andrew breitbart: Page 1
For examples, see the videos below. In the first, they block a woman in a wheelchair from leaving a building. In the second, they use little kids as human shields.
Yet another example of Teaparty being useful idiots for the Koch brothers? (Madison union protests) - 02/19/11
Are the tea parties useful idiots for an attempt by the billionaire Koch family to fight unionization in order to increase their profits? The latest example of the Koch family pushing an agenda that helps their bottom line and getting help from the teapartiers in that endeavor comes from the protests between public sector unions and Republican governor Scott Walker in Madison, Wisconsin. I haven't been closely following the issue, but at the very least it's clear that the Kochs are attempting to take advantage of the issue to push their agenda. And, pushing that agenda would help the bottom line of their energy and resources empire.
The Kochs helped elect Walker , and their Americans for Prosperity has now created a site to support him and opposing at the least collective bargaining by public sector unions. However, it might also be an attempt to oppose collective bargaining in general . Meanwhile, the Kochs have a financial interest in reducing labor costs in Wisconsin (as they do in other states) .
Today, the tea parties held a counter-protest featuring luminaries such as Andrew Breitbart ( National Review interview: peekurl.com/v9LhdhK ), Gateway Pundit, and Herman Cain ( peekURL.com/vhZ64cs ). Meanwhile, Glenn Reynolds is going all out (instapundit.com/115329, instapundit.com/115324, instapundit.com/115278 and probably more).
On the one hand, unions are somewhat of a negative force in the U.S. because most of them support illegal immigration, with groups like the Service Employees International Union getting a good part of their dues from money that was earned illegally. The SEIU even paid someone linked to the Mexican government to organize immigration marches inside the U.S. And, allies of the unions also support mass/illegal immigration. And, excessive demands by public sector unions might in fact lead to budget shortfalls.
On the other hand, the billionaire Koch brothers are at the least taking advantage of this issue to push an agenda that would help their bottom line. And, the teapartiers are being useful idiots for them. And, the same types of people who harp on public sector unions in regards to California's problems (while ignoring the impact of the massive immigration they support on the state) are now involved in the Madison counterprotests.
So, there doesn't appear to be a good way out on this issue. The last thing we should want is a victory for the teaparties and their Koch stringpullers. But, another last thing we should want is for a victory by Barack Obama and groups that support illegal immigration.
UPDATE: Via this, part of gov. Walker's "Budget Repair Bill" (PDF link, excerpt at ) would allow Wisconsin state energy assets ("heating, cooling, and power plants") to be sold to private companies or their operations transfered to private companies. Surely it's a coincidence that the Koch family is in the energy business and that the sales would be done "with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state".
UPDATE 2: Yet another questionable, possibly Koch-friendly action by Walker happened last month (link):
A plan to spend $100 million on a boiler that would burn plant-based fuels at UW-Madison's Charter Street power plant was axed Thursday by Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch... Cullen Werwie, a spokesman for Gov. Scott Walker, said Huebsch halted spending on the boiler based on Walker's wishes... According to a 2008 university study, converting the plant to burn biofuel was the most expensive of the options considered and would be about twice as expensive as using other coal-burning technologies or natural gas... University officials credited the strong support of former Gov. Jim Doyle for the plan to burn biofuels. Doyle and state environmentalists praised the switch to biofuels because such fuels can be grown in Wisconsin and would, in the long run, be more reliable and less expensive than natural gas, which must be purchased and piped in from out of state.
The source for the claim that biofuels would save money long-term isn't given, but at least from that article it doesn't sound like Walker was taking exception to that claim. Instead, it at least sounds like he was being penny wise and pound foolish. And, coincidence or not, the Kochs are in the natural gas business and even have a pipeline network in Wisconsin. Hopefully someone will ask him for an explanation.
UPDATE 3: Instead of pressing Walker for an explanation, dim Democrat/union supporters are doing what they tend to do: play games. The latest example is Ian Murphy from the Buffalo Beast (free weekly) calling Walker and pretending to be David Koch from the Koch family (link). On the call, Walker says nothing in any way incriminating; the call (unless Walker was waiting for the "secret code" or knew it was a prank) makes clear that Walker had not been previously coordinating with the Kochs. And, the idea that a politician would rush to take a call from a major donor is only shocking to those who are completely naive.
The stupidity highlight of the call is this:
[A Walker assistant] was eager to help. “I was really hoping to talk directly to Scott,” I said. He said that could be arranged and that I should just leave my number. I explained to Gilkes, “My goddamn maid, Maria, put my phone in the washer. I’d have her deported, but she works for next to nothing.” Gilkes found this amusing. “I’m calling from the VOID—with the VOID, or whatever it’s called. You know, the Snype!”
If I said that, it would be with the recognition that the Kochs fund loose borders groups and support mass immigration. However, Ian Murphy doesn't have that excuse: it's doubtful whether he knows that the Dems/far-left/unions and the Kochs support the same basic immigration policy.
 Per this:
According to Wisconsin campaign finance filings, Walker's gubernatorial campaign received $43,000 from the Koch Industries PAC during the 2010 election. That donation was his campaign's second-highest, behind $43,125 in contributions from housing and realtor groups in Wisconsin... The [Koch] PAC gave $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, which in turn spent $65,000 on independent expenditures to support Walker. The RGA also spent a whopping $3.4 million on TV ads and mailers attacking Walker's opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett...
...Walker's plan to eviscerate collective bargaining rights for public employees is right out of the Koch brothers' playbook. Koch-backed groups like Americans for Prosperity, the Cato Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and the Reason Foundation (see Reason Magazine) have long taken a very antagonistic view toward public-sector unions. Several of these groups have urged the eradication of these unions. The Kochs also invited (PDF) Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, an anti-union outfit, to a June 2010 confab in Aspen, Colorado; Mix said in a recent interview that he supports Governor Walker's collective-bargaining bill. In Wisconsin, this conservative, anti-union view is being placed into action by lawmakers in sync with the deep-pocketed donors who helped them obtain power. (Walker also opposes the state's Clean Energy Job Act, which would compel the state to increase its use of alternative energy.) At this moment - even with the Wisconsin uprising unresolved - the Koch brothers' investment in Walker appears to be paying off.
 AFP created standwithwalker.com, which just redirects to americansforprosperity.org/walker. The petition there says:
Union dues should be voluntary, and the state should not be in the business of collecting them. Union certification should require a secret ballot. Collective bargaining should not be used to force extravagant pension and health benefits that cripple state budgets... These common-sense reforms have made the union bosses desperate to disrupt Wisconsin government and overturn an election. They must not be allowed to succeed. In fact, every state should adopt Governor Scott Walker's common sense reforms.
Koch owns a coal company subsidiary with facilities in Green Bay, Manitowoc, Ashland and Sheboygan; six timber plants throughout the state; and a large network of pipelines in Wisconsin. While Koch controls much of the infrastructure in the state, they have laid off workers to boost profits. At a time when Koch Industries owners David and Charles Koch awarded themselves an extra $11 billion of income from the company, Koch slashed jobs at their Green Bay plant
16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b).
Jared Loughner: anti-Bush, pro-small government? Intellectually dishonest Tea Party defenders - 01/17/11
Enablers of the tea parties have, of course, been completely intellectually dishonest when attempting to defend themselves against claims that Jared Loughner is linked to them in one way or another. One example is here, and today's example involves the New York Times piece "Looking Behind the Mug-Shot Grin" (link).
Based on the relevant portion of that article , Loughner sounds a bit like a libertarian or perhaps anarchist . Instead of considering the whole of the relevant portion of the NYT article, Tea Party enablers stop at the part about not liking George W Bush, attempting to portray Loughner as a liberal. (Personally, I think he had no clear ideology but might have been motivated by Tea Party tactics.)
The NYT article gives the impression of someone who leans more to the libertarian side, and teaparty enablers are trying to transmogrify it into making him a liberal:
* Gateway Pundit offers "Finally We Know What Drove Insane Left-Wing Pothead Loughner to Violence: GEORGE BUSH" .
* Glenn Reynolds links to the Lowry post with "LOUGHNER: NOT EXACTLY A TEA PARTIER: “His anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush, or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government.”" (pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/113333)
* Pat Dollard offered at post linking Loughner's school to George Soros and quoting the Bush part of the NYT piece (but not the rest). He also seems to have deleted the post which was at:
patdollard.com/2011/01/soros-educated-loughner-bush-hater and bit.ly/hHeNpf
* Andrew Breitbart tweeted a link to the Dollard post before it was apparently deleted:
Why did Soros put target on Jared Loughner's young brain? Will MSM scrutinize #HeatedPoliticalStudentIndoctrination? http://bit.ly/hHeNpf
- twitter dot com/AndrewBreitbart/status/27077637046280194
* Dana Loesch tweeted a link to the NYT article:
So Loughner hated Bush http://bit.ly/hQXdxb . Lots of people still owe others an apology. Let's see if they have the character to do it. - twitter dot com/DLoesch/statuses/27038728664915968
* Matt Drudge at post time is linking to Page 3 of the NYT piece with the text "AZ SHOOTER: BUSH HATER..."
* Fox News offers the blog post "NYT: Arizona Shooter Was a Bush Hater" which stops at the Bush part of the relevant portion:
* IowaHawk tweets:
Loughner a 9-11 Truther whose "anger would well up at the sight of G.W. Bush" http://nyti.ms/g5vkMa Mission Accomplished, @markos
- twitter dot com/iowahawkblog/status/27015807926009856
UPDATE: Earlier I said Loesch linked to the Dollard post; she just linked to the NYT piece. I've updated this with their full tweets.
UPDATE 2: The Dollard blog post is back at:
It was unavailable while he "[e]xpanded the story." (twitter dot com/PatDollard/status/27125395375529984).
I've added an image he included with his post to show the types of people who enable the teaparties.
* FAQ: Is Jared Lee Loughner linked to Tea Party, conservatives, or libertarians? (Gabrielle Giffords shooting)
* Claims by Tea Party enablers that Pima Sheriff Dupnik could have stopped Loughner are false
* Friend's claim that Loughner wasn't political is two years out of date
* Loughner's "Genocide school" video
* Jared Loughner's AboveTopSecret postings show no clear political slant
* Arizona state Fusion Center uses Giffords shooting to smear American Renaissance)
* Glenn Reynolds denies Tea Party's history of intimidation
* first post on Gabrielle Giffords shooting
But Jared, a curious teenager who at times could be intellectually intimidating, stood out because of his passionate opinions about government — and his obsession with dreams.
He became intrigued by antigovernment conspiracy theories, including that the Sept. 11 attacks were perpetrated by the government and that the country’s central banking system was enslaving its citizens. His anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush, or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government.
“I think he feels the people should be able to govern themselves,” said Ms. Figueroa, his former girlfriend. “We didn’t need a higher authority.”
Breanna Castle, 21, another friend from junior and senior high school, agreed. “He was all about less government and less America,” she said, adding, “He thought it was full of conspiracies and that the government censored the Internet and banned certain books from being read by us.”
Among the books that he would later cite as his favorites: “Animal Farm,” “Fahrenheit 451,” “Mein Kampf” and “The Communist Manifesto.” Also: “Peter Pan.”
 Many libertarians were opposed to George W Bush, and libertarians, the Teapartiers, and conservatives in general are "all about less government".
Finally, we know what drove Tucson shooter mad… GEORGE BUSH.
The Corner discovered this buried in a New York Times article, via Instapundit:
(This little nugget was hidden on page 3 of the online article.)
Tea Party "Patriots" mostly silent about anti-American DREAM Act (and rightwing bloggers too) - 12/07/10
The "patriots" in the tea parties aren't exactly going all out to oppose the anti-American DREAM Act amnesty. The loudest voices against the Obama administration have mostly gone silent against an amnesty which could cover between one to two million illegal aliens and which would allow those illegal aliens covered by it to take college resources away from their fellow citizens.
The Service Employees International Union might be funneling money from foreign citizens and illegal aliens in the U.S. into U.S. elections. According to this, the SEIU claims to have spent several million dollars more in the 2008 campaign cycle than their political organization - Committee on Political Education ("COPE") - announced as expenditures:
In May 2009, the Wall Street Journal reported that SEIU officials bragged they had spent $85 million during the 2008 campaign season, making them the the single biggest contributor to either party in the last election cycle.
Yet according to the Federal Election Commission, the SEIU's COPE fund had total expenditures of just $40.9 million during the 2007-2008 campaign. Hmm. Where did the other $44.1 million come from? It appears that "most" of the SEIU's political expenditures came from sources other than COPE.
As I've been mostly discussing alone for years, a large portion of the dues that the SEIU receives are from illegal aliens, putting them in the position of profiting from illegally-earned money and giving them a distinct financial incentive to promote illegal immigration as they do. Now it looks like they're funneling some of that funding into the U.S. political system.
Note: the money would come from their general fund; they have what they describe as a legal way for non-eligible persons (i.e., illegal aliens) to participate in the political process as discussed here. Assuming the SEIU is telling the truth about that alternative to COPE being legal, the concerns above have nothing to do with that post.
The video at peekURL.com/vcf8el2 shows a college student - presumably a College Republican - trying to engage Rep. Bob Etheridge (Democrat of North Carolina) in conversation on a Washington DC sidewalk. Rather than pausing to speak to him, Etheridge grabs his arm and then puts him in a horse collar, repeatedly asking, "who are you?" The video is currently linked by Drudge, and Glenn Reynolds  and Andrew Breitbart    among others are currently promoting it. Whether Breitbart was involved in making the video isn't clear, but it's in the Youtube account belonging to his associate Larry O'Connor .
Whether this was actually assault isn't clear since we can't see the full confrontation. The camera did get close into Etheridge's face, but at the same time it's doubtful that he could have considered a cookie cutter Ronald Reagan Jr. as a threat. Hopefully there will be some sort of investigation, because unless they're threatened, politicians shouldn't be grabbing people like yahoos.
But, there probably won't be an investigation of any kind, and the reason for that is because those involved have no intellectual power and aren't trying to get it:
1. This video is akin to paparazzi who try to get publicity for them being beaten up by a celebrity after they get into that celebrity's face. Whether the student wanted to provoke a response similar to what he got or whether he actually wanted to engage the Congressman in conversation isn't clear, but generally speaking we should be concentrating on discussing ideas rather than Congressmen Behaving Badly.
2. The "question" the student had is one of those bad questions: "Do you fully support the Obama agenda?" and it's on the same level as and uses the same "ambush" technique as the GOP has been doing for over a year. Actually, whether they're still doing videos like that isn't clear, because they never had an impact. While there's the possibility that the student was simply using the first question as an entree into really tough questioning, that possibility is incredibly slight. Those in that orbit seem incapable of coming up with tough questions but instead rely on repeating talking points or cheap stunts.
3. Just a few days ago, I continued my campaign to try to get Breitbart to raise the bar by asking truly tough questions, tweeting the following (starting here):
@andrewbreitbart: if you want to send a message the Obama admin can't ignore, help discredit Jim Wallis. He is/was fan of Karl Marx, plus... he's incredibly vulnerable to being discredited. Send a smart, experienced trial lawyer to one of his appearances to... "cross-examine" Wallis over http://24ahead.com/s/false-compassion Then, post the video of the exchange to your site.
Once again, I don't know whether Breitbart was involved with the making of the video, but what I suggested to him is the opposite of the video he's promoting. The type of questioner I'm suggesting isn't a wet-behind-the-ears College Republican but an experienced trial lawyer or similar. And, while ideally the questioning would take place at a designated Q&A session, if it had to take place on a sidewalk I'd hope that the experienced questioner wouldn't just shove a camera in the person's face. And, most importantly of all, the goal would be to discredit the ideas of Jim Wallis, and not to catch him behaving badly.
UPDATE: Etheridge has released an apology; it says in full (etheridge.house.gov/News/
"I have seen the video posted on several blogs. I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction and I apologize to all involved. Throughout my many years of service to the people of North Carolina, I have always tried to treat people from all viewpoints with respect. No matter how intrusive and partisan our politics can become, this does not justify a poor response. I have and I will always work to promote a civil public discourse."
I used to think that Andrew Breitbart was a bright guy who was laughing behind the backs of the absolute idiots that he publishes at BigGovernment, BigHollywood, and his other sites. Now, I'm not so sure.
A recent post from Andrew Marcus (link at , bio at , linked by Glenn Reynolds ) has BigGovernment acting like the far-left and racial power groups when it comes to concerns about illegal aliens being able to attend colleges at the in-state rate. And, unlike the far-left, they don't know what they're doing: they're helping the far-left because they're absolute idiots.
At the post, Marcus quotes a student who's been protesting fee increases as saying:
Well um in the fall the UC regents voted in a %32 fee increase to over 10000 a year for in-state tuition. This at a time that they are cutting classes, letting in fewer student from in-state and more students from out of state. Um, so effectively we are closing off the campus, making it less accessible to people, and those who are here are getting less out of their education.
He then goes on to accuse the student of hypocrisy and says:
That complaint doesn’t sound too immigrant friendly. Is she saying that Berkeley students only want immigrants from other states and countries just as long as they go to private schools?
Now, I'd like you the reader to please go take a look at the DREAM Act page, which is about an anti-American bill that would let current or former illegal aliens attend college at the in-state rate. Please go take a look; it'll just take you a minute to get the gist.
As you can see, this site has been opposed to that bill for several years, and on the PIIPP page we've collected a large number of examples of the mainstream media printing cookie-cutter propaganda articles promoting that anti-American bill.
Did Andrew Brietbart and Andrew Marcus come out against that bill and support those - like to a certain extent the student - who realize that we only have limited resources?
No, Breitbart and Marcus did the exact opposite, playing little games like little children and acting just like the far-left, but without knowing what they're doing.
Memo to Andrew Breitbart: grow up and try to raise yourself above Glenn Reynolds' level.
 From biggovernment.com/author/amarcus
Andrew Marcus is an independent video and multimedia producer based in the Midwest. For the past several years his work www.andrewmarcus.com has focused heavily on web distributed political stories in video and blog format.
Early examples of his work include first-person coverage of the Camp Cindy protests in Crawford, Texas, as presented on his blog, Lights, Camera, Protest! In 2005, Andrew produced the video blog, The Mental Ward, to cover the Ward Churchill visit to DePaul University. In 2006, Andrew led a team of bloggers to produce ground-breaking video coverage of the congressional mid-term elections from Lieberman HQ. In 2007, Andrew produced the video blog, Incorrect University, to document politically incorrect actions on campus, beginning with the Terrorism Awareness Project’s Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. Recently, Andrew has been working closely with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) to produce web videos documenting stories of injustice on college campuses. Most recently, Andrew has devoted his energies to producing Founding Bloggers, his current political blogging project.
 pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/95116 says "AT BIG GOVERNMENT, a look at Berkeley Riot Hypocrisy. Who knew those rioters were immigrant-haters?"
Tea party intellectual Dana Loesch: if you disagree with the tea parties, you're a socialist - 01/02/10
Over at Big Government, tea parties organizer Dana Loesch offers "Its a Wrap: The Most Underreported Stories of 2009" [sic; URL at 1] which, among others, contains this jaw-droppingly stupid paragraph:
The most misreported and misunderstood thing about the tea party is its political leanings. The tea party has no political leaning. It stands straight for limited government, low taxes, and liberty for all. Disagreement with those tenets is an accidental admission of socialism on the part of the antagonist. The beauty of the tea party movement is that it is independent and thus a true check and balance of the Republican and Democrat parties. It’s not a pawn of the GOP, thus untouchable in criticism of the Democrats – I view it as an unattached conscience of the Republican party.
Obviously, the second sentence is false, whether she means "political" in the sense of ideology or in the sense of party. The parties don't stand straight: they lean towards the right and towards the GOP (or libertarianism). That's akin to liberals who refuse to see liberal bias in the media. If she does in fact believe what she's saying it's yet another example of tea party solipsism. Their far-right ideology (at least on economic matters) isn't far right because they're at the center of the universe.
Then, of course, it's her "you're either with us or you're against us" moment, where she says that anyone who doesn't support her far-right economic policy is a socialist. Michael Bloomberg? Socialist! Mike Huckabee? Socialist! George W Bush? Socialist!
There are plenty of Reds under the GOP bed, but also across America. Dozens of millions of Americans, when informed of the tea party ideology and what it would result in would oppose them. And, they're all socialists.
The bottom line is that the tea parties are a loud fringe group of low-wattage loons. Andrew Breitbart is smart enough that he's probably laughing at them behind their back even as he prints their unhinged screeds.
10/11/10 UPDATE: Dana Loesch is the new editor at Breitbart's Big Journalism, so I guess I'll have to retract the sentence directly above.
On 9/18/09, Darryl Fears and Carol Leonnig of the Washington Post offered "The $1,300 Mission to Fell ACORN/Duo in Sting Video Say Their Effort Was Independent" (link), an attempt by the WaPo to undercut the recent undercover reporting videos showing highly questionable activity by ACORN workers. Now, the WaPo has corrected a smear that Fears and Leonnig put in the article:
This article about the community organizing group ACORN incorrectly said that a conservative journalist targeted the organization for hidden-camera videos partly because its voter-registration drives bring Latinos and African Americans to the polls. Although ACORN registers people mostly from those groups, the maker of the videos, James E. O'Keefe, did not specifically mention them.
The correction was most likely brought about by Powerline! (exclamation added for extra emphasis) which called out those reporters by name (powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/09/024567.php). While it's easy - and fun! - to laugh at Powerline for being extremely doctrinaire GOP hacks who write one-hour-old-stubble-scratching articles and who don't approve comments showing how they're wrong, in this case they seem to have succeeded at making the WaPo look bad, at least to those who'll see the correction.
UPDATE: On second thought, calling what Fears and Leonig did a "racial smear" as the title used to do is only implicit and it's more accurate to simply call it playing the race card.
Andrew Breitbart is teasing a major story to appear on Monday and he's hinted that it will come from "left field".