Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Source: ABC's newsroom upset with decision to tap Andrew Breitbart

It looks like lefty bloggers aren't the only ones irked by ABC News's decision to tap Andrew Breitbart for election-night analysis: People in ABC's newsroom were also caught completely off guard by the news, a newsroom source tells me.

"This blindsided a good portion of the team here," the source emails. "And not in a good way."

ABC News has confirmed Breitbart's announcement that he will be bringing analysis live from Arizona on election eve, along with Dana Loesch, the editor of Breitbart's Web site Big Journalism.

The news kicked off a round of criticism from liberal bloggers who pointed out that Breitbart is an unabashed right-wing activist with a known history of trafficking in distortions and falsehoods, most recently the heavily edited and subsequently debunked video supposedly showing racially-charged comments by Shirley Sherrod

ABC's David Ford has now justified the decision this way:

"He will be one of many voices on our air, including Bill Adair of Politifact. If Andrew Breitbart says something that is incorrect, we have other voices to call him on it."

The problem with this, of course, is that it suggests that ABC thinks it's very possible Breitbart may try to mislead viewers -- but that this won't be a problem because someone else will be there to correct him. You can see why the network's professional journalists might be unhappy about this.


UPDATE, 4:48 p.m.: ABC News clarifies Breitbart's role.

By Greg Sargent  | October 30, 2010; 12:05 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Political media  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama hits McConnell "one term president" claim
Next: Analyze this: ABC News clarifies Andrew Breitbart's role

Comments

Are they trying to outFox Fox? The real journalists hit it on the head: it's one thing to have somebody representing a POV on the spectrum. It's another to have a known liar who must have his own fact check police.

Who's representing the liberal side? And does the liberal have to be a major propogandist/known liar to offset Breitbart?

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 30, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

If Arianna Huffington was there would be silence on the left.

Posted by: itsme32221 | October 30, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

No "open thread" today?

Go Angle, Toomey, Rubio, Fiorina, Whitman, Miller, O'Donnell, and other TEA Party candidates!

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Okay so ABC wants a rightwing blogger on election night. But why Breitbart - a known liar and manipulator? Briebart is neither a journalist nor a pundit - he is a con-man.

This is a low point for ABC.

Posted by: FauxReal | October 30, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Arianna Huffington regularly criticizes Obama and the Democrats. When conservatives criticize conservatives, they are voted off the island. See: Sullivan and Frum. If you don't see the difference between a Breitbart and a Huffington, you are willfully blind.

CL, The TP lineup. You must be so proud. Laugh of the day. Thank you.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 30, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

You're welcome.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Its pretty bad when you hire a *known* liar and hope that someone else will clean up the mess.

Unless they want ratings...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Greg:

"The problem with this, of course, is that it suggests that ABC thinks it's very possible Breitbart may try to mislead viewer..."

That's utterly absurd. Saying that "If X happens, Y will fix it" in no way whatsoever "suggests" that one thinks X is "very possible".


Posted by: ScottC3 | October 30, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

ABC is not completely moving to only conservative voices - just adding one.

Sure sounds like the efforts on this blog - ban the conservative.

The only thing that will make the liberals happy is 100% liberal voices.

Posted by: SanityNow | October 30, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

For a paycheck, Arianna would viciously unleash on her mom, with neverseenbefore! video.

She is the Breitbart sans tackle (and wit).

Posted by: tao9 | October 30, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Greg

Why won't you address these issues ??? Moderation should not be done on a partisan basis.

________________________________


Greg

I disagree with you obviously.

I am attempting to have a "real conversation"

It is the people who are engaging in nasty comments - on a constant basis - who are not engaging in "real conversation."

It is impossible to have a "real conversation" in the atmosphere of hostility which has been allowed to develop on this blog.

Those nasty comments are not "intent to harass," designed to drive people away ?

You are not being even-handed at all.

Ethan engaged in capitalization. That was never a problem until it came from a Conservative poster.

20 straght postings from liberals sure seems like "thread-bombing" from the other point of view.


I have requested many, many times a clear definition of "thread-bombing" so one could comply with that.

You are not being honest - because you know perfectly well that liberal posters would fall under any definition of "thread-bombing."

It is the point of view which the democrats simply do not want to hear.


Sure, we hear claims that the democrats want to be bipartisan, but we don't see it in their actions.

When it comes time to be bipartisan, the democrats stick their fingers in their ears like little children and say "I'm not listening to you."

That is childish behavior - which should be ignored. And it should certainly not be allowed to drive people away.


It is time to grow up.


Yes, Greg Sargent I AM QUESTIONING YOUR MANHOOD - if you can not confront these issues and deal with them in an even-handed and honest manner - YOU ARE ARE NOT A MAN.


.

Posted by: SanityNow | October 30, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is not a "liar" in any sense of the word. The Sherrod video was given to him in an edited form, and simply he released it as is. Typical that the HuffPo and Daily Kos folks would call that being a liar.

As to the liberal blowhards in the ABC newsroom, it might do you people good to hear some non-liberal commentary for a change...an antidote to all the Upper West Side cocktail parties you attend.

Posted by: larryfind | October 30, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Looks as if Breitbart is threadbombing here under the name of SanityNow.

Wingnuts of Amerika, Unite!

Posted by: Patriot3 | October 30, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Digby's p1ssed about Loesch, that lying little extremely camera friendly helper.

No comment yet from Hullabaloo re: the POTUS interview with Shemp.

I think Digby might be steamed for reasons other than journalistic purity.

It's still a biz...just sayin'.

Posted by: tao9 | October 30, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

ABC's newsroom is disgracing their profession with their personal and unprofessional reaction to this addition of diversity to their election night coverage with Andrew Breitbart. As far as 'correcting misstatements' goes, it's a two way street - the Left in general certainly has no standing to accuse others of dishonesty or a lack of ethics.

Their partisan fanaticism is particularly out of place in an environment that professes to disseminate balanced news and commentary, rather than propaganda.

I call on the ABC Newsroom crew to drop their infantile, ignorant partisan attitudes and start respecting diversity of opinion. These Kool-Ade infused Lefties would do well to remember that it's the Republican Party that best represents the middle class who do most of the work and pay most of the taxes in the USA.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Hey Pat3!

You used a K in America...never seen that!

Awesome.

{{{geegul}}}

Posted by: tao9 | October 30, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

KathleenHusseininMaine wrote,

"Are they trying to outFox Fox? The real journalists hit it on the head: it's one thing to have somebody representing a POV on the spectrum. It's another to have a known liar who must have his own fact check police."

I dunno. CBS had the partisan Dan Rather hosting their evening news for many years before he was eventually fired for his outright lies and distortions. I suppose you were on his case long before that. Right?

"Who's representing the liberal side? And does the liberal have to be a major propogandist/known liar to offset Breitbart?"

If he/she does have to be a propagandist/known liar, they could pretty much draw names of liberals from a hat. However, they wouldn't be "major" since must of them are miserable failures. How about Keith Olbermann or Ed Schultz or Lawrence O'Donnell? Maybe they could get Chris Matthews to experience that thrill up his leg one more time. What about Christine Amanapour? Now there's a partisan hack who already works for ABC? Is Peter Arnett still alive? You couldn't find a bigger liar than him?

Posted by: Brigade | October 30, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

"...unabashed right-wing activist with a known history of trafficking in distortions and falsehoods..."
HA!
They cite ONE item and call it a "history"....

Who in the ABC newsroom isn't an "Unabashed leftist"?
Are any of them free of the charge of "trafficking in distortions"?

Posted by: laurencejohn | October 30, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

"...unabashed right-wing activist with a known history of trafficking in distortions and falsehoods..."
HA!
They cite ONE item and call it a "history"....

Who in the ABC newsroom isn't an "Unabashed leftist"?
Are any of them free of the charge of "trafficking in distortions"?

Posted by: laurencejohn | October 30, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Oldest, lamest rhetorical device in politics: attempt to paint the other guy in the same way rather than addressing the original point.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

What part of the following doesn't address the original point?

Breitbart is not a "liar" in any sense of the word. The Sherrod video was given to him in an edited form, and simply he released it as is.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart did a public service in not suppressing the Sherrod Video. Why hadn't the MSM been on top of that?

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Rather was lying. I think the Bushes rival the Mob at cleaning up their messes.

Olbermann, Matthews and Schultz are editorialists. They are not propagandists. There's a difference. You might not like what they're saying, but they don't create events and launch made-up BS into the newscycle.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 30, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart performed a public service in not suppressing the Sherrod Video. Why hadn't the MSM been on top of that?

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

The network whose chief political journalist and GMA cohost is a former chief of staff to a Democratic president is upset that hearing from a conservative voice is going to hurt their objectivity? I think that ship sailed a long time ago.

Posted by: tomtildrum | October 30, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Of course Rather was lying and he admitted as much by confessing via his infamous 'fake but accurate' weasel-word mantra to culpability for pushing the forged Killian documents onto the public.

There's no two ways about it: Rather was so egregiously dishonest that even CBS had to get rid of him, until then their fair-haired boy, and that's pretty bad. George W. Bush as well as CBS's entire viewing audience was victimized by Rather's and Mary Mapes' shameless fabrication and smear campaign.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Rather was lying. I think the Bushes rival the Mob at cleaning up their messes.

------

And that is exactly what Rather was hoping you'd think. The absence of any evidence whatsoever to support a charge simply means the evidence was cleaned up. The charge is still true, even in the absence of facts or evidence to support it. And Lucy Rameriz is a real person---the Bushes had her whacked, Clinton had Vince Foster killed, Obama was born in Kenya, and Elvis and Marilyn are living together somewhere in Paraguay.

Posted by: Brigade | October 30, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

"Breitbart performed a public service in not suppressing the Sherrod Video. Why hadn't the MSM been on top of that?"

To answer my own question: The MSM *was* on top of it....busily suppressing the Sherrod Video. Guess they figured they couldn't upset their 'progressive' agenda with too much inconvenient truth regarding the 'progressive' sources of racism and bigotry.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Can't they find a conservative voice who doesn't doctor videos and isn't a raging racist?

But hey, did anyone really think Breitbart would suffer any kind of career setback for his racism? Of course not.

Anyways, what is this software I can use to erase 37th from my life?

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

"Can't they find a conservative voice who doesn't doctor videos and isn't a raging racist?"

Got great news for you. They already have.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

"Can't they find a conservative voice who doesn't doctor videos and isn't a raging racist?"

Got great news for you. They already have.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

So why does the Alabama Air National Guard show Bush as AWOL? Any ordinary person, that would have stayed a problem.

Missed the Lucy Ramirez story. Will have to Google that, thanks for the tip.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 30, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

@ddawd,

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/89140

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 30, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Lots of crybaby Lefties here in the comments.

As for me, I will tune in early to ABC to hear Breitbart. If they don't give him time and we end up hearing the same old shlock from the LeftWing Nutz of the regular ABC Tribe, off with your head...(the channel changer gets flicked, and ABC goes off, permanently, for the election).

Posted by: Keltin1 | October 30, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Just one more reason ABC and most of it's affiliates are going down the tubes... Just what ABC needs right now... The display of a partisan HACK who will bash anyone other than the FAR right hate machine, is quite frankly disgusting.

Posted by: rbaldwin2 | October 30, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

As America continues her descent into mediocrity, ABC decides to help accelerate the process. Our poor children.

Posted by: mikemfr | October 30, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

"You can see why the 'network's professional journalists' might be unhappy about this."
What part of the fact that their liberal bias is putting AllBS out of business don't the "network's professional journalists" understand? See Fox, See WSJ and keep supporting an extension of unemployment benefits, you're gonna need them.

Posted by: hughglass | October 30, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"You can see why the 'network's professional journalists' might be unhappy about this."
What part of the fact that their liberal bias is putting AllBS out of business don't the "network's professional journalists" understand? See Fox, See WSJ and keep supporting an extension of unemployment benefits, you're gonna need them.

Posted by: hughglass | October 30, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

"You can see why the 'network's professional journalists' might be unhappy about this."
What part of the fact that their liberal bias is putting AllBS out of business don't the "network's professional journalists" understand? See Fox, See WSJ and keep supporting an extension of unemployment benefits, you're gonna need them.

Posted by: hughglass | October 30, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

"You can see why the 'network's professional journalists' might be unhappy about this."
What part of the fact that their liberal bias is putting AllBS out of business don't the "network's professional journalists" understand? See Fox, See WSJ and keep supporting an extension of unemployment benefits, you're gonna need them.

Posted by: hughglass | October 30, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Can you imagine anyone carrying the water of Andrew Breitbart? The guy has embarrassed himself and his supporters so often, I'm amazed he can pull off his schtick once again. What's next? Fair and balanced Middle East analysis with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 30, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Oh, wow, that's amazing. Just zapped SanityNow. Thanks, Kevin

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

This is a JournoList blog, right?
I feel like I wandered into a dark basement.

You kids are creepy. Does WaPo know about this?

Posted by: happyacres | October 30, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

12B, in between Halloween events, I put up one more health care post on silos, don't worry, we'll get through this. Soon we'll get on to solutions...

DD, isn't that great? It is kinda like what we have been asking for from the hosts all along.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Lots of crybaby Leftists...

As I write there are about 28 Trollbagger comments to 12 Liberals. That includes repeats. Take out those and we're still looking at 2-1 Trollbaggers in the lead.

Now most of our Righties are here not to add value but to fling mud and cry na-na-na-boo-boo. And threadbomb. Today we have irregulars and newbies like Keltin1, who seems surprised to find Liberals. Or happyacres, who most likely think they're hilarious when they throw down Journolist, but think it's fine when Supreme Court Justices go hang out at Koch-funded conservative lovefests with Krauthammer and company.

So that means one thing: This post got linkage. Here they come.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 30, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

@ddawd,

Amazing, right? I am taking bows, since Kevin created the script for STRF et al to block me. :))

Troll Hunter downloaded, let me see...48 times and counting.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 30, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

OK, concerned, I'll take the bait.

"Breitbart did a public service in not suppressing the Sherrod Video. Why hadn't the MSM been on top of that?"

What did Sherrod actually say in her speech? Her entire speech.

Posted by: boscobobb | October 30, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Wrt his National Guard Duty, Bush asked for and received an honorable discharge from the Texas National Guard in late 1973 and was transferred to 'inactive' status for the final six months of his six year National Guard commitment so he could attend Harvard Business School. That honorable discharge and change of status appears to be the primary grounds for the specious 'AWOL' accusations.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

This is interesting. In my text entry box for my prior post the initial use of the word 'discharge' only appeared once, but in the final post as displayed, it appears twice in succession.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

@shrink,

Back at you on the Angle thread.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 30, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Now the same thing has happened in my prior post with 'word'. Definite bug.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Note to ABC: Now there's a small chance that I might actually tune in. I'll be watching the coverage on election night and would enjoy seeing Breitbart. He'll have to be on when I'm going through the stations, otherwise- it's off to Fox.

Posted by: jbtx | October 30, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

After the comments posted about Mimi Gurbst exit from ABC News and what was said about other key ABC News personalities, caring about what the ABC newsroom cares about is like caring what the inmates in an asylum care about.

Posted by: Question_Assumptions | October 30, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

@LF: Breitbart is not a "liar" in any sense of the word. The Sherrod video was given to him in an edited form, and simply he released it as is.

Sorry to disappoint you, but Breibaby is a serial liar and blatant propogandist. You do recall the heavily edited "pimp and hooker" videos that in fact edited out both the context of the questions and also excluded the many times they were shown the door. Showing his minions dressed like a 1970's superfly entering buildings and not pointing out that he NEVER ACTUALLY WENT INTO ANY ACORN OFFICE DRESSED THIS WAY.

And lets not forget the Landreiu office break in by the same persons.

On the Sherrod video, if Breibart had the journalistic integrity of my dog, he would have contacted Sherrod or the NAACP and shown them the video before airing the slanderous and totally false and misleading segments. That is willful ignorance if not outright deceit.

Breibaby is a talentless, partisan, hack, who doesn't deserve any platform bigger than a literal soapbox on a physical street corner.

@c22: To answer my own question: The MSM *was* on top of it....busily suppressing the Sherrod Video. Guess they figured they couldn't upset their 'progressive' agenda with too much inconvenient truth regarding the 'progressive' sources of racism and bigotry.

Any documentation of this so calle suppression, you know, links to your sources, etc... Its how you earn credibility...

@hg:What part of the fact that their liberal bias

REmember, the meme of the liberal media was an admitted tactic used by conservatives to "work the refs" and get even more conservatives on the air. Every major media outlet is controlled by large multinational corporations, so what we actually see on TV is a corporatist bias which aligns nicely with republicans...

Breibaby is an collective insult to every person in the media interested in informing (as opposed to spinning) the public.

Posted by: srw3 | October 30, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Remember, the old media companies are all battling bankruptcy. Opinion sells. Controversy sells. It isn't that big a deal. It will get worse before it gets better.

I am much more annoyed by NPR firing Juan Williams for saying he feels frightened by people in Muslim clothing on flights he is on. I mean, why can't you say that?

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

shrink-

Well, aside from the possible bigotry involved in what Williams said, how many terrorists on 9/11 dressed "like Muslims"?

Exactly none. Maybe they shoulda fired him because he's just a punter.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

From the previous thread:

"Shots fired at the U.S. Marine Corps Museum in Washington D.C.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse"

I've checked CNN and elsewhere-no mention of it.

Clawrence- I'll ask again, gotta link for this?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

"Any documentation of this so calle suppression, you know, links to your sources, etc... Its how you earn credibility..."

Sure. Breitbart broke it, and the MSM have been doing their best to ignore it all along. This is all the proof a reasonable person could ask for. I'm not going to pull a 'Dan Rather' whom I suspect you're in sympathy with, btw, and fabricate emails that doesn't exist. For me, the facts speak for themselves.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

erratum ...emails that don't exist.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

"I've checked CNN and elsewhere-no mention of it."

I think because this happened yesterday.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-10-29/us/marine.museum.shooting_1_bullet-holes-shots-virginia?_s=PM:US

I have no idea why clawrence is posting about this now - maybe trying to convince us it's related to the rally somehow?

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 30, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

erratum ...emails that don't exist.

Posted by: concerned22 | October 30, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

ABC scrambling to clarify Breitbart's role:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/abc-news-backs-away-from-breitbart.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 30, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

thanks, s-cat.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

@Kathleen "So that means one thing: This post got linkage. Here they come."

Exactly and Breitbart supporters have never offered any critical thinking. Be a short day on the blog for me today...once the mindless troll infestation hits is just too big of a pain to wade through for genuine thoughtful commentary.

@Shrink "I mean, why can't you say that?"

Well I'm not saying he needed to be fired for the comment and so I have NO reason why you CAN'T say that...but I can think of at least a couple of why Juan the boring one SHOULDN'T have said it.

1.)The goal of the terrorists is to "terrorize" us...make us fearful..you know like look at someone dressed in a Hajib and pee our pants like Juan. We used to call the French "surrender monkeys" because they were to smart to not join G.W's idiotic invasion of Iraq...when in reality it is WE who are the surrender monkeys everytime we confess to these irrational fears..and they are irrational. You have a far better chance of dying in an automobile accident than from a Muslim bombing the plane you are on...and so are we afraid everytime we get in a car?

2.) Context....Juan works for and released his comment on the most Islamophobic network in all of cable tv. He did it on a show whose host..utters things..like Tiller the baby Killer..and oops indeed somebody assassinates while the Dr. while he was ushering at his church on Sunday morning. Bill O had just created a huge controversy on The View for saying all terrorists are Muslims. Personally I think people who go to political rallies with weapons locked and loaded and signs about "watering the tree of liberty" code for shooting those they disagree with...and politicians running for the Senate and the House who talk about "2nd Amendment Solutions" and "Violence remaining on the table" if they lose elections are the REAL terrorists. That is pure and simple intimidation every bit as strong as what the Brownshirts did in Germany. The only difference is the Brownshirts were more effective and able to carry out their threats...but threats are threats! People who carry locked and loaded firearms to political rallies...politicians who talk about violence remaining on the table and 2nd Amendment solutions are LITERALLY domestic terrorists. Why else utter such nonsense if not to intimidate?

If Juan had said these remarks during a speech to an Islamic organization he would have just revealed himself to be a major coward...saying it on Fox means he is part of the Islamophobia propaganda machine.

But considering Roger Ailes has been frequently quoted as saying "If I have to hire a liberal then I'm going to find the dumbest f&ck I can." we can only guess what a self loathing, financially desperate man Juan Williams must truly be.

Again however I don't believe he should be fired for being an obvious coward or self loathing.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 30, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

WT hell? Can't they find a conservative with a decent reputation???

Posted by: Leslie51 | October 30, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Jon Stewart's 'Rally to Restore Sanity' energizes expats from Paris to Prague

Jon Stewart's 'Rally to Restore Sanity' may have compelled some Americans living abroad to cast votes in a mid-term election they may have otherwise ignored.

Jon Stewart's "Rally to Restore Sanity" in Washington has sparked more than 1,160 mini-rallies in 84 countries, morphing into something of a global political happening.

The last time a political rally in America gained such international traction was during the 2003 protests against the Iraq war, says Timothy Patrick McCarthy, director of the Human Rights and Social Movements Program at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2010/1029/Jon-Stewart-s-Rally-to-Restore-Sanity-energizes-expats-from-Paris-to-Prague

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 30, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

@suekzoo I hope you realize you are ruining clawrence's day. He went bonkers over the crowds at the Beck rally and gave us breathless reports on this blog all day.

I watched the entire 3 hours of Stewart's Rally. The left has far better entertainment. :-)

Since Beck held his rally at the Lincoln Memorial meaning that the reflecting pond made the crowd look much larger visually...the people had to crowd around the edges while the water took up all that space...Stewart held his on the mall where the crowd could spread out over the entire area.

And so just looking at the TV shots...I would have to estimate that in Beck/Hannity/Faux numbers...Stewart was right..there were TEN MILLION people there. LMOA

Remember when Beck tried to claim 1-2 million for his 9/12/ rally on Faux and Friends and when asked by Dueshbag for his attribution for such a number(actual authorities had it well under 100,000) Beck breathlessly lied and said a University has a special satellite analysis that confirmed his 1-2 million.
When Deushbag followed up with "Which University" Beck dismissed it with a quick "Oh I don't remember" Again LMAO!!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 30, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

YOU PEOPLE, who comment on these blogs can't be that DENSE!

How hard is it to know why ABC tapped this man, and to know what message ABC is sending by booking him, AND, to know who ABC is sending that message to?

Posted by: texas5 | October 30, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

YOU PEOPLE, who comment on these blogs can't be that DENSE!

How hard is it to know why ABC tapped this man, and to know what message ABC is sending by booking him, AND, to know who ABC is sending that message to?

Posted by: texas5 | October 30, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Snort...LOL

"Sarah Palin Calls Joe Miller A Lost Cause, Quotes Scopes Monkey Trial Attorney"


There are probably better ways to inspire confidence in a candidate's prospects when he's in free fall than to call him a lost cause. But that's exactly what Sarah Palin did to one of her favorite tea partiers last night.

"Joe Miller - do not give up. It's you against the machine. This is it. 'Lost causes' are the only ones worth fighting for,'" Palin tweeted, quoting famed Scopes Monkey Trial attorney Clarence Darrow.

It seems unlikely that Palin is aware that Darrow was a big wig at the American Civil Liberties Union given her penchant for scoffing at...civil liberties. And one wonders whether Palin knows that, in the Scopes trial, Darrow defended John Scopes, who violated Tennessee law by teaching evolution. But there you have it.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/sarah-palin-calls-joe-miller-a-lost-cause-quotes-skopes-monkey-trial-attorney.php?ref=fpb

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 30, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Hilarious, in any ways....

"After Joint Campaign Stop, Nazi Reenactor Hedges On Boehner For Speaker"


House Minority Leader John Boehner took on the conventional wisdom that it's bad politics to associate with Nazi reenactors by campaigning recently with Ohio congressional candidate Rich Iott. That's about the only public support Iott's received from the GOP since his SS scandal broke.

Returning the favor, Iott, who's running in Ohio's 9th congressional district, now won't say whether he'd support Boehner for Speaker.

"I don't know, we'll have to wait and see," Iott told Roll Call.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/after-joint-campaign-stop-nazi-reenactor-hedges-on-boehner-for-speaker.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 30, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

If Sarah Palin had the smarts that God gave a goose, she would not cross her palm with tweets. How many times does she have to do this, causing her negatives to climb, climb, climb?

But then, she wouldn't be Sarah, would she?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 30, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

I will say this much, just let Shirley Sherrod go ahead and try to SUE Brietbart, and see what type of coverage she will get from ABC NEWS!!

Posted by: texas5 | October 30, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

sue-

Maybe I underestimated Ol' Saracuda? That's a pretty ironic, post-modern Tweet.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Again however I don't believe he should be fired for being an obvious coward or self loathing. Posted by: rukidding7

Exactly. If he were making a virtue of it, fine, fire his bigoted azz. But saying he is weak, a victim of his own bogey man fears, that could be big medicine for white America. Dark skinned people are not different. He wrote Eyes on the Prize, he isn't just some jerk like Andrew Breitbart.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Returning the favor, Iott, who's running in Ohio's 9th congressional district, now won't say whether he'd support Boehner for Speaker.
--------------------------------
It goes to prove that no good deed goes unpunished.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 30, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

ChuckinDenton, do you have irrational fears?
Everyone does. The "reason" that drives racism, that drives bigotry in general is fear. We pretend it does not exist, we make a big mistake.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Juan Williams, does anyone listen to him? I am not an avid follower or anything, but I have never heard the man say anything liberal. Is Williams experiencing that leftward shift that black people undergo? Like when people refer to Michael Steele as a moderate for some reason?

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

12B we just got back from kiddie Halloparty #1, they had geese out back by their pond.

They are dumb all right but like
SP, they are mean, just nasty.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

"They are dumb all right but like
SP, they are mean, just nasty."


Which is how I used to view the main difference between Palin and O'Donnell. Both uninformed twits but O'Donnell used to be the "nice" one while Palin is a harpy. But then I saw that video of O'Donnell's radio interview where she angrily pushes her campaign manager towards the radio host with daggers coming out of her eyes that said...get this guy under control will you. Now I'm not so certain Christine is all the sweet after all. But in fairness I'm sure if I saw Obama behind the scenes fire up a ciggy I'd be disappointed as well...what is that ole saw about "clay feet"?

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 30, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Bible Spice was not the nice spice girl, I forgot which one that was actually.

Years ago she made big eyes at the camera in her Don't Masturbate! video and said, "If he chooses to please himself, then why an I in the picture?" she pretty much outed herself as (biblical) spicy.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Palin may be bad on geography, but I think she can count votes. That is why she left Alaska. I don't think there is any chance that she seriously runs for prez, UNLESS the economy goes into the toilet by early 2012. She will no doubt flirt with the effort until then though.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 30, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

shrink-

So, you are saying that he was just expressing his irrational fear? That's fine, but he didn't acknowledge it as such. That was a mistake-unless he believes it...


Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

All, ABC News tries to clarify Breitbart's role:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/abc_news_clarifies_andrew_brei.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 30, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

All, ABC News tries to clarify Breitbart's role:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/abc_news_clarifies_andrew_brei.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 30, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of the ThrillaFromWasilla:

The GOP tends to really like former VP candidates for the next nominee, so she has a leg up for sure.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

They are bringing a conservative on because they don't want to have a liberal break down and start crying as they see the results of Obambi's failed policies come in.

Posted by: russellburgett | October 30, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Chuck, I have to go to another kiddie Halloween party, but this is important so I will respond some other time. Yes, everyone who says they are afraid of someone else because of how they look should be on camera. KKK guys scared of darkies. Boys and girls scared of each other. People afraid of being anything, of The Other is what we need to see more of. The flip side is getting enraged (I should never be afraid! Kill the scary people!). Gotta go.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 30, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

@5446544 I agree with your post. I think by 2012, again with your caveat of barring some unforeseen catastrophe of 9/11 proportion, Caribou Barbie will not actually run.

She has had how many interviews with an open press? How many press conferences? How many debates? I don't think she'd survive a "series" of debates by saying, "I'm not going to answer the questions you ask but instead give my talking points" and then wink her way through the rest of the debates. Her act is already growing weary, can you imagine her through even 3 debates? She really doesn't wish to do the homework, and she quite literally may be unable to manage the intricacies of policy detail to hold her own with Mittens, Huckabee, Pawlenty et al. In fact I'm hard pressed to think of a more ill informed or less knowledgeable R candidate at the moment...perhaps Foghorn Leghorn aka Haley Barbour.

Regardless she is God's gift to the Dems. If she does run she'll push the party even farther to the right...if she doesn't run, she still be able to push the party farther to the right as it's kingmaker.
Pretty amazing actually.

By the time the R convention reaches our sunny shores here in Tampa Bay I expect the music to be Pink Floyd's "The Wall"
"We don't need no education"
And Michael Steele can be the honorary bearer of the "Fasces" and carry it out onto the stage as the "standard bearer".

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 30, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Troll Hunter updated. One new sock puppet added.

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/89140

Can't get them all immediately, but I'll try to keep up for lmsinca's sake. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

shrink-

OK, I see your point. Yeah, I'm with you. Have a good party.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 30, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

@c22:Sure. and the MSM have been doing their best to ignore it all along. This is all the proof a reasonable person could ask for.

BEEP, sorry using breitbaby as a reference does not cut it. See pimp and hooker, impersonating a phone worker, sherrod video etc.

I noticed that you can't actually provide a link, even to the breitbaby site where the "suppression of a HUGE story by the MSM" is documented...I assume that is because this is a totally fabricated claim...You have all the credibility of breitbart.

Posted by: srw3 | October 30, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Oh my. The ABC newsroom folks have their knickers all twisted up. The idea that they'll have to put a conservative on the air is just beyond the pale. Is it any wonder that the credibility of the MSM is in the crapper?

And their viewership numbers will continue to decline as they continue to pull this kind of crap. The only good that comes of this kind of thing is that, as viewers flee ABC, the network hands out red slips to all these "pure" journalists. Basically, it is Darwinism in the news business, and it may be what saves the industry.

Posted by: dakotadoug83 | October 31, 2010 1:04 AM | Report abuse

GREG

You too are hiding behind software to hide the fact that you are either an eight year old girl or a HERMAPHRODITE.


A real man would defend Obama on the field of ideas.


Instead, you have hurled a series of half-truths and complete lies.

Greg, you know perfectly well when you are lying - and your readers are sick of your complete bullshit.

You are a deceiver and a liar.


First ADMIT that Obama took $500 Billion out of MEDICARE. If you can't do that, you have shown right there you are NOT A MAN.


Everyone who reads your crap KNOWS YOU ARE A LIAR.

Anyway - DEFEND OBAMA.


You give us a bunch of lies - but you really don't have the BALLS to defend Obama - who has DRAGGED THIS ECONOMY THROUGH THE MUD FOR THE SAKE OF HIS OWN STUPIDITY AND EGO.


It really is amazing that someone so stupd could have such an ego, but I suppose that is what AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DOES.


I just want to see the LIBERALS ADMIT IT.


OBAMA AND HIS CREW ARE BULLYING PEOPLE WITH FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM


Be a MAN and admit that.


I would like to see the liberals at least BE MEN and ADMIT THE TRUTH


YOU WORTHLESS PEOPLE - YOU DO NOT EVEN DESERVE TO LIVE IN AMERICA.


Just admit that you made a mistake and voted for someone with no experience and no qualification.


IF YOU CAN NOT ADMIT THAT - LEAVE THE COUNTRY AND NEVER COME BACK - YOU SPINELESS IDIOTS.


WE ARE TAKING OUR COUNTRY BACK

Posted by: TheTruthYouRefuse | October 31, 2010 1:30 AM | Report abuse

In the past year Andrew Breitbart has exposed the corruption at ACORN, racism at the NAACP, and the false allegations of racial slurs hurled at the Congressional Black Caucus members during the HCR vote in DC, allegations used to smear conservatives.

For this he is relentlessly attacked by left wing bloggers, who are conspiring here to pressure ABC to cancel his appearance on the election coverage on Tuesday.

ABC has a chance to attract many viewers who would not normally watch them, like myself. I hope ABC ignores the left's organized attempt to shut down Breitbart and find out how many more viewers they will get.

Posted by: MPCpiano | October 31, 2010 2:19 AM | Report abuse

"It looks like lefty bloggers aren't the only ones irked by ABC News's decision to tap Andrew Breitbart for election-night analysis"

What an interesting statement. Is the implication here that only those on the left are actually concerned with veracity? That conservatives are OK with having a known fabricator on the airwaves because his views are closer to their own?

Wow.

Posted by: frharry | October 31, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

frharry, did you see my posts about "known fabricator" Dan Rather?

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 31, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

I am sure any one who has watched this clown in action, Brietbart, he doesn't shut up. Once he has the floor he goes on and on and never shuts up and he will do the same thing on tuesday. He will fillibuster all night and will not allow others to get a word in edgewise. Tuesday is going to be a very sad night. I doubt I will even watch the outcome. A truly sad day for America. What is amazing is that with so many avenues for truth to come out it seems to make no difference and people choose to believe the lying liars. Amazing and sad. What is also truly tragic is that November third starts the presidential campaign for 2012 and wherever the Repubs have control there will be lying obfuscation delay investigate and obstruction. This is a very very sad day and I do not understand why people are not smart enough to understand that you don't fix the problems overnight repair takes time just think of a house renovation. Good luck all except for the idiots who are intent on destroying this country and this president because they hate more then love.

Posted by: stephen3 | October 31, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

SOOooooo beautiful that ABC newsroom being perfectly, 100% in synch with the radical professional left completely escapes them! Hahaha. And WHY are they doing this? So that they can get MORE left-wing liberal viewers who are full of hate for an opposing view?? Nope, so that they have ANY shot at ratings, that's why.

Posted by: gaymedia | October 31, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Oooohhh...."professional journalists" are upset? Oh my! Katie, bar the door.

Most MSM "journalists" stopped being professional long-ago. And the fact that they consider themselves part of the ruling elite means that 98% are liberal goofballs.

Dan Rather, Daniel Schorr, Walter Duranty, the entire New York Times operation, all network news, most newspapers, Time, Newsweek, etc...on and on.

What a bunch of whiners and clueless liberals "professional journalists" truly are.

What's next? Climate change scares? Bush is a liar and a threat to civil liberties? Unions have not out-lived their usefulness? Please, oh please "professional journalists", inform all of us neanderthal know-nothings.

For without you, we are truly lost.

Funny how "professional journalists" will analyze to the smallest detail a Tea Party candidate running for the Delaware senate.

But the next leader of the free world? Nah...no analysis necessary. After all, Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright and Franklin M. Davis were just the phases of youth.

Thanks "professional journalists".

Posted by: churchill99 | October 31, 2010 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Oooohhh...."professional journalists" are upset? Oh my! Katie, bar the door.

Most MSM "journalists" stopped being professional long-ago. And the fact that they consider themselves part of the ruling elite means that 98% are liberal goofballs.

Dan Rather, Daniel Schorr, Walter Duranty, the entire New York Times operation, all network news, most newspapers, Time, Newsweek, etc...on and on.

What a bunch of whiners and clueless liberals "professional journalists" truly are.

What's next? Climate change scares? Bush is a liar and a threat to civil liberties? Unions have not out-lived their usefulness? Please, oh please "professional journalists", inform all of us neanderthal know-nothings.

For without you, we are truly lost.

Funny how "professional journalists" will analyze to the smallest detail a Tea Party candidate running for the Delaware senate.

But the next leader of the free world? Nah...no analysis necessary. After all, Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright and Franklin M. Davis were just the phases of youth.

Thanks "professional journalists".

Posted by: churchill99 | October 31, 2010 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Oooohhh...."professional journalists" are upset? Oh my! Katie, bar the door.

Most MSM "journalists" stopped being professional long-ago. And the fact that they consider themselves part of the ruling elite means that 98% are liberal goofballs.

Dan Rather, Daniel Schorr, Walter Duranty, the entire New York Times operation, all network news, most newspapers, Time, Newsweek, etc...on and on.

What a bunch of whiners and clueless liberals "professional journalists" truly are.

What's next? Climate change scares? Bush is a liar and a threat to civil liberties? Unions have not out-lived their usefulness? Please, oh please "professional journalists", inform all of us neanderthal know-nothings.

For without you, we are truly lost.

Funny how "professional journalists" will analyze to the smallest detail a Tea Party candidate running for the Delaware senate.

But the next leader of the free world? Nah...no analysis necessary. After all, Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright and Franklin M. Davis were just the phases of youth.

Thanks "professional journalists".

Posted by: churchill99 | October 31, 2010 11:50 PM | Report abuse

Truly stunning to see ABC stoop so low, nearly lowering themselves to the Fox News level. Breitbart has proven to be a cowardly unethical instigator and manipulator, not a source of any meaningful analysis. He is in fact a far-right-wing extremist/activist. An appalling choice by ABC. I will be sticking primarily with NBC and MSNBC for elections coverage, and while I may occasionally check out CNN or CBS, I will studiously avoid ABC.

Posted by: OHIOCITIZEN | November 1, 2010 2:12 AM | Report abuse

Breitbart is not a journalist. He pushed the Sherrod video (that he "received") out the way it was, and did not do any research on it because he had an agenda.

It was Olbermann & the crew who had to get the entire video out to clean up his mess and right the wrong. In journalism, truth does count for something.

Breitbart is a hack. He can't spell the word "credible".

Posted by: STR8UPDOWN | November 1, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps ABC News ratings would not be in the toilet if they allowed an opposing view commentator to express his opinions also. Maybe they should tune into Fox News to see that they allow opposing viewpoints to be aired and their ratings are soaring!

Posted by: edenii | November 2, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company