Leftist’s Hate on Full Display Over Breitbart’s Passing

It is sad that to be a left-winger is to be a hatemonger, but the death of conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart has certainly brought out those true colors of the left. The giddiness displayed and cheering indulged by America’s leftists over the fact that Mr. Breitbart died late Wednesday night has been shrill, disgusting, and suffused with the lamentable inhumanity so commonly found in the hearts of leftists everywhere.

It should be no surprise that left-wingers are prone to authoritarian regimes and acts of genocide.

Breitbart succumbed to a heart attack (most likely) as he took a late night stroll around his Los Angeles neighborhood late on February 29. It was only hours later that the cacophony of celebration by the American left began.

The worst example is that of Rolling Stone’s venom-spitter Matt Taibbi who said of Breitbart’s death, and pardon the language, “Good! Fuck him. I couldn’t be happier that he’s dead.”

Slate writer and left-wing infant tyro Matt Yglesias rushed to his twitter account to say that the world was “slightly improved with @andrewbreitbart dead.”

Nobody commentator Jill Kennedy couldn’t wait to blog about how she felt Breitbart was “an asshole.”

Then there is the arrogance of David Frum of The Daily Beast who thinks he is better than Andrew and in a positon of passing judgment on the man.

“In time, Andrew Breitbart might have aged into greater self-control and a higher concept of public service,” Frum arrogantly writes. “Premature death deprived him of the chance at redemption often sought and sometimes found by people who have done wrong in their lives and work.”

Appalling conceit.

Naturally the Democrats and cretins on Twitter were gleefully dancing on Andrew’s grave. Scumbag Ben Jackson (@neuteronomy) of Massachusetts called Andrew a “tyrant” and was happy to “celebrate” Andrew’s death. He also said that he was “up for a little dancing” and said he doubted anyone was going to mourn Andrew’s passing.

Another creep named Chico Delainky (@ChicoDelainky) tweeted his vileness saying, “My thoughts & Prayers are with the workers who had to hose down the sidewalk after they took #AndrewBreitbart’s body away,” and “#AndrewBreitbart didn’t deserve to die of a heart attack;Set on fire, hit by a bus, or torn apart by polar bears sure,but not a heart attack.” She also said, “America truly lost an asshole. I’m sure Satan will treat him good. #AndrewBreitbart”

Heartless Sharoney’s (@Sharoney) Tweets celebrated Breitbart’s death for hours on end, yet began with a tweet saying she didn’t care about the story because Breitbart “wasn’t that important a public figure.” The hours of her later tweets seem to make a liar of her.

Leah Buckus (@leahbackus) indulges some perfectly illogical liberal “thought,” by tweeting, “I would hate to go through life as such a miserable human being that people gloried in my death.” Oh, yeah. Perfect liberal stupidity, that. They called Andrew “miserable” and therefore he MUST be miserable! It’s their label not anyone else’s but this Buckus cretin imagines everyone “thinks” just like her. Not much for tolerance, eh?

Then there was tweeter Stephanie (@stefsstuff) who was happy to tweet, “I’m not shocked or surprised at the death of #AndrewBreitbart he was rotten from the inside out. No RIP for him!”

This is the black heart of the left on full display. But even so, as much as he loved the dueling, I’d bet Andrew would give us a knowing nod, flash that twinkle in his eyes while happily retweet each hate-filled example of the left’s vitriol. He loved exposing them for what they are.

NOW President: Bishops assault on women's rights will kill women
Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
  • SoBeRight

    Live by the sword, die by the sword.

    I don’t think Breitbart would have been bothered by this. He had the testicular fortitude to dish it out and take it.

    What was his saying? Something about “I like making enemies!”….

    He’d call the author of this piece a panty-waisted whining opportunist.

    •  Breitbart would certainly have saved it all and republished or “re-tweeted” it – but with the purpose of demonstrating what soulless bastards the leftists are, totally bereft of any human decency.

      To compare his aggressive pursuit of the truth to them is to confirm that you too are a worthless piece of human detritus.

      • SoBeRight

         He pursued the truth so aggressively he went so far as to fabricate and edit and misrepresent the facts to fit….

        Media Matters has documented a timeline of Andrew Breitbart’s
        smear of Shirley Sherrod, from Breitbart’s initial posting of his
        deceptively edited clip of Sherrod — which was amplified by Fox News
        and other right-wing media — through the release of the full video of
        Sherrod’s comments, which made clear the context of her remarks.


        • cirby

          “his deceptively edited clip of Sherrod”

          …which was no such thing.  The “edited” clip came to Breitbart as posted – the full version turned up later.

          The pretend-concern about the “edited” clip skips right past the important part… when Sherrod was talking about her initial racist response (that she talks about in the full video, emphasizing how wrong it was), the audience applauded her apparent racism.  And laughed at the “victim.”

          The “edited” clip showed pretty much the same thing: Sherrod was talking about her epiphany of how she was having racist feelings about an innocent person.

          Even MSNBC’s Chris Matthews had to walk back his initial attacks on Breitbart, admitting the Breitbart was right.

          • Evil Otto

             Keep in mind that Flounder here doesn’t actually care about Sherrod… his straight-from-Media-Matters accusations of selective editing are meant to change the subject.

        •  Lies.  The tape was edited before Breitbart ever got it, as you certainly know by now since it was immediately pointed out.

          None of which changes the fact that Sherrod and her husband made millions off a program designed for poor black farmers but co-opted by a cottage industry of fraud.

          You filthy lying scumbag.

          • What do you expect from someone who reads media matters.   I bet that Stephen is one of Obama’s truth patrollers.

          • SoBeRight

            Sticks and stones… whatever.

          • Evil Otto

            Good comeback. Really.

        • LiberalNitemare

           Geez, fer a minute there, I thought we were talking about Michael Moore

    • iwogisdead

      Jeez, ZGoFish, do you monitor this site minute by minute? You always manage to get a mindless, sophomoric post up before anyone else. Do you get a bonus for the first to post or something?

    • jim_m

      Just remember this leftist hate fest the next time any of those compulsive hypocrites opens their pie hole and says some sanctimonious bullshit about, “Have you no decency?”

  • JWH

    I think OTB put it pretty well.  It’s one thing to use the occasion of Breitbart’s passing to reflect on his career and contributions to journalism, even if one ultimately concludes those contributions are overwhelmingly negative.  But there’s no call to spew childish invective at him.

    • SoBeRight

      “But there’s no call to spew childish invective at him.”

       Stuff like this?

      JSchuler: With all due respect: bullshit. The man killed a woman and evaded responsibility for it. When we treat such a man with honor and respect, we dishonor and disrespect his victim. When such a man is allowed to stay in high office in a democratic society, we are then accomplices in the corruption of our civic institutions. Yes, God gets ultimate judgment, but here on Earth, we must judge for practical, temporal reasons. We cannot condemn the man to hell, but we surely can condemn him to a landfill or sewage treatment plant.

      Which was the very first comment on this Wizbang post on the passing of Ted Kennedy.There are more like that, I’m sure, but honestly, I don’t have the stomach to read them.

      Such childish BS bubbles up from the left and the right. To frame this as a ‘lefttard’ or righttard’ thing only serves to encourage it.

      To encourage it, as Wizbang has done with this post, and then complain about it at the same time is the height of lunacy…


      • Gmacr1

        Teddy is still dead and sober to this day.

      • JWH

        I did not indicate approval of Teddy Kennedy comments, Fish.  Grind your ax in somebody else’s flesh.

      • cirby

        Because a man who left a woman to drown in a car alone, then spent his entire adult life being a sexist drunken lout is exactly like a devoted family man who writes things that Democrats don’t like to hear.

        • SoBeRight

           nuance? Obama is a socialist = no nuance.

          Live by the sword…

          •  As I’ve pointed out, there is no way to discuss anything with the likes of filth like you.

          • “Obama is a socialist = no nuance.’

            Stephen that is correct.  It is not nuance. It is fact.

          • Evil Otto

             Agreed. There is no nuance. Obama is a socialist.

      • iwogisdead

        Let me explain the difference, you lefttard. Kennedy was disliked because he got drunk, killed someone, and got away with it. Breitbart was disliked because he expressed his opinion.

      • Oysteria

        “… I don’t have the stomach to read them.”

        But reading MediaMatters soothes your soul.

  • JWH

    PS.  When creating a possessive out of a plural noun, place the apostrophe after the S.

  • Hank_M

    The disparaging comments by commenters on other lib sites doesn’t bother me so much.
    Kinda like some trolls here where you expect their comments to be lacking in logic, decorum and class.

    But Matt Taibbi,  Matt Yglesias and David Frum are different. They’re prominent voices on the internet, in print, and elsewhere. What they wrote is beneath contempt, especially Taibbi and Yglesias.

    There comes a time when politics needs to be put aside. If the untimely death of someone you disagree with isn’t the time, then what is? For these fools, the answer is never.
    And that, more than anything, shows how much hate these people possess.

    I’d suggest  they should all be ashamed of themselves. But I doubt they have the capacity to do so.

  • Commander_Chico

    We’re all gonna die.  Do we get some automatic absolution from our public sins when we do?

    Breitbart was “in the arena.”  That is admirable in some ways, but he had his sins.  The selective editing of the Sherrod tape, for one.  I don’t think it’s admirable to edit someone’s comments to mean the exact opposite of what they meant in full.  Is that “conservative?’

    Ms. Sherrod sued him for it.  Did that contribute to the stress that might have led to his coronary?  Who knows.

    Here are his last tweets, he seemed to be in constant combat:

    1 MarAndrewBreitbart

    I called you a putz cause I thought you werebeing intentionally disingenuous. If not I apologize. @CenLamar @dust92

    1 MarAndrewBreitbart

    Apologize for WHAT? @KRAUSEEE

    1 MarAndrewBreitbart

    Why was he FILMING his typical hijinks? Evidence? That’s why he was let off. It proved he was innocent of MSNBC ‘wiretap’ charge. @CenLamar
    1 MarAndrewBreitbart‏

    What ‘felony’, genius? Getting senator’s aides to admit she lied when not answering constituents calls claiming busted phones? @CenLamar
    1 MarAndrewBreitbart‏

    That’s certainly not what the judge’s ruling was, putz. @CenLamar

    • cirby

      (deleted because of bad formatting) see edited version

    • cirby

      Man, that formatting went all screwy… let’s try again:
      “Breitbart was “in the arena.”  That is admirable in some ways, but he had his sins.  The selective editing of the Sherrod tape, for one.”
      Which, as pointed out many times, didn’t happen like you describe it.
      Even the “short” tape (and the story that accompanied it) told the real story.
      Transcript of the Breitbart “short” video:Shirley Sherrod: “The first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm, he — he took a long time talking, but he was trying to show me he was superior to me. I know what he was doing. But he had come to me for help. What he didn’t know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me, was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him. [audience chuckled]I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland, and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land. So, I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough so that when he — I — I assumed the Department of Agriculture had sent him to me, either that or the — or the Georgia Department of Agriculture. And he needed to go back and report that I did try to help him.So I took him to a white lawyer that we had — that had…attended some of the training that we had provided, ’cause Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been enacted for the family farmer. So I figured if I take him to one of them that his own kind would take care of him.That’s when it was revealed to me that, ya’ll, it’s about poor versus those who have, and not so much about white — it is about white and black, but it’s not — you know, it opened my eyes, ’cause I took him to one of his own…”
      That last paragraph is the important part: she realized, AFTER her actions, that she was being racist.
      “having to help a white person save their land” 
      Yeah, how could ANYONE think that’s racist at all?
      When you see the longer videos and transcripts, you see even more annoying stuff – like her claim that racism was “created” by white people:
      “That’s when they created the racism that we know of today. They did it to keep us divided. And they — it started working so well, they said, “Gosh, looks like we’ve come up on something here that can last generations.” And here we are over 400 years later, and it’s still working. What we have to do is get that out of our heads. There is no difference between us. ”
      She backs off a bit in that last sentence, but doesn’t seem to realize just how bad that first part sounds.  That’s the problem.

    • Jay

       Is that “conservative?’

      Unfortunately, that’s what it’s meaning currently means.  There are very few Alan Simpsons in the US right now.  Even though you might not like the ideology of these people, at the very least, you could agree to disagree.  What it currently seems like is that the latest batch of conservatives are only interested in winning at all costs.  Require voter ID which will take away 23 million people from voting (ALEC), polarize the populace on crazy right wing stances (Santorum), and push out moderates and independents that could keep the party sane (G. Johnson) or help balance the deficit.

      To say that I’m disappointed with how most conservatives seem to act is an understatement.  We currently have more people locked up than the rest of the world combined.  We also have more people in jail with mental disorders than in a hospital getting treatment.  Our economy is going down based on crony capitalist capture (on both sides of the equation) and yet the conservative agenda seems to get more right wing as the days go by.  I dunno when it’ll be enough for either party, but it’s only going to get crazier from here.  The saddest thing about this is that Breitbart’s ideas of “journalism” involving manipulation of the truth, and heavy doctoring of footage will probably be followed by more provocateurs.  I can only hope that more people recognize these tactics as what they are: hate filled, manipulations rather than actual progress in debates.

      • “We also have more people in jail with mental disorders than in a hospital getting treatment’

        Actually they used to be in mental hospitals.  That is until the left decided they were being held there against their will and went to court to have them turned out into the street and homeless or get locked up for committing crimes.

        • Jay

          RM, that was a coalition of both the left and the right.

      • jim_m

        Breitbart’s ideas of “journalism” involving manipulation of the truth, and heavy doctoring of footage will probably be followed by more provocateurs.

        Excepting of course that Breitbart’s activities did more to expose exactly that kind of corrupt deception in the MSM than ever actually occured in his own product.  Once again the left takes their own propaganda as the gospel and ignores the actual facts that his so-called manipulation of the Sherrod video did not amount to what they claimed and the MSM’s own manipulation of video (The fake murder of Mohammad Al Dura), photographs (AP photoshopping of war photos) and quotes (the fact that we have a word “Dowdification” says a lot about the willingness of the leftists to lie about their opponents).

        • Jay

          Jim, where are all of the tapes where Breitbart “interviewed” people that denied any wrong doing?  

          You constantly pull this crap with this “leftist” bullshit.  What is it about an actual argument that has you running for the hills into rhetoric?

      • Voter ID taking away 23 million people?
        And your evidence is . . . ?

        Actually, voter ID would take away all those dead people who keep voting for Democrats.

        • SoBeRight

          All those dead people voting?
          And your evidence is…?

          Actually Voter ID is unnecessary because all of the talk about dead people voting etc, always turns out to be mythology once you examine the evidence.

          So cough it up, David. Maybe in a new post instead of here, and let’s check out your ‘evidence’ that there are dead people voting. If it’ happening, let’s quantify it. Are we talking about thousands of votes?

          • iwogisdead

            All those dead people voting?
            And your evidence is…?Try this, meathead — dead people aren’t able to show ID. Not to mention people who aren’t really people, like Mickey Mouse. Conservatives like for voters to be identified as real people who have the right to vote. Liberals don’t like this idea. What could it possibly mean? Since you typed the word “evidence,” why don’t you show some, dingbat? A link, a source, an authority. Cough it up.

          • SoBeRight

            So – essentially what you’re admitting is that there is no evidence of  “dead people voting” to any extent that matters.

            Which means the reason for “Voter ID” is not to stop voter fraud.

            Well, why then?

            Because some poor people don’t have ID, so by requiring a Voter ID those people can’t vote.

            And poor people tend to vote for Democrats more than Republicans. Minorities too – and those constituencies tend to vote Democratic.

            And that’s why the fake concern about “dead people voting” is just cover for more right wing bullshit.

            Studies show that as many as 11 percent of eligible voters do not have government-issued photo ID.
            That percentage is even higher for seniors, people of color, people
            with disabilities, low-income voters, and students. Many citizens find
            it hard to get government photo IDs, because the underlying
            documentation like birth certificates (the ID one needs to get ID) is
            often difficult or expensive to come by. At the same time, voter ID policies are far more costly to implement than many assume.


          • jim_m

            investigators were able to obtain ballots under the names of dead voters at polling locations Tuesday by simply asking for them, he said.

            Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/11/video-nh-poll-workers-shown-handing-out-ballots-in-dead-peoples-names/#ixzz1o2pqdWbBor try this link: http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/14/10405361-study-1-in-8-voter-registrations-have-errors  I like the part where the dems own database shows 1.8 million dead voters registered to vote.  That’s just the ones they want to admit to.

          • Gmacr1

            A voter ID law resolves the question of illegality and does so by verifying that person casting the ballot is indeed legally alowed to do so at that location only.

          • Jay

            No, you might want to read up on the costs.

          • jim_m

            the statement did not say anything about costs dumbass.  It asserted that ID laws reduced fraud,  Of course it will cost something, but I suppose asshole leftists like you wouldn’t want to spend a dolar if it reduced the fraud your side commits.

            Oh, and feel free to claim that the GOP commits lots of fraud while youstand in the way of preventing it.  If you really believed that the GOP was fraudulantly winning elections you would do something to stop it, but you don’t.

          • Jay

            Jim, I’ve asked you time and again about backing up your assertions.  It sure as hell costs something and it’s not just monetary.  But talking to an ignorant asshole like you, that can’t do anything but denigrate everyone that disagrees with you as some kind of “leftist” without an explanation as to who or what exactly you’re railing against leaves me with the feeling that you’re nothing more than a bigot that can’t quite figure out how to articulate your arguments.

            The GOP just did voter fraud in Maine.

            Wisconsin GOP officials did the same damn thing.

            And yes, I’m well aware of the huge fight against corporations like ALEC that pass legislation that requires ID.  Just because you don’t see the fight doesn’t mean it isn’t occurring.

          • Gmacr1

            The only cost is the person’s time.

          • How do you explain areas where more than 100% of registered voters vote?

        • Jay

          The DNC shows those numbers

          Progress VA says that voter fraud is very rare.

          And last I checked, Republicans showed that “problem” with their own boneheaded moves instead of any problem on dead people turnout.

          • jim_m

            Go look up the election of Christine Gregoire to the governorship in WA.  It was acheived by fraud and everyone (even the dems) admits it.

            Your statement that fraud is insignificant is pure bullshit

          • herddog505

            How can you write that???  Why, didn’t you see the links to no less honest, unbiased organizations than the DNC and Progress VA that state categorically – CATEGORICALLY, I say – that voting fraud is very rare and demands for ID are just a pack of racist bigot homophobe rethuglikkkans trying to bring back slavery because getting a photo ID in America is, like, even harder and more expensive than getting birth control pills???


            In other news, the Sinaloa and Los Zetas organizations issued a joint statement declaring that they do not traffic in so-called illegal drugs, and offer as evidence of their innocence that you can’t find a single living soul who’ll tell you otherwise more than once.


            It must be wonderful to be married to a lefty if your personal morals are… um… well, like Bill Clinton’s:

            “Honey, I would NEVER cheat on you!  I mean, you’ve never actually SEEN me do it, have you?  No?  Well, what does that tell you!  And if you STILL don’t believe me, here’s a list of totally unbiased, completely honest character witnesses.  Amber, Aimee, Jenna, Asia, Dakotah, Venessa… any of them will tell you that I am TOTALLY faithful to you.  Would they lie?  So, you don’t worry your pretty little head any more!  Now, I’m going out for the evening.  Don’t wait up.”

          • Jay

            Jim, I have two examples of Republicans committing fraud on a large scale.  I still have doubts about fraud when the Republicans have had a number of plans to disenfranchise votes through Voter ID, increased punishments of minority classes, and the ever constant push of America into a police/plutocratic state.

  • Jay

    Should have known this was going to happen.  Breitbart was a polarizing figure, but no, it’s not a “leftist” agenda that people are going to vilify him.  He was a manipulative person who used the media for an agenda… A game.  He wanted to have the GOP win.  

    And yet, we have people such as John Q. Adams is who Breitbart is being compared to?

    No, it’s unfortunate that he died at 43, but let’s keep in perspective what he did.  He didn’t care about the people he hurt if they happened to be middle class or low income earners.  He hurt those that would possibly vote Democrat.  And no matter how you slice it, the guy is not going to be liked because all of his attention was in destroying any opposition to Republicans.

    Sure, it’s unfortunate he died.  But to say this is a leftist conspiracy?  For shame…

    • SCSIwuzzy

      Jay, back that up with some kind of evidence.

      • Jay

        John Q Adams/Breitbart comparison – Link

        I would say looking at The Young Turk’s evidence and his final interview there will be a lot less biased than what others may suggest on both sides.

  • ackwired

    You might want to check Wisbang archives before you condemn hate.

    • SoBeRight


      • Brucehenry

        Right now,on another current thread, the Wizbang community is voicing its full-throated support of Limbaugh’s calling a college co-ed a “slut’ because of her political views. 

        And regular commenter Adjoran, who above calls leftists “soulless bastards bereft of human decency,” told another commenter that his mother is a whore on that same thread.


        BTW, Huston, Yglesias, Taibbi, Frum (a conservative), and a baker’s dozen random twittering nobodies doesn’t constitute “the left.”

        • I think it’s more because she’s really, really wanting to not have any responsibility as far as paying for birth control goes.  She’s OWED, dammit, simply because she exists.

          I have no problems at all with her wanting birth control. But maybe she can actually take the responsibility of paying for it.

          • Brucehenry

            As I said on another thread, I doubt anyone here applauding Limbaugh’s despicable name-calling has actually READ Ms Fluke’s testimony. For that matter, I bet you haven’t either, Lawson.

          • Gmacr1

            One really doesn’t need to read her testimony to grasp the fact that she wants “other people’s money” to pay for her sexual needs.

          • What’s she going to do when she can’t eat at the college cafeteria any more?  Sue the country to let her eat free anywhere she wants?

          • Evil Otto

            Are we wrong that she wants someone else to pay for her birth control, Bruce?

          • Brucehenry

            According to research done by Wizbang regular Herddog, Georgetown students pay $1895/yr for health insurance. so, umm, yes, you’re wrong. At least arguably so.

          • Gmacr1

            “Georgetown students pay $1895/yr for health insurance.” and no where in that insurance coverage does it say that her birth control costs are covered.

        •  It’s a shame we force you scum to stay, isn’t it?

          Suck on it.

          • Brucehenry

            I’ve been here for years, articulating my point of view just a little more artfully than “suck on it,” Genius.

        • jim_m

          Frum is a conservative only when compared to the other idiot leftists in your list.  Compared to the general spectrum of political belief he’s not much of a conservative.

          • Brucehenry

            Look him up on Wikipedia, Jim. He may not be “much of a conservative” but he damn sure ain’t no liberal!

          • Evil Otto

             Wikipedia? Really?

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, genius, wikipedia. It’s perfectly adequate in its recap of Frum’s career. He wrote for National Review, worked in the George W Bush White House, etc. He’s no liberal, whatever Huston here claims.

          • Evil Otto

            Wikipedia is not “perfectly adequate” on anything, Bruce.

          • Brucehenry

            Fine, look up his curriculum vitae anywhere you like, Brainiac. It won’t make him a liberal.

          • Evil Otto

            Getting pissy, Bruce? Good.

          • Brucehenry

            Hahaha did you find a source yet that describes Frum as a “leading liberal commentator,” Einstein?

        • Bruce, I did not know what was going on with that other thread that you mentioned. When I read it, I did not like it. I do not support what Limbaugh did, and I said so.

        • Gmacr1

          Dumbass, “Limbaugh’s calling a college co-ed a “slut’ because of her political views. ”

          Uh, no, because she evidently spreads her legs for so many people that her bill for contraceptives is big enough that she wants “other people’s money” to pay for it. That qualifies as “slut” in any country.

          • Brucehenry

            I rest my case, folks.

        • Commander_Chico

          When Limbaugh croaks off, I admit I’ll celebrate. 

          He’s scum, a nasty hypocritical racist draft-dodger chickenhawk junkie and sex tourist. 

          And I’ll say that after he’s dead.

          • jim_m

            That’s right.  He’s a conservative so he must be a RAAAACIST!!!!

          • Commander_Chico

            So I guess you accept that Limbaugh’s a nasty hypocritical draft-dodger chickenhawk junkie and sex tourist?

            But, he has said racist things, for example his attack on Donovan McNabb.  Anybody who’s fair knows that just about any starting quarterback is overrated and hyped in some ways, not just the black ones.


            “Take that bone out of your nose and call me back!”

            “Barack, the Magic Negro.”

  • herddog505

    And so it goes… the tolerant, peaceful, intellectual, non-biased, non-judgmental lefties rationalize why it’s perfectly OK to engage in the same kind of speech that makes Breitbart, Rush, O’Reilly, Coulter, et al “hatemongers” and “racists”.

    • As I’ve said before – ‘hate’ has essentially lost its meaning…

      • SoBeRight

        I hate it when people say that…

    • ackwired

      Yep… The extreme right accuses the extreme left of doing what they accuse the extreme right of doing….and on and on and on.

      • jim_m

        The difference is that the left actually does do the things they accuse the right of doing or wanting to do.  Evidence the obama administration.

        • ackwired

          Yes, they do.  And the extreme left does things that extreme right accuses them of doing and the extreme right does the things that the extreme left accuses them of doing and the extreme right does the things that it accuses the extreme left of doing.  It is in the nature of the extremists to believe that the ends justify the means, and both extremes are right to condemn some of the actions of the opposite extreme.

  • Citizen_Jerry

    As a somewhat sane person, I never have been able to understand the vile, visceral hatred that drives the left. But in a way, they’re to be pitied. Because in the final analysis, they’ll have no excuse or explanation for their twisted selves.

    • They don’t really need it.  Hatred like the following is self-justifying.

      “I hope you all die of cancer. I hope some of it is skin cancer that starts at the tip of your nose and covers your face and leaves you writhing and moaning in pain until you expire in the soiled bed of a third world cancer ward. I hope your families are hit by a bus during your funerals and I hope that anyone who is angered or hurt by what I’ve just written catches HIV from a rapist. How’s that folks? Biting enough? Cutting? I hope so because aftet all of this misery is visited upon you (And I pray to Jesus it will) THEN I can bash you regardless of your ‘moral high ground’ just like ann!

      i just read your blog and it is apparent to me that whoever enabled you to use a computer should be tortured and shot. I hope you die. This site is the most offensive and discusting peice of literature on the internet. If i ever found you i would rape you out of spite and then burn your face off with acid and fire. 

      Those were off the Sistertoldjah.com website, as samples of some of the loving comments of the left.

      There was a reason why “1984” had the 2-minute hates.  It’s cathartic, it purges all the uncertainties of your belief, and it unites you with the people around you.

      So it’s perfectly justifiable to go “I hope you die of cancer, your families are hit by a bus, and anyone who disagrees catches HIV from a rapist.”  Because YOU, by the very power of your frothing hate of someone who dares to disagree with you, are pure and holy and good.

      Either that, or fucking delusional.  Take your pick.

  • TomInCali

      It was only hours later that the cacophony of celebration by the American left began.The worst example is that of Rolling Stone’s venom-spitter Matt Taibbi who said of Breitbart’s death, and pardon the language, “Good! Fuck him. I couldn’t be happier that he’s dead.”

    This is really a deceptive and agenda-laden post. First of all, you completely ignore the nice things that prominent “lefties” like Arianna Huffington have said about Breitbart. All you scour the net for is random twitter bursts from random nobodies.

    Next, if you actually read Taibbi’s piece, it’s actually a very real homage to Breitbart. It’s full of recognition of what he accomplished, his intelligence, and his humor. And while you pulled out Taibbi’s quote, you didn’t note that he said, “I’m sure Breitbart himself would have respected this reaction”.

    Let’s also note that Brietbart himself was quick with “giddiness and cheering” after Ted Kennedy died (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/08/26/57997/breitbart-kennedy-twitter/). It seems it wasn’t a problem for you back then.

    And before you decide that the left is “shrill, disgusting, and suffused with the lamentable inhumanity so commonly found in the hearts of leftists everywhere”, perhaps you should take a look at what the right is now directing toward Taibbi:

    Well done, Breitbart fans, well done! In less than 24 hours you’ve
    hacked into my Wiki page, published my telephone number on Twitter,
    called the Rolling Stone offices pretending to be outraged
    “advertisers” (anonymous ones, who hung up before we could figure out
    which “ads” to pull), and then spent all night calling and texting my
    phone with various threats and insults, many of them directed at my
    family. “Better grow eyes in the back of your head,” was one; “I’m going
    to take a shit on your mother’s grave,” was another; a third called my
    wife a “piece of shit like you,” and many others called me a “pile of
    human excrement.”

    Death threats, and threats to his family. And you have the gall to talk about the black heart of the left.

    • jim_m

      The post did not attempt to deny that there were a very few people on the left that had some decency.  The point was that there are a large number of significant voices on the left who revel in the deaths of conservatives.

      I recall the death of Jerry Falwell, which elicited the same response form many on the left nad one of the few who stood to defend the man was none other than Larry Flint.  So, while it is true that there are some on the left with some scruple, there certainly are exceedingly few. 

      I also recall the reaction of the left when Reagan was shot and they were cheering the event and hoping that he would die.  The left are just a bunch of sick bastards and there really aren’t many exceptions to that rule.

      • Brucehenry

        I call bullshit on that one, Jim. You remember “leftists” in 1981 “cheering the event”? Which leftists? American leftists? Like who?

        Also, in this post, Huston mentioned exactly TWO “significant voices on the left” who were supposedly “reveling” in Breitbart’s death. Had YOU ever heard of any of the others he mentioned? (Frum is, as I’ve demonstrated, a lifelong conservative.)

        • cirby

          I recall quite a few of my leftist acquaintances cheering Reagan’s shooting – I was in a college town at the time, and to some, it was practically a national holiday.

          You have to remember that, to a majority of the left wing, Reagan was evil incarnate.  They KNEW, with all the certainty in the world, that Reagan was going to unilaterally get us into World War III (because he was such a religious nutcase that he wanted to bring about Armageddon, ya know).

          Others hated him with a fiery passion because of his social conservative leanings – he was going to do all sorts of things to put gays back in the closet, foment racial hatred, et cetera.

          It’s funny – each new generation of left-wing haters think that previous lefties were kind and gentle souls who only failed in their plans because they were so kind and gentle… and when you mention that this is blatantly untrue, you get silliness like “have YOU ever heard of” (meaning “I never paid attention, and I hope you didn’t either”).

          • Brucehenry

            Hahaha “quite a few of your leftist acquaintances” — whom, as far as we know, exist only in your faulty(?) memory, do NOT constitute ‘the left” that Jim accuses of “cheering the event.”

            I had “quite a few leftist acquaintances” myself 31 years ago, there, Cirby. How come I don’t remember this cheering? As a matter of fact, for myself, my fear for a couple of hours was that the madman Haig might attempt some kind of coup or something.

            Where’s Jim to enumerate the numerous examples of people on “the left” cheering Reagan’s shooting and “hoping that he would die”? And by numerous examples, I don’t mean “quite a few of his (nameless) leftist acquaintances” hahaha.

          • cirby

            It’s funny how often people like Bruce try to pretend that all of the nasty stuff the left does or says is “all in the imagination of the right” – until they read the news stories, when they shift into “well, that’s a really small minority of left-leaning people,” followed by “well, of COURSE they think like that – it’s only right!”

            Look at this comment: “As a matter of fact, for myself, my fear for a couple of hours was that the madman Haig might attempt some kind of coup or something.”  

            Which is, unfortunately, exactly the point.  You excuse a really, REALLY stupid mental flaw on your part, while pretending that similarly stupid mindsets at the time are just fantasies of the right wing.

            “That madman Haig” was nothing of the sort.  That’s the thing – when the left doesn’t like someone on the right, they’re MADMEN, or EVIL, or WARMONGERS.  Until someone reminds them of the previous times they said such things, and then it’s “well, your imaginary leftist people must have said that.”

            When the first Iraq war kicked off, I was on a college campus, and a bunch of people had a “peace march” at midnight.  They all dutifully gathered outside of the college admin building, and the guy who organized it spent ten or fifteen minutes telling everyone that our troops were going to go over there, carpet-bomb cities, and murder or rape the innocent civilians.  He ranted and raged about how awful our troops were, and how they were going to basically commit genocide.  This is understating his choice of words, by the way – he was graphic in his descriptions, calling up images (literally) of Nazi Germany.

            Then, seconds after catching his breath from his long rant, he said “now, I’m not saying anything bad about our troops,” and the entire crowd just nodded and murmured agreement – completely forgetting every nasty (and specific) thing he had just said about our soldiers.

            That’s the same thing Bruce is doing now – say nasty and stupid things in the past, then pretend that they were never said – or that they were justified because the Republican was a “madman.”

          • SoBeRight

            Where’s Jim to enumerate the numerous examples of people on “the left” cheering Reagan’s shooting and “hoping that he would die”? And by numerous examples, I don’t mean “quite a few of his (nameless) leftist acquaintances” hahaha.

            It’s also funny how many times Bruce and others challenge the right to back up their wild claims with some facts and evidence — and they can’t, proving they’re full of BS.

            Instead of facts, the right these bullshitters mount personal attacks – trying to distract everyone from the fact that they are full of crap and just making up facts as they go along and can’t – in a million years – provide the proof they’ve been challenged to provide.

          • Brucehenry

            Another anecdote we have only your word for.

          • cirby

            The thing is, I have an actual word to go on.

            There are enough of us here who lived through those times as adults – and remember.  You can keep living in denial, just like all of the other times you went into “I can’t believe you” mode here, but we know better.

          • Jay

            Anecdotes do not constitute actual facts.  If you had a few newspapers that possibly exposed how Reagan was a dictator, then your word would hold more weight.  As it stands, it’s quite difficult to accept that a “few leftist acquaintances” equates to all authoritarian or libertarian leftists thought the same way about such a monumental event.

          • cirby

            You wanna move those goalposts a bit more?

            Going from “some people on the left hating Reagan and wishing he was dead” to “all authoritarian leftists” coupled with “exposing Reagan as a dictator?”

            What in the hell have you been smoking?

          • Brucehenry

            “”No, the “goalposts” were Jim’s statement that “the left when Reagan was shot” were “cheering the event and hoping he would die.”

            By “the left” I assume he meant ALL or MOST people on the left were “cheering the event and hoping he would die.” 

            THAT’S the statement I called bullshit on. All you have responded with since is  unverifiable anecdotes  and allegations that three stand up comics said unkind things about Reagan.

        • Gmacr1

          I remember the event quite clearly and there were many on the left who were hoping he would die.

          • Brucehenry

            Name three.

          • cirby

            George Carlin, Richard Pryor, Bill Hicks.  Watch the Hicks routine on Reagan some time – that alone basically refutes your entire argument.

          • Brucehenry

            Links? And wasn’t Hicks in the 1990s and 2000s?

            Edit: no, I see, a video of him in the 80s asking why good people get murdered and bad people don’t. He says,”Martin Luther King — murdered; Gandhi — murdered; Jesus — murdered; Reagan — wounded” to the snickers of the audience.

            Now, you may think that joke tasteless, but where is the evidence that it was made at the time of Reagan’s shooting, or that it constituted “the left” hoping that Reagan would die?

            BTW, when you plug “Richard Pryor reagan” or “George Carlin Reagan” into Google, nothing comes up to suggest that either man was hoping for Reagan’s death at the time of the assassination attempt.

          • cirby

            Has nobody ever taught you how to use Google?

            Hicks started doing standup in 1978.  He died in 1994.  The first thing that pops up when you search “bill hicks reagan” on google is from the “Sane Man” video – released in 1989.  

            Note that the references to Reagan are all present tense – that routine was created and polished during the Reagan Presidency.

            Here’s the thing: standup comedians reflect the tastes of their audiences.  They don’t get famous (and stay famous) if they say a lot of things that their target audiences disagree with.  So when you have a world-famous comic doing routines about how they HATE someone like Reagan – there’s a helluva lot of people who think that’s “funny” – and accurate, in their worldview.

          • Brucehenry

            Sorry, see my edit above.

            BTW, I personally never heard of Bill Hicks until recently.

          • cirby

            So, in the seven minutes it took for you to reply, you managed to watch all of the Richard Pryor and George Carlin clips on YouTube?  You must have an amazingly fast Internet connection.

            Either that, or you did a couple of searches, didn’t see anything blindingly obvious in the text of the search results, and pretended you made some sort of effort.

          • Brucehenry

            I’ll be happy to admit I’m wrong about Pryor and Carlin if you provide a link that constitutes evidence of your claim, Mr Prosecutor.

          • Brucehenry

            Cirby? Where is the link? I’ve been waiting for HOURS…..

          • cirby

            Keep waiting.

          • SoBeRight

             The only link you’re going to get from Cirby is pork sausage.

          • Brucehenry

            In any case only one of his three examples is, even remotely, valid. And neither Jim nor Gmac have produced any.

      • Hugh_G

        Ted Kennedy??????????

        Look in the mirror bolsters.

  • Brian_R_Allen

    It is sad that to be a left-winger is to be a hatemonger  ….

    No it is not sad.

    It’s a symptom.

    Fascissociailsm is a psychosis.

    Experienced secondary to its underlying disorder, Envy, Hatred and rage are experienced — and are morbidly Denied and pathologically Projected — by 100% of the Facsissocialism Psychosis’s sufferers.

    …. the Democrats and cretins ….

    The Democrats and/or  other cretins, methinks?

  • Pingback: Weekend Link Love: A Tribute to Andrew Breitbart | All American Blogger()

  • Balvinder Singh

    I don’t think it’s admirable to edit someone’s comments to mean the exact opposite of what they meant in full. Is that “conservative?’
    FIR For Lost Voter ID Card