breitbart answers leftist critics

Breitbart Answers Leftist Critics

andrew breitbartAndrew Breitbart, the founder of Big Hollywood, Big Government, Breitbart.com and the brain behind the Huffington Post, has had enough of criticism from leftists. Especially an article published at The Daily Beast, and the Atlantic’s Andrew Sullivan’s linking to and affirming it, provoked his ire.

The author, Breitbart believes, came up with a lot of fancy theories about what Breitbart does and why he does it, but he didn’t have the courage to talk to the man himself.

Breitbart’s reaction:

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…

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.

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.

There’s more, so be sure to read the whole thing.

Breitbart touches upon a very important subject here: the left’s modus operandi. Breitbart isn’t attacked because he is biased, but because he’s a conservative. If he were a leftist, nobody on the left would have had a problem with the way he operates.

No, the left’s problem is that Breitbart is the only conservative media personality who successfully launches one attack on leftist organizations and individuals after another. He does what the MSM dare not do: He exposes them. He has shown the world what kind of organizations ACORN and the SEIU are. He has educated all of us about the tactics used against the right by the left. Tactics that are, although highly effectively also terribly despicable.

Lastly, I emailed Breitbart today to ask him whether he’ll let me interview him. He confirmed – more on that later. Conclusion: he is very reachable, so why didn’t TDB contact him?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine


  1. Rudi666

    October 7th, 2009 at 20:06

    Reply |
    Quote |
    #1

    Andrew Breitbart, the founder of Big Hollywood, Big Government, Breitbart.com and the brain behind the Huffington Post, has had enough of criticism from leftists.

    Friedersdorf and Sullivan are Marxist Lefties, in what alternate universe?

    Friedersdorf is a regular contributor at Claremont Institute, a riight wing think tank.

    http://www.claremont.org/scholars/id.157/scholar.asp

    How are Friedersdorf and Sully Lefty critics?


  2. Doomed

    October 8th, 2009 at 03:32

    Reply |
    Quote |
    #2


  3. Michael Merritt

    October 8th, 2009 at 07:18

    Reply |
    Quote |
    #3

    Friedersdorf and Sullivan are Marxist Lefties, in what alternate universe?

    I haven’t read enough of Conor’s material to make a judgment call on his political leanings, but have been reading Andrew for about two years now. He describes himself as a libertarian-leaning conservative (of a Paulian strain), and because of his current disdain for American conservatism, a “Tory,” but in terms of a left-right spectrum, is probably closer to a moderate.

    Perhaps slightly to the left of John McCain.


  4. Conor Friedersdorf

    October 8th, 2009 at 17:27

    Reply |
    Quote |
    #4

    As it happens, I did once attempt to contact Mr. Breitbart for an interview — he did not reply to my e-mail. You would’ve known as much if you’d have contacted me!

    Of course, none of the bloggers criticizing me, nor Mr. Breitbart himself, makes a habit of interviewing everyone they criticize in print. Does anyone think that is common practice at Big Government or Big Hollywood?

    I reply at length to Mr. Breitbart here: http://theamericanscene.com/2009/10/06/responding-to-andrew-breitbart


  5. Michael Merritt

    October 9th, 2009 at 09:06

    Reply |
    Quote |
    #7

    As it happens, I did once attempt to contact Mr. Breitbart for an interview — he did not reply to my e-mail.

    I saw that in your response, so thanks for clearing it up. Yes, I also wrote an article criticizing your argument, but not because I think you’re wrong in your views. It’d be great if every publication could hold a position of complete neutrality in their news departments, and report ALL the news that’s fit to print, but as you yourself point out, it just isn’t happening.

    Thus, sites like Breitbart’s, or site like HuffPo, are needed to fill the gap in reporting. Yes, it is partisan, but probably not so much more than the big boys are these days.

    I don’t think the Times deserves to be destroyed, but if it happens (and newspaper readership is already dwindling across the board), the paper cannot say that it did not play its part in that untimely death.

Comments are closed.