credit card number.

    Simon Jester (341efa)

  22. Chris is just trolling us. We’re giving it exactly what it wants. Dollars to donuts this is an Obama fan who couldn’t hold his own in an argument so decided to pose as a crazy person.

    Lot of that going around lately.

    Dustin (b2fb78)

  23. I think that, in order for Chris to talk with women, he has to give his credit card number.

    Say it ain’t so, Simon Jester! We’ll be sooo disappointed…

    Dana (4eca6e)

  24. Ejercito, where — prior to the 19th Amendment — did there exist a federal law granting women the vote?

    Icy Texan (534223)

  25. I was eating dinner and felt a disturbance in the force. What’s going on?

    elissa (4904b3)

  26. Of course they aren’t forced to vote, but many feel compelled to simply because of social pressure and the fact they don’t want to “waste” a right. Add feminist nonsense and identity politics as well. The fourteenth amendment used language indicating that only male voting rights were protected. In the 1860s they were more willing to let black men vote than white women.

    Chris (b0fa47)

  27. Sorry I can’t hang around and debate, though. There’s a baseball game on.

    elissa (4904b3)

  28. Prior to the Fourteenth Amendment, the Constitution was silent upon the matter of gender.

    Several states had very liberal (pardon the expression) voting conditions that women could, and did, meet. It wasn’t common, but it wasn’t unheard of.

    Things were different in the 19th Century, though.

    Pious Agnostic (6048a8)

  29. Comment by Dana — 8/26/2011 @ 5:49 pm

    If you’re having dinner anywhere near Chris, wear ones that fly straight, and sting.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (985f21)

  30. Dana,

    I’m surprised at you. Surely, you know you aren’t supposed to be wearing any shoes at all.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  31. tomorrow is gonna be a big letdown after all the festive equality we had today

    especially for womens

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  32. Help me out here, y’all. Being a dumb girl and all I’ve been reading Pat’s site for years, but I’ve only recently started commenting… how long has Chris been stinking the place up?

    First he gets all anti-Dr King on us last night, now he’s lecturing us girls on why we don’t really want nor need the right to vote?

    I am just a woman, but something around here smells of Democrat troll…

    //bats her lashes and holds her nose//

    Book (c7b6c5)

  33. ____________________________________________

    In the 1860s they were more willing to let black men vote than white women.

    Which truly reflects the foolish, idiotic nature of focusing on the external, superficial characteristics of a person or people.

    So back in the 1860s, society’s gatekeepers, if you will — but assuming they weren’t totally devoid of common sense — would actually have preferred liberals who happened to be black but male going to the voting booth instead of conservatives who happened to be female?

    If one wants to focus on or obsess over aspects of people, forget about their gender or race. Instead delve into the way that people’s innate socio-political biases can steer them in either a sensible or nonsensical direction. Everything else is mostly a meaningless veneer.

    Mark (411533)

  34. Chris is a lefturd.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  35. Wingnut fail

    Go figure.

    Spartacvs (b94d40)

  36. Could someone explain to me what the idiot was referring to with his hatred bile filled comment?

    JD (318f81)

  37. Which one JD, this thread has a whole bunch of ’em?

    Spartacvs (b94d40)

  38. Obviously, I was referring to your idiocy, spurty. Did you ever come clean about all the names our have commented under?

    Why are you all hot and bothered about Women’s equality, and why do you attribute a wingnut fail to the commemoration of this particular day. Never mind. You are a lying coward.

    JD (318f81)

  39. Chris pops up whenever there is a post that gives him an opening to spew his racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory bile.

    Icy Texan (534223)

  40. I think sporty said he hates women. There’s a surprise.

    Maybe something happened in Japan.

    Ag80 (9a213d)

  41. it’s that it is unfair to burden them with a responsibility they clearly don’t really want
    Comment by Chris — 8/26/2011 @ 3:43 pm

    Awww…aren’t you just the sweetest lil spastic colon ever to worry your empty brain bucket over us wimmen?

    Bah. Go blow a yak..it’d appreciate your attention far more.

    ppk_pixie (901c40)

  42. Pixie rox.

    JD (318f81)

  43. I see that Fificvs continues to post, after getting spanked repeatedly for being lazy, stupid, and thoughtless.

    Weebles wobble but they don’t fall down, apparently.

    As for Chris, well, I think he, um, doesn’t have much experience with women.

    Simon Jester (5dcd09)

  44. People need to stop using the “but look at this exception!” excuse. Did I say that this applied to all women? No. Did I say this applied to the bulk of women? Yes. The fact of the matter is that there are numerous people under 18 that would make better voters than many adults. Does that mean we should abolish voting age restrictions? Of course not.

    Chris (b0fa47)

  45. Forget RINOs for now. We need to take the liberalism out of conservatism before all is lost.

    Chris (b0fa47)

  46. People need to stop being sexist anti-Semitic racists. That is a good place to start.

    sparticvs (318f81)

  47. Although I think someone didn’t decloak, the admonishment remains the same.

    sporty, why are you a misogynist, racist, anti-Semite.

    Inquiring minds want to know. Show your work.

    Ag80 (9a213d)

  48. People need to stop being sexist anti-Semitic racists. That is a good place to start.
    Comment by sparticvs — 8/26/2011 @ 7:49 pm

    — OMG, he finally said something sensible!

    Add this to the earthquake and the hurricane and you’ve got three signs of the apocalypse, all in the same week!

    Icy Texan (534223)

  49. _______________________________________________

    Did I say that this applied to all women?

    But look what you wrote previously:

    I think it disrespects women to force them into a role they were not meant to play.
    Comment by Chris — 8/26/2011 @ 3:43 pm

    There’s no qualifier between “disrespects” and “women.” You could have at least said “most,” “many,” “few” or “a percentage of.”

    Moreover, the only qualifier that really deserves to be placed between those two words, at least in a somewhat flippant manner, is “liberal.” Because disrespecting liberals in general — female or male — is about all they deserve. Or it’s about all that anyone limited in basic logic and honesty (not to mention post-teenage, post-college-aged or perhaps post-30-year-old ideological immaturity) merits.

    Mark (411533)

  50. Chris floats out the “I’m not stereotyping because I said ‘most’, not ‘all'” defense.

    Any takers?

    Icy Texan (534223)

  51. So Sarah Palin is dumb but Maobamas gaffes are honest mistakes.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  52. Yes, the wimmins are being unjustly maligned here tonight. Thanks to all you guys who are so gallantly and logically pushing back on Chris’ idiotic stereotypes.

    Machinist–the following link is for you. With respect to unfortunate stereotypes and how they get perpetuated…memba I mentioned this guy in a comment a couple weeks ago?

    http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110826/news/708269751/

    elissa (4904b3)

  53. “Wingnut fail Go figure.”
    You’ve never touched a woman in your pathetic meaningless life, have you? Come on admit it, you’re a completely worthless, sexless, loser who has never had even a remotely intimate relationship with someone of the opposite sex. You know it’s true and you won’t answer this like you won’t respond to any substantive challenge to any of your useless attention-whoring postings. Your entire life revolves around trying to grab attention on the internet and you have no conception of how to even attempt to attain a real, meaningful relationship with a living breathing human being. You’re so easy to figure out.

    Jack Klompus (07a5ab)

  54. You’re so easy to figure out.

    Er… uh… shutuppa you face stoopid teabaggerzz!

    spartawalgreens (f1c59f)

  55. O/T-
    Perhaps we need some “Hellfire” down at Foggy Bottom:

    State Department: Don’t Invade Privacy of Cleric on CIA Kill List

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/26/state-department-dont-invade-privacy-cleric-on-cia-kill-list/#ixzz1WEuFHSel

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (3370e1)

  56. Ken Mrs Doubtfire Ashford aka kmart and spartcvs get their talking points at the same place.

    JD (85b089)

  57. The fail is yours. Again.
    Your incompetence is never ending.

    SPQR (0fd8f2)

  58. Yes it will, Precious won’t it? It will get the hose!…Now it places the lotion in the basket.

    Chris (8211ab)

  59. Alert! Someone, somewhere, is missing a bed sheet right now.

    Simon Jester (5dcd09)

  60. …and he doesn’t need to re-inforce the pillow-case as it will drape naturally over his pointed little head.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (3370e1)

  61. Robert Byrd is that you?

    DohBiden (d54602)

  62. Why was the Ninteenth Amendment necessary?

    Should not the Fourteenth Amendment have been sufficient to strike down laws prohibiting women, but not men, to vote?

    For the same reason that the 14th Amendment was not sufficient to strike down laws prohibiting black people, but not white ones, from voting. Which is why the 15th Amendment was necessary.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  63. There are very few people seething in anger that women are allowed to vote now

    Petitions to end women’s suffrage notwithstanding.

    malclave (4f3ec1)

  64. Well, since we know what’s good for us, we “seeth” silently.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (69a267)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4747 secs.