PDA

View Full Version : Andrew Breitbart Watch


bjkeefe
08-07-2010, 03:10 AM
Time for a separate thread to track this guy, as long as he is going to be such a prominent voice of The Right.

Let's start it off with his most recent disgrace (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050053):

What the Pezzi saga tells us about Breitbart

Earlier today, we pointed out that Andrew Breitbart's Big Government published posts from Dr. Kevin Pezzi smearing Shirley Sherrod as a racist.

Pezzi is rather overtly racist (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050030), and has repeatedly used racial epithets like "Japs" and "Chinks," and claimed Native and African Americans should have been grateful for their subjugation by whites. Additionally, Pezzi is a doctor/"sex expert"/author/inventor/huckster, who, among other things, says he has "beaten Bill Gates" on a math aptitude test, is "bigger than some porno stars," and stumbled upon a cure for cancer. Pezzi has also apparently created (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050034) a series of at least six fake MySpace profiles of women claiming to be big fans of his sex books.

(Be sure to open that "created (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050034)" link in a new tab, to be saved for some serious laugh time.)

But back to the business at hand ...

In response to our posts, Big Government has now disappeared Pezzi's articles. If you attempt to visit the pages for his posts and bio, you are greeted with an error. While Big Government has disappeared Pezzi from their website, they posted the following (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fbiggovernment.com%2Fpublius%2F2 010%2F08%2F05%2Feditorial-note%2F%23idc-container) "Editorial Note" from "Publius," which doesn't mention Pezzi by name:

Earlier this week, we read an on-line column which provided one of the most thorough and well-researched examinations of the many controversies surrounding former USDA employee Shirley Sherrod. We asked the author of the column for permission to reprint his article. Since publishing the articles, we have been made aware of other writings from this author which do not reflect the principles and values of this site. Because of this, we have removed the articles from Big Government. While we stand by the information contained in the articles we published, we do not wish to see the underlying issue confused or diminished by other work the author has done. We regret the error.

TRANSPAREMENCY!!!1! JUST LIKE WE DEMAND FROM JOURNOLIST!!!1! (And who is this "Publius," anyway? Ann Althouse demands to know!!!1!)

Continuing ...

So, let me get this straight: After Breitbart and his "Big" websites became the focus of well-deserved criticism and national ridicule for posting a misleadingly edited video and smearing Shirley Sherrod as a racist, their defense was that Breitbart merely posted the video he was given, and he didn't bother doing any extra research. (Breitbart later conceded (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007300033) that the video was out of context and that he "should have waited for the full video.")

Yet in the wake of this embarrassment, Big Government sought out posts from a guy smearing Sherrod as a racist without doing any research into his background. Notice a pattern here? Breitbart and co. are so eager to cover their tracks and somehow "prove" that Sherrod is a racist that they have long-since abandoned any pretense of responsible behavior.

Big Government would not have had to do anything more than read the bio he posted on their website to realize something was amiss. [...]

(Media Matters found out damning information about Pezzi within minutes simply by doing a Google search.)

The rest (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050053). And see also (http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/kevin_pezzi). Especially MM's first post on this guy (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050030). Amazing what the Google will reveal.

(h/t: Lauri Apple (http://wonkette.com/417216/sex-wizarddoctor-too-creative-for-andrew-breitbart%e2%80%99s-truth-blog))

bjkeefe
08-07-2010, 03:32 AM
In response to our posts, Big Government has now disappeared Pezzi's articles. If you attempt to visit the pages for his posts and bio, you are greeted with an error.

That assertion (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050053) appears to be true (http://www.google.com/search?q=Kevin+Pezzi+site%3Abiggovernment.com).

Looks like Andy the Breit has even figured out which pages to update to overwrite the Google cache!

RELEASE THE FULL ARCHIVES, BREITBART. WHATFUR SAYS (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=173592&highlight=100k+your%27s#post173592) $100K CAN BE "YOUR'S."

Whatfur
08-07-2010, 12:54 PM
MediaMatters really doesn't.

So a blog is not able to edit itself? I think the below suffices and those running around screaming for something more...well...can be found running around screaming for something habitually.

On Breitbart's blog:

"Earlier this week, we read an on-line column which provided one of the most thorough and well-researched examinations of the many controversies surrounding former USDA employee Shirley Sherrod. We asked the author of the column for permission to reprint his article. Since publishing the articles, we have been made aware of other writings from this author which do not reflect the principles and values of this site. Because of this, we have removed the articles from Big Government. While we stand by the information contained in the articles we published, we do not wish to see the underlying issue confused or diminished by other work the author has done. We regret the error. "

bjkeefe
08-07-2010, 04:11 PM
MediaMatters really doesn't.

So a blog is not able to edit itself? I think the below suffices and those running around screaming for something more...well...can be found running around screaming for something habitually.

On Breitbart's blog:

"Earlier this week, we read an on-line column which provided one of the most thorough and well-researched examinations of the many controversies surrounding former USDA employee Shirley Sherrod. We asked the author of the column for permission to reprint his article. Since publishing the articles, we have been made aware of other writings from this author which do not reflect the principles and values of this site. Because of this, we have removed the articles from Big Government. While we stand by the information contained in the articles we published, we do not wish to see the underlying issue confused or diminished by other work the author has done. We regret the error. "

That's the best you can come up with? You'd have done Breitbart more of a favor by saying nothing at all.

Thanks for re-posting the same quote Media Matters offered (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050053), though. It helps amplify the point MM was making. Deleting everything that has been published, by a guy whose name "Publius" dares not mention, is not "a blog editing itself." It is an attempt to scrub history.

You can go all Pavlovian at the mention of Media Matters just as you do whenever you hear the name Krugman, but your blind rage against the keenest observers of your tribe's foibles means nothing. Here's what means something: the rapidity of the scrubbing effort on Breitbart's site. This shows, unambiguously, their recognition that they were busted, by Media Matters, and that they were thoroughly embarrassed by it, so much so that they didn't even try the usual week or two of blustering response which usually characterizes their reaction to getting caught.

Whatfur
08-07-2010, 09:20 PM
That's the best you can come up with? ...

No, but its all I am going to on such a nothing story. There must have been a sale on bundled panties.

handle
08-07-2010, 11:19 PM
No, but its all I am going to on such a nothing story. There must have been a sale on bundled panties.

No surprise the revisionist himself should trivialize revisionism. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174104#post174104)

Added: Revisionist Party?

bjkeefe
08-08-2010, 12:03 AM
No, but its all I am going to on such a nothing story.

If it were a "nothing story," why couldn't you just ignore it? The truth is: it is a major embarrassment for one of your heroes, so you instinctively responded by trying to trash everyone who was talking about it, and then realized that even in full zealot mode, you couldn't begin to mount a defense. So now you're attempting to belittle what you can't defend.

Not to mention showing your fourth-grade-level skills as you run away:

There must have been a sale on bundled panties.