Put it this way you don't discourage me, that just doesn't happen. I mean the fact is that as the original offending article was titled, Andrew Breitbart is the enemy of the American People a real, living social criminal.
But if it weren't for him, Ann Coulter, and their flunky, ColoKat, I probably would have written no more about Breitbart for the week, maybe longer. To be sure he needs to be discussed and what he does needs to be understood and he still needs to be held accountible for his past actions let alone what he's planning now. So thanks for the reaction Doing so let me know I hit a nerve. So obviously I've got to write more about it.
He tries to dignify what he does by calling himself a "citizen-journalist" and even tries to color it as a kind of muckraker for fighting corruption in government, making it cleaner(of course "smaller" as the name of his website is Big Government) and doing the same for journalism(in his companion blog Big Journalism) by calling it on accuracy, objectivity, etc.
In fact this is completely inaccurate: rather than any kind of muckraker he is a muckraker in reverse. The one thing you learn about Breitbart pretty quick in observing him, is he takes himself very, not to say absurdly, seriously. Who can forget after he destroyed Weiner back in June that he even had to high jack Weiner's sorry, abject press conference of resignation and mea culpea?
Breitbart of course, had to spike the ball, destroying this decent man-who did nothing but send a picture on twitter and hit the wrong button(he should have hit Direct Message but hit Mention; again for anyone who tries to construe this as a crime, the recipient of his picture wasn't complaining far less suing)- wasn't enough. for him. He had to take a bow right then, pour more salt in the wounds.
Just how seriously does Andrew Breitbart take himself? Well the title of his recent book is "Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World."
Besides being mawkishly grandiose it's also the opposite of the truth. Far from saving the world his project is to condemn it: as noted, he is a muckraker in reverse. This I mean quite literally. The original muckrakers-Upton Sinclair, et al.- were about bringing public attention various social ills and evils.
Whether it be corruption in government, yellow journalism, substandard education, bad meat, improper safety for food and drugs, etc.
Breitbart sort of claims to do this for government, the media, Hollywood(thought this category is a misnomer and we already see the truth in the lie of his "libertarianism" for he wants to censure movies and television; as I suggested in a previous post this even shows a certain truly sadistic streak in him as not only does he oppose government and media which serve the public but even begrudges their entertainment and enjoyment), and now he is starting a new one Big Education-so he as our nation's public education in his sites now.
But whereas the muckrakers endeavoured to improve society Breitbart's effect is the opposite. He is sort of like Bizzaro Upton Sinclair who rather than tries to cal attention and improve the condition of meat, food, and drugs, he seeks to bring attention that the condition of meat, food and drugs, overall public safety is too good and needs to be drawn back to the time before the muckrakers. After all think of all the money we can save by abolishing-or scaling back-the FDA! That is what downsizing government amounts to.
It is important to understand that in talking about Breitbart this is not a history less, he has harmed the public before he works tirelessly every waking second, every day to do more; as he is the Bizarro Sinclair it is fitting that he adheres to a Bizzaro Hippocratic Oath: 'First do much harm. do as much harm as possible'.
We know about the most famous examples-through entrapment and doctored tapes bringing about the defunding of Acorn. While ultimately charges against Acorn were dismissed nothing was done in terms of resititution, restoring their funding or holding Mr. Breitbart personally, legally, and criminally responsible. For providing misleading evidence with an intent to deceive and destroy; or that whole undercover stunt from the start reeks of bad faith attempt at entrapment.
Who will make all the Americans who were served by Acorn whole? To this end Breitbart's profits ought to be garnished.
We also know about Sharon Sherrod and more recently, Congressman Weiner, and fine and worthy NY Rep who the voters supported right till the end. He was on the short list of Democratic candidates for Mayor and now he has been destroyed. A terrible loss to the people of NY.
But the muckraker in reverse continues. He is currently targeting the SEIU and Media Matters to just name a few but there are many more. And no one in "Big Journalism" has the balls to even think about standing up to him. So who will?
"Conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart is celebrating a victory over the Huffington Post after the site retracted an article alleging he may have doctored a video clip from a White House press briefing to make it look like CBS anchor Norah O’Donnell was upset about the recent debt compromise.
In an article posted yesterday, HuffPo said that Breitbart was being accused of doctoring video of an exchange between O'Donnell and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. Some conservatives had alleged that the exchange showed liberal bias on O'Donnell's part. They'd asserted that O'Donnell, questioning Carney on the deal to raise the debt ceiling, had said, "You gave them everything they wanted."
As usual he targetd a media outlet, in this case HuffPo, and the result was a total fold. Because the very idea an "upstanding citizen-journalist" could doctor video is-well very much in line with his modus operandi. Using the word "journalist" in the same breath of Breitbart is too rich an irony. As for "citizen" fine if we emphasize that he is the implacable enemy of the American citizens.
The answer to the posed question who will stand against him will have to be you and me those who form the liberal media. A good place to start is
Anyone know any other good ones or any info about prosecuting Breitbart please let us know! I know there are some Acorn workers who have brought suits against his partner in screwing the public, James O'Keefe.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-maass/acorn-worker-sues-james-o_b_641076.html
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004020029
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-maass/acorn-worker-sues-james-o_b_641076.html
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004020029
No comments:
Post a Comment