MattM

Kind of like Andrew Breitbart, right?

Keep dodging the question and living in your right wing fantasy land. I'm pretty much done talking to you on this subject, as you've pretty clear flunked the litmus test for being a reasonable, well-intentioned human being.... PS How is it phony to repeatedly say that if someone on the left does something scummy or unethical they should be called out on it, but to then call out this excuse for human being Breitbart here when he does something completely unethical? Logic isn't your strong suit I take it. I turned your video off because it has ZERO to do with this thread or the question I presented, other than try to change direction away from the topic at hand, which is one you find yourself losing massively on. Notice how none of your other conservative friends other than perhaps our friend in Wisc. who seems to have some of his own racial insecurities/issues is sticking up for this guy.

Yeah, and that was Breitbart's intention, to make this woman rich. Give me a break. That said, I hope it works out that way and I hope she sues him for defamation and slander for all he's worth (which is probably a lot, not from his own endeavors, but since from his bio it's pretty clear that he's a spoiled little rich kid from Brentwood--what a shock, a wealthy Republican talking head who largely inherited money and his position in our society from mommy and daddy. I shall alert the media). I'm pretty sure he thought he had the only videotape of that speech and wouldn't be unmasked as he has been, otherwise unless he's a complete and utter moron he'd have never run the story the way he did. It's pretty clear to any objective person that this guy ran (no, created through his disingenous editing) a story with the incredibly foreseeable result that it would ruin an innocent person's life, but he really didn't care about that at all. That it didn't turn out that way through forces outside of Breitbart's control doesn't excuse this fact. He's a scumball who deserves to be shunned (or worse).....

Go ahead--keep refusing to answer the question. This thread is about Breitbart and his video, in case you've forgotten. Your silence on that point speaks volumes about your views. Personally, I view this issue as a litmus test about whether someone has good intentions and is a reasonable person and not just a party apparatchik. FWIW, I've got several very good and very conservative friends (one of whom was sending me e-mails from Monday touting Breitbart's initial video) who've admitted that this guy did wrong and deserves to be at the very least sued. That's because along with being conservative, they're also fair-minded. Without saying that your video shows a wrong (I watched about half of it before getting disgusted at your attempt to change the topic--maybe it does show a "wrong", maybe it doesn't, but I don't believe that germane to my question to you right here), I've told you above, two wrongs a right do not make. If someone "on the left" uses dodgy tactics then call them out on them and condemn them for it, but BE CONSISTENT, otherwise you're no more than an unthinking, knee jerk moron without principles. I'm still waiting for your answer to the question at hand here in this thread ON THE BREITBART VIDEO.....

I've searched your posts this week, but I must have missed your thoughts on Breitbart other than your "egg on his face" comment. Really, that's all you have to say about someone who INTENTIONALLY RUINED AN INNOCENT PERSON'S LIFE FOR PERSONAL/POLITICAL GAIN? That's okay, keep trying to switch topics, but it just makes YOU look like a one-trick political hack (to use your word) who can't think for himself and who's got himself so far out there on the Right Wing limb that he can't realize when someone on that side of things does something reprehensible. PS Do you only write on politics and not football (the original purpose of this board, BTW)? From a quick look, sure looked that way to me. Are you from WNY and/or a football fan or did the Republican party plant you here to just stir the political pot?

Two wrongs making a right? What's your point other than to deflect blame here since "the other guys do it too"? Pathetic. Quit dodging the immediate questions here--where do YOU stand on Breitbart? Difference is, what he did referenced an INDIVIDUAL and was clearly something that was going to COST AN INNOCENT (AND SOME WOULD EVEN SAY INSPIRATIONAL) PERSON HER JOB AND WORSE (SHE'S GOTTEN DEATH THREATS, FOR EX.). HUGE, HUGE difference. Imagine if it was YOU he pulled this crap on. I'm using all caps because you seem a little slow on the uptake or maybe just unwilling to think for yourself and away from your orthodoxy. It's funny that since you're such a slave to it you figure others are, too, but no, some of us can realize that something's clearly wrong even if it's "our side" that's doing it....

PS I, too, am psyched for this game. Never been to Lambeau, but am looking very much forward to it!

I was wondering the same thing. Must be nice to live in a part of the country where $400k buys you more than a garage.....

How so? I give reasonsed responses and I get back grade school name-calling and garbage. Par for the course in political discourse these days, sadly. I'll ask it again--how can ANYONE defend what this guy did? He clearly knew what he was doing was wrong (I suspect he didn't realize that someone else had the tape to find him out and is now spinning like mad to try to not appear to be the complete jerk he's been shown to be) and could inflict serious damage to the person he was wronging, but really didn't care. She should do us all a favor and sue him into the poorhouse. What infuriates me is that if you take the time to read her speech, while you may not agree with aspects of it, it was 180 degrees away from what Breitbart's excerpts painted it as. It was about racial reconciliation and this woman using an example of she herself learning to not be racist and to overcome her own background and prejudices--using herself as an example of what not to do and why--and this guy twisted it completely around. Absolutely shameful.....

No, looked to me, too, like he was trying to defend that POS Breitbart. Simple question--do you repudiate this guy and what he did here? If not, I've got no time for you, since you're so far gone from reality that you can't be saved and I'd hate to live in your bitter and twisted world. PS As you can tell, this guy's got me very worked up--the last thing people in this country need is some racist wannabe demagogue creating racial issues where there were none. What he needs to be is shunned......

I'll say it again--you folks defending him are NUTS and by standing up for this guy you show your true colors. What he did was plain and simply WRONG and his tactics here to any fair-minded, non-bitterly partisan person serve to severely delegitimate any "message" he was trying to send (although it's been fun watching him try to spin this aspect of things). For the record, quit trying to peg me as someone "you know" on these issues who defends things like Al Sharpton, which is what Mr. LA is implying. No, when someone like Sharpton says something nuts I call him out on it, too, as do most reasonable-minded people. Keep setting up some non-existant boogeyman to knock down--works so well for Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly, must work here, right? Absolutely, ridiculous and as I said before, anyone who defends this guy should be ashamed of themselves now that the whole truth has come out.....

After what's come out the last day or so on this story, I have ZERO respect for anyone who can stand up in any way for what Breitbart did here. He basically edited a film to distort and in some ways completely reverse the speaker's message in order to score political points. In doing so it was clearly foreseeable that it was going to have horrible consequences for his innocent victim who he didn't even know, but he didn't give a rat's ass who he hurt and damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead. This guy is a complete jerk and what he did here should completely delegitimate any message he was trying to send. I'm normally a fairly non-violent guy, but there's a part of me that thinks justice will only be done here should Ms. Sherrod have a 6 foot 5 250 pound son who played some D-I linebacker happen to have an "encounter" with good ole Mr. B..... Here's the transcript of her ENTIRE speech, BTW--makes me incredibly angry to read it, but the primary sources are always your best bet for unspinned information: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/s...aacpfreedom.htm

7-9, although it could go as high as 8-8 (hope I'm wrong on the low side there) or 6-10.....

Plus One on the Prayers and Best Wishes for a Speedy Recovery....

I love the fact that they don't mention his looming 8 game 'roid/HGH/PED suspension--lol........

....the upper middle class: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/business...ream&st=cse Among the gems: “Scott has got to find somebody who knows someone,” the grandfather said, “someone who can get him to the head of the line.” About the young man's dad: "He joined one of those companies — owned by the family of his friend — and he has stayed in manufacturing, particularly at companies that make hand tools." Yet based on their descriptions (a retired stockbroker and plant GM respectively) I'd bet dollars to donuts dad and grandpa winge about how the poor and minorities just need to "suck it up" and "work harder" to succeed, "just like they did". I understand that this is the way the world works, but the hypocrisy is what galls me. Don't just read the article, check out the comments, too. Some of them are priceless. I especially liked number 19.....

Tough break for him--almost always sorry to see a season-ending injury.....

I stand corrected--Vollmer and Edelman are the only two in that class who seemed to impress (at least me) last year. Brace didn't suit up for some games, and Chung and Butler didn't exactly set the world on fire, while Tate was on IR, IIRC......

Plus one--are there any FA's still available at that spot?

Try telling their fans that--I was reading one of their message boards the other day and they were already coronating this year's draft class (none of whom has ever played an NFL down) and last year's (uhhh, besides Edelman, did any of them even play much last year?) as two of the best drafts ever, I sh*t you not......

You hit the nail right on the head--I actually rooted for the Pats* in their first Super Bowl (I just threw up in my mouth a little with that admission), but it really didn't take too long for him and the rest of his mates to become bigtime douchebags (or perhaps they were always DB's, but the media just didn't cover them that way--ye olde chicken/egg phenomenon). Little did we know at the time that they were cheating all along.....

Yeah, and I'm sure that's what he meant--that's BS and we both know it.....

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/07/24-ty...f-libertarians/ Enjoy. My favorites are "the Island" and "Nepotist".....

....and BTW, what a non-story this is, as per the following from it: "To be fair to the president, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform was created after the Senate failed to pass legislation establishing a bipartisan panel that would have been able to force up-on-down votes in Congress on deficit reduction measures. He pushed for the stronger panel before accepting the current commission, which has no enforcement power. " The guy wanted to create a panel to actually force Congressmen to do something on deficit reduction measures, but, oh, no, can't have that--much easier to just criticize than actually make decisions you can be called on the carpet for (and that's directed at both parties).....

What's with the ghetto slang subtitle? He's never spoken like that in his life and you know it. Reasonable people can certainly disagree with the President, but I read that kind of crap and immediately tune out the message of the "speaker", since it sends a pretty clear signal of what their "real" problem with him is.....