Rush Rips Into the AP's 'Outrageous Mendacity' in Coverage of 'Loudmouth' Breitbart's Passing
Anyone who saw what the Associated Press wrote when former Bush 43 press secretary Tony Snow died in 2008 (original AP article; related NewsBusters post) knew that the wire service would do what it could to subtly distort Andrew Breitbart's considerable accomplishments in exposing leftist hatred, duplicity, and criminality. The only question was what form(s) it would take.
Not surprisingly, reporters/distorters Philip Elliott and Sue Manning misrepresented or omitted key elements of the three episodes for which Breitbart will be best remembered -- the James O'Keefe-led ACORN stings; Shirley Sherrod, Pigford lawsuit opportunist; and his exposure (so to speak) of former Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner's sleazy online escapades. The 11:44 a.m. version of their report (saved here for future reference, fair use and discussion purporses) was bad enough. In their 1:56 p.m. revision (saved here), perhaps egged on by the vitriol which has been posted all day at leftist sites, they descended into cheap-shot name-calling adjectives which would rarely if ever be used to describe activist leftists. In his opening hour today, Rush Limbaugh covered some of what happened during the three key episodes; I will expand on them later in the post:
Story Continues Below Ad ↓... the AP in their story, slash, obit of Andrew Breitbart misrepresents him, even in death. And maybe fittingly, given his quest in life, this AP article is a textbook example of the kind of outrageous mendacity in the news media today that he fought against. Even in death the AP cannot refrain from lying about him and misrepresenting him. They treat his posting of the Shirley Sherrod video clip as one of the highlights of his career only in order to use it against him. But Breitbart's clip did not misrepresent her views.
The clip that he posted -- he had the Big Government websites, Big Journalism websites -- the clip that he posted of Shirley Sherrod contained enough of her comments that any fair-minded viewer would realize she was telling the audience about her previous prejudices. This was the case involving all of the mythical black farmers that were signed up for a giant government payout. She and her husband were in on that, and so many of them were not qualified to receive the payment. ... He exposed Shirley Sherrod, just as he supposed Anthony Weiner's photos, or Anthony's Weiner photos, he exposed 'em. Where's Weiner today? He's walking the baby to the dry cleaners in Queens.
... Then there was ACORN. Remember the James O'Keefe videos. That was Andrew Breitbart. They went walking in portraying a pimp and a prostitute looking for ways to scam the system, and there was ACORN telling 'em how to do it. All caught on tape. It caused ACORN to theoretically shut down, and change their name and come back to life as a bunch of separate organizations. The AP article damns Andrew Breitbart with faint praise. It describes him as "an outspoken critic of the mainstream media but was lionized by his fans for his efforts at exposing government corruption and media bias." Now, was he only lionized by his fans?
Wouldn't you think that real life journalists would applaud Breitbart's efforts to expose government corruption and media bias? I mean, what does the media claim to exist to do? To hold the powerful accountable! "Speak truth to power," is that the phrase? Well, the mainstream media has become part of the power. When that power is held by the Democrat Party, the mainstream media covers up the corruption. He was exposing it. He did more and greater work than Woodward and Bernstein! He should have been one of their heroes. But he wasn't. He should have been given the same kind of hero worship that Woodward and Bernstein have gotten. And unlike the work of Woodward and Bernstein, Breitbart's investigations were actually truthful.
... the AP notes that, quote, "Breitbart's websites also featured a 2009 hidden-camera sting video that brought embarrassment to the community group ACORN. The videos show ACORN staffers offering advice on taxes and other issues to actors posing as a prostitute and pimp," close quote, which is another blatant misrepresentation. We all know that those ACORN staffers were doing more than "offering advice on taxes and other issues." Why else would they have been fired? They were all fired in humiliating disgrace. Why didn't ACORN lose its funding? Why was it disbanded, and then rebranded and put back together?
Because of Andrew Breitbart.
All in all, this AP article just goes to show that the country desperately needs another thousand more Andrew Breitbarts, if you ask me.
Couldn't agree more, El Rushbo.
For the record, here is an event-by-event correction of AP's 11:44 a.m. write-up. First, Shirley Sherrod:
Sherrod, who is black, was fired from her job as Georgia state rural development director in July 2010 after an edited video surfaced of her making what appeared to be a racist remark. She is seen telling a local NAACP group that she was initially reluctant to help a white farmer save his farm more than two decades ago, long before she worked for USDA.
Missing from the clip was the rest of the speech, which was meant as a lesson in racial healing. Sherrod told the crowd she eventually realized her mistake and helped the farmer save his farm.
Points:
- Shirley Sherrod was offered her job back and rejected the offer. In other words, she could have avoided playing the martyr had she wished.
- Almost no one reported the fact that the Sherrods and their "New Communities" entity received a proudly trumpeted settlement of $13 million just days before she accepted her position at USDA.
- The sentiment uttered in the Breitbart video was racist, and the African-American audience clearly enjoyed it. What follows is my opinion, but I believe that Sherrod made a political calculation that she couldn't get away with what she was thinking about doing to the white farmer, and later decided to put her change of heart into a pretty outfit. Given the rest of her record and that of her husband, it's hard to see how I can be proven wrong.
- Charles Sherrod was caught on video in a university speech advocating bizarre and clearly separatist ideas and racist whines ("create a food delivery system from the South to our people in the North"; "our labor and our monies and our contracts usually end up in white folks’ hands and pockets"; "Finally we must stop the white man and his Uncle Toms from stealing our elections. We must not be afraid to vote black").
- Nobody in the establishment press ever exposed the illegal and sometimes brutal employment practices of the Sherrods when they were engaged in farming during the 1970s, backed up by an "I was there" commentary at Counterpunch.com, where Ron Wilkins noted that conditions were so bad that "the United Farm Workers (were) called in to defend these laborers against such exploitation by management."
Next, O'Keefe/ACORN:
Breitbart's websites also featured a 2009 hidden-camera video that brought embarrassment to the community group Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. The videos show ACORN staffers offering advice on taxes and other issues to actors posing as a prostitute and pimp.
Those videos triggered a firestorm of criticism, with some ACORN employees appearing willing to support illegal schemes involving tax advice, misuse of public funds and illegal trafficking in children.
An internal review later concluded the videos "feed the impression that ACORN believes it is above the law." The internal investigation and a Government Accountability Office report cleared ACORN of criminal activities.
Even so, public pressure led Congress to block previously approved funds from going to ACORN and to stop future payments. Roughly 10 percent of ACORN's funds came from federal grants and the group eventually disbanded.
Points:
- The employees didn't "appear" willing; they were willing, underhandedly creative, and almost eager.
- The "internal investigation was not the promised "audit," which should have been conducted by a reputable CPA firm instead of lifelong Democrat and bogus Amirault child-abuse case prosecutor Scott Harshbarger, who generated the predictable whitewash.
- The reason ACORN "disbanded" (but in many cases remains under different names in many cities) is because corporate and charitable donations dried up once O'Keefe exposed the cretinous behavior at several ACORN offices.
- As far as I know, no one besides yours truly made what was an obvious point, namely that ACORN's housing and tax assistance work, based on information it disclosed itself, were from all appearances barely blips compared to what other charitable groups were doing, that they didn't help that many people, and that they appeared to function as cover for its main mission of mass-registering voters and submitting questionable voter-registration cards to potentially influence future elections.
Finally, Weiner:
Breitbart also sparked a controversy that ultimately led to the resignation of Weiner, whose problems began on May 28 when Bretibart's biggovernment.com posted a lewd photograph of an underwear-clad crotch and said it had been sent from Weiner's Twitter account to a Seattle woman.
... The congressman denied sending the photo and said he had retained an attorney and hired a private security company to figure out how someone could pull off such a prank.
But Weiner dropped that story line on June 6, offering a lengthy public confession at a Manhattan news conference, acknowledging to online activity involving at least six women.
The biggest miss here is the omission of Breitbart's gutsy, spur-of-the-moment decision to speak at that June 6 conference. As the Hollywood Reporter noted, despite insisting that Breitbart "hijacked" the press conference, "50 reporters surrounded him asking questions. Reporters, in fact, asked him to take the stage so that they would hear him better." Had Weiner shown up on time, the "hijacking" which wasn't would never have happened.
In their 1:56 p.m. report Elliott and Manning began the denigration, starting with the headline:
Loved and hated, Breitbart dies in LA at 43
Caustic commentator Andrew Breitbart was loved and hated.
The conservative media publisher and activist who died Thursday was embraced by anti-tax, conservative tea partiers and reviled by liberals for his Internet investigations that brought down politicians and chastised mainstream journalism.
Breitbart, 43, was behind investigations that led to the resignations of former Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York and former U.S. Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod.
His loudmouth style was lionized by his fans for exposing government corruption and media bias. He was a colorful and often abrasive user of Twitter, including a final message that called a follower a "putz."
Breitbart was skilled at finding issues that pushed conservative buttons while pulling Internet traffic to his websites anchored to news aggregator Brietbart.com.
... Breitbart's online profile called him a "mild-mannered family guy," However, Rick Santorum said he was a "powerful force." (as if you can't be one without the other? -- Ed.)
One suspects that they and the folks who take over on the next shift won't stop there in future revisions.
The only people who "hated" Andrew Breitbart were those who can't handle the truth about this country's media-assisted statist direction, especially when it's rubbed in their faces. That group would appear to include many of those at the so-called Essential Global News Network who are supposedly dedicated to the truth wherever it leads, but have instead become a shameless establishment lapdog organization appropriately nicknamed the Administration's Press, populated by many who can barely restrain themselves from crossing over into where hardened leftists are going today in virtually celebrating Breitbart's untimely passing.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
⇒ Gotta love Shirley Sherrod
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:32pm.
Just a couple of days as an individual human being, fighting against the Obama Administration that fired her, and she's ready to crawl back under the protective condescension of the Democrat Plantation.
I'd wager that to this day, she hates Breitbart who posted her entire speech, and loves Obama who made a fool of himself in firing her.
Oh, well. Lots of people sell themselves for the boss.
Sherrod's reaction to news of Breitbart's death...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:39pm.
Shirley Sherrod reflects on her link to Andrew Breitbart
By Krissah Thompson
This is what Shirley Sherrod, the Georgia woman who was inadvertently made infamous -- then famous -- by Andrew Breitbart, had to say on the conservative media figure’s unexpected death Thursday:
“The news of Mr. Breitbart’s death came as a surprise to me when I was informed of it this morning. My prayers go out to Mr. Breitbart’s family as they cope during this very difficult time.”
She had no further comment, and, having spent time with Sherrod, I am not surprised that she would refrain from speaking ill of Breitbart in death — no matter how she felt about the impact he had on her life....
Jer
⇒ Nice words
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:54pm.
So Krissah Thompson took the liberty of twisting the truth for her.
It would have been easy to predict what her statement would be. So I didn't.
And remarkably free of rancor given she was painted as a racist
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 6:14pm.
Are we to therefore conclude your wager presuming her hatred for Breitbart was a difficult one to make, so you did?
Jer
⇒ Very cute, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 6:23pm.
What you are leaving out is that she painted herself as having caught herself thinking racist.
You mislead by omission with your post. Fortunately, the truth is out there.
Here you are, trying to correct me for what I'd wager she thinks, and you're doing your best to connect Breitbart with racism. Even Krissah Whatsername bothered to point out it was the response by the NAACP that was the real issue.
Good try, Jer. but this time you're far too transparent.
The truth is right here, Cool...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 6:46pm.
Spend some time. Read Andrew's full introduction which was devoted to both Sherrod's "racist tale" and the NAACP's reaction. Follow the comments blasting her racism, calls for a lawyer to represent the white farmer she had ostensibly victimized, but interspersed with a few cautionary notes along the lines of hmm...there seems to be more to this story than Andrew is presenting. And finally the outrage when it is discovered there was indeed quite a bit more to the story.
Sorry, Cool. That wasn't even a good try.
Jer
Beware the lefties and libs, whether ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 7:06pm.
the troll version or the house variety; who seek to convince us that NBs mantra is not only pointless, but likely false, as well.
There IS no liberal bias in the media; and white people are chasing a will-of-the-wisp that does not exist - that being black against white racism.
Barack and Michelle are living proof of that fact; and Shirley Sherrod thinks exactly as they do.
Right.
Cut me a f**king break.
MD
Beware of a house conservative whose memory is so short
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 9:54pm.
that by dinner time he can't remember what he ate for lunch.
My head is spinning too, amy....
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 08/14/2011 - 4:05am.
I have on several occasions denounced race hustlers like Sharpton and Jackson...and it flies over everyone's head
I continually condemn the historical race-card dealing by Democrats....and it is completely ignored
I repeatedly lament the identity and group politics of the modern Democratic party...and it's like I typed it in invisible font
[Actually MrShy doesn't totally ignore them. But he has charged it's a ploy on my part to curry favor with conservatives, that I don't really mean it when I say it but I'm trying to deceitfully portray myself as the "reasonable" lib which makes me a charlatan because I'm really a hard-core leftist at heart]
But, let me call a comment inappropriate and suggest the probability that the author had black children in mind when he used the term "animals", and I am met with thundering condemnations for being a racist, playing the race card, called an authoritarian attempting to stifle free speech who would probably use violence to do so, etc.
I wasn't "jumping ugly" on anyone who hadn't seen the comments and therefore hadn't weighed in with an opinion. There is no question I was hoping that once read, there would be more reactions like UpNorth's and cajun's [and Restless can be added to that list as well].
Jer
Oh, and btw, amy ...I have also acknowledged and deplored the same pathologies in the black communities which cajun delineated and addressed statistically. Again, I may as well have posted it on the "Forum That Nobody Reads".
[my emphasis in bold]
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/08/10/rick-santelli-stri...
But unless there is irrefutable evidence of racism--by personal admission or self-description or patently clear and unambiguous behavior, for example--I will never presumptively label someone a racist.
And finally, Matthew...I've also acknowledged the general liberal tilt of the MSM many times.
Sheesh...
Jer
⇒ Thank you, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:04pm.
So you see "African Americans for Obama" as a desecration to Martin Luther King's memory, and a pandering to the most disgusting levels of human nature?
Cool...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:40pm.
I think your rhetoric is a tad more harsh than I would use, but, in a larger sense, I view most if not all affirmative action mandates and identity politics to be fundamentally antithetical to King's vision of a colorblind society. I understand the underlying reasons which generated and sustained those policies, but I have long recognized their capacity for racial division and hence the ultimately counter productive consequences to the nation.
Jer
⇒ Harsh rhetoric
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 11:17pm.
It's at least as racist as Harry Reid expecting Marco Rubio to stick to representing his own kind.
But in lawyerese, I'll take your observation of "antithetical to King's vision" as an admission that yes, it is racist.
Here's a thought:
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 11:45pm.
How about taking it exactly as I worded it and no further.
Jer
⇒ I did, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 11:54pm.
"antithetical to King's vision" can only be translated as racism. OK, our judges will accept "racial bigotry" also.
Take your pick. You're the one who said it.
No thanks....
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 12:07am.
Other than clarifying any words or phrases which may be confusing, my work is done. It's your job to draw inferences, preferably reasonable ones.
Jer
⇒ My work is done also
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 12:13am.
And it's too late for you to withdraw your admission.
Before you go...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 12:37am.
Even if I had admitted to either or both of the two possible options you presented, it wouldn't be too late to withdraw the admission. But I didn't, so a withdrawal is unnecessary, unwarranted, and unwise.
Later, Cool...
Jer
Finally, Jer? Are you ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:21pm.
kidding me?
Same old shit, different day. Your tune never changes.
You are a lefty Democrat. Period.
The only thing your posts would indicate that are more crystal clear than that fact, is your continual, never ceasing effort to paint yourself as being a " fair, compassionate, and ever so even-handed" dispenser of both criticism and kudos to all points of the political compass.
Just because you believe it; believe that you actually practice it; and tout it ad nauseam; does not make it so.
MD
Matthew....I only ask if you intend to continually
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:50pm.
criticize me and the content of my comments that you please make at least a reasonable effort to characterize fairly what I have in fact posted. Beyond that, I realize I can't make you believe what you choose not to believe.
Jer
You are a lefty, Jer, and what's worse, a ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:14am.
"sensitive" one.
Criticism makes you edgy, uptight, and defensive; all at the same time.
Odd that those on these threads who consider you an ok person never rain pejoratives on my head for not being 'fair' when "characterizing" what you have to say.
Why do you suppose that is?
Could it be that what you post is there for all to see - and that only you take issue with what you contend is an apparent lack of commitment on my part to render accurately what you post?
I may like to play at being a word smith, but I am not a magician and I do not have the ability to physically alter your posts.
To ask that I make a 'reasonable effort to be fair' in characterizing the contents of same bespeaks a malady that causes you to either see things no one else does, or to interpret what you do see differently.
MD
⇒ I follow
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 7:26pm.
Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance.
She told a personal tale where she was tempted by racism. She decided she wasn't that way.
It's all there.
So why should she have a problem with Breitbart in the first place unless she's somehow ashamed of her words?
The NAACP still clings to its racism. Alan Colmes went so far as to say "White people are already advanced" More Darwinism from the Left.
The President now calls on Americans to vote according to their race. Doubtless he'll lead the parade past MLK's tomb as they laugh at the folly of "content of their character"
You can claim Breitbart painted Sherrod as a racist, but you're awfully quiet about absolute evidence of it in your own ranks. And I still say Breitbart did no such thing.
Dude?
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:20am.
Uncle Jer: ...given she was painted as a racist.
Dude, she CONFESSED to a racist action. Denying help to a farmer because he was white.
Dude? You perform a racist action, people are gonna paint you as a racist. Little suggestion ferm teh Veet. Don't do racist things and you won't be painted as a racist.
No surprise
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:37pm.
The MSM collectively has its so-called narrative on Breitbart, and that's what we see.
Within days, clowns like Chris Matthews will say something like, "Well, if all that bad stuff about Andrew Breitbart wasn't true, then why was it reported by the New Yort Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Newsweek, The Atlantic, all three major networks, the Huffington Post, Mother Jones, The Nation, The New Republic, and CNN, just to name a few?"
Arianna Huffington's reaction to Breitbart's death...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:48pm.
"I was asked many times this morning for my thoughts on what Andrew meant to the political world, but all I can think of at the moment is what Andrew meant to me as a friend, starting from when we worked together -- his passion, his exuberance, his fearlessness. And above all, what I'm thinking of at the moment is his amazing wife Susie and their four beautiful young children. My love and thoughts are with them right now."
Jer
Jer, no one is saying the liberal press has no class,
Submitted by vrwc13 on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:52pm.
...it's just many of them aren't characterized by it.
That's the only reason NB exists.
v
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne
vrwc...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 6:30pm.
So, you're saying the liberal media has some class, just not very much? And NB exists only to illustrate how little it exhibits?
Jer
If you consider that lacking class would encompass ...
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 6:38pm.
... lying, omitting, distorting, left-cheerleading, military-hating, name-calling, conservative-bashing and countless other classless characteristics, the answer is "yes."
And there's far more than a "little" of all of the above. I can't get to 10% of what I'd like to get to.
Wait. Wait. Wait.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:34am.
If Mr. Blumer were to get to 100% which is 10 times more than what he currently gets to (10%), why then we would have on our hands an exponential or logarithmic Mr. Blumer and I don't think the internet could handle that Mr. Blumer because like internet fuses would blow or suntin'. The intensity and awesomeness of the exponential Mr. Blumer would be too much for the internet to handle. And frankly, prolly some of our Blumerfan hearts.
Thanks ...
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 2:58am.
(I think.)
⇒ Well, at least
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 6:38pm.
At least candidate Obama chunked Jeremiah under the proverbial (by now) bus for very real racist statements.
Arianna did the same to Breitbart for unfounded rumors even she admitted were probably not true.
Jer, really!
Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 7:51pm.
No one gives a rat's ass what Arianna has to say.
Just leave us alone already. You are pulling at a scab that hasn't even formed yet....and you've been at it all bloody day, too.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde...you are free to skip right over whatever
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:07pm.
I post and resume your abuse of "trollboy" goldwater for daring to express the opinion that a Republican moderate would be preferable to a far left Dem. That might put you in a better mood.
Jer
Thank you ever so much for your unwanted advice
Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:23pm.
Why don't you make a nice defense of Stalin now?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Stalin had nicely coiffed hair...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:58pm.
Not a single follicle out of position--ever.
And Arianna agrees.
How's that?
Jer
Dude?
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:45am.
Zit poppin' out the example of an abusive troll by pointing out one example of his posts is hardly indicative of his moderateness. In fact, that troll has spent an entire year insulting, (Yea, I said insulting) every single Republican he dislikes. Names like moron, ignorant and more. Not just Republicans but insulting, (NOTE - I did not say disagree with, I said INSULT) the Tea Party and right wing.
So, what has happened is this. The straw broke. Not just one little post that Blonde or me or others happened to take a dislike to. And to make it seem as if it was just a post with a moderate outlook that was taken as an offense is highly disengenuous of you.
My apologies, Vet Dude....
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 4:16am.
I did not know goldwater is a troll. But having now reviewed a number of his past comments, I note that he is indeed a supporter of Mitt Romney.
I have been only sporadically visiting NB, following threads, etc. lately, but that is no excuse. I will try to be more attentive in the future.
Jer
BTW...a list of all currently active trolls would be really helpful. Thanks. UJ
Blonde has the list right now.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 6:28am.
When she is done with it, I will let you borrow it.
Maybe you should feel free, Jer, to ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 10:25pm.
skip right over all those posts wherein you believe you are being stalked.
That might put you in a better mood.
MD
Matthew, I think I just spied bal lurking about
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 11:05pm.
the Rolling Stone thread.
Sic 'im, tiger!
Jer
Thanks for the tip, Jer, but I just can't seem to ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:17am.
ruffle ol' bal's feathers the way I can yours. :o)
MD
These people are truly evil in nature.
Submitted by JLin on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:40pm.
There is no one more wretched than the stubborn and willfully ignorant. Despite all their open hatred for Andrew they could never produce evidence to indict him of the crimes they attributed to him.
What does that tell you?
His loudmouth style was lionized .....
Submitted by JLin on Thu, 03/01/2012 - 5:57pm.
Loudmouth? Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Cenk Uygur, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher. Need I say more? These heroes of the Left don't have enough collective character, talent or professional integrity to reach the soles of Andrew Breitbart's shoes, and yet these are the tools the Establishment fetes and publicly adores.