http://nation.foxnews.com/andrew-breitbart...tbart-1969-2012

 

In Memoriam: Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012)

 

By Larry Solov, Big Hollywood

 

Mar 1st 2012 at 5:58 am

 

With a terrible feeling of pain and loss we announce the passing of Andrew Breitbart.

 

Andrew passed away unexpectedly from natural causes shortly after midnight this morning in Los Angeles.

 

We have lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a dear friend, a patriot and a happy warrior.

 

Andrew lived boldly, so that we more timid souls would dare to live freely and fully, and fight for the fragile liberty he showed us how to love.

 

Andrew recently wrote a new conclusion to his book...

 

 

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/andrew-breitbart...2#ixzz1nsN3uRpV

Acorn strikes again.

Acorn strikes again.

Read some of the comments on the news sites and you would think that by the glee some are expressing.

Read some of the comments on the news sites and you would think that by the glee some are expressing.

 

Comments like this?

 

Kennedy was a special pile of human excrement.

 

 

 

Hated the guy but wasn't he just on Maher like a couple of weeks ago? Wow. Too young.

Hated the guy but wasn't he just on Maher like a couple of weeks ago? Wow. Too young.

 

43

Comments like this?

 

Kennedy was a special pile of human excrement.

So another one of the 'that's ok, the other side did it too' defenses? Still not right.

Hated the guy but wasn't he just on Maher like a couple of weeks ago? Wow. Too young.

 

He was apparently on TV just last night.

 

I would never have guessed that he was only 43.

So another one of the 'that's ok, the other side did it too' defenses? Still not right.

 

My thoughts on Breitbart's passing are more or less what Brian said -- I thought the guy was a verminous douche, which doesn't mean I wanted him to die, and I will treat his death with dignity. However, can you not admit that this is slightly different than "the other side did it too" since it wasn't just "the other side" but Breitbart himself who was engaging in the same behavior that, in your words, is "not right?"

My thoughts on Breitbart's passing are more or less what Brian said -- I thought the guy was a verminous douche, which doesn't mean I wanted him to die, and I will treat his death with dignity. However, can you not admit that this is slightly different than "the other side did it too" since it wasn't just "the other side" but Breitbart himself who was engaging in the same behavior that, in your words, is "not right?"

HOw is that different? He was mean to someone after they died so it's ok to be mean about him? Sounds the same to me. And you can assault his character, think he was an asshole when alive, but to express glee that he is dead is just wrong. That is reserved for a few special evil people in the world.

My thoughts on Breitbart's passing are more or less what Brian said -- I thought the guy was a verminous douche, which doesn't mean I wanted him to die, and I will treat his death with dignity. However, can you not admit that this is slightly different than "the other side did it too" since it wasn't just "the other side" but Breitbart himself who was engaging in the same behavior that, in your words, is "not right?"

 

...and to ME, it's STILL not right, regardless of who did it/does it.

American blog owner Andrew Breitbart is dead. He was 43 years old, and reportedly died of “natural causes” in Los Angeles early this morning. We knew Breitbart — “we,” meaning many of us who have written for Wonkette, including young Riley Waggaman, pictured above at left — and he was a pleasant enough goofball in person. Breitbart was also a talented writer of headlines (it really is an art!) who worked anonymously for many years as Matt Drudge’s assistant on the West Coast. What he is known for today is the vile collection of websites that includes “Big Government,” and his rambling, slurring appearances on broadcast media.

 

Breitbart leaves behind a wife and four children, along with hundreds of idiotic half-literate bloggers for his various websites who share his zeal for mindlessly attacking every non-wingnut aspect of life on Earth but lack his amiable personality.

http://wonkette.com/465368/andrew-breitbar...ead#more-465368

 

Whoa. At age 43, Andrew Breitbart reportedly died of natural causes last night. My condolences to his family, friends, and colleagues.

 

For obvious reasons, namely our polar-opposite politics and wildly divergent set of professional ethics, I was not a fan of Breitbart, and I cannot say that I felt his contributions to the national dialogue were constructive or positive in any way. He hurt people, shamelessly and wantonly, for political gain.

 

I didn't know the man personally, and what I knew of him I did not like.

 

But I am not glad he's dead. I would have preferred instead that he'd lived long enough to change his mind.

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/201...-breitbart.html

Edited March 1, 201214 yr by StrangeSox

HOw is that different? He was mean to someone after they died so it's ok to be mean about him? Sounds the same to me. And you can assault his character, think he was an asshole when alive, but to express glee that he is dead is just wrong. That is reserved for a few special evil people in the world.

 

No, I was making the distinction between "this is something Conservatives said about a Liberal's death, Andrew Breitbart was a Conservative, therefore it's more fair for Liberals to say this about Breitbart's death" and "this is something Andrew Breitbart said about Liberal's death, therefore it's more fair for Liberals to say this about Breitbart's death."

 

Y2HH, I agree with you, to a certain extent -- it's still not right, and I wouldn't do it; as I said, I would treat his death as I treat others' -- with dignity. Obviously for any celebrity it's different that I'm not personally sad about it, but I still respect it in the sense of, "Even if I detested him, I'm sure he still had people who loved him that are greatly impacted by this and I'll treat his death with dignity in deference to their sorrows."

 

The "certain extent" I go to is that I'm a firm believer in the "Golden Rule;" following that, Breitbart did not treat Kennedy's death with dignity, and therefore he has given permission to be treated like that himself. I, like you, choose not to act on said permission; but some people do, and I understand where they're coming from even if I don't agree with them doing so.

No, I was making the distinction between "this is something Conservatives said about a Liberal's death, Andrew Breitbart was a Conservative, therefore it's more fair for Liberals to say this about Breitbart's death" and "this is something Andrew Breitbart said about Liberal's death, therefore it's more fair for Liberals to say this about Breitbart's death."

 

Y2HH, I agree with you, to a certain extent -- it's still not right, and I wouldn't do it; as I said, I would treat his death as I treat others' -- with dignity. Obviously for any celebrity it's different that I'm not personally sad about it, but I still respect it in the sense of, "Even if I detested him, I'm sure he still had people who loved him that are greatly impacted by this and I'll treat his death with dignity in deference to their sorrows."

 

The "certain extent" I go to is that I'm a firm believer in the "Golden Rule;" following that, Breitbart did not treat Kennedy's death with dignity, and therefore he has given permission to be treated like that himself. I, like you, choose not to act on said permission; but some people do, and I understand where they're coming from even if I don't agree with them doing so.

 

Even if he did treat Kennedy's death with dignity, this still would have happened. Idiots don't need permission to be idiots. They are anyway.

 

Even if he did treat Kennedy's death with dignity, this still would have happened. Idiots don't need permission to be idiots. They are anyway.

 

Er, yes, but he didn't treat Kennedy's death with dignity. That's the entire point. Put another way, Breitbart was an idiot for the way he treated Kennedy's death; I'm merely saying I can more easily understand where idiots are coming from when they're targeting another idiot.

Er, yes, but he didn't treat Kennedy's death with dignity. That's the entire point. Put another way, Breitbart was an idiot for the way he treated Kennedy's death; I'm merely saying I can more easily understand where idiots are coming from when they're targeting another idiot.

 

Which only means they too should be targeted when they die? Its dumb.

The news of Mr. Breitbart's death came as a surprise to me when I was informed of it this morning. My prayers go out to Mr. Breitbart's family as they cope through this very difficult time.

 

Shirley Sherrod

Which only means they too should be targeted when they die? Its dumb.

 

Not exactly equivalent, since the cycle was started with Breitbart being a douchebag over Kennedy's death for political reasons, not because Kennedy gloated about someone's death.

It's still idiots being idiots regardless of the color of brush you all choose to paint it with.

 

The more you defend this type of behavior, the less I'm inclined to believe that you aren't exactly like them, DESPITE you claiming the contrary.

Not exactly equivalent, since the cycle was started with Breitbart being a douchebag over Kennedy's death for political reasons, not because Kennedy gloated about someone's death.

 

If you really want to play the technicalities game, Brietbart didn't contribute to anyone else's death either... That is if we are playing "Its different!"

If you really want to play the technicalities game, Brietbart didn't contribute to anyone else's death either... That is if we are playing "Its different!"

 

I don't think anyone's said he has?

It's still idiots being idiots regardless of the color of brush you all choose to paint it with.

 

The more you defend this type of behavior, the less I'm inclined to believe that you aren't exactly like them, DESPITE you claiming the contrary.

 

I'm not defending the behavior, just pointing out that ss2k5's argument doesn't hold up imo.

I'm not defending the behavior, just pointing out that ss2k5's argument doesn't hold up imo.

 

That only left wingers get to break the rules of acting decent when someone dies? Nope you just reinforced that by putting their behavior on a higher level.

That only left wingers get to break the rules of acting decent when someone dies? Nope you just reinforced that by excusing putting their behavior on a higher level.

 

No, I was saying the chain doesn't exactly follow since there's a defined starting point at Breitbart. If republicans want to rejoice when some dumb lefty s***head who gloats over political opponents dying dies, have at it.

No, I was saying the chain doesn't exactly follow since there's a defined starting point at Breitbart. If republicans want to rejoice when some dumb lefty s***head who gloats over political opponents dying dies, have at it.

 

Frankly, I think gloating over death is never appropriate.