Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.breitbart.tv/in-memoriam-andrew-breitbart-1969-2012/" target="_blank">http://www.breitbart.tv/in-mem...69-2012/</a>
Originally Posted By skinnerbox No love lost here. The man was a toxic d-bag whose only goal in life was to lie, cheat, and steal his way to place of prominence in the Far Right Wing of the GOP Hall of Fame. Good riddance.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Well, reaction to this death should be interesting, as evidenced if nothing else by skinnerbox's post here. Breitbart had no qualms about pissing on someone's grave, either: "Andrew Breitbart, Washington Times columnist and operator of Breitbart.com, called Kennedy a "villain," "duplicitous bastard," and a "prick" on Twitter hours after he died. Breitbart continued his opposition to Kennedy by posting: "I'm more than willing to go off decorum to ensure THIS MAN is not beatified,” Breitbart wrote. “Sorry, he destroyed lives. And he knew it." The above was from: <a href="http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/278320" target="_blank">http://www.digitaljournal.com/...e/278320</a> Breitbart was responsible for bringing to light Anthony Weiner's proclivity for texting nude pictures of himself, but he also enable James O'Keefe and his ACORN videos, and managed to unapologetically mangle Shirley Sherrod's words and get her fired. He was also keynote speaker at the first Tea Party convention. Karma can be a b!tch, I suppose. He leaves a wife and four children, so no one would realistically want to increase their pain, but polarizing only begins to describe the now late Breitbart.
Originally Posted By ecdc Crazy. I can feel bad for someone's family but recognize that Breitbart was absolutely poisonous. Our country and our politics are far worse off because of him, not better.
Originally Posted By ecdc Cue Republican candidates singing his praises and the media embracing a narrative of Breitbart as a "fierce warrior for his cause" in three, two....
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I can feel sympathy for his kids, but not so much for his wife. She had a choice to live with this guy, and she chose to stay. Obviously, his actions didn't disgust her enough to leave him and sue for divorce. I've read several comments online about how he was "too young" to pass away or how folks didn't agree with his politics, but were willing to offer condolences for his passing. Sorry, but I refuse to play this disingenuous game. The man was toxic and poisonous. He lied through his teeth over and over and over. He worked very diligently to eliminate ACORN with doctored video and get Shirley Sherrod fired with doctored video. And this d-bag had the gall to lie through his teeth on Bill Maher's show that the doctoring of Sherrod's speech wasn't done by him, but by Glenn Beck!! Even when he was caught red-handed, he didn't have the decency to admit to his wrongdoings. For me, the drunken profanity-laden rant towards Occupy protestors was the last straw. His deep-seated hatred of progressives came bubbling up to the surface, and he lost all rational control to keep his mouth shut. That one drunken out of control rant told me everything I needed to know about how immoral and damaged this individual truly was. The world is a bit better, now that Breitbart is gone. His entire life was lived in a bubble of falsehoods and extremely biased beliefs in order to be adored and admired by the right wingnuts he pandered to and elevated to sainthood. There was nothing good about any of his actions. Nothing. The man was worse than Cruella de Vil. And that takes a great effort to achieve.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I had no idea his father in law was Orson Bean. That was a "wait... what?" moment for me. Game show fans of the 70s would know Orson.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Seriously? I remember Orson from What's My Line. Orson Bean, Kitty Carlisle, Bill Cullen... wow. What a bizarre disconnect.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Except that only one out of the three was worthy of my sympathy, so I cannot link the three in any form.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Except that only one out of the three was worthy of my sympathy, so I cannot link the three in any form.<< Sigh. Tough crowd.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Despite what he stood for or wrote my condolences go out to his family. He didn't kill anyone. He didn't molest any children. He simply had an opinion that was different from 25% of the population, 25% agreed with it. And 50% agreed with with it 25% and disagreed 25%. That is all. 43 is too young for anyone to lose a father and a husband.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>25% agreed with it. And 50% agreed with with it 25% and disagreed 25%<< I'm struggling with the math, but I get what you mean I think.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<He didn't kill anyone. He didn't molest any children.>> And this is the only measure of immorality we should be concerned about? Please. The man LIED about individuals and organizations that were actually helping the working poor and minorities who didn't have the socio-economic privilege that Breitbart was born into. And those LIES cost thousands of individuals, including Shirley Sherrod, their livelihoods. That is immoral, pure and simple. <<He simply had an opinion that was different from 25% of the population, 25% agreed with it.>> "Had an opinion?" Hilter "had an opinion" that Jews, gypsies, and gay folk were inferior. But to only focus on Hitler's 'opinions' is being disingenuous to history, our ancestors, and future generations. You are being way too simplistic about Breitbart's political agenda and what he was getting away with, thanks to conservative media outlets and pundits who supported him. As it is with all of us, Breitbart was entitled to his OPINIONS. What he wasn't entitled to were his own FACTS. Breitbart continually and consistently replaced the FACTS with his warped OPINIONS and tried to pass them off as being truthful, and unfortunately, was getting away with it far too often. That is an important distinction that you're glossing over, for whatever reason. <<43 is too young for anyone to lose a father and a husband.>> Yes, it is. But the man was still a d-bag.
