
There is a new street art poster that’s being emailed around and will no doubt eventually be spotted on a street corner near you. It’s a gritty black and white image of Andrew Breitbart looking both battle-worn and ever vigilant with the caption: “BREITBART IS HERE.”
Those three words express the instant connection many of us feel for our fallen friend. They express our identification with him, and our need to continue his fight for the good of our republic.
With the death of Breitbart, the conservative movement didn’t just lose a General – we lost an entire Special Forces Division. But he didn’t leave us without the tools and the knowledge we need to fight. This website – Breitbart 2.0 – is the culmination of his study of the technology and aesthetics of new media. The team Breitbart assembled under the leadership of Steve Bannon, Larry Solov, and Joel Pollak will advance his mission with courage and integrity.
Breitbart’s most immediate mission was the belated vetting of Barack Obama. This obviously is an issue very near and dear to my heart.
During the ’08 campaign, the same media that reported breathlessly about an old used tanning bed I purchased to get some sun during the dark Alaskan winter, couldn’t be bothered to investigate Barack Obama’s associations, statements or even his voting record as a state senator. Suntans and what I wore on the campaign trail were more important than Obama’s political background. Unbelievable.
But when you come to think of it, the media didn’t investigate either of our actual political records very closely.
Barack Obama and I both served in political office in states with a serious corruption problem. Though there is a big difference between serving as the CEO of a city, then a state, and regulating domestic energy resources, and being a liberal Community Organizer, bear with me on the comparison. The difference between my record and Barack Obama’s is that I fought the corrupt political machine my entire career (and I have twenty years of scars to prove it) on the local, state, and national level. But Obama didn’t fight the corruption he encountered. He went along with it to advance his career. Graft, cronyism, and quid pro quo are the methods of the Chicago political machine from which he emerged.
You would think the media – those watchdogs of the public trust – would be interested in this. But they refused to vet Barack Obama. With tingles up their legs, they shielded him.
That’s a good match: A religious zealot and a martyr (guess which is which?).
A carpetbagger and a gold digger…which is which?
The msm is completely corrupt. We saw this in the Journolist news that went largely unreported in ’08. Reporters actually signed on to a conspiracy to spin the news to help Obama’s election. Almost no one in the msm covered this…why would they? They were part of the conspiracy. “Reporters” have given up objectivity for access…or perhaps for other enticements. I use the word conspriacy with intent. That’s exactly what it was and what it remains.
The msm still refuses to cover Obama in an even way. His early life is out of bounds. The only evidence ever presented that he was born here…has been deconstructed…totally….and the media ignores the issue. No college grades or thesis available. Passport records…sealed. College tuition records sealed. Which drugs did he take at Columbia? How did he afford them? Did he sell drugs? Who was his supplier? Where are his college girlfriends? Where are any of his college friends? Did he have any? There are rumors that while at Occidental he lived in the foreign student dorm. What was his relationship with the Rev. Wright? Tony Rezko? How did he come by a social security number issued in Connecticut in 1977?
As a child how did he get into a religious-public school in Indonesia? I have read that one had to be a citizen to be admitted. Is there not one “reporter” in this country who is willing to check into this? They seem to be too busy covering Republican candidates. I wonder if they are still following Palin’s children around?
Obama the child and the young man still remain a mystery.
A bad match: liberals and objectivity. Kind of like matter and anit-matter, they can never meet.
Since religious zealots are known by their zealous behavior, perhaps you can supply some examples of Plain behaving in a zealous fashion. This should be simple, because Palin’s whole life has been scrutinized under the microscope of a “zealous” media. There should be plenty of articles to choose from showing Palin engaging in egregious and aberrant behavior while practicing her “religion”.
Either Palin is a “religious zealot” as you claim, or you’re a lying troll.
I say you’re a lying troll. Prove me wrong. I dare you!