This will very likely be the last post I ever write about Andrew Breitbart, unless there are surprises in the case of his death. But it has come to my attention, through a friendly rival blogger--whose opinion I often disagree with, but nonetheless respect--that my impropriety is somewhat out of character.
Maybe it is. But Breitbart was hardly Mr. Rogers. And was guilty of much worse. I'd hoped that my reasoning for my reaction would be obvious in the piece. And I've modified the post a bit to encourage reading it, to see where I'm coming from. Just to make it clearer, here's a piece by former Air America Radio host, Sam Seder of The Majority Report. Sam relates--in a slightly less brusque manner than does Matt Taibbi--pretty much how I feel about Breitbart.
Maybe it is. But Breitbart was hardly Mr. Rogers. And was guilty of much worse. I'd hoped that my reasoning for my reaction would be obvious in the piece. And I've modified the post a bit to encourage reading it, to see where I'm coming from. Just to make it clearer, here's a piece by former Air America Radio host, Sam Seder of The Majority Report. Sam relates--in a slightly less brusque manner than does Matt Taibbi--pretty much how I feel about Breitbart.
And as I noted to my blogger friend, while I can often be irreverent, I am rarely so about the death of anybody other than say, Osama bin Laden. But as Clarence Darrow was alleged to have said, “I've never killed a man, but I've read many an obituary with a great deal of satisfaction.” I won't go quite that far, but I'll cop to understanding the sentiment. And I'm not sure it's necessary to be reverent or respectful over the death of a person who was wildly irreverent, and often disrespectful himself.
