Two Fish, One Barrel: Deconstructing Andrew Sullivan’s ‘The Breitbart Standard,’ Demolishing Conor Friedersdorf’s ‘The Right’s Lesser Media’
by Andrew BreitbartTo which I respond to my unofficial biographer Conor Friedersdorf’s Daily Beast criticism of your’s truly and bigger fish Andrew Sullivan’s two-thumbs-up to it:
Andrew Sullivan (left) and Conor Friedersdorf
In the piece you link to and affirm in the Daily Beast, “The Right’s Lesser Press,” Conor Friedersdorf refuses to interview me as he continues to be my unofficial biographer. (I’m VERY reachable, Conor.) He writes opinion pieces on me purporting to be journalism. He doesn’t quote or cite me, he simply assumes and pushes the point of view he thinks I have and makes an argument based on these alleged positions. It’s sloppy and you, of all people, should know better.
Breitbart.com is MOSTLY a news aggregator. It carries the Associated Press, Reuters, even, Agence France Presse, from those dreaded croissant eaters!!!
It even carries the New York Times on its front page — a benefit that even Big Government and Big Hollywood don’t receive.
Big Hollywood is what it is: a counter-voice to the virtually monolithic Hollywood left. How dare I grant a platform, and a means for the defense of those in Hollywood who would dare go against the strident and intolerant Hollywood left.
Big Government, too, is providing an outlet for voices and ideas that are not proportionally represented in the traditional and mostly biased mainstream media.
When lefties have asked to challenge something written at either site I have granted them the ability to do so.
Read my entire response here.
Read Conor Friedersdorf’s piece here.
Read Andrew Sullivan’s affirmation of Friedersdorf’s piece here.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
136 Comments
Andrew – you do us all a service; Conor is, to be blunt, a jerk!
He reminds me of Olberman. Olberman devotes half his time to giving news about the news o'Reilly shares.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Grey Champion, DRIP USA and AZ grassroots. AZ grassroots said: Two Fish, One Barrel: Deconstructing Andrew Sullivan’s ‘The Breitbart Standard.. http://bit.ly/3hU4Jq #dripusa #ocra #tcot [...]
Andrew – you do us all a service; Conor is, to be blunt, a jerk! Andrew Sullivan, I have always thought, is a pseudo intellectual who thinks incredibly highly of his own intellect. I do not share his wiew.
Good stuff Andrew. I have to say that when these people are confronted with their personal attacks they don't quite know what to think. You are turning the tables on them and the backtracking and stumbling backwards is interesting to see. Look at it this way, if all they have is this: And the angry muppet James Carville calling Beck crazy you and Glenn and the rest of the good guys are winning. The people see it to. GOOD JOB!
To which I respond to my unofficial biographer Conor Friedersdorf’s Daily Beast criticism of your’s truly and bigger fish Andrew Sullivan’s two-thumbs-up to it:
A hilariously inept opening sentence.
Great Editorial Andrew. Keep the pressure on. You know you are doing well when they continue to snipe at you.
It's not the mainstream media–it's the downstream media. They're just watching it all float by, while they hang on to the branch, praying not to be swept over the falls. The choir to whom they're preaching doesn't read or follow the news, and their lost subscribers are angry at them for supporting the administration that seems to be bent on the destruction of our economy. The NYT won't get another dollar from us, and they did for a couple of years.
Andrew, you should have had them name it The Puffington Host.
Hilariously inept is the perfecto descripto for everything I've seen you publish, Substance Abuse. Whadda dull troll.
I know! He beats up conservatives for the first 45 minutes then goes after FNC for the last 15. The same show over-and-over again, 5 days a week, year-after-year.
Caricaturing conservative views and then debating that basterdized version is typical tact for the left. When debating someone from the left the first major obstacle is getting their idiotic perception of my views correct. That is what happens when people get their understanding of us from those that don't understand or even like us, you know like teachers and news orgs.
You can judge someones character and power by that of their opponents. The quickest way to tick someone off is to catch them doing something they're not supposed to be doing. The louder they shout foul, the closer you've hit to the heart of the subject in my experience.
Keep up the good work.
You, Mr. Breitbart, are so much cuter than those two. By that virtue alone, YOU WIN.
Give em both barrels AB
There is no logic in Sullivan's musings. Sullivan rose to prominence by being an early proponent for George W. Bush and the Iraq War. When the Iraq War started getting tough he bailed and became a John Kerry supporter. When John Kerry lost he started touting John Mccain and complained that there weren't enough troops in Iraq. When George Bush initiated the surge (as per John Mccain's advice) Andrew Sullivan suddenly opposed the idea and said that George Bush was "about to do a terrible thing". If that wasn't enough flip-flopping, he then decided that he loved Ron Paul and endorsed him in the 2008 primaries. When he tired of Ron Paul he switched to Barack Obama and became an outspoken critic of Mccain and Palin. In fact he was possibly the most outspoken advocate
for the "Palin's baby is not her baby" conspiracy theory.
Sullivan is probably a good guy but he has no credibility whatsoever.
[...] Andrew Breitbart responds to Conor Friedersdorf: As you well know, I was the person who came up with the idea behind the Huffington Post, and even helped Arianna and Ken Lerer launch the sucker. At the time I did not abdicate my point of view as a right leaning voice. I stated what I believe today: Let’s put it all out there, and may the best ideas win. Is it insignificant that I was behind the left’s most prominent blog/media site? Is it insignificant that I have written for the liberal-leaning Daily Beast which carried Conor Friedersdorf’s criticism of me? I believe that you and Conor would like to paint me into a corner, the one you are currently trying to paint Glenn Beck into. You are trying to marginalize me because of the net effect, pun intended, of the White House/NEA “propaganda” series on Big Hollywood, and the explosive ACORN expose´ on Big Government. Protecting President Obama and the left at all costs is your prerogative. But anyone who knows me, has conversed with me, understood my complexities and paradoxes, does not comprehend the “obvious point” that Conor is trying to make, and you are attempting to affirm. The New York Times is a daily read. It always has been. I loved its recent profile of my college pal, hotelier Jeff Klein. No daily publication can capture the essence of the cultural elite — good, bad and ugly — like the New York Times. The paper has its merits, no doubt. But when it comes to the political scene, its ascent into monolithic partisan hackery in its news pages — never mind the op-ed experience — is worthy of exploration granted its self-identified motto “all the news that’s fit to print” is disproved day after day when the news that hurts the political left is either ignored or distorted to sate its diminishing readership’s need for political conformity. At no point have I attempted to hide my political leanings as I have endeavored to create Big Hollywood and Big Government. There is a need for a checks and balance against the New York Times and the rest of the supposedly neutral traditional press. Just as there was a need in 2005 for Arianna to put her platinum Rolodex online so that the world could see how the power brokers, power agents and power left felt on matters that face us all. Information is gold. I don’t resent criticism. I embrace it. But I do resent self-superior journalists attempting to malign me and my vision without coming to me to get my thoughts. I’m glib and quotable and even prone to slip up. Try me! [...]
I, too, am sick of people who barely know me acting like they are better informed than I am about what my personal beliefs are, and what my supposed bias and prejudice will lead me to do, simply because I happened to mention that I didn't vote for Obama, (for example.)
Great response Andrew! Also, despite being hideously off the mark from the beginning (and probably still) kudos to Andrew Sullivan for at least airing Breitbart's response.
Andrew has better hair, too, when he doesn't cut it too short. I guess it looks more professional for the TV interviews, but the silver curls are fantastic.
Andrew, please keep up the good work! If it weren't for you and a handful of others, we would no longer have anything resembling a free press in this country. The attacks are coming because you are succeeding in reaching a large number of people with the Left's least favorite thing – the truth.
They're running scared. Expect a lot more attacks. Sullivan is such a sad shadow of what he once was. He is just a shrill blowhard now. As for Friedersdorf, the Daily Beast is as redundant as the Huffington Post. Soapboxes in an echo chamber for dullards.
One question Conner, if the old Gray Lady or The Paper of Record is such a bounty to all mankind, why is it about to go the way of the Titanic?
You have dared cross the line AB. As Chelcie Ross tells Gene Hackman in Hoosiers:
Look, mister, there's… two kinds of dumb, uh… guy that gets naked and runs out in the snow and barks at the moon, and, uh, guy who does the same thing in my living room. First one don't matter, the second one you're kinda forced to deal with.
You're barking in their living room and they don't like it. Please keep it up and maybe pee on their couch while you're at it.
It all boils down to this: the lefties are losing their media power! –now, let's make gravy!
You are obviously relavent or they would have nothing to say about you.
I'll stray briefly off topic and wonder what was in Paul Krugman's water before he launched a sand box temper tantrum. Bratty 13 year-old's? It would be a far reach to conclude he chose 13 instead of 12 or 14 since 13 is the Magic Polanski Number. Krugman is the most unreadable economist but he sure can draw a crowd when the NYT needs a little help with advertising revenue.
Now bring Keynesian Krugman into the fold with the Friedersdorf 'piece' and we have the making of an orchestra. Or is it an opera? The Rahm Emanuel 'mantra' that 'when you get hit hit back twice as hard' might make for a fine rally cry for MoveOn and DailyKos but their body blows have the power and teeth of a UN resolution. (Or shall we say a bratty 13 year-old)
Opera Emanual – oh wait it's a ballet – proves you are exposing another chapter in their playbook. And they are dancing around the issues because their ideology is undermining their attacks. Their hypocrisy is the genie out of the proverbial bottle. And the retort seems to be unwavering and unsympathetic.
If we were all truly a bunch of "bratty 13 year-olds" they wouldn't dignify you with a response. But they might invite you to Jack Nicholson's house. Shame shame shame.
I think that if we were to somehow stop people from posting ad hominem attacks on their opponents that we’d see very little posted to blogs and online discussion groups because people clearly prefer to attack the messenger rather than the message, with a thin veneer of pop psychology terminology to make it all sound scientific when it’s really little more than schoolyard name calling.
Hmmm, maybe they're giving you guys a taste of your own medicine.
Like how you censor even the most innocuous dissent HERE. I've tried to be part of the dialogue–NO cursing, NO outrageous behaviour–and nothing. My comments aren't allowed.
How's it feel?
Andrew, since you believe in 'putting it all out there,' why not post the other ACORN videos that O'Keefe made which, supposedly, show ACORN employees refusing to assist him and Giles? I don't understand why O'Keefe is being coy about this (acknowledging there were other visits but refusing to divulge the outcome or release the footage). It's not like that information would change the facts of what did happen in Maryland and San Bernadino. But in the interests of the transparency you say you champion, you should let everyone see everything.
[...] ANDREW BREITBART responds to his critics. [...]
[...] ANDREW BREITBART responds to his critics. [...]
Well dude I see your comment right here right now. Are you SURE they got deleted? I see dissent here all the time.
Please sign our petition http://mywhitehouse.org/dont-tread-on-me/
Also if you have a petition idea, we will put it online for you. Just let us know and we can add it to our petitions.
http://mywhitehouse.org/contact-us/
Mike, you get ACORN to drop their lawsuits against Hannah and James and me, and I can promise you what you want and more! We have told the truth. ACORN continues to lie — and you and the media refuse to call them on it hoping and praying that we're holding back a lie. Look at our track record. Look at theirs. And rethink your challenge.
According to the dictionary principles of news reporting are ; “ truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability ".
All newspapers and TV News shows should report the news in a fair unbiased way…just report the facts, nothing more. When the ACORN and Van Jones stories broke, I tuned in to the main stream big media, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN. What I found was very disturbing. It was only thru Big Government.com and then Fox news that I could find any information. Thank God for the Web and Big Government.COM. As I started surfing the web I found incredible amounts of information that supported what Fox and Big Government.COM. had reported.
My question is if I could find this information, why couldn’t the major
TV and Newspapers in the country find the information? I thought that was what their job.
Credit where credit is due. This is the first time–ever–a comment of mine went straight on, or in some cases got on at all. Cool.
Hope this continues, I love it when you guys talk about movies and such. Too bad about the namecalling partisanship, (yeah, I know, the "other side" did it first) but nothing's perfect I guess.
I do enjoy the concept of this site, even though I have a hard time thinking Hollywood movies are all "liberal" plots, seeing as most movies I notice are filled with glamorizing guns, and wholesome family flicks and such. And it's hard to begrudge them not making "overly conservative" movies like "An American Carol" and the Ben Stein thing when they do less $$ than even Janeane Garofalo movies. You know, let the market rule and all…
No, not all movies have liberal plots. Welcome to our Board!
No, not all movies have liberal plots. Welcome to the Board!
"Andrew, since you believe in 'putting it all out there,' why not post the other ACORN videos…"
The is the same SOP we've already been through a countless number of times. Upon the first vid's release, we have the flat denial by ACORN'S ridiculous President/ Apologist; then after another vid is released, ACORN grudgingly acknowledges the accuracy of vid, then immediately goes into their lock – down "but that's just a few people operating under their own rules, and we just canned them." To which yet another vid is released, then another, yet another again – all with the same predictable and inane responses from ACORN. Over and over we go, yet still we have demands for ever more proof of the immense fraudulence of ACORN's offices across the country. Dude, you're operating under the illusion that somehow, somewhere there must be a magic fairy that emanates something akin to cinnamon buns and will suddenly disprove all of the documented ACORN sins of the past. Give it up, you sound tremendously desperate to save your hallowed meme – cognitive dissonance must be difficult for you, but when you acknowledge that you have a problem, that's the first step towards recovery.
Sullivan accuses Breitbart of the heinous crime of "ignor[ing] liberal insights entirely". As if there are any. The only liberal "insight" I've noticed is a penchant for getting sight of what's in my wallet. Frankly, the more there are no liberals in sight, the better off the country would be.
Thanks–
Though I noticed "Big Hollywood" has closed the comments section for this particular post, and is diverting comments to here at "Big Government"…
Maybe that's why my post got on this time. I wonder if they have a stricter post thing there than here for some reason…
Their job?
Most news organizations are not about providing news. Their job is to gather eyeballs and sell advertising. They *pretend* to do news. Everyone conveniently forgets this. Including them, apparently.
Every bit of information you read – from anywhere – has some level of ideological tilt. Never forget that.
Off Topic but help needed!
A request for re supply for some of our soldiers in Nuristan the full info can be found at http://www.anysoldier.com
Robert Wilson Comand Sergeant Major
Oct 5th
Hello all,
Some of you may have seen the news reports of the heavy fighting in the Nuristan providence. Many of my Soldiers lost all of their personal gear and we are working through our supply channels to replace as much as possible. Until we do I will send all of your donations directly to that Troop. We are working to get them all of the basics; Towels, wash cloths, razors, running shoes, pillows, sheets, blankets, white socks, and all other basic hygiene items. They also lost all of their entertainment items, DVD movies, players, IPODS, gaming systems and games, and music. We will work to get them reimbursed for their high dollar items so they can replace as much as possible.
You know what they say Andrew? Living well is the best revenge.
These guys sound pretty jealous and that's the best way to leave them.
Well… those two are a couple of liars… not terribly gifted at it either. It wont take that long before they are marginalized by their own lack of ethics and core beliefs. As they say in France : You can kiss a horse in Istanbul, but only a Polanski can get arrested in Austria…. I dunno – loses a little in translation, but you know what I mean.
You are mistaken. I''ve never been a fan of ACORN, and I'm happy to see them go down. I've just seen O'Keefe allude to other visits in a couple interviews and decline to say how many or what happened. I don't understand why he doesn't post anything. It's not like anything he's withholding could redeem the misdeeds he's documented, so again, why not be transparent?
You know, I've figured out why the New York Times hasn't filed for bankruptcy. The reason is that they spin the news. And, there are, perhaps, 5,000 people directly working for the elite system in DC. And, these 'aristocrats' do not want any interference. When you came out with O'Keefe & Giles videos, I thought you had damaged the legacy media beyond repair. Not so. But it was a great counterweight to what gets passed to us as news. And, so far? It's the legacy media that creates what's in motion every single day. (Except when they got hit by a pile of ACORNS.)
I worry that Obama can become the "you want less government, and no one does less goverment that I do," shtick. While Reid & Pelosi are America's version of the aristocratic french court; that was so out of touch with the People, the french, when they manned the barricades also brought out the guillotine.
Why can a few, rule? It's done all the time. And, it's been done throughout time. Just opposing obama won't be enough, either. Since Nixon excelled at 'oppositional research,' and look where his paranoia got him. I still think the independent voters, and dissatisfied voters of all stripes, need to hear a positive message. "HOLD THAT LINE!" works for me. It doesn't discount our problems. It says no one is in charge in congress whose worth listening to. Yes, I just included republicans in this mix. And, I think Bob Dole, Dubya, and McCain, were all charlatans. They know to throw crumbs to the religious right. (Coma-passionate conservative, and no nitwit left behind stuff.) While the meat is distributed by the lobbyists. And, they'll pass anything they can get away with passing.) Let alone for some odd reason 'the powers that be in DC,' thought McCain would be popular. No. Not with the insiders. They knew he was crazy. But they thought the media would help him trounce Obama. And, nothing is further from the truth.
People who want to put their faith back into politicians, AND the media!, will need better messages, ahead. Ones that don't need the old spin masters to spin Letterman, or whatever the current 'tease' is. We're all adults. At least you have to be one to vote. Letterman screws. So what? Where's the right's ability to pose solutions through a better party elephant? Hope something comes along that beats Barnum.
Given Andrews proclivities it isn't a stretch to see that he is an expert in BS too.
The NYT is irrelevant to anyone seeking to be informed. The elitists who stroke their emotions by seeing their own limited perspecitves parroted are its only audience. This biased rag repeatedly follows the lefty line and contorts and creates parallel realities for its indoctrinated toadies It has been rejected in the market place of ideas. Check its stock price and circulation numbers. The same stories and stilted perspectives can be gotten from Michael Moore, Keith Obermann, David Letterman, and the brain trust on the View; just as ignorant, but exponentially more amusing.
As much as I liked your response, I can't but help thinking of pearls and swine.
I don't think Intense Debate has all the kinks ironed out. Comments can hang in limbo for a while.
I believe it's a technical thing. When the same article is on two different boards comments can only be loaded on one board. You CAN click on the headline and it will take you to the board that has the comments loaded for that item.
Conor correctly identifies you as a threat. That's why he can't quit you, Mr. Brietbart.
Keep up the fabulous work exposing these frauds and shining light on their connections to the politically powerful. The nation thanks you.
I think they've got something planned. The silence is LOUD. Maybe a game of chicken?
At this point, Sullivan has about as much credibility as Stephen Glass.
Personally, I think all three of these people are way out of touch with reality and the common man. I wouldn't want to be in the same room with any of them. But what really bugs me about this site is that no one wants to talk about movies. Most of the posts are about how movies are liberal or how they are not conservative, whatever that means. Or the posts sing praises for some commentator ranting and griping about how things are unfair. Or they espouse some conclusion about liberals and conservatives that is just plain meaningless.
Basically, the prevailing view here is: if the premise of a movie is something other than good conquers evil, then the movie is bad. I've tried to engage posters about how that premise exists only in fantasy and cartoons. There is much evil in the world. It cannot be conquered. It can only be resisted within the self. But I digress.
As they say, a mutual admiration society is doomed to mediocrity. In this case, so are opposing mutual admiration societies engaged in a conflict over pure nonsense. Not exactly fertile ground for a movie premise.
I really don't bother with The Daily Beast or A.S. I don't know who Conor Friedersdorf is, but I'm not going to look him up based on the fact that he attacks Andrew. All kinds of fools do that. A.S., for instance. Anybody who can't see the fallacy in claiming that gay marriage is the same as interracial marriages isn't worth wasting time on.
Conor Freisdorf and Andrew Sullivan can't carry Breitbart's jock.
In fact, Breitbart's outlets have done more real journalism in the last four months than either of those two Obama leg-humpers have in the last 4 years.
Andrew: Please keep it up. Your opinions and reproting are needed.
I don't know who Conor is or much about him, but I would be willing to bet Andrew Sullivan's affirmation of whatever Conor writes is based, at least partially, on cuteness (just like his support of Barack Obama).
As a gay guy, I say to Andrew Sullivan, give it up. You are making a fool of yourself and by default all of us gay men. I really think he's on drugs.
That someone could flip from Ron Paul to Obama shows a distinct lack of authentic convictions.
And his ratings show it. Of course Immelt doesn't care if MSNBC makes a penny. He's counting on gargantuan kickbacks from Obama to show a profit.
BTW, if you want a creepy woot watch any Oblermann rant and then watch the Criswell give the "grave robbers from outer space" speech in "Plan Nine from Outer Space"
I don't know who Conor is or much about him, but I would be willing to bet Andrew Sullivan's affirmation of whatever Conor writes is based, at least partially, on cuteness (just like his support of Barack Obama).
As a fellow gay man (not that that has anything to do with it), I say to Andrew Sullivan, give it up. You are making a fool of yourself and by default all of us gay men. I really think he's on drugs. Andrew S. and Conor really don't know what to make of someone like Andrew B., someone who honestly believes differently than they do. They think there must, there just has to be, some sinister motive. They can't believe someone can really be a nice, good person and lean to the right (or to the truth). They believe, because their media people are liars and hacks (Olberman, Maddow (see I am being good and didn't call her Madcow or Maddog), that other media people must be liars and hacks.
Keep up the good work Andrew B. and keep printing the truth!
I don't know who Conor is or much about him, but I would be willing to bet Andrew Sullivan's affirmation of whatever Conor writes is based, at least partially, on cuteness (just like his support of Barack Obama).
As a fellow gay man (not that that has anything to do with it), I say to Andrew Sullivan, give it up. You are making a fool of yourself and by default all of us gay men. I really think he's on drugs. Andrew S. and Conor really don't know what to make of someone like Andrew B., someone who honestly believes differently than they do. They think there must, there just has to be, some sinister motive. They can't believe someone can really be a nice, good person and lean to the right (or to the truth). They believe, because their media people are liars and hacks (Olberman, Maddow (see I am being good and didn't call her Madcow or Maddog)), that someone like Brietbart must be doing schtick as well, just like they are.
Keep up the good work Andrew B. and keep printing the truth! There are more people paying attention to you than them, that's what is driving them crazy.
How can Sullivan be a good guy and yet lack credibility? I would say credibility is the sine qua non of being a good guy webwise.
I'm just so impressed that Andrew Sullivan managed to publish 2 items in one day – the other one even a criticism of Obama! – that had nothing to do with Sarah Palin's birth canal.
If Andrew Sullivan had an original thought, or an honest moment of refection his shiny bald head would implode.
The leftist really are desperate, I am reminded of the scene in the wizard of oz where the man behind the curtain is hand waving and shouting in the hope that everyone will just move on and ignore the lie.
As to the other fellow, who?
Amen!
And the point about McCain is a good one as well. McCain was Sullivan's white knight whenever he (McCain) criticized Bush on Iraq and the terrorism in general, but once it became clear that McCain was the Republican nominee all of a sudden he was "McBush" in Sullivan's clouded eyes.
How dare you question Sullivan and, … uh… what was the other guy's name?
No matter. It's unpatriotic. And racist! Uh…..
/sarcasm
Keep 'em flying!
Charlie
LOL ok I've just had TWO comments disappear! And to top it all off, this article has two sets of comments loaded on both boards. Color me dumb, I don't know what goes on around here LOL.
Hahahaaaaa.
Never has a gay dude been so obsessed with a women's reproductive organs.
And the point about McCain is a good one as well. McCain was Sullivan's white knight whenever he (McCain) criticized Bush on Iraq and terrorism in general, but once it became clear that McCain was the Republican nominee all of a sudden he was "McBush" in Sullivan's clouded eyes.
Hey, Darogr, glad you're here. I only learned of the site, GayPatriot, after finding BigGovernment. I'm a straight white male who believes conservative politics can and should benefit everyone, not just straight white males, with no need for anyone to renounce their political beliefs. Anyhow, welcome.
Another well-deserved powerful bootay-kicking with your strong RIGHT foot, Mr. Andrew Breitbart. Damn, I don't know how we managed without BigGovernment and BigHollywood, back in the day. Keep on keeping on; clearly, it's working.
Another well-deserved, powerful bootay-kicking with your strong RIGHT foot, Mr. Andrew Breitbart. Damn, I don't know how we managed without BigGovernment and BigHollywood, back in the day. Keep on keeping on; clearly, it's working.
Andrew, you have more credibility in your pinky than Sully and this Conor twit in their combined brains. Sully spends about 75% of his time stalking Sarah Palin's reproductive system and Conor spends way too much time stalking Mark Levin. Obsessed, both of them. How not surprising that they are now ganging up on you! These two are obviously struggling for relevance and YOU have it all. Please keep up the good work!
At least Sullivan was able to link to your response without whoring one of his non-selling books (there are almost as many amazon links in his posts to his books as there are vowels). Hey, Sullivan (we all know you're reading), you're a professional writer: how does it feel to know that Sarah Palin outsold your entire catalog in about half an hour?
I denounce my racism and/or homophobia/bigotry. You know the accusation is coming…
Andrew Sullivan is not to be taken seriously. He's a Jew hating drama queen with a "penchant for buggery".
Liberalism is usually about self-promotion. That's why the left has so many 'special interest' groups.
Andrew, PLEASE keep it up — you're doing great. And remember, the Left hates capitalism (the most), and Christianity, and actual poverty reduction for really poor people (mostly foreign).
On GREED, please consider the alternative incentive, FEAR. Greed, peace agreement, or fear, obedience or punishment. Carrots & sticks. The two ways to influence all animals, including humans.
Rich people respond more readily to sticks / fear / gov't.
For all their supposed radicalism, liberals seem to greatly enjoy getting the same thing over and over again.
Andrew Sullivan is a pedophilic homosexual with a really teeny piece. Of course, I wouldn't know that, but I am making a snap judgment from his photo. If he is none of the above, he is certainly CREEPY. I wouldn't want him around my children. The other guy is just doing him.
Andrew, some folks are born to talk, and some folks are born to be the subject of conversation. You are blessed to be both, you lucky, talented dog.
Thanks, Andrew, for giving us, conservative Christians, a voice.
I've responded to Mr. Breitbart's post here: http://theamericanscene.com/2009/10/06/responding...
Sullivan can't even answer for himself.
Awww, the trolls are out again– thinking they're making an impact by clicking "thumbs down". What a sad, pathetic life. Sympathies to the trolls who have nothing better to do.
I am a big fan of yours, Mr. Breitbart. You help inspire me to be the best political analyst and writer I can be, because I know there are at least a few forums on the Internet for my point of view. I hope someday to be a good enough writer to be on your radar. Until then, Keep up the great work. You have a following, and we've got your back if you need us.
I am a big fan of yours, Mr. Breitbart. You help inspire me to be the best political analyst and writer I can be, because I know there are at least a few forums on the Internet for my point of view. I hope someday to be a good enough writer to be on your radar. Until then,all I can say is keep up the great work. You have a following, and we've got your back if you need us.
I am a big fan of yours, Mr. Breitbart. You help inspire me to be the best political analyst and writer I can be, because I know there are at least a few forums on the Internet for my point of view. I hope someday to be a good enough writer to be on your radar. Until then, all I can say is keep up the great work. You have a following, and we've got your back if you need us.
Bravo and a hearty THANK YOU for exposing ACORN. Keep it up – it’s a target rich environment with the left in charge of everything right now.
NO RETREAT, NO SURRENDER!!!
Conservative men are sexy….
One can often judge the intellectual and moral quality of a man by the obvious lack thereof in his detractors.
By this score, you're a demi-god.
Keep up the good work!
DD
So good bye then.
Try Big Hollywood for movie talk. This is Big Government. Different site. I can see how you'd be confused though. Both start with the word "big." Life can be confusing like that, I know.
Your link didnt work, a$$hat. Why bother coming here to post, and then posting a link to a site that is not currently working? Good gravy at the utter lameness.
no kidding. The man went from necon to paleocon to socialist in the course of one election cycle.
no kidding. The man went from neocon to paleocon to socialist in the course of one election cycle.
The only reason I keep an eye on Breitbart.com is to make sure I am aware of just how badly the right wing nuts are twisting reality to suit their preconceptions! As a news source, it sucks. I prefer my news sources unbiased.
I've responded to Mr. Breitbart's post here: http://theamericanscene.com/2009/10/06/responding...
[...] Andrew Breitbart is wondering why a guy named Conor Friedersdorf, who writes for the Atlantic and the Daily Beast, keeps writing about Breitbart but refuses to interview him. [...]
Or Jayson Blair.
with obama liar showing his incompetence and the American people increasingly rejecting the America hatred of obama and his defenders, the right can expect an exponentially increased level of LIBERAL VITRIOL AND HATE toward the Real Americans
Conor , when we were children, and we whined, my father would reach for his back pocket and say
"Aaaaahhhhhhhh…………………………………..HERE………………………………………….do you want my HANKY?"
I just want you to know that while I read your piece today…………………………..thats all I could think about……………………….Here, do you want my hanky.
Enough with the sour grapes son, you need to strap some balls on, and man-up a little bit.
Andrew Breitbart dropped you like a 2 foot putt…………….get over it.
Andrew, I don't know what's better, the verbal cuckoldry on the official blogs or the verbal cuckoldry here, in response to your piece!
I am shocked, shocked, to read how those other two guys got their panties in a bunch. You'd think they'd be grateful to have something else to talk about. The question is, can they talk about anything else? The only way we find out is if you keep up the machismo and we'll watch the rally with ardent joy as it continues.
Keep 'em sweatin, AB!
The irony is the NYT affirmed its reputation by breaking the 1912 story about the RMS TITANIC sinking. Maybe back then it was a bounty to all mankind, but now, it's not so much.
" those dreaded croissant eaters" Hey, not fair, Sarkozy is my new hero: "The Prime Minister said it was time "to draw a line in the sand" on Tehran's nuclear programme while the Frenchman mocked Mr Obama for the naivety of his "dreams" of eliminating nuclear weapons."
He completely PWNS Olbermann in the looks department.
Andrew, I know you have to respond to the attacks but don't get into this blogger war too deeply.
Their argument boils down to this: We (the lefties) bring in token conservatives (who are usually just Progressive-lite pundits for the most part) to "prove" we're balanced and not just an ideological outlet. You (the righties) ignore us.
I think we can all live with that.
[...] author, Breitbart believes, came up with a lot of fancy theories about what Breitbart does and why he does it, but he [...]
[...] Breitbart defending himself here. Watch him on ReasonTV here and here. And in December 2004, I used Breitbart as my lead example of [...]
And his ratings show it. Of course Immelt doesn't care if MSNBC makes a penny. He's counting on gargantuan kickbacks from Obama to show a profit.
I used to like Sullivan, sincerely. As far as I can like any blogger, which frankly isn't that far. They exist to help me waste my time, as far as I can tell. Anyway, Sullivan was good when I started reading him around 9/11, but fell out of my orbit because of his obsession with gay marriage, among other things.
Tides Center
PO Box 29907 Bldg 1014
San Francisco, CA 94129
Phone: (415) 561-6300
Fax: (415) 561-6301
Website: http://www.tides.org
Email: adavis@tides.org
Description: Star-nest for left-wing causes, provides fund-raising and management services for groups that can't or won't get their own IRS tax exemption.
2004: election year flap over Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, donating money from her foundations to Tides Foundation and Tides Center radical projects. The Heinz foundations gave millions to the Tides Center and small amounts to the Tides Foundation, but all of the money was earmarked and spent on Heinz-prescribed projects, most in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania area where the Heinz family office is located, and not for Tides to use for any other purpose. Tides operates numerous radical organizations, but Heinz foundation money has not gone to any of them. The Heinz foundations have their own problems.
(Form 990 available at guidestar.org)
Tides Center finances, 2000
Revenue Expenses
Contributions $39,181,697
Government Grants $2,145,499
Program Services $4,934,290
Investments $1,290,738
Special Events $268,971
Sales $0
Other $0
Program Services $42,383,273
Administration $4,292,511
Other $23,061
Total Expenditures $46,698,845
Total Revenue $47,821,195 NET GAIN/LOSS $1,122,350
Board of Directors
Drummond Pike, PresidentWade Rathke, Chair
Mary Mountcastle, TreasurerEmmett Aluli, Director
Susan Lehman Carmichael, DirectorAndrea Kydd, Director
Denise Ellis, Asst. Treas. David Salnicker, COO
Ellen Friedman, V.P. Stephanie Clohesy, Director
Rinku Sen, Director
Andrew runs a little empire Substance McLightweight. Do you even have a real job or do you just fill the emptiness that is your life with mindless juvenile snark?
The left is a bunch of cowards. Notice they're not much into debate. But hey, everything's relative, just like a relativistic bullet in the relativistic heads of the lefties. Always speak highly of relativism when your smashing in a leftist's head. Wouldn't want to be impolite now, would we? Well, not unless you do so *arbitrarily* and without prejudice.
Excuse me, I have a leftist's daughter to scam at the bar. She just loves that "nothing's objective, right/wrong, true/false" crap.
(Olberman, Maddow (see I am being good and didn't call her Madcow or Maddog))
Hahahaaa.
Nice one, dude.
Thanks, it's very cool that Brietbart links to GayPatriot.
I agree. Conservative politics can and do benefit everyone much more than Lib. That's one of the big lies. Under the conservatives everybody gets or can have a piece of the pie, they just have to work for it. Under "lieberals" (hey did I just make that up? I'm very clever today!), the "gifted" or "special" people always get more, they make sure of that. There will always be a way for them to justify having more and holding others down.
Breitbart.com is the best, cleanest, most business-like news aggregate going. BigHollywood is rich in content daily. Breitbart has come up with winning formulas and needs to be replicated if Conservatives want to match the online presence of the Left, thereby offering It's influence to the masses.
Who are Andrew Sullivan and Conor Friederdorf and who cares?
People are still missing the point. The MSM is still desperately trying to get a government bailout. All those 50-something liberal editors need to get official government status in order to make it over the finish line and collect a pension. They will do anything for Obama in exchange for survival. It is not just that they are Democratic Partisans. They need to tap the only font of money and power in a Messiah-Based Economy. And even if they can't get their bailout, they still expect to have the Government crush their competition.
[...] and news outlets went after him. One such attack angered Breitbart so much that he decided to answer his detractors [...]
The most honest thing about the Breitbart empire is it's complete lack of pretension when it comes to matters of fairness and balance. Mr Breitbart undermines this position ever so slightly by claiming Big Hollywood and Big Government are some sort of cultural defensive move on his part.
But just in case someone else might confuse Glenn Beck and Mr Breitbart, let me offer this deliniation: Glenn Beck wants to be the biggest, kookiest right wing hatemonger clown perpetually standing at center stage. Mr Breitbart would rather own the stage and parade his own lineup of kooky hatemongers across it while standing comfortably off to one side counting the box office.
[...] and news outlets went after him. One such attack angered Breitbart so much that he decided to answer his detractors [...]
[...] Andrew Breitbart responds, in an e-mail to Sully: I believe that you and Conor would like to paint me into a corner, the one you are currently trying to paint Glenn Beck into. You are trying to marginalize me because of the net effect, pun intended, of the White House/NEA “propaganda” series on Big Hollywood, and the explosive ACORN expose´ on Big Government. Protecting President Obama and the left at all costs is your prerogative. But anyone who knows me, has conversed with me, understood my complexities and paradoxes, does not comprehend the “obvious point” that Conor is trying to make, and you are attempting to affirm. The New York Times is a daily read. It always has been. I loved its recent profile of my college pal, hotelier Jeff Klein. No daily publication can capture the essence of the cultural elite — good, bad and ugly — like the New York Times. The paper has its merits, no doubt. But when it comes to the political scene, its ascent into monolithic partisan hackery in its news pages — never mind the op-ed experience — is worthy of exploration granted its self-identified motto “all the news that’s fit to print” is disproved day after day when the news that hurts the political left is either ignored or distorted to sate its diminishing readership’s need for political conformity. At no point have I attempted to hide my political leanings as I have endeavored to create Big Hollywood and Big Government. There is a need for a checks and balance against the New York Times and the rest of the supposedly neutral traditional press. Just as there was a need in 2005 for Arianna to put her platinum Rolodex online so that the world could see how the power brokers, power agents and power left felt on matters that face us all. Information is gold. I don’t resent criticism. I embrace it. But I do resent self-superior journalists attempting to malign me and my vision without coming to me to get my thoughts. I’m glib and quotable and even prone to slip up. Try me! [...]
Glenn Beck is not a hatemonger. He is trying to warn us. Like a foghorn. You really don't want to hear one but you'd better pay attention.
Regarding Sullivan. It is interesting that on the left, a "journalist" can commit what in the past were unforgivable crimes, downright dishonesty (which Glenn "Sockpuppet" Greenwald did), or descent into yellow, tabloid madness (which is what Sullivan did with Trig Palin), and not be fired, not be blackballed, not be suspended, not required to apologize, not even be criticized.
Sullivan has the cover story on this month's Atlantic. After all of his recent madness about Trig Palin. Unbelievable.
[...] FINANCIAL Times: Breitbart Shapes Conservative Agenda; Two Fish, One Barrel: Deconstructing Andrew Sullivan’s ‘The Breitbart Standard,’ Demolishing Conor Friedersdorf’s ‘The Right’s Lesser Media’ …. [...]
Andrew Sullivan is a gay who claims to be a conservative. That seems to be his only characteristic. When you take away the conservative descriptor, Mr. Sullivan becomes simply a very common gay leftist who would not draw much attention at all. Sorry Andrew, you are just a bore now. You have gone the way of David Brock.
The AP story about the British High Court is a blockbuster in disguise: it allows us to bring back to the public the sickening truth of Bill Clinton's treason 1993-2001, and the fact that even Tony Blair (who probably appointed the Court now trying to screw up the American & British intelligence services sharing information), quit sharing intelligence with the U.S. after he learned Clinton was little more than a Chinese flunky. Blair did that to protect the British from Chinese spying. To learn more about that, go back and read the books and articles by The Washington Times's Bill Gertz. Among them you'll find at least one article by Gertz detailing the British cut-off.
Nothing like a little antisemitism to sweeten the standard leftist pot of self-contradictory conspiracy theories.
Certainly nothing intentionally antisemitic in the posting you replied to, and I don't see anything that could be interpreted as accidentally antisemitic. So, to what are you referring?
More power to you AB. Keep fighting the good fight.
So did they call?