Breitbart Busts Birther at Tea Party Confab

cbsnews ^ | February 6, 2010 12:10 PM | Charles Cooper

[Syncro]

February 6, 2010 12:10 PM

Breitbart Busts Birther at Tea Party Confab

by Charles Cooper

Attending the Tea Party Convention in Nashville this weekend, The Washington Independent's always-excellent David Weigel recounts an extraordinary hallway confrontation between online publisher Andrew Breitbart and WorldNetDaily Editor-in-Chief Joseph Farah over the question of President Obama's citizenship.

*snip*

"Prove your case."

"I should prove, what, a birth certificate that may or may not exist?" Farah had gotten irritated. "That’s ridiculous. You don’t even understand the fundamental tenets of what journalism is about, Andrew. It’s not about proving things. It’s about asking questions and seeking truth."

Breitbart tensed up after that insult. "Right."

"I know you’re not a journalist, so that’s fine. But don’t diminish people who’ve been doing this for 35 years."

"So you’re going to go on record saying that I’m not a journalist?"

"Are you? I’ve never heard you claim to be. Are you?"

"I’ll let it be answered by you."

"Well, I knew [Matt]Drudge didn’t consider himself a journalist, so I assumed that you were. … I don’t know, I’m not trying to insult you."

"You did."

[ml/nj]

Breitbart doesn't want to run the country. He simply made a political observation.

Besides other things, I think you have a problem with the English language. From mw.com:

Main Entry: pol·i·tics
Pronunciation: \ˈpä-lə-ˌtiks\
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
Etymology: Greek politika, from neuter plural of politikos political
Date: circa 1529
1 a : the art or science of government b : the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c : the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government

ML/NJ

[whatisthetruth]

I don't understand - if he's NOT a naturalized U.S. citizen, then, he's NOT eligible to be President.

It is my understanding that a naturalized citizen cannot run for the office of President, only a 'Natural Born' citizen can, there's a difference.

[noinfringers]

Impeachment, very doubtful. Quo Warranto, possibly. full exposure, in the future probably.

[HerrBlucher]

Yes, I have no doubt about that, for the reasons I explained in post 70. Its all about public image, public pressure. The public did not support the impeachment of Clinton because they thought is was just about sex, Clinton left office with high approval. If Obama admitted lying about eligibility their would be tremendous public pressure for him to resign.

[MortMan]

Yes, but Breitbart would observe that the time to do that is before the election. The barn door is swinging on this one, and the cow is up on the hill.

Possession is ten tenths of the law.

"Rule of law" used to mean something. From your statement, you believe we should live in a kleptocracy - If you can steal it, it is yours.

[jackibutterfly]

"IF OBAMA HAD BEEN BORN IN KENYA, AS SOME FOOLS ALLEGE, HE WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE LONG FORM OF HAWAIIN BIRTH CERTIFICATE..."

That doesn't make sense - IF he was born in Kenya, HOW could he produce a Hawaiian long form???

[MortMan]

If there was any merit to their argument, it would have won over more adherents but it hasn’t.

Do you REALLY mean to say that the number of people who believe something decides whether it is true or not?

God help us.

[jackibutterfly]

"Breitbart is getting old fast."

WHY?? Because he's becoming well known?

[1rudeboy]

Besides other things, I think you have a problem with the English language.

Stick to the other things, then. If you mention enough of them, you might state a truism. Sort of like a squirrel finds a nut.

Observing that an issue is not a "winning" issue in the realm of politics is a "political" observation. Is that the sort of English you can understand?

[giotto]

Its not up to sceptics to prove Obama is inelegible, its up to Obama to prove that he is.

You're right. And proof of that eligibility just happens to be a minimum requirement for holding the office of president.

[1rudeboy]

"Rule of law" used to mean something. From your statement, you believe we should live in a kleptocracy - If you can steal it, it is yours.

No, that is not what I believe. I am making the observation that the thief will get away with it, not that he is innocent of the crime.

[Tex-Con-Man]

I believe you have your timeline wrong.

If I remember correctly, questioning McCains place of birth was in response to republicans questioning Obamas eligibility...which, I have no proof, but believe, actually originated with some of the Clinton dirty tricksters.

[MortMan]

You are also making the statement we should not try to investigate or prosecute. Hence, if you can steal it, it is yours.

[jackibutterfly]

"You'd think the doctor who delivered the "President of the U.S." or the attending nurses or staff would be jumping out of the woodwork to claim their 5 minutes of fame. That hasn't happened."

HOW do you know? Maybe some of them are dead - maybe some of the rest have, but have been ignored or squelched - like they're trying to do to us birthers.

[Man50D]

Focus, people. Whatever the validity of the birth certificate issue, it is a DEAD issue that will go NOWHERE politically.

WRONG, WRONG,WRONG!!!!!! You need to focus on the fact this is a Constitutional matter! What is wrong with you people who insist on ignoring the Constitution under the misconception somehow enforcing the Constitution is politically incorrect?

Go ahead and hit me with the constitution, but continued pushing on the birth certificate knocks your integrity down three notches in the eyes of the public. It’s just the way it is.

You're damn straight we'll hit you with the Constitution since you are so easy to forget what you are relinquishing thereby allowing someone who has nothing but disdain for the Constitution and seeks its destruction!!. It is incomprehensible so many are willing to kick to the curb the very document that gives you all the freedoms you enjoy!!! Have you forgotten are founding fathers sacrificed far more than you to form the Constitution? They risk their lives and those of their families while you're merely worried about political expediency!! Not condemning the act is tantamount to condoning the act.

[AnnaZ]

few things are as pitiful to witness as a contest of egos.

Andrew Breitbart is not motivated by ego.

[Syncro]

I don't think too much of people who want to run the country based upon what they think is a "winning issue."

Don't worry, Breitbart doesn't want to run the contry.

So you threw him under the bus huh?

[FTJM]

Would Alinsky let up?

[Lady Heron]

The problem with the birther argument, outside of the fact that the birthers have not proven their case, is that no one else believes it, not even other conservatives

My problem with, and I have not paid that much attention to the whole thing, is that the Constitution requires for the president to be a natural born citizen.....it is not up to the people to prove him one but up to him to be open and honest and prove he is one.

Even if he ever produced a BC and proved he was born in HI there are still other questions that supposedly disqualify him like being adopted in a country that does not allow for duel citizenship.

If he is not qualified as a natural born citizen or even a citizen then the Democrats have perpetrated the largest fraud ever on the American people.

But hey I guess it is ok because only Republicans have to follow American laws.

[1rudeboy]

You are also making the statement we should not try to investigate or prosecute.

Slow down, cowboy. I am merely stating that, even after we get to the point, impeachment proceedings will accomplish nothing. If the best the Birther movement can do is bitch about people like me, then it should direct its attention to the larger problem--namely, getting itself to the point where it has the opportunity to prove me wrong.