Andrew Breigtbart

[robin]

The fact that a 43 year old who has created so many powerful enemies would die of "natural causes" weeks after stating that he had very damaging video of the President in collage that would effect the election is beyond suspicious.

Another Question. How can they know that he died of natural causes so quickly after his death? Has there even been an autopsy?

I wonder now if we will ever see that footage?

www.prisonplanet.com/media-trailblazer-andrew-breitbart-dies-aged-43.html

[shirley]

After reading who he is above, I still don't know who he is, but I'm sure a certain brother of mine will send out an E-mail in the next couple days telling me all about how he really died.

[Josh]

The first I heard about this guy was today on NPR

(don't tell my dad I was listening to it again)

[robin]

It's funny, In my world, this guy is a rock star! This is the guy responsible for exposing congressmen Anthony Weiner (no pun intended). He also exposed ACORN and stopped billions of tax payer dollars from being funneled to liberal front groups. There are a lot of people on the Left who are quite happy about his death.

[atheist jon]

I don't wish a premature death upon anyone, apart from a very few exceptions. So for this man to die at 43 is tragic, regardless of the fact that I find most of his views fairly repulsive. Any opinion on the manner of his death would be pure speculation on my part, so for the moment I will accept it was just one of those terribly sad things that happens occasionally. I'm sure many people are looking into the circumstances and if they come up with some verifiable evidence that points to the contrary, I may make another judgement. My younger brother died suddenly a couple of years ago aged 46, so I know first hand that it happens.

As for Robins examples of his work, we all know that for governments of any colour there are people, departments and outside agencies too, that use underhand ways to benefit that political party towards which they lean. I would argue that the Republicans are by far the greater culprits and particularly the last Republican administration. And they are far better at it too. Don't remember hearing much from Andrew Breigtbart back then. But he was partisan and that's fair enough. Acorn is small fry though.
As for Anthony Weiner, that just becomes hypocritical posturing to the Republican base. It's only sex for goodness sake. Big deal. So he sent a few pictures. That's an issue to be sorted out between him and his wife or whomever. Yes, it was unwise of him to do what he did, and clumsy of him to get caught too, but he has broken no laws. Lies about sex are a catagory of their own and hardly comparable with lies that enable you to attack other countries with brave but unwitting American troops, for instance. The libido does funny things to humans sometimes and we've all made some pretty poor judgements because of it. Or is that just me?
Anthony Weiner is a essentially good man and a fantastic politician and orator who will certainly be back on the public stage before too long. Too many qualities to keep down forever over something so trivial.

Jonny has spoken.

[robin]

More mystery added?

www.prisonplanet.com/breitbart-wait-til-they-see-what-happens-march-1st.html

[robin]

As for Robins examples of his work, we all know that for governments of any colour there are people, departments and outside agencies too, that use underhand ways to benefit that political party towards which they lean. I would argue that the Republicans are by far the greater culprits and particularly the last Republican administration. And they are far better at it too. Don't remember hearing much from Andrew Breigtbart back then. But he was partisan and that's fair enough. Acorn is small fry though.

And anytime we see that corruption is smoked out and exposed, be it on the left or right we should all cheer it on! I don't care what letter is next to their name, I care about their principles and convictions. And ACORN is not small fries, as you said. They are corrupt, dangerous and don't deserve one penny of tax payer money.

As for Anthony Wiener, that just becomes hypocritical posturing to the Republican base. It's only sex for goodness sake. Big deal. So he sent a few pictures. That's an issue to be sorted out between him and his wife or whomever. Yes, it was unwise of him to do what he did, and clumsy of him to get caught too, but he has broken no laws. Lies about sex are a catagory of their own and hardly comparable with lies that enable you to attack other countries with brave but unwitting American troops, for instance. The libido does funny things to humans sometimes and we've all made some pretty poor judgements because of it. Or is that just me?

It's is not about sex. Please! It's about the ethics of our representatives. He sent these pictures, they made into the public, and he lied about them being his. Fairly simple right? Not so. Congressmen Wiener threatened Breigtbart (who was the publisher of those photos) with litigation claiming slander. For days he went on denying and calling Breigtbart a liar and slandering him in public, but eventually after a couple weeks Weiner had to admit that he did indeed take those pictures and send them out to some girl in Seattle who was not his wife. He never did apologize to Andrew as far as I know.

Anthony Weiner is a essentially good man and a fantastic politician and orator who will certainly be back on the public stage before too long. Too many qualities to keep down forever over something so trivial.

Essentially a good man, and something so trivial? I fear you are missing the big picture. We need to make sure dishonest politicians stay out of power. If you want someone to champion the liberal cause, go find and honest and trustworthy person person to do the job.

Lies about sex are a catagory of their own and hardly comparable with lies that enable you to attack other countries with brave but unwitting American troops, for instance.

I'm not interested in digging into this right now, but I did not want to let this pass either. I'm not interested in defending Bush. However, Obama may not have lied about any WMD's as an excuse to attack another sovereign nation. He just does it with consulting Congress as the Constitution requires (Libya). I don't think Obama's wars are anymore justified than Bush's.

[shirley]

Based on the above exchange we should call my brother Aetheist Robin because he is an aetheist and would agree with Robin. (Though I pray Robin you are really nothing like him in person). As I figured he would he sent out an unsolicited political update, which simply said:

"Please click the link below to listen to Michael Savage explaining why Breitbart was killed.
"

So there's some more support for your thoughts Robin.

[robin]

There was a lot of information in that 13+ min. You can tell that he is speculating much like I am, and he is far more conspiratorial than I. But overall, Savage is just asking the same questions that I'm asking and others in the media have asked these questions as well. Mike Gallagher who is far more mainstream had a similar discussion.

Personally, I'm not a Savage fan, and I think he is a bit "out there".

[atheist jon]

So this Michael Savage fellow Shirley; he would be a reliable, calmly reasoned and impartial source of information would he?

Robin, the point I'm trying to make regarding corruption in Government is that there will always be elements of it in any administration anywhere in the world. The question is, to what degree does that corruption or unethical behaviour take place? So when you have a relatively scandal-free administration the opposition will latch on to what they perceive to be the worst example of wrong doing and proceed to blow it way out of proportion for their own political gain. That's understandable.

Yes, Anthony Weiner probably did lie himself into an untenable position, but it was only about sex. It is a uniquely complicated aspect of our lives and people have, and always will, do dumb things concerning it. Including Republicans. Anthony Weiner didn't bang on endlessly about 'family values' or how gay people are so bad, and then get caught doing exactly what he publicly condemned. Others have.

As I said, essentially I believe he IS a good man and good at his job too. He'll be back.

Oh, and if you cannot see the difference between the way the Iraq war was prosecuted and the lead up to America's ultimate involvement in Egypt, then you must be very partisan indeed Robin.

[robin]

I'm not interested in justifying either administration's actions. But if you want to defend Obama's wars, while mocking Bush's I think you may be a little off base calling me the partisan.

[robin]

By the way, I don't think Shirley knows much about Savage. She was sent that link by her brother, and was asking if he was a reliable source. In general I would say no.

[shirley]

Hi guys,
Jon - I was simply passing on the information I knew my brother would provide. I did read the articles Robin posted, unfortunately my computer refuses to show youtube video so I could not watch it.

Jon and Robin - As for whether or not I think Savage is a reliable source, well, my brother has a lot of respect for him; I do not have a lot of respect for my brother. But I know that doesn't necessarily negate the value of the information he(my brother) provides. It is good to hear someone else's opinion of him (Savage).

Robin - Given Breitbart's openness about his views and the hours preceding his death I think it would have been easy for someone to have slipped something into his wine.

[atheist jon]

Hi there Shirley. I have to admit I was being a little sarcastic in my original question. I am very well aware of who Micheal Savage is and I consider him to be quite a ghastly person.

Robin. Obama's wars? Which wars? I don't want to go into details about Iraq and Egypt either, but to equate the actions of the current administration with the previous one seems to be over-simplification of the highest degree. They are not equal morally nor ethically and I don't see many people pretending they were.