Liberals despise Andrew Breitbart with a passion. Conservatives cheer him on for the most part and from a recent profile piece in The New York Times, Breitbart seems to be overly accessible, willing to make contact with him easy by volunteering his email and his phone number whenever asked and even when not asked.Breitbart runs websites like Big Government, Big Journalism and Big Hollywood and was responsible for the outing of Anthony Weiner by being the first to publish and expose Weiner's online antics, which resulted in Weiner eventually resigning after first claiming his Yfrog, Facebook and Twitter accounts were hacked.
Breitbart's sites were also responsible for publishing videos about ACORN which subsequently resulted in Congress ending grants to the organization and federal agencies severing ties.
Liberals love to hate Andrew Breitbart, in my opinion, because he plays the game by the rules liberals and the liberal media created and he is better at it.
Some examples listed below will show how liberals do exactly what they claim to hate about Breitbart.
Conservative example via Breitbart:
Breitbart published an edited video he received of Shirley Sherrod (USDA employee when Breitbart published the video) speaking at the March 2010 NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia where her words from the edited video implied heavily that she discriminated against a white farmer.
The correction on Breitbart's initial post says "Correction: While Ms. Sherrod made the remarks captured in the first video featured in this post while she held a federally appointed position, the story she tells refers to actions she took before she held that federal position."
Subsequent events showed that the posted video was an excerpt of broader comments that conveyed alternate meaning. Breitbart said he did not edit the video and did not have a copy of the entire speech at the time.
The NAACP, who actually had the entire speech the whole time condemned Sherrod before watching it, then apologized, and Sherrod was forced to resign and is now attempting to sue Breitbart.
Liberal pundits toss Sherrod's name consistently claiming Breitbart's treatment of Sherrod was unethical, accusing him of editing the video himself all without one bit of proof or evidence to support their allegations.
Then they do the same thing they have accused him of.
Liberal examples:
Sarah Palin, October 2010, referenced the 1773 Tea Party and members of the far left liberal progressive portion of the Democratic party decided to deride her for her lack of knowledge, it was tweeted, retweeted, reported on and generally the left were having a field day stating that Palin didn't know the date of the Tea Party.
Cuffy Meigs at Perfunction provides a nice list of examples of liberal pundits and media personalities that jumped on that bandwagon before simple searches showed... oooops, Palin was right.
A more recent example from this past week of liberals providing a partial story, jumping into the fray, providing condemning headlines before the whole story emerges.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court flap where an initial story set liberals on a crash course with a brick wall, head first before the rest of the facts emerged.
From yesterday's post:
Latest Wisconsin news involves Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley and Supreme Court Justice David Prosser where initial headlines quoting an anonymous source claimed that Justice Prosser "choked" Justice Bradley. No arrests were made and no charges filed against Prosser but liberals sites jumped off the cliff fast and furiousy before subsequent reports added a few facts to the news accounts.
Such as, there were other witnesses and according to another unnamed witness, Bradley charged after Prosser with fist raised and Prosser "put his hands in a defensive posture," adding "He blocked her."
That led to headlines from Think Progress such as "Four Ways Justice David Prosser Can Be Removed From Office", which discusses how the alleged choking was a class H felony, headlines from FireDogLake stating "Reports: Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Prosser Choked Colleague Before Anti-Union Decision," and more.
Those are just the tip of the iceberg where liberals report before they have the full facts, before they know the whole story, even as they condemn Breitbart of doing the same thing.
At least with the Sherrod affair, Breitbart actually had a video where the words came out her mouth, giving a legitimate reason for jumping fast and adding corrections after.
Do as I say, not as I do seems to be a liberal's prevailing mindset.
Back to Andrew Breitbart, who is accused by liberal pundits relentlessly of making up stories, hacking, photoshopping all allegations made against him in regards to the Weiner pictures and story before Weiner admitted he did do it all.
Breitbart wrote a book called RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION where he talks about how one needs to deal with the liberal news world head on and the reason Breitbart is so hated within the liberal community is because he does just that, he meets them toe to toe, he plays the game by the rules they set up and he wins, time and time again.
Breitbart exposes their agenda, shines a light on their hypocrisy and beats them at their own game.
We need more Andrew Breitbarts.
.
