Breitbart “News” Duped By Same Satirical Site They Blasted WaPo For Believing

It is becoming evermore inescapable that Breitbart “News” is run by the dumbest bunch of pseudo-journalists ever to disgrace the profession. Just a couple of weeks after freaking out over an alleged association between then-Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel and the Freinds of Hamas (a terrorist group that, it turns out, does not exist), the BreitBrats are at it again.

Breitbart - Krugman

Media Matters caught Breitbart editor-at-large, Larry O’Connor, posting an article (now deleted) that claimed that Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman had filed for bankruptcy. It was a juicy story for a conservative rag that would like nothing better than to discredit one of the shining lights of progressive media – a columnist for the New York Times no less.

Unfortunately for O’Conner, the story was utterly false. In fact, it was the work of The Daily Currant, a satirical web site. The thought of doing any actual reporting never entered into the minds of the BreitBrats or they would have quickly discerned that the article was a comical fake.

What makes this even more embarrassing is that just last month O’Conner’s fellow BreitBrat, John Nolte, went to great lengths to slam the Washington Post for having fallen for an article from the same site. Nolte’s pompous critique made some points that apply perfectly to O’Conner. He lambasted the WaPo author saying that…

Nolte: If [Suzy] Parker had a shred of self-awareness, integrity, and dignity, she would have changed the headline to “Too Good To Check,” and under it posted an essay about how shallow, smug, bitterly angry partisanship can blind you to common sense.

What part of that doesn’t reflect precisely the predicament in which O’Conner now finds himself? And why did the Breitbart site simply delete the phony article rather than adding a correction (which WaPo did) and an essay about angry partisanship and common sense. It should also be noted that the erroneous item on WaPo’s site was posted by a guest blogger not employed by WaPo, while the Breitbart screw up was by an editor.

The magnitude of hypocrisy here is off the scales. Breitbart never took responsibility for the phony Hamas story. They also never reported at all that their one-time Golden boy, James O’Keefe, had settled litigation against him for $100,000 in a case where he smeared an ACORN employee. And now they quietly sweep their brazen incompetence under the rug despite having made such a fuss about a similar recent situation.

Nevertheless, Breitbart’s site is still highly regarded in conservative circles, including Fox News, who frequently republish their tripe. It simply cannot be said enough that this is how right-wingers have become the most ignorant and misinformed people in America.

James O’Keefe Agrees To Pay $100,000 To Former ACORN Employee [Update w/O’Keefe Statement]

James O'KeefeHaving already been convicted of criminal activity in Louisiana, recidivist law-breaker James O’Keefe is now shelling out a hundred grand to one of his victims in the notorious ACORN affair.

ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera was surreptitiously videotaped (for which criminal charges are still pending) and falsely portrayed as offering assistance to O’Keefe’s phony endeavor to transport underage girls from El Salvador for the purpose of prostitution. Unbeknownst to O’Keefe, Vera had notified the police after his encounter with O’Keefe. But O’Keefe posted his fraudulent and heavily edited videotapes anyway with the help of Andrew Breitbart. It will be interesting to see how Breitbart News covers this breaking story – if they do so at all.

This is yet another vindication for ACORN, which has never been found to be guilty of any wrongdoing throughout the trumped up scandal that led to its demise. And it is further evidence that O’Keefe is a disreputable scumbag with no respect for journalism and no personal integrity. This civil litigation defeat is well-deserved and it ensures that the money O’Keefe swindles from his ignorant donors will be put to better use.

[Update] O’Keefe has posted a statement on his settlement agreement that typically denies responsibility and blames others. He calls the $100,000 “the cost of exposing the truth,” and insists that he “will not be deterred from investigating and exposing corruption.” Of course, that statement conflicts with the one he agreed to in court documents wherein he said that he “regrets any pain suffered by Mr. Vera or his family.” How can he be genuinely remorseful while saying that the “ridiculous lawsuit” consists of “meritless accusations?” What’s more, it is absurd to characterize a $100,000 payout as a nuisance suit. Two or three grand maybe, but a hundred large is real money that only the guilty fork over.

Clearly O’Keefe is an unprincipled and deceitful weasel whose word is worthless. And his equally disreputable cohorts at Breitbart and Fox have not even bothered to report the news of this settlement 24 hours later.

Breitbart Refuses To Apologize For Hagel Story Proven To Be False

In a typical display of arrogant obstinance, Breitbart News is refusing to acknowledge or take responsibility for a false story that was apparently based on a joke.

Breitbart News

BreitBrat Ben Shapiro posted an item of February 7, asserting that the White House was “Duck[ing] Questions On Friends of Hamas” with regard to Chuck Hagel’s nomination to be Secretary of Defense. Shapiro wrote that his investigation had turned up several sources claiming that Hagel had received donations from the terrorist sympathizers with the unlikely name.

However, it turns out, as it often does with the BreitBrats, that there was no truth to the rumor. In fact, it wasn’t even a rumor, it was a joke. When investigated by real reporters it was learned that Friends of Hamas does not even exist. But upon being revealed as a hack who never bothered to look into the claims of his alleged sources, BreitBrat Ben is now stiffening his back and defending his journalistic incompetence.

Shapiro is attempting to divert attention from his bumbling reportage by attacking the reporters who actually did what reporters are supposed to do. Meanwhile, his phony story is bubbling up the conservative food chain and has even made it to Fox’s Lou Dobbs program. So far, none of these disseminators of the debunked story about the fake group have issued corrections. But that’s to be expected from “news” enterprises that have such a devoted aversion to the truth.

Brilliant Breitbart Investigation Exposes: The Plot To Eat LUNCH!

Breitbart News appears to be angling to overtake The Onion as the funniest Internet site. Unfortunately for them, they aren’t doing it on purpose.

The geniuses at Breitbart News blasted out a shocking expose today that threatens to blow the lid off of Obama’s Justice Department. After an investigation that included the filing of numerous Freedom of Information Act requests concerning “questionable behavior by agency personnel” and their relationship with the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Breitbart’s crack team of reporters (or is that team of reporters on crack?) published the shocking results of their investigation.

Breitbart News

The DOJ had invited Morris Dees, founder of the SPLC, to speak at a Diversity Training Event. Dees was a particularly appropriate choice to address the group because of the SPLC’s long record of fighting bigots and hate groups and advocating for, and teaching, racial tolerance. The SPLC has also worked with both federal and local police agencies to identify racist individuals and groups who engage in criminal activities.

What Breitbart found, via their pals at the right-wing legal group, Judicial Watch, was a batch of emails that revealed … well, see for yourself (cut and paste from Breitbart News):

  • May 3, 2012 email – “We would like to tape the [Morris Dees] remarks and, at the same time, out Morris real time on the DOJ system can watch from their desks. Is that okay with Morris?”
  • June 27, 2012 – “Let me know Morris’ air schedule so I can pick him up at airport and plan an evening for us if he stays over.”
  • July 11, 2012 – “I will be at National in my [REDACTED] in which he has ridden before … I can arrange dinner. If he has a preference in DC where he wants to eat … tell him to let me know his druthers.”
  • July 16, 2012 – “The AAG’s office want to take Morris out to lunch before the 1:30 pm July 31 remarks … I’d pick Morris up at his hotel at 11:30 am if that worked for him.”
  • July 23, 2012 – “I will pick you [Morris Dees] up at the airport July 30. Would you go out to dinner with my wife and me and our two teenage daughters that first night? The girls need some inspiration from a master of inspiration.”

That’s it. Really! The DOJ communicated with a guest speaker to arrange airport transportation and meals. And for this Breitbart seems to think that prison, or perhaps waterboarding, would be warranted.

This article, written by former “Moonie” Washington Times reporter Kerry Picket, castigated the SPLC as an “attack group” and complained about them allegedly “labeling organizations with conservative views on social issues as ‘hate groups.’” However, it is hardly the SPLC’s fault that many so conservative groups are so often found to be bleating overt hate-speech. The SPLC carefully documents every allegation they make and they are respected by the nation’s foremost experts on organized bigotry.

This is another example of the BreitBrats simply targeting an ideological opponent and, lacking any evidence of actual wrongdoing, manufactures an imaginary outrage with which to regale their easily misled audience. But when the pickings are so slim that they are reduced to fanning a scandal comprised of dining reservations, you just have to laugh. It doesn’t get much more pathetic than this.

Fox News Deliberately Low-Balled Sarah Palin According To Reliable Sources (CNN)

Sarah PalinMuch has been made of the news that Tea Party queen Sarah Palin and Fox News, the cable network that served as the PR agency for the Tea Party, have parted ways. The reporting generally implied that Palin had turned down Fox’s offer to renew her contract. That is, in all likelihood, exactly what happened.

However, contract negotiations are more complex than that. And now we have reporting from CNN’s Howard Kurtz that fleshes out some of the ambiguities of the original stories. On his program Reliable Sources, Kurtz expanded on the matter by saying…

“My reporting shows that Fox News did offer Sarah Palin a new contract, but it is what I would call a low-ball offer, significantly less, a fraction of the million dollars a year she had been paid.”

In other words, Fox deliberately made an offer that they knew Palin would reject because they had no interest in retaining her beyond her current contract. As speculated previously here at News Corpse, Fox probably “offered her a moose burger and parking validation to re-up – and even that would have been more than she’s worth.” After all, why would Fox continue to overpay someone about whom Fox CEO Roger Ailes reportedly said he thinks is an idiot?

Palin’s star has been fading fast. Fox News only posted a modified AP story about the separation on their web site. Fox Nation, known for its rabid partisanship and rank dishonesty, didn’t report on it all. As evidence of Palin’s rapidly declining value, her first post-Fox stop was at the Internet’s home of doctored videos and right-wing propaganda, Breitbart News. There she answered a couple of vacant questions from BreitBrat Stephen Bannon, the sycophantic producer of the fawning Palin crockumentary, “The Undefeated” (the most ironically named box office bomb ever, considering it chronicles one of modern history’s most frequently defeated political failures).

In response to Bannon’s query about what she planned to do next, Palin had no answer other than vagaries about her desire to quit “preaching to the choir.” She spoke of “sharing more broadly the message of the beauty of freedom” to a larger audience. She didn’t give any indication of where she would find an audience receptive to her wingnuttery that she thinks is larger than Fox News from which she was just ousted. The narrow appeal of her conservative extremism is unlikely to find much acceptance beyond the tiny choir that is currently singing from her warped hymnal.

Then Bannon asked her where she thinks the country stands today and she launched into a dirty laundry list of every worn out criticism the right has lobbed at Obama for four years. She spoke of deficits and unemployment – problems that resulted from George Bush’s mismanagement of the economy and have improved under Obama. Of course, she also included fabricated controversies about ObamaCare, Benghazi, and gun control, that are a staple of the right’s outrage machine.

Palin told BreitBrat Bannon that “Conservatism didn’t lose.” She blames the 2012 GOP debacle entirely on Mitt Romney, despite the fact that he ran as a “severely conservative” candidate embracing every position held dear to the Republican far-right fringe. And she declares that “we haven’t begun to fight! But we delight in those who underestimate us.” In that regard she must be filled to the brim with delight, because it would hard to have a lower estimation of the woman who thinks a “gotcha” question is “What magazines do you read.”

On the basis of that level of insightful commentary, it’s no wonder that Fox chose to insult Palin with a pittance of her prior pay, and free her to tarnish the reputation of some other news enterprise (i.e. Breitbart). Apparently somebody at Fox has concluded that their reputation has already been tarnished enough.

Breitbart Takes An Early Lead In The ‘Stupidest Article Of The Year’ Contest: On Gun-Related Deaths

The year is only about two weeks old but a strong entry has already been made to capture the “Stupidest Article Of The Year” award. And to no one’s surprise, a perennial favorite in the competition to achieve Olympian idiocy has leaped to front of the pack.

Breitbart

Breitbart News has few rivals when it comes to jaw-dropping dimwittedness. And they have once again proven their mettle with an article sporting the headline “Less Than One Percent Of Deaths In 2011 Were Gun-Related.” Here’s an excerpt:

“The media regularly twists gun numbers to make gun-related deaths appear predominant over every other type of death in this country. However, a rational examination of how small the percentage of gun-related deaths are when compared to the overall number of deaths in any given year helps one to see through the hype.”

The blockheads at Breitbart are actually trying to deceptively distort the argument by comparing the number of deaths by guns to the total number of all deaths, including old age, disease, accidents, and auto-erotic asphyxiation (that last one was thrown in as a frame of reference for the Breitbrats who probably have personal experience with it).

Over two and a half million people died in 2011 for all combined reasons. It is utterly irrelevant to compare that number to just the deaths caused by guns and conclude that such deaths are therefore not a problem. A proper analysis would be to compare gun-related deaths to other types of similar fatalities. But by the perverse logic employed by the Breitbrats tuberculosis, AIDS, asthma, influenza, Parkinson’s disease, leukemia, and prostate or ovarian cancers are also not a problem. According to the Centers for Disease Control they all have death rates that are less than or equivalent to gun-related deaths. So rest easy America.

If all of that weren’t bad enough, the Breitbrats can’t even get their statistics straight. Their article claims that “in 2011, the total number of gun-related deaths was 8,583.” However, the actual number is 32,163 – a discrepancy of a mere 375 percent. That’s the sort of buffoonery that will make Breitbart a challenge to defeat as the year in stupid progresses. So congratulations to them on their world-class ignorance, and to the other contenders (i.e. Fox News, Daily Caller, WorldNetDaily, Newsbusters, et al), Don’t give up, the year is still young.

He’s Baaack! James O’Keefe’s Latest Exercise In Lame: The Gun Free Episode

See the update to this story here.

James O'KeefeRemember this guy: James O’Keefe, a self-styled citizen journalist whose shenanigans have been financed by the likes of Andrew Breitbart. O’Keefe is best known for producing videos that have been deliberately edited to smear his victims and deceive his audience.

Among his most notorious adventures were: His attacks on ACORN, an organization that was later proven to have done nothing unlawful; His attempt to seduce a CNN reporter aboard his “Love Boat” that blew up in his face when his accomplice exposed him; His unlawful trespassing into a Senator’s office disguised as a telephone repairman, which resulted in his conviction for that criminal activity; His effort to demonstrate the existence of voter fraud wherein the only evidence of any fraud was that he engaged in himself; His misrepresentation of NPR officials that was so bad that Glenn Beck’s web site debunked and denounced him; And let’s not forget his alleged drugging and harassment of a female colleague who claims to have been held against her will at a barn in his New Jersey home.

Now choirboy O’Keefe is teasing his latest deception, a project he promises will make journalists angry. Of course, actual journalists have always been angered by charlatans who disgrace their profession. O’Keefe’s current publisher, the conspiracy web rag WorldNetDaily (has Breitbart ditched him?), has more details:

O’Keefe’s crew asked journalists working for CNN, MSNBC and others whether they would put a sign in their lawn that says “Citizens Against Senseless Violence. THIS HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE!”

“No journalist wanted the sign,” he says. “Many journalists had armed guards.”

“We also showed up at Eric Holder’s house,” O’Keefe added. “Authorities came to protect him.”

O'Keefe Gun Sign

What O’Keefe is trying to prove is completely unfathomable. It makes no sense that a public person like a journalist would ever consider advertising private information like their home address or security arrangements. Journalists often work under circumstances that put themselves at great risk. There is no rational scenario in which their private life is analogous to that of ordinary citizens. Consequently, the revelation that a journalist would decline the absurd offer to post such a sign should be of no surprise to anyone with a functioning brain.

The obvious intent of O’Keefe is to fabricate a situation in which he can attempt to embarrass the target of his childish scheme. It has nothing to do with journalism, and everything to do with the politics of gun worship. What’s more, it completely misrepresents the concept of gun-free zones, which are not efforts to brag about the absence of firearms, but are intended to alert law-abiding citizens that such weapons are not permitted and that bringing them into the designated area would subject them to criminal prosecution.

The gun worshiping crowd is fond of whining that regulations are ineffective because criminals would simply ignore them. However that would also apply to any law, including rape and murder. So their argument is that no laws prohibiting anything should ever be enacted. Clearly that would be insane. Laws do deter people from engaging in the behavior they are intended to inhibit. And for those who are not deterred, laws provide a mechanism to punish the offender. No one has ever suggested that the mere presence of a law would eliminate crime, but any sane person knows that laws are an essential part of the justice system and that they have a legitimate purpose and a demonstrable effect.

O’Keefe has promised that his videos of journalists declining to accommodate his prank will be released soon. If history is any guide they will be severely mangled in the editing room to give the most disparaging possible impression of the subject. But the good news is that, at this point, his reputation has been so shattered that he has been relegated to aligning himself with the bozos at WorldNetDaily, as if Breitbart wasn’t already low enough. Thus, fewer people will be exposed to his dishonest and puerile antics, and this charade will dissolve away without much notice. Because if there’s one thing the world needs less of, it’s O’Keefe’s smug mug heralding more deceitful excursions into pseudo-journalism.

Not So Breitbart: Left Media in Full Civil War Over Fact Checkers?

The BreitBrats are at it again. They continue to embarrass themselves with hypocritical articles that lack substance or reason. However, they do provide an abundant source of unintentional humor.

The latest episode features a column by the Editor-At-Large for Breitbart News, Ben Shapiro, with the outrageously hyperbolic title “Left Media in Full Civil War Over Fact Checkers.” The entirety of his outrage is based on the criticism of a single article by the Associated Press that purports to fact-check Bill Clinton’s speech at the Democratic National Convention.

The AP’s article deserved the criticism it received. It’s analysis was strikingly biased and avoided the most elementary criteria for judging the factual basis of its subject. For instance, the AP highlighted a portion of Clinton’s speech where he correctly quoted a Romney aide saying that “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers.”

Mitt Romney

The quote was accurate, in context, and documented. The AP’s response…

THE FACTS: Clinton, who famously finger-wagged a denial on national television about his sexual relationship with intern Monica Lewinsky and was subsequently impeached in the House on a perjury charge, has had his own uncomfortable moments over telling the truth.

What the hell did that have to with Clinton’s remark? What bearing did it have on whether or not Clinton’s statement was factual? Obviously, none at all. And it was the criticism of this article by the AP that brought BreitBrat Ben to the boiling point, accusing the left of engaging in a “civil war” with nothing more than this one article as evidence. Ironically, Breitbart News has been conducting their own war against fact checkers, whom they regard as a “liberal” media plot. And I have evidence. Here are a few recent columns from the BreitBrats:

  • AP Publishes Laughably Unserious Fact-Check Of Clinton’s Speech
  • When Not Outright Lying, Fact-Checkers Make Fools of Themselves
  • Media Launches Preemptive ‘Fact-Check’ Strike on Romney Speech
  • Era of Media Fact Checkers Intimidating Republicans Is Over
  • WaPo’s Glenn Kessler Has Fact-Checking Tantrum Over ‘You Didn’t Build That’
  • Romney to Media Fact-Checkers: Drop Dead

Note that the first article above lambastes the very same AP fact-check that Shapiro is now bashing liberals for criticizing. Breitbart’s Editor John Nolte is apparently among the liberals who are at war. Except that Nolte’s war is with his own dementia. He actually believes that the AP published an “intentionally ridiculous” fact-check in order to help President Obama:

“From where I sit, the corrupt AP intentionally manufactured a ridiculous fact check so they could be on record fact-checking Clinton while at the same time doing zero harm to him and by extension Barack Obama.”

That’s in keeping with his previous paranoid delusions about fact-checkers being a liberal plot. Nolte and Shapiro are so obsessed with their assault on truth-telling that it has clouded their ability to even remember what they wrote a week or two ago. Even worse, in Shapiro’s article asserting that liberals are at war with fact-checkers, he unleashes a litany of attacks against them himself. So he can’t even recall his delusions from one paragraph to the next.

Last month I posted an article with the headline “Is Breitbart News Really A Parody Site Attempting To Make Conservatives Look Stupid?” That question sounds less and less rhetorical every day.

Breitbart Conspiracy Theory: Fact-Checkers Are A Liberal Plot

A new front has been established in the political war zone that reveals the unique character of the American conservative movement. Not satisfied with bashing everything about the media (despite the fact that their own Fox News is a huge part of it), the wackoids on the right have declared war against … Fact-checkers!

This may seem wildly deranged, but upon reflection it makes perfect sense. If your entire movement is built on a foundation of lies, then fact-checkers are your mortal enemy. This became clear a few days ago when a Mitt Romney adviser publicly declared that “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”

Romney Anti-Fact-Checker

That comment was hailed by John Nolte, editor of Breitbart News, as evidence that Romney’s campaign had decided to tell fact-checkers to “Drop Dead!” It’s astonishing that a political operative would admit something so absurdly anti-fact and to frame his remarks in the context of factuality being a dictatorship. He plainly believes that being forced to adhere to only statements that are true is too large a burden for the Romney campaign. Of course, that has been apparent for the past several years to anyone who has observed Romney in action.

Now the mental deficients at Breitbart News are piling on with more articles blasting fact-checkers as if it were a dishonorable profession on a par with crack dealers. BreitBrat Nolte veritably glows with excitement as he declares that the “Era of Media Fact Checkers Intimidating Republicans Is Over.” Where he gets that from is a mystery, but then he doesn’t require any facts to support his assertions so he can say whatever the hell he wants – which he often does, such as when he advocated the murder of a child actress’ mother.

The source of Nolte’s glee came from reports following Paul Ryan’s fib-filled speech at the Republican National Kvetch-a-Sketch. Ryan was found to have slipped off of the truth tracks on numerous occasions that were well documented by a broad and diverse cross-section of the press, including Fox News. Nolte’s paranoid, conspiratorial dementia drove him to assert that the flurry of fact-checking that found fault with Ryan’s speech was…

“…undoubtedly pre-planned and organized between Team Obama and his Media Palace Guards. […] My guess is that Obama and the media set up this plan weeks ago.”

Of course they did. And Ryan must have been in on it as well because he dutifully spewed the lies that the media had pre-planned to expose in their fact-checking. The scheme would have failed without Ryan’s cooperation. Apparently, in Nolte’s diseased brain, Ryan is a double agent working to sabotage Romney’s campaign. And the plot was only uncovered because, as Nolte revealed, “Breitbart is everywhere.” Somehow the zombie spirit of Andrew Breitbart is still haunting the material world and communicating with Nolte to expose liberal media shenanigans. Scary, isn’t it?

In another article, Nolte bashed a columnist for the Washington Post, Glenn Kessler, for daring to venture into what sane political analysts call “speculation.” Nolte seems to think that when an opinion columnist attempts to anticipate events in the political world, which is what opinion columnists are paid to do, he has broken some sort of commandment. Nolte goes even further, accusing Kessler of extortion (while engaging in some childish insults):

“This feckless, impotent little fact-checker is bullying Romney; putting him on notice and threatening him. Kessler’s firing a warning show (sic) across Romney’s bow.”

Nolte virtually froths with revulsion over Kessler having the audacity to presume that Romney’s speech will contain some of the ideas Romney has been talking about on the campaign trail for several months. He may have a point. With Romney’s proclivity for flip-flopping on almost every position he takes, it may be risky to expect that he’ll be consistent in his speech tonight. So once again, Romney would have to be complicit in his own downfall in order for this plot to succeed. It’s downright insidious.

After celebrating the demise of fact-checking, Nolte feverishly condemns the practice of anticipating a future event in politics. But that doesn’t stop him from making his own wholly unsupported prediction:

“Day after day, before our very eyes, we are witnessing the media Kamikazee their integrity against the truth for a guy who’s going to lose.”

So Nolte thinks that Kessler is feckless and impotent for correctly noting the themes of Romney’s campaign and suggesting that they might be included in his big speech. But Nolte has no problem with stating as a fact that Obama is going to lose an election that is still two months away, despite the fact that the electoral college map is swinging heavily in his favor. However, that’s no problem for Nolte since he has already cast off facts as annoyances that are only important to liberals. How convenient.

Is Breitbart News Really A Parody Site Attempting To Make Conservatives Look Stupid?

The question in the headline above may seem whimsical, but at some point it needs to be taken seriously. When the Breitbart news posts a series of articles about President Obama’s press availability, like the ones they posted recently, it seems almost impossible to conclude that they aren’t there strictly for comedy.

A couple of days ago, the BreitBrats posted an article complaining that Obama hasn’t done enough press conferences. This is not the first time that the President has faced such complaints. A couple of years ago the conservative media, led by Fox News, voiced similar sentiments. However, that was only after they finished complaining that Obama was doing too many press appearances and was “overexposed.” Now, after another brief lull in press gatherings, they are at it again.

The headline of the BreitBrat piece was “Obama Dodging Issues, Tough Questions From Journalists.” Fair enough. The President should be accountable to the people and the media are their representatives. I am a big believer in public servants offering themselves up to press inquiries regularly.

So today, that is exactly what President Obama did. He made a surprise appearance in the White House Briefing Room and took questions from the cream of the presidential press corps. So of course the BreitBrats responded with gratitude for the President accommodating the demands of the people and submitting himself for questioning. Their headline today was “Obama Caves To Media, Hijacks Press Briefing.”

Actually, that doesn’t seem very gracious. After demanding that the President be more forthcoming, the BreitBrats insult him for doing so. What’s more, BreitBrat Ben Shapiro makes a delusional criticism of Obama for “dropping by on a weekend.” Someone should inform Shapiro that Monday is not generally considered to be part of the weekend.

In a separate article, Shapiro accused the President of telling “lie after lie” during the press event. But he only gave a single example of anything Obama said in the press conference that Shapiro considered to be untruthful. It concerned the President’s statement that “Nobody accused Mr. Romney of being a felon.” Obama was responding to a question about comments made by Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter. She said a few weeks ago that…

“Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments.”

Of course, that is not an accusation of being a felon. Simply saying that if someone were to commit a felony they would be a felon is not even remotely the same as saying outright that someone is a felon. I could, for instance, say that if I were to commit a felony I would be a felon. See? I did not just call myself a felon. But that simple distinction was too much for BreitBrat Ben and his only example of an alleged lie dissolves into vapor.

Additionally, BreitBrat John Nolte chirped in with his own hilarity. He is apparently very disturbed that the President made a reference to Mitt Romney not releasing his tax returns. So he stretched credulity beyond recognition by associating Obama’s comments with a comedy routine by Jon Stewart. A few weeks ago, Stewart blasted Harry Reid for suggesting that Romney’s dead father, who famously released twelve year’s of tax returns, would be ashamed of his son Mitt for his resistance to making his taxes available to the American people.

Nolte thinks that Obama’s reference to the tax issue in general was identical to Reid’s invocation of the elder Romney’s shame. It’s not. While it could be argued that Reid stepped over the line by imputing an emotional reaction by Romney’s father that Reid couldn’t possibly have known, Obama did nothing of the sort. It is perfectly acceptable to make note of the fact that Romney’s dad released twelve years of tax returns when he ran for president. Nolte seems to be implying that any mention of an actual fact about prior presidential candidates and their tax returns is off limits. That is just plain crazy.

All of this nonsense occurred within hours of Obama’s press conference – a conference that the right, including the BreitBrats, had been clamoring for. And when they got what they wanted, they spent the afternoon making up incoherent critiques rather than giving the President credit for listening to his critics and appearing before the press as they had requested.

The sort of right-wing extremists that inhabit Breitbart’s domain make a mockery of the conservative media. They castigate the President for not doing something, then lambaste him for eventually doing it. They have a built in lose-lose proposition that really does nothing but dissolve any credibility they might otherwise have strung together. That’s why I’m becoming more and more convinced that they are a secret offshoot of The Onion. That would explain so much. And otherwise, they are just making fools of themselves for no good reason.