How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
I received the e-mail below from The Atlantic writer Conor Friedersdorf this morning:
Diane,
Today I wrote a short obit at The Atlantic that urged people to set aside politics for a day and mourn Breitbart the husband, father, and energetic professional. After some time passes, probably early next week, I'm going to write a post that grapples with his professional legacy.
I saw that you wrote on Ricochet:
The tremendous work that Andrew Breitbart accomplished for the conservative cause is all the more remarkable when you consider that he really only became a household name for us conservatives over the past three years.
Would you mind telling me, on or off the record, what specifically he accomplished for the conservative cause that is tremendous and remarkable? I've got my critiques of Breitbart. Insofar as there are accomplishments to set forth alongside them I want to do so.
Thanks for reading.
I'll kick us off with the things that stood out to me in reading through Ricochet's large collection of Breitbart tributes and remembrances:
1. As Ben Domenech noted a few months ago, conservatives really lag in the arena of investigative journalism. Andrew Breitbart did more to expose the stories that the rest of the media either conveniently ignored or even worked hard to keep under wraps than anyone else. In the process, he:
- exposed Anthony Weiner's lies, ultimately driving him out of office which paved the way for a Republican to assume office in NY-9 for the first time since 1923;
- drove ACORN into extinction.
2. He built up a whole lot of invaluable internet infrastructure that has proven to be an important set of resources for the right. From Breitbart.com to Big Government, Big Hollywood, Big Journalism, Big Peace, and with an assist to the Drudge Report.
But to be sure that Conor has a thorough list of the things that conservatives consider to be Andrew's biggest professional achievements, I put the query to the Ricochet community.
- Comment (63)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Seriously, what planet has this forgettable Atlantic commentator been living on for the past three+ years? Even Breitbart's adversaries are quick to acknowledge his accomplishments. Why bother trying to respond to someone who chooses to ignore - whatever his personal reasons or agenda - the life, work and the force of nature that was Andrew Breitbart? Does anyone care what the Atlantic or Mr. CF opines? Moving on to more important matters.
Jan '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
It's amazing to me how people can write multiple comments about an author they claim to have no interest in.
Jan '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Taking out Anthony Weiner and destroying ACORN were good, tactical achievements that put a dent in the Left's reputation when it was needed, but neither will have any lasting effect beyond that. Moreover, I don't think Breitbart's media empire delivered on its initial promise of producing meaningful investigative journalism since the ACORN tapes, though there a few marginal exceptions. It's also failed to account for some of the sloppiness of its early work, especially its libel against Juan Carlos Vera.Breitbart's position -- which I really hadn't appreciated until this week -- as a conservative leader is remarkable and I think some people's earlier comments pointing out how Breitbart's lived demonstration that hating the Left doesn't make one a luddite scared of the future, are spot on.
Aug '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Well, for my part, I wrote what I wrote not because I have any great hope that Conor will regard our impressions as anything other than quaintly misinformed, if he reads them at all. But if he doesn't just dismiss what we have to say, I wanted to take the opportunity to frame my impressions in a way he might understand.
Edited on March 3, 2012 at 5:56pmJun '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Thanks. It's not just Conor, it's the entire Atlantic, with the notable exception of Megan McArdle.
Aug '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
It's interesting...
Each side of the left-right divide sees itself as the party of polite, reasonable discourse while the other side is merely the party of propaganda. Yet reasonable discourse isn't the only means by which ideas live -- it isn't even the only respectable means by which ideas live.
"Reasonable discourse" is an inadequate description of poetry, music, and other arts, for example -- in fact, great art is often great because it simply observes without trying to shoehorn its observations into some sort of "reasonable discourse".
Leftists, I think, have long been more comfortable than the right with realizing that flamboyant, cheerfully "unreasonable" means of expressing their ideas can enhance rather than undermine the expressive power of reasonable discourse. For example, leftists have been more successful at publicly shaming the right for its "unreasonable" expressions than vice versa.
Of course Breitbart wasn't a paragon of polite, reasonable discourse. We have plenty of that already. Ideas live in other ways, whether we like it or not.
In fact, you might wonder whether ideas that never leave the realm of polite, reasonable discourse are really ideas, rather than the timid burblings of wallflower temperaments.
Nov '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Regarding Vera, here is Friedersdorf. Here is the link to the California AG'S report on ACORN. Here and here are unedited audio and transcripts of the Vera/OKeefe encounter. Ricochet members can decide for themselves if ACORN was justified in terminating Vera.
Jan '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Midge,Your comments were substantive and not the target of mine own. As for the question of "reasonable discourse," my frustration is that conservatives are the first to pat themselves on the back for our civility -- the "why don't Leftists ever get picketed at college campuses" meme, which I think is acutally a really good question -- but also herald Breitbart without even noting his own penchant for nastiness (e.g., his tweets celebrating Ted Kennedy's death).As I have not said so earlier, I offer my condolences to his family and lament that one of our strongest fighters has left us before his time.
Aug '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
I didn't attack Conor because I, for the most part, find him to be a good journalist. I don't always agree with him, and sometimes he rides the wave of "conventional wisdom" a little too much, but I like him.
Jun '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
I, for one, have no interest in what Conor Friedersdorf says or writes. That is not a claim. That is a fact. Breitbart's remarks on the death of Ted Kennedy may have been impolite and improper but pale in comparison to the improper, impolite and reckless behavior of the departed senator from Massachusetts himself who should have been convicted on manslaughter and whose political career should have ended with the death of Mary Jo Kopechne that he caused. Kennedy survived because he was a Kennedy and the hoped-for heir apparent to his assassinated brothers to ascend to the Presidency. My opinion of Kennedy is not far removed from what Breitbart wrote. This was the same Kennedy who later sat in pompous and hypocritical judgement on Clarence Thomas. Kennedy deserved a good deal more criticism, scrutiny and rebuke than he ever received...this so-called "Lion of the Senate".
Aug '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Long gone are the days when you could count on an objective journalist to dig deeper and risk their jobs (and perhaps their lives) to bring the true story to the public. Breitbart did. I could count on Breitbart (and Drudge) to provide me the facts, regardless of who it skewered. I appreciated the occasional "in your face, telling it like it is" approach and look forward to seeing more from his site. I am hoping that all the platitudes that I am seeing will result in more activism from all those who knew him well. When one falls, it's incumbent for those behind him to pick up the flag and move forward. I know that I have been inspired to do so.
Edited on March 3, 2012 at 7:46pmJun '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Breitbart was refreshing precisely because he could be nasty and give as good as he got. When dyed-in-the-wool Marxists want to destroy everything that America is and stands for then "nastiness" is merely the polite way to counter their attacks. For too long, conservatives, and in particular country-club, establishment, inside-the-beltway Republicans have been overly polite to those who wish to fundamentally transform this country into a socialist state. The problem is that we should have been in their faces years ago.
Aug '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Well, what's nice or nasty isn't just a question of morals (which people of the same worldview could presumably agree on), but also a question of taste and prudential judgment (which even people with identical morals can disagree on). In other words, it's also a matter of style.
Since style gets better with practice, I'd say the correct thing for the Right to do is to keep practicing, rather than backing off. We'll eventually get the hang of it :-)
Edited on March 3, 2012 at 8:05pmNov '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Who is Conor Friedersdorf? Here's all you need to know, via two quotes:
and
Edited on March 3, 2012 at 8:19pmNov '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Friedersdorf's post on Breitbart's death here is a perfect example of the way that he writes. On the surface, it seems reasonable enough; he has some kind words for Breitbart
, but reminds us why Breitbart was so reviled by the Left, and by "responsible journalists":
Here is my problem with this piece:
(continued)
Nov '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Now, I didn't click through to read all of these pieces; I just looked at the one from Slate, and to characterize it as the "best" of anything is not something a conservative would do. Why? From the Slate piece:
Nov '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
You can watch Mattera's comments at CPAC here. I'll allow Ricochet members to decide if he is using a "Chris Rock voice" or "racial tones", whatever those are. The notion that journalists from the NYT can write such slurs, but somehow Breitbart is the bad guy for referring to a "respected journalist" like Zernike as "despicable", seems a bit wrong to me. Despicable means "deserving of contempt or scorn". That sounds about right.
Jul '10
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
I have no interest in writing for the Atlantic in any capacity. Nor the National Enquirer, for that matter.
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Well, for my part, I wrote what I wrote not because I have any great hope that Conor will regard our impressions as anything other than quaintly misinformed, if he reads them at all. But ifhe doesn't just dismiss what we have to say, I wanted to take the opportunity to frame my impressions in a way he might understand.
I agree w/you, MFR.
I understand all of the skepticism expressed in this thread by Members, and largely share it. And I strongly considered e-mailing Conor back and asking him how it was possible that he wasn't already aware of Andrew's long list of accomplishments.
But while I'm concerned that Conor will go and write another David Frum-type nasty hit piece, I figure that at the end of the day a conversation such as this allows everyone to hash out what it is that we find so memorable and remarkable about this lion of a man we've lost. It's for us. Not for Conor.
Because frankly, with all due respect to Conor, who cares what petty complaints he has to level at Andrew's memory?
Nov '11
Re: How Andrew Breitbart Advanced the Cause
tabula rasa
... you'd have to be living in hut half-way up Mount Everest not to know about Brietbart's accomplishments.
Many liberals metaphorically are isolated in this way. Talking to them is like being trapped in hell, arguing with a brick.
Breitbart was the one who went into the dens of Occupy Wall Street, union protesters, MSNBC, and Bill Maher's show because he knew that conservatives needed to be represented in all places.
He did some of the same stuff that a younger Rush Limbaugh did 20 years ago or Buckley decades ago. Ann Coulter does some of this, but she stops to do in-depth research for new books. However, Breitbart was in constant motion. He was seemingly in a thousand places just this past month.
He always hated bullies, and liberals and the media are the biggest liars and bullies. He was a mountain of a man, and it takes a person of a certain size and personality to confront bullies.
This conservative general was like Patton, but he was also like Ike or Marshall, finding and recruiting talent for the cause.