Breitbart’s Unhinged Hypocrisy: Vetting Obama OK, Vetting Romney Disgraceful

The Breitbart site is well known for dishonesty and rabid servility to the uber-rightist agenda. But this morning they may have outdone themselves in an Olympian feat of hypocrisy.

The Washington Post published an article today by Jason Horowitz, detailing accounts of bullying and possible gay-bashing by Mitt Romney while attending the elite Cranbrook prep school. According to five independently acquired reports by his former schoolmates, Romney led verbal and physical assaults on other students who were presumed to be gay.

Responding to that article, Breitbrat Ben Shapiro posted a frenetic critique that took the Post to task for what he called “an egregious hit piece.” Shapiro saw both fallacy and conspiracy on the part of the Post.

[T]he timing of the story is obviously designed to protect President Barack Obama, who just yesterday said that he would embrace same-sex marriage. The narrative from the media therefore became: Obama is fine with gays, Romney hates them. Since they had zero evidence that Romney has any antipathy toward homosexuals, they had to dig up an incident nearly 50 years ago, invest it with anti-gay rage, and print it as fact.

This is character assassination of the worst kind. It doesn’t go to Romney’s deeply-held beliefs and positions. It doesn’t show how he was defined as a young man. It’s just an old prank brought up and infused with nastiness, sans evidence, in order to turn Romney into a jerk in the public eye.

Breitbrat Ben’s assertion that this story was timed to benefit the President reveals his inability to comprehend reality. For Shapiro’s timing conspiracy theory to be true, the White House must have told Horowitz to start working on the story months ago so that it would be ready the day after an announcement that no one could have anticipated.

Shapiro’s defense of Romney as having no ‘antipathy toward homosexuals” surely rings hollow to all the homosexuals who would be forbidden to marry or even enjoy the same civil liberties as straight citizens. And his characterization of physical assault and possible gay-bashing as merely “an old prank” is evidence of Shapiro’s own insensitivity to such victimization.

But the most brazenly unhinged assertion in Shapiro’s column is his lambasting of the Post for “dig[ging] up an incident nearly 50 years ago” and declaring that “It doesn’t show how [Romney] was defined as a young man.” Seriously?

Shapiro, and others on the Breitbart team, have spent months digging up ancient material about Obama in a relentless campaign of character assassination. All of it was meant to show how Obama was defined as a young man. However, most of it fell impotently into the dustbin of pseudo-journalism due its irrelevancy, but their intent was clear. They called their slander “vetting” and posted such inane classics as Obama embracing his law professor at Harvard – the well-respected Derrick Bell, who was the first African-American to receive tenure at Harvard Law School.

Even more astonishing, while Shapiro blasted the Post for publishing information about Romney’s high school history, Shapiro himself posted information about Obama’s high school past.

Breitbart

Somehow the irony and hypocrisy of posting two stories – one complaining about reports of Romney’s past and the other doing to Obama what he was complaining about – on the very same day, seems to have escaped the wet noodle mind of Breitbrat Ben. His article on Obama rehashed information that has been known for years and was disclosed by Obama in his own writings and speeches.

But that didn’t stop Shapiro from misrepresenting the truth. He contradicted himself by asserting that “Obama, by all accounts, was a habitual drug user in high school,” even though a couple of paragraphs down he cited a report in the New York Times wherein Obama’s classmates said that drugs played only a “bit part” in Obama’s youth. So it obviously wasn’t “by all accounts.” Then Shapiro went on to scattershoot tired and false allegations that Obama was a black nationalist and a communist.

When a phony journalist like Shapiro can write an article about the absurdity of dredging up a decades old story, and then himself dredges up a decades old story – the same day – there has been a serious cognitive disconnect. It is a sign that these people are either severely disturbed or deliberately deceitful. Either way it is additional evidence that they simply cannot be taken seriously and that they may require acute care at an in-patient facility.

[Update] Romney has responded to the WaPo story by saying that…

“I played a lot of pranks in high school and they describe some that well you just say to yourself, back in high school well I did some dumb things and if anybody was hurt by that or offended obviously I apologize but overall high school years were a long time ago”

Romney also said that the didn’t recall having held down a classmate and cutting off his hair. Yeah right. His five school chums all remember, but the guy with the scissors has forgotten. He further said that it had nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the victim. But how could he know that if he doesn’t recall the incident? That’s like saying “No, I didn’t kill my wife. And besides, she deserved it.”

Breitbart Is Hot For Gay Activist Dan Savage

Most people have vivid memories of the first rumblings of romance in their youth. It usually manifested itself as teasing or taunting the object of one’s affection in their fifth grade class. That playful hostility was the surest sign of a crush in those days of flirtatious immaturity.

That must explain the response by the Breitbart crew to remarks made by gay activist Dan Savage to a group of high school journalism students. Savage’s address was typical of his controversial oratorical styling that commonly includes profanity and challenging subject matter. This address was no exception.

The part of the speech to which the Breitbrats, and a growing amen chorus of conservatives, object is when Savage observes that many Christians cling tightly to Biblical verses that condemn homosexuality even while they ignore passages that similarly condemn – to death – children who curse to their parents, women who are not virgins on their wedding day, and anyone who works on the Sabbath. That contradiction was too much for some of the student reporters as well as their adult counterparts in the right-wing press.

I have no problem with coverage of public figures like Savage that includes criticism of their ideas or even their method of presenting them. However, there is something extraordinary about the Breitbrats’ reaction that bears mentioning. They posted at least nine articles in one day blasting Savage for his remarks at the student convocation and resurrecting past commentaries that have nothing to do with it.

Breitbart Dan Savage

The ferocity of their assault reminded me of the childish romantic who, knowing that his desire could not be fulfilled, resorted to harassing his love interest. This applies particularly to Ben Shapiro who wrote six of the articles. Is Breitbrat Ben secretly stuck on Dan Savage? Who can say? But he is plainly obsessed in some respect and might want to examine his deeper motivations. This sort of fixation is unhealthy and, for his own good, Shapiro should not ignore it.

Primetime Propaganda And The Sesame Street Path To Socialism

Ben Shapiro’s “Primetime Propaganda” is a book that perfectly epitomizes the rightist paranoia about liberal bogeymen under our beds, in our closets, and, most of all, on our TV sets. The book is promoted as…

“The inside story of how the most powerful medium of mass communication in human history has become a propaganda tool for the Left.”

In the book published by Rupert Murdoch’s HarperCollins, Shapiro claims to have interviewed Hollywood’s most important power players and gotten them to admit that they have been secretly inserting their subversive messages into popular programs for decades. But his work is decidedly one-sided and he takes great pride in the obvious. For instance. the revelation that MASH had an anti-war theme is not exactly earth-shattering and it hardly exposes a liberal conspiracy. However, he presents it as a triumph of investigative journalism.

Big Bird - Sesame StreetIn a defensive posting on Andrew Breitbart’s BigJournalism, Shapiro complains about the criticism his book has received. He is dismayed that critics allegedly focused on the parts referencing Sesame Street, but then proceeds to bash Sesame Street for the remainder of the posting.

According to his own defense, Sesame Street is awash in propaganda. For instance, they broadcast segments teaching kids about divorce. He apparently thinks that subject has no relevance to kids today. The program also aired segments after 9/11 about peaceful conflict resolution. Shapiro asserts that these were designed to steer kids away from retaliating against terrorists, when the more likely purpose was to illustrate how wrong the actions of the terrorists were. Then Shapiro whines about everything from teaching kids not to beat up other kids of different cultures, to using gender-neutral language like firefighter or flight attendant. If that is evidence of leftist indoctrination, then Shapiro is implying that rightists support cross-cultural fights amongst children.

What doesn’t seem to be acknowledged in Shapiro’s book is that the vast majority of television programs in the period of time his research encompasses were far from being dogmatically left-wing. There were more police dramas and westerns than any other genre of program. Gunsmoke, Bonanza, and The Waltons, or Dragnet, Magnum P.I., and 24, were not exactly peddling liberal doctrine. Nor were the iconic sitcoms from Andy Griffith, The Golden Girls, or Frasier. Why didn’t Shapiro interview people from those shows to ascertain whether they were planting conservative opinions in their programs?

Even worse, Shapiro is attempting to position this book as a scholarly investigation into historical television practices and philosophies. But he provides no historical context whatsoever to support his obviously predetermined conclusions. He lumps shows like The Partridge Family, Happy Days, and Family Ties, into the liberal cabal that “took over your TV,” but fails to note that those years were mostly dominated by Republican presidents and conservative culture. It was the heart of the era that saw the rise of the Reagan Revolution, the Moral Majority, and the Christian Coalition. If the purpose of these pinko TV executives was to reshape America in their leftist image, they failed miserably. Yet Shapiro insists that this was their purpose and that they succeeded in turning America into a socialist state.

For the record, Shapiro is the Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, an ultra-conservative organization whose mission is to “combat the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country.” Shapiro was interviewed about the book by Horowitz’s Front Page Magazine who called him “a courageous defender of our civilization – and such a brave soldier on the frontlines in our culture war.”

Shapiro’s previous books were Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth, and Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future. He recently penned an article for CNSNews, a division of the rabidly right-wing Media Research Center, wherein he castigated Jews who support President Obama as…

“Jews in name only. They eat bagels and lox; they watch ‘Schindler’s List’; they visit temple on Yom Kippur – sometimes. But they do not care about Israel. Or if they do, they care about it less than abortion, gay marriage and global warming.”

That exclusionary and insulting diatribe suggests that the Jews are such a shallow people that they are incapable of caring about more than one thing at a time, particularly if it’s about the rights and well being of others. And Shapiro neglects to disclose who designated him as the Jewish certification authority.

Shapiro is a part of the conservative campaign to assault the media and popular culture, and he is tightly integrated with the leaders of that campaign. David Horowitz’s Freedom Center began as the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1988 to “establish a conservative presence in Hollywood.” Andrew Breitbart, who runs both the BigJournalism and BigHollywood blogs, wrote in his recent autobiographical book, Righteous Indignation,” that…

“The biggest point I wanted to make was one I’m still making: Hollywood is more important than Washington. It can’t be overstated how important this message is: the pop culture matters.”

This is a coordinated attack on the creative community that has long been a target of the right-wing martinets of virtue. They demonstrated their hostility for the arts when they orchestrated congressional hearings and blacklists against Hollywood in the 1940’s and 1950s. And they are demonstrating it today as they seek to defund public radio and television, as well as arts institutions like the National Endowment for the Arts. Their censorious mission is reflected in attacks on movies like Avatar and rappers like Common. It is ingrained in the works of the secret society of Hollywood conservatives, the Friends of Abe. They recognize the power in creative expression and they are determined to either hijack it or shut it down. That’s why Shapiro et al are so adamant about silencing overt propaganda like this alarming segment from Sesame Street that he explicitly rebuked for advancing a gay/liberal agenda:

Do you feel gayer or more liberal yet? Shapiro’s new book appears to be the literary equivalent of James O’Keefe’s dishonest video ambushes. Shapiro taped conversations with his subjects and is releasing them without having obtained permission to do so. Of course, he certainly won’t release any tapes that exhibit ideological fairness or otherwise don’t fit his agenda. And, as noted above, we won’t be seeing any comments from producers of the far more numerous conservative-themed programs that reveal their own biases. There is no way of knowing whether the tapes were edited in misleading ways, as the right is prone to doing – particularly the Breitbart right. And notice to whom Shapiro ran first to whine about being criticized.

Expect to see Shapiro making the Fox News rounds with an already announced appearance on Sean Hannity’s show. Watch as he shamelessly bashes the broader media even as he exploits it. And sadly, like a victim of spousal abuse, the media will forgive him and beg him not to go. His Murdoch-published book will get plenty of play from Fox News, the rightist blogosphere, and conservative talk radio as he laments the imagined prevalence of left-wing media. How ironic.