Video: Breitbart goes nuclear on Salon writer at CPAC for smearing James O’Keefe as racist
posted at 4:55 pm on February 20, 2010 by Allahpundit
Via Big Journalism. I’m kicking myself for not having covered this at the time because most of you won’t know the background before watching. Briefly, lefty smear merchant Max Blumenthal dropped a hit piece on O’Keefe at Salon a few weeks ago alleging that he had helped plan some sort of white-supremacist conference in 2006, and even manned a table there at which racist literature was being sold.
Minor problem one: It wasn’t a white-supremacist conference. It was a debate on “Race and Conservatism” featuring a panel discussion between mainstream conservatives and racist radicals. Among the mainstreamers was Kevin Martin, a black conservative who spoke up after the Salon piece was published to say that O’Keefe chatted with him at the conference and “voiced personal support for me and my positions. He also repudiated the radical elements in the room that night.”
Minor problem two: Dave Weigel of the Washington Independent, the alleged source for the detail about O’Keefe manning the table with racist lit, also spoke up after Blumenthal’s piece hit to say that he had no reason to believe O’Keefe had helped plan the event and had never claimed that O’Keefe manned a table there.
And those weren’t the only “minor problems.” The end result: Salon had to formally retract the detail about O’Keefe planning the event, although as far as I know, the fact that O’Keefe allegedly told Kevin Martin he was on his side remains unreported.
You’re now pretty well prepared for what you’re about to see, although I recommend following the links above and reading Patterico’s reports on this, which were stellar as usual. Exit question: Breitbart’s having a good week at CPAC, isn’t he?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Yeah, Patterico has done some weird things at times, which is why I stopped reading and trusting him too.
ray on February 20, 2010 at 8:48 PM
I’m so going to CPAC 2011! Wow! Andrew Breitbart rulz!!
Salon’s Max Blumenthal: YOU LIE! A high school journalism class does better research. The real facts are there; you just need to dig deeper past your pre-set bias.
TN Mom on February 20, 2010 at 9:02 PM
Like that would stop the left –if they cannot find something they will make it up.
CWforFreedom on February 20, 2010 at 9:03 PM
Blumenthal seems likely to recover from his embarrassment and keep right on smearing. By way of comparison, I doubt he would similarly smear a prominent muslim or even tell an ugly truth about one. However, after shredding the reputation of a prominent American conservative activist, he walked openly among an entire assembly of them without harm. The borkings will continue because they’re effective and risk-free.
Kralizec on February 20, 2010 at 9:04 PM
I will too, I think your right. I am sure he has had many a sleepless night along with Beck.
wi farmgirl on February 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM
FYI – Larry O’Connor started his new media career blogging under the pseudonym, “Stage Right”. Look for his Blog Talk Radio show. It’s a blast.
MikeZero on February 20, 2010 at 9:27 PM
@ Vancomycin:
I think most reasonable observers would conclude that Blumenthal made an error, and that his carelessness resulted in perhaps unrecoverable but wholly unmerited damage to O’Keefe’s reputation.
My point is not to defend Blumenthal. I just think that Breitbart used a muckrake when he could have used a sledgehammer.
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 9:30 PM
Figured I’d include a link to Larry’s show.
MikeZero on February 20, 2010 at 9:32 PM
Lord, did anyone actually read this. If we are going the guilt by association route then what does a post like this tell us about Hot Air.
Buddy you need to be banned. I know I’ll say a ton of provacative stuff here, but I’d never go this far.
I like this site and the people here and I know that a lot of people disagree with me. However this post is beyond the pale.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 9:41 PM
Please. The ‘attack dogs’ like @$$-thing can call people’s mothers wh*res to punish them for deviating from the groupthink with impunity. And remember The Ronin Edge? He never got banned, he left of his own accord, and Canopfor is positively mild in comparison.
Dark-Star on February 20, 2010 at 9:50 PM
Libtards hate facts and they especially hate facts that they can’t change.
Mojave Mark on February 20, 2010 at 10:02 PM
Sad isn’t it.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 10:03 PM
It’s not much better on the libtard sites; both sides have similar tactics and members.
Dark-Star on February 20, 2010 at 10:04 PM
I’m not sure whether he was speaking metaphorically or not.
If he wasn’t using a “rough” figure of speech and meant it literally, it was over the top and needs to be ignored.
SteveMG on February 20, 2010 at 10:05 PM
I’d agree with you there, except for the part about killing people who disagree with you stuff. I’d guess he’d also be into camps for those who don’t follow the groupthink and “showers” for those who prove most difficult.
Other than that, exactly like the left wing blogs.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 10:08 PM
Funny. That’s exactly what the lefty Weathermen wanted to do.
MikeZero on February 20, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Make that, “allegedly” wanted to do.
MikeZero on February 20, 2010 at 10:34 PM
LOL!
harry, you are pitied by us. But canopfor? Much beloved here…
OmahaConservative on February 20, 2010 at 10:43 PM
We love canopfor. You? Meh. You should go.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:05 PM
I guess if you support killing people to further your cause….yay
Do you agree with him?
harry on February 20, 2010 at 11:07 PM
You lying, whingeing little sack of s***. You pompously decree that Palin has no right to go after those who attack her family, yet you whine about my going after your whore of a mother? And you have the gall to carry it to another thread? PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, A**HOLE! You reap what you sow. Every time I see you, I’m gonna rip you a new one, b*tch! And you need to STFU when I do it, because if you think Palin should shut up when people attack her family, YOU NEED TO DO THE SAME, HO!
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:08 PM
Lord, did anyone actually read this. If we are going the guilt by association route then what does a post like this tell us about Hot Air.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 9:41 PM
harry: I also don’t like Mormon or Christian bashing by the
left either,oh,I’ve used Preview,maybe twice in 2
years!!
canopfor on February 20, 2010 at 11:12 PM
I think you’re a cowardly little squint who deserves to be kicked to the curb.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:12 PM
Ignore the trash. Not worth the powder.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:13 PM
Maaaaan…can’t you do what you advise Palin to do and just let it go? ;)
ddrintn on February 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM
I don’t get it. O’Keefe attended what some have called a racist conference and Breitbart get’s all up in arms about guilt by association.
However, he is the first to bring up Obama’s supposed ties to Ayers.
It’s confusing.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 6:34 PM
===========================================================
harry: Do you really believe,what you posted above!!!
canopfor on February 20, 2010 at 11:14 PM
It’s a hypocritical POS. It’s going to whine and cry in every thread about this now. And I’m gonna keep on slamming it every time it opens its mouth.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:15 PM
I guess if you support killing people to further your cause….yay
Do you agree with him?
harry on February 20, 2010 at 11:07 PM
harry: “Why Soooooooooooooooo Serious!!eh!
canopfor on February 20, 2010 at 11:20 PM
How old are you? You realize that you’re talking to a guy that uses terms like “deviating from the groupthink”, right? Acting childish in return accomplishes nothing.
Which is sort of the whole point with this Breitbart episode, isn’t it?
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:21 PM
canopfor on February 20, 2010 at 11:12 PM
———————————————-
Ignore the trash. Not worth the powder.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:13 PM
atheling: Normally I don’t,thanks for covering my 6!:)
canopfor on February 20, 2010 at 11:23 PM
Piss off, troll.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM
Actually, I think “deviating from groupthink” in the Family Guy thing would be to say Palin was within her rights to criticize.
ddrintn on February 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM
Other than that, exactly like the left wing blogs.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 10:08 PM
harry:And there in lies your motive,to besmirch and
basterdize Hot Air,it must irrate you to no end,
that Hot Air is the last bastion,er blog on the
net that is free from the Left,and this is one
blog that has a BIG TARGET,THAT YOU DREAM,to take
down,as a Nutty Extreme RightWing hate blog,
harry,I’m from Canada,looking in,Good Luck!!:)
canopfor on February 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM
I’d hazard a guess that YOU are advocating violence against those who diagree with you.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
You are the type of guy who shows up on the 10 o’clock news and all say they didn’t see it coming.
harry on February 20, 2010 at 11:34 PM
Persuasive as ever.
If you don’t like your prose styling being criticized, don’t write it online for everyone to see.
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:42 PM
I don’t give a rat’s a** what you think. I’m just sorry someone moved your rock.
atheling on February 20, 2010 at 11:45 PM
You were going on about how someone was slinging mud at you for bravely departing from groupthink. It struck me as a self-aggrandizing and somewhat elitist attitude to take.
In any case, it was a side comment that was not intended to redirect the entire discussion. Your characterization of me as being a troll seems tenuous, since this insult (the interpretation most charitable toward your position) comprises but a small portion of my writing in this thread, most of which has (ironically) been about how using invective and insults weakens one’s position.
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:57 PM
Ooops, pardon me. You’re not a troll. You’re a pompous windbag.
atheling on February 21, 2010 at 12:00 AM
Because I think you were mischaracterizing me? For someone who disapproves of invective, you appear to engage in it rather freely.
CliveStaples on February 21, 2010 at 12:03 AM
Andrew Breitbart has cojones, God bless him!
disa on February 21, 2010 at 12:54 AM
Yes! He is my new hero!
atheling on February 21, 2010 at 12:57 AM
you have no idea wth you are talking about, and no room to claim ANY sort of rectitude about what is proper. Particularly a gross distortionist like you.
canopfor is correct, that is exactly where things will end up, as long as liars like you and your pals on the progressive left keep trying to cram your socialist agenda down the throat of the taxpayers in this nation. Even now, Obama et al are stating they will re-re-re-try to cram socialized medicine upon this nation, despite a year of the People clearly stating NO. When our government routinely denies any redress of grievances or even the barest accounting for their abuses, revolt is the only option left.
And pretending that isn’t the course we are locked on, or that anyone who dare mentions that fact should be locked out is yet another manifestation of your ilk’s sick censorship and arrogance. You guarantee the very result you claim to shun, by your actions. Just like those leftist idiots in our security apparat that proclaim former military and constitutionalists ‘potential terrorists’. They create the very problem they seek to warn about. And that’s ironic as hell since the same progressive morons are the ones claiming it is WE that create islamic terrorists.
rayra on February 21, 2010 at 2:08 AM
prime example
Damned distortionist. There’s nothing “supposed” about it.
rayra on February 21, 2010 at 2:13 AM
We have a redress for our grievances; it’s called an election. We elect representatives, and they vote on laws. This is the system the Founding Fathers constructed to provide accountability. Just because you don’t like the policies the President or various Senators advocate doesn’t mean “our government…denies any redress of grievances or even the barest accounting for their abuses[.]“
CliveStaples on February 21, 2010 at 2:29 AM
What’s this “we” crap? You’re not part of “we” here. You’re just a pompous, fatuous troll. Concertn troll with a pompous wind.
atheling on February 21, 2010 at 2:36 AM
By “we” I meant “we, the people of the United States.”
Your invective is unhelpful; it only serves to drive away people who might otherwise be receptive or sympathetic to your position. This applies to Breitbart, as well.
CliveStaples on February 21, 2010 at 2:41 AM
You don’t speak for me pal.
And that “we” you just wrapped up in the
US Constitution, and tossed in here, smells like a leftist turd!
As for your bloviating attempts to smear it on atheling and Brietbart, you reveal yourself to be the arse of record.
“Let’s Roll”
On Watch on February 21, 2010 at 5:22 AM
I used to teach middle school. This Max character reminds me of a pubescent boy caught on his cell phone during class. “It’s not mine–I found it in the hall!”
Even the tone of voice is the same–that thin, nasally whine. Why do liberal men never outgrow that?
Grace_is_sufficient on February 21, 2010 at 6:04 AM
I did not purport to speak for you; I spoke only of my belief of what rights the Constitution describes.
I’m not attempting to smear Breitbart; I think his criticism of Blumenthal’s article is well-founded and persuasive. I take issue only with the particular presentation he displayed in this episode.
As I said before, he used a muckrake where he could have used a sledgehammer. It’s emotionally gratifying to have him go off on Blumenthal, but if he had marshaled his substantive arguments against Blumenthal (as O’Connor did), the video would be a refutation of leftists instead of just a barrage of (deserved?) insults.
CliveStaples on February 21, 2010 at 6:43 AM
Damn, that’s one of the best moments of troll bashing I have seen at this site in quite some time. Bravo!
Canopfor,
You and I go back many years. Loved ya then, love ya now. This little bi**h slapping you and your mates just laid on these libtards reminds me of some great times had at CQ…
Keemo on February 21, 2010 at 7:58 AM
Breitbart backed the yellow dog up!! It’s so easy to call someone a racist, but when confronted, notice the tail always goes between the leg?
yoda on February 21, 2010 at 8:23 AM
Brietbart was justified in calling Blumenthal out on his smear tactics. The left wing media has for far too long gotten away with name calling and inuendo. If every conservetive would confront the people who recklessly throw about terms like racism, facists and bigotry then these words would return to thier true meaning.
As I have said the left uses these terms for a reason. The reason is to stifle any opposing opinions. Do I think that confronting smear tacticians like this will stop people like Blumenthal? Probably not. But what it will do is expose the Blumenthals of the world as fools and agenda driven idealogues.
Thanks Brietbart.
TomLawler on February 21, 2010 at 8:51 AM
Ping: canopfor
Medical update re BIL? If it was somewhere else I missed it this morning.
Wife doing OK over there? Does she need anything.
If my sister had been up at her cottage this weekend I’d have had her run over to Petoskey to give a hand. She can be a tiger. She’s not up there now (I don’t think) but she might have insight into things if your wife needs anything.
Yoop on February 21, 2010 at 9:12 AM
Boy, here’s an example of the contemporary rudeness exchange.
AnninCA on February 21, 2010 at 10:03 AM
Clear and present Danger. Mr. Breitbart calls a spade a spade and Mr. Blumenthalhe cannot defend his words. When challenged, Liberals need a dictionary to develop their slanderous responses, while they maintain their PC cover.
Therefore, lesson one, do not be afraid of the PC police, call em as you see em and let them defend their words. Lesson two, be sure your facts can withstand scrutiny. Lesson three, when they call you a racist make them explain their slanderous remarks with actual proof, not innuendo.
Now go out there and “give em hell”. They have created hell here on earth and it has been accomplished intentionally via incremental use of false information, to establish a society of have’s and have nots, creating a dysfunctional society in which only the haves can provide for the have nots the essentials to simply exist.
The spade is socialism and they are using that spade to dig us deeper into disparaging debt and distrust.
MSGTAS on February 21, 2010 at 10:14 AM
I am Breitbart!
elifino on February 21, 2010 at 10:15 AM
A good summary.
rrpjr on February 21, 2010 at 10:26 AM
Please. What did the little boy deserve? Respect? No not really.
CWforFreedom on February 21, 2010 at 10:32 AM
Liberals have voluntarily abandoned reasonable, responsible, honest discourse. They fully expect their targets to not respond.
Those days are over. Get used to it.
Yoop on February 21, 2010 at 10:39 AM
Right on target. They use the race card to try to destroy someone and expect us to just go along. No…not anymore.
CWforFreedom on February 21, 2010 at 10:47 AM
AnnIn
I forgot to thank you for the many times on this site that you have come to the defense of those on the right from the irrational hate-filled rants that come from shows like THE VIEW, OLBERMANN, and MADDOW. Thank you!
/sarc
CWforFreedom on February 21, 2010 at 10:59 AM
There, fixed it for you. You’re welcome.
2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:05 AM
I rant regularly about the current version of “liberalism.”
It’s so important to me, I’ve abandoned voting for Democrats without very careful evaluation.
If you want more, you’ll have to earn it.
AnninCA on February 21, 2010 at 11:08 AM
after watching that..one word: pwnage.
themistocles on February 21, 2010 at 11:10 AM
Right on.
rrpjr on February 21, 2010 at 11:12 AM
Then I suggest you’re still missing the real point.
Independents are disgusted by partisanship THINKING.
It’s petty. It’s absurd on both sides.
We’re sick of the need for either side to command attention, while real problems go unsolved.
We’re ready for real workers in government to get busy, and that’s not going to be blow-hards, from either side.
AnninCA on February 21, 2010 at 11:15 AM
Seems to me that Breitbart’s and O’Conner’s calling out of that fool was an attempt to fix a real problem.
CWforFreedom on February 21, 2010 at 11:21 AM
Give it a rest. You’re just another phony “centrist” a la Evan Bayh who talks a good game, and who never fails to play the Bipartisan Moral Superiority card, but who is in reality a radical ideologue who’s just mad that you’re not getting your way.
Give it a rest.
2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:41 AM
What part of that video is partisan?
daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM
I’m glad you asked that. None of that exchange was partisan.
daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 11:57 AM
Yoop, YEP!
Good on Andy for calling him out. More please
JusDreamin on February 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM
While Mr. Brietbart’s anger was admirable in his defense, who was the gentleman that confronted Mr. Blumenthal on his actual use of the word “racist” regarding Mr. O’Keefe? The Left is always shocked, shocked when they are confronted with their own words. I love it.
Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Mr. Larry O’Connor from Big-xdotcom.
daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 12:19 PM
Not really. We hear that when conservatives have decided they’ve had quite enough, thank you, and give back in kind. It’s sort of like during the last campaign, when McCain was told that “going negative” would drive “independents” away from him. At the same time, the relentless sliming of Palin was brilliant strategy because it drove “independents” to — Obama! What a neat trick.
ddrintn on February 21, 2010 at 12:21 PM
What a sh*t weasel! They gotta do this more often.
cjk on February 21, 2010 at 12:27 PM
People can say and preach what they like, but it’s always been clear to me that going negative usually wins and especially so when you can do so by telling the truth.
I’m not saying I’m happy about it, but it’s true IMO.
cjk on February 21, 2010 at 12:30 PM
It was impressive.
Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 12:33 PM
What is this about? I read Patterico and have never read anything like this:
“Patterico’s slanders of Robert Stacy McCain, Radley Balko, Jeff Goldstein and others make me not particularly into trusting him on issues like that.
I am a big fan of Breitbart and O’Keefe’s work.
Mr. Joe on February 20, 2010 at 8:33 PM
Yeah, Patterico has done some weird things at times, which is why I stopped reading and trusting him too.
ray on February 20, 2010 at 8:48 PM”
I hope we are not starting to eat our own.
sharinlite on February 21, 2010 at 1:26 PM
What is your evidence of “slander?” Do you know the difference between slander and libel? Are your own remarks defamatory?
Truth is an absolute defense against either form of defamation. I challenge you to prove your statement about Patterico slandering RSM. If you can’t prove it, perhaps you should retract it.
The Race Card on February 21, 2010 at 2:20 PM
Race realists? Finally the truth slips out.
That phrase “race realist” comes directly from Amren’s about us page. Amren aggregates “news” that promotes a segregationist, separatist, racist agenda.
***
Q: Why would anybody take 2Brave2Bscared seriously after knowing this about him?
A: Because many conservatives are cowards on issues of race and can only recognize bigotry when it is directed at the right. F*** you cowards.
The bigot-sympathizer and promoter of Lawrence Auster speaks up. It’s nice that you think people like Jared Taylor and other extreme-bigots are “race realists.”
You’ve exposed yourself as a raging bigot-sympathizer if not outright bigot yourself.
Accusing me of being a liberal, which you will invariably do, does not absolve you of the link attached to your screen name or from your perpetual stream of racial-vitriol.
You may not be a racist, but you play one very well.
The Race Card on February 21, 2010 at 2:25 PM
Ann,
You often mention bipartisanship in your posts, and I’ve always wanted to ask, does that mean we need to rid gov of the ‘right’ view of no slavery of producers, and the ‘left’ view of total slavery of producers, and get busy fixing real problems by agreeing on some slavery?
shibumiglass on February 21, 2010 at 3:05 PM
The “point” is a surpassing moral issue of the Left’s degradation of political discourse and disregard for human dignity, and you’re not only missing it, you’ve vitiated it.
There isn’t a thing “partisan” about what Breitbart said or in his argument. Review the case history. He’s responding to an attempt to carve away, to permanently disfigure, a person’s reputation. This is de rigeur on the Left. Breitbart knows it, and is equally aware of the “partisanship” phantoms and double standards about “civil discourse” the Left uses to intimidate any impulse of response. He’s breaking free of sef-imposed fetters conservatives have put on themselves, or been conditioned to accept by mainstream culture. As a conservative or independent or “classic liberal” or whatever you are, you should be celebrating Breitbart’s liberating challenge and defense of human dignity. Breitbart, as you may or may not now, has estabished three websites to challenge the Left’s stifling supremacy in popular culture. He is the leader of the new model of rapid-response conservatism and bold institutional challenges to the Left. We only got where we are by remaining silent in the name of unilateral “civil discourse”, which the left never honored anyway, and Breitbart will have none of it anymore.
It really boils down to an uncomprehension of the Left. I suggest as a primer David Horowitz’s “Left Illusions.” Horowitz is a former leftist intellectual, a gentleman who values civil political discourse, and a forensic examiner of the Left’s strategy to annihilate a dissenter’s personhood just as they disable the capacity to respond to their attempts at annihilation (something you apparently do not understand).
rrpjr on February 21, 2010 at 3:08 PM
I doubt AnninCA understands the meaning of the word “bipartisanship”, since she cannot spell it correctly.
Kini on February 21, 2010 at 3:36 PM
sharinlite:
This fellow Joe goes around trying to start fights between bloggers. I banned him for it and he is still crying about it months later. Pay him no attention.
Patterico on February 21, 2010 at 4:36 PM
No, all I took issue with is your crazed violence filled rants. I was very clear.
harry on February 21, 2010 at 4:47 PM
Max Blumenthal is your typical left wing coward. He’s a smear merchant of the lowest caliber. I was glad he didn’t lay a hand on him. If he had, it would just perpetuate the lie that conservatives are a violent group. It was good to see AB hand his head to him.
Poway on February 21, 2010 at 6:27 PM
Sweet tag-off there Andrew and Larry.
oakpack on February 21, 2010 at 6:44 PM
Well-done Misters Breitbart and O’Connor!
I don’t believe you.
Hmm. That may explain a cryptic comment left by ‘Mr. Joe’ on another thread recently, off-topic, something about thanking HotAir for responding to a request to reset his password or some-such thing.
RD on February 21, 2010 at 6:53 PM
Patterico,
Are these creatures slimy or what. Jeez…
Keemo on February 21, 2010 at 6:56 PM
Why should anyone follow your dictates, bub?
I have noticed that you are quite the whiny beta male who can’t take criticism of himself very well. Grow up, and stop taking yourself so seriously.
Bizarro No. 1 on February 21, 2010 at 10:09 PM
Patterico is not a saint.
Look at his bossy “Pay him no attention“; he is a control freak who can’t handle being challenged.
Bizarro No. 1 on February 21, 2010 at 10:20 PM
I heart beirtbart.
upinak on February 21, 2010 at 10:30 PM
Joe, I mean, er, Bizarro No. 1, go nuts. I think people with a level head can distinguish between a suggestion and an order.
Patterico on February 22, 2010 at 1:45 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »