Andrew Breitbart Dead

Nope, that's not why.

 

Spaz, he did not take comments out if context. You are clueless. He presented the whole story, including Sherrod's apparent change of heart in regards to her racism. It's so much easier for people like you to just call others racist. You are pathetic.

 

You know that he actually edited her speech to make it appear as if she was saying things she wasn't, right?

 

Likewise with ACORN. It's performance art, not journalism.

Anyone know why this guy is dead, by the way? I'm guessing it's his ticker, based on how he looked like a stressed out maniac. Maybe with an additive, like coke, meth or oxy. Something about Breitbart reminds me of John Belushi. Maybe it was a speedball....

 

And surprisingly some liberals say they liked the guy. I bet he didn't believe half of what he said - more like a schtick.

Fox saluted him like a conquering hero.

 

That's some chilling shit in there.

 

I hope you guys show the same love to Keith Olbermann when he dies.

 

Who is the Shirley Sherrod in Olbermann's career?

If you can't name one, what, then, are you implying?

Seriously, man, you conservatives have turned into uber-pu$$ies. You whine like bitches.

 

So the whole reason you disliked Breitbart was because of Sherrod?

 

That is why Laurens County is kept in South Carolina.

 

That, and all of the other misleading editing jobs.

 

I'm not sure what's worse, the fact he was did this nonsense or the fact it has been passed off as journalism.

 

The worst is that even after he'd been busted for doing it, allegedly real journalists took him seriously.

 

That's the problem with the race to be first. Actual news is buried deeper and deeper every day.

 

No, he did not. I guess this is one of those "if you repeat it enough times, it becomes the truth" things.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/msnbc-does-re-do-matthews-defending-breitb

In case you don't want to watch the videos, the first one is basically Dean & Walsch INSISTING that Breitbart edited the video, and did NOT show any part of her so called redemption. Mathews insists that he did.

The second video proves Mathews right, and places egg all overthe faces of Dena and Walsch. Walsch claims that since the video didn't contain the whole story of her redemption that somehow Breitbart is trying to portray Sherrod as a racist. As Mathews pointed out, if it was a complete hatchet job, Breitbart would have left thet part out.
Also, the beginning part of the second video shows the gall of our president. Bretibart didn't fire her. Fox News didn't can her, and yet he has the nerve to lecture others about his administrations lack of jugement.

 

Cuz I'm busy today and don't have 7 minutes, can you give us a clue as to when the damning part shows up?

I read the text, and the text seems to say the opposite of what you're saying, that's why I want to check it out.

 

From the link:

Apparently in Tweety's mind, Breitbart including that somehow absolved him from the editing of the tape he did. The more Walsh and Dean tried to point out to Matthews that the tape was edited and that what he was saying wasn't true, the more agitated he got.​

​

From the comment that Steamer left on my MyBigsoccer Page responding to a neg rep I gave him.

Actually, I'm not lying. You can either do your own research, or feel free to read my latest post. Breitbart did not edit a clip. I guess to be accurate, he claims to have recieved the 2:36 video as is and there is no proof that he edited it. Either way, the video includes a portion of Sherrod's "redemption."​

​

 

If only the Arts community was conservative, he may well have been on his way to an Academy Award, ala Michael Moore in the "documentary" category.

 

If a candidate is allowed to promise not to look at porn again, why can't a candidate pledge not to have pre-marital sex again? I have to believe that will exclude most men, even in South Carolina. I suppose the candidates can take a practical approach and just lie.

 

The big video bomb that Breitbart was supposedly assassinated for was of Obama giving a speech in 1990 at Harvard. It purports to show his radical views.

It's been available from Frontline since before the 2008 election.

 

Awesome.

 

Breitbart's rough cut has the future president promising genocide against Christianity.

 

I saw the 1990 Harvard video last night. Not only is protection of that video not assassination worthy, I don't think it would even merit a swirlie.

An eloquent speech in support of a tenured professor who was threatening to leave the school because of a lack o diversity? Wow. Not much controversy there. I will patiently wait for the attempts to turn this professor into a radical socialist. That Harvard faculty is out of control.

 

Oh, this is WAY worse than pallin' around with a terrorist who wanted to bomb more people after 9/11.