Breitbart to NAACP: “Go to Hell!”

2010 July 18
by bc3b

In the past few years Andrew Breitbart has become a leading force in conservative media developing a number of conservative websites attacking Hollywood, big government and other factors that negatively affect Americans. He is responsible for exposing ACORN and its corruption.

Unlike Rupert Murdoch (who believes in whatever will line his pockets), Breitbart actually is a true conservative. Wouldn’t it be great if Breitbart could get the funding to develop a true conservative network and challenge the neocon FNC from the right? A network that would engage in true conservative discussion of the news and issues rather than Bill O ‘Reilly, Sean Hannitty, “smart blonde/dumb blonde,” the ” Great, Great, Great American Panel” and a constant diet of Dick Morris, Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove?

But, I digress. Breitbart is once again speaking out and leading the fight – this time against the NAACP for its charges of racism within the Tea Party movement. Here’s Doug Giles in Town Hall on Breitbart, telling the NAACP’s Ben Jealous to “go to hell”:

For the NAACP to call the Tea Party a bunch of “racists” is like Rosie O’Donnell complaining that Chelsea Handler is a bit flabby in the arms, sometimes snacks too much, is not as pretty without her makeup, and really isn’t all that funny.

I believe, via personal experience and watching extensive TV coverage, that I’ve seen way more blacks, browns, yellows (and one green dude) at Tea Parties than I have white devils at NAACP rallies.

Yep, I’m pretty certain that’s been the case, especially at the Tea Party I emceed that had Lt. Col. Allen West as the keynote speaker. I believe he’s black … either that or he has a smokin’ tan. I also believe he should be our next President. So much for my cracka racism, eh? Allen West & Michelle Bachmann 2012. Yahoo!

What was conspicuously absent from the Tea Party I emceed, however, was the presence of south Florida’s evangelical ministers making a big noise and standing up for God and country. Where you at, girlfriends?

Anyway, the irony—or ironies—regarding the racism accusations the NAACP leveled at the Tea Party is their direct ties to the New Black Panther Partyin nudging the Department of Just Us to drop charges against King Schlemiel Schlamazel in the slam dunk Voter Intimidation with a Frickin’ Billy Club case. Yep, that’s a wee bit weird.

Read more.

Hat tip: Town Hall

12 Responses leave one →
  1. 2010 July 18 5:41 am
    bc3b permalink

    Once again Andrew Breitbart is standing tall and leading the fight.

  2. 2010 July 18 5:58 am
    justrand permalink

    He is indeed!

    Breitbart is calling them out, and the truth of what he’s saying is so evident they aren’t even trying to hit back!

    The NAACP attack on the Tea Party movement was [and is] an attempt to force the Tea Party folks, and Conservatives everywhere, to dance to the NAACP’s tune…and self-condemn based on false accusations and random associations.

    It is isn’t working, and Breitbart is making it obvious!

  3. 2010 July 18 6:01 am
    bc3b permalink

    The charge of “racist” – whether true or false – carries a tremendous stigma in 21st century American.

  4. 2010 July 18 6:03 am
    justrand permalink

    less of a stigma all the time, bc3b…thx to morons like Jesse Jackson, alSharpton, the New Black Panthers and the NAACP. The more false accusations hurled, the more people discount the charge.

    And the REAL racism in our midst, like those calling for the killing of “Cracker babies” gets lost in the shuffle.

  5. 2010 July 18 6:07 am
    justrand permalink

    on a very related subject. over at Instapundit Glenn Reynolds has suggestions related to the piece by Angelo Codevilla on America’s ruling class that WEC linked to yesterday> HUGE Hattip to Instapundit!! Here’s the start to how to deal with our new “Ruling Class”:

    First: Mockery. They are very mockable, and they are very thin-skinned. That leads them to erupt in embarrassing ways. Use their sense of entitlement against them.

    Second (and related): Transparency. One-party government makes you stupid, and although composed of both Democrats and Republicans the political class is basically its own party, and these people are pretty stupid. Point it out, repeatedly. Use FOIA, ubiquitous videocameras, and other tools to make the stupidity show.

    Third: Money….

    -and so on…I encourage everyone to go over and read the whole thing at Instapundit!!

  6. 2010 July 18 7:33 am
    janzam permalink

    A little OT and long, but an interesting analysis by Ashbrook:

    Axelrod and the Democrats’ Strange Strategery

    Sunday evening, while out to dinner with the family at a local cafe, I happened to catch David Axelrod attempting to mount a defense against the coming electoral tide with CNN’s Candy Crowley. That the cafe’s television was tuned in to this sad demonstration made for a hazardous dining experience as, the longer I listened, the more choking became a danger. It was not that I was having difficulty swallowing Axelrod’s spin. I’ve tasted that spin before and I know better than to pretend it’s edible, forget nutritious. Even so, I could not help but savor the edges of his “argument,”–because, like a cheap gum one takes when offered but never bothers to buy–it hinted at a flavor that promised to resemble something tasty even though it would quickly lose all taste and I’d have to spit it out. In this case, Axelrod’s flavor was double-down lefty mint–touting the causes of Obama’s coming electoral nightmare as reasons he should be celebrated.

    Axelrod proudly noted the bailouts that have produced economic stagnation, prolonged the recession, and prevented job growth; the passage “after 100 years of trying” [*choke!*–ed]. of health care reform; and, most important [*really? MOST important?!*–ed.] Obama is going to put an end to “don’t-ask-don’t-tell” and after that he’s going to push for “comprehensive” immigration reform. Now, this is not my regular fare, to be sure, but it was surprisingly tasty in this context. Why? Because it tells me which voters Axelrod means to impress. And why is it that Axelrod–this late in the game–is worried about impressing.. who, exactly? Lefties? He’s worried about bleeding lefty votes? The chef is focused on cooking for the regulars because his problem right now is not so much that he’s not bringing in new customers (though he’s certainly not), the real danger is that he’s losing the old ones. He can’t be bothered right now with seasoning the dishes in ways that appeal to the masses. Right now he’s got to focus on making sure that what he’s been serving up all along is cooked.

    Axelrod’s menu appeared to be reduced to the caveman-like proportions: find meat, kill meat, cook meat. No sauce, no flair, no sweeteners or sides.

    Indeed, the leftward tilt of Axelrod’s defense of Obama was something to behold. For in addition to revealing their desperation, it also revealed something of their anger and complete lack of understanding when it comes to the mood of the national electorate. His message seemed to simmer down to this: we’ve set a full table–laid out our whole menu here for your eyes to behold and your tongues to taste… Why don’t you like it? It seemed to me that Axelrod’s attitude was more one of anger and disbelief with the electorate for their ingratitude and, of course, lack of appreciation at Obama’s great culinary efforts over the course of many hot days in the kitchen when, after all, everyone knows that George W. Bush broke the air-conditioning.

    I’ve heard some other commentators speculating that the frustration of those on the American Left these days–especially from within the Obama Adminstration–is stemming from the realization that they’ve got their fingers on all the right buttons now and, yet, things aren’t working out as they imagined they should. Their ideas do not yield the results (particularly not in the economic realm) that their ideology has taught them to anticipate. That may be true as far as it goes and with respect to a defined group of practitioners on the Left and in the Administration. But I think that’s over-thinking the thing and does not explain the broader phenomenon. More likely, it seems to me, is that they really did not anticipate the kick-back coming from the American people. It is not enough for the American Left to win some elections and set their pet projects into motion–they are still pining for the energy, affection, and excitement they experienced during the courting phase of their relationship with voters in the 2008 campaign. In its place they are finding a demanding, nagging, results-oriented spouse who is repeatedly asking pointed questions about what they’ve been doing with themselves all day. But the Left is beyond trying to please these voters at this point. Their anger has moved them to the point where they shout back, “You don’t understand what I’ve been dealing with!” and “You never appreciate anything I do for you!” This resent-laden self-defense that they’re now mounting can only appeal to the most far-gone among the infatuated.

    So for now, I’m chewing on this gum and enjoying the show. I don’t expect this flavor to last for very long, however. They can’t be this self-destructive, can they?
    Posted by Julie Ponzi

  7. 2010 July 18 7:57 am
    drdog09 permalink

    Andrew is indeed leading a good fight. He has quickly become our Patrick Henry for the 21st century.

    Even more relevant is that the NAACP has in a few short years gone from the leading light in the civil rights movement to a mirror of the very thing that brought them into being — racism. When a minority believes that because of their status they cannot be racist, they have made the first step in becoming one.

  8. 2010 July 18 8:06 am
    drdog09 permalink

    Jan, good read. If that is the way the O WH is going then they are in a losing strategy for sure. If the WH is locked into a battle to win back their base, forgetting the center, then they have capped themselves into a 30% upside. Having 100% of 30% of the voters does not win elections.

  9. 2010 July 18 9:38 am
    janzam permalink

    From this morning’s Power Line:

    Basically, the NCAAP seems to think that any harsh criticism of President Obama is “racist.” But all presidents are criticized harshly; often unfairly so. The NCAAP is trying to extend a special zone of protection around Obama, an effort that is doomed to failure. And its reliance on Think Progress doesn’t inspire confidence. That site has faked video evidence to try to support the claim that the Tea Party is “racist.”

    Are Americans dumb enough to fall for this dodge? I doubt it. My guess is that only true believers take seriously the claim that those who are concerned about out-of-control government spending are “racists.”

  10. 2010 July 18 10:33 am
    TLS permalink

    I’ve heard some other commentators speculating that the frustration of those on the American Left these days–especially from within the Obama Adminstration–is stemming from the realization that they’ve got their fingers on all the right buttons now and, yet, things aren’t working out as they imagined they should. Their ideas do not yield the results (particularly not in the economic realm) that their ideology has taught them to anticipate.

    This statement assumes that their goal is to correct the economy. My personal opinion is that they intend to collapse the economy. So the idea that this is not working out as they planned misses the point. The problem is that it’s hard to sell collapsing the economy to their base, since they are part of the economy as well.

  11. 2010 July 18 10:52 am
    JustMary permalink

    Indeed, and they do not mind the economy collapsing because they have the means to escape it relatively unscathed. If I see a tornado coming, and I am the only one with a basement…..

  12. 2010 July 18 6:45 pm
    JustMary permalink

    I steal everybody else’s Oreos and get to the basement while they get sucked away. /dem

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.