“Wake up, Conservatives: Left is involved in 100% organized class & race warfare & you think you can sit this one out & not fight back?!?!”
Remembering Andrew Breitbart 7 years after his death
Every year on March 1, we remember the life and death of Andrew Breitbart.
He was larger than life.
Here’s what I wrote on March 1, 2012, Andrew Breitbart dead:
Very sad news to report, just breaking. Andrew Breitbart is dead.
Via Big Journalism:
Andrew passed away unexpectedly from natural causes shortly after midnight this morning in Los Angeles.
We have lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a dear friend, a patriot and a happy warrior.
Andrew lived boldly, so that we more timid souls would dare to live freely and fully, and fight for the fragile liberty he showed us how to love.
… There are few people who are irreplaceable, but Andrew may have been one of those few.
I wrote A personal note on the death of Andrew Breitbart that day:
I only spoke once with Andrew Breitbart. He reached out to me, and we spoke by phone. The topic is not important, but I was shocked that he even knew who I was; but as I’ve come to learn, Andrew seemed to know who everyone was in the conservative blogosphere. He was just that way.
Since my wife called this morning to let me know of Andrew’s death, it has been hard to focus on anything else. In her words, we don’t have that many bright media lights, and to lose him hurts.
To this day, he is maligned from the left for the video he and Larry O’Connor released about Shirley Sherrod. I have tried to set the record straight, but particularly in this social media age, I’m not sure the truth prevails anymore:
- The Original Sherrod Clip Was Not “False”
- Dissecting Shirley Sherrod’s Complaint Against Andrew Breitbart
- Saturday Night Card Game (Repeat after me: “The Shirley Sherrod tape was not misleading”)
- The myth of Andrew Breitbart’s “deceptively edited” Shirley Sherrod tape lives on at Slate.com
- NY Times perpetuates myth of Andrew Breitbart’s misleading Shirley Sherrod video
- Shirley Sherrod case settled, now put to bed myth that Breitbart’s tape was misleading
“Apologize, for what?” became most associated with him, and it was phrase he tweeted the day of his death:
If that was the phrase most associated with Andrew, this was his advice which is more true now than ever:
Wake up, Conservatives: Left is involved in 100% organized class & race warfare & you think you can sit this one out & not fight back?!?!
This is still my favorite interview of him, by Prof. Glenn Reynolds and the Instawife:
I just saw this video for the first time, and it is so on point with what is happening now in politics and media.
Those who knew him best remembered him today as well.
Andrew Breitbart. March 1, 2012.
God, we miss you. pic.twitter.com/AQqLw1ZDxy
— Larry O'Connor (@LarryOConnor) March 1, 2019
Seven years ago, my friend @andrewbreitbart abruptly passed away. I miss him every day, and so does the country.
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) March 1, 2019
Michelle Malkin pays tribute to “disruptor” Andrew Breitbart, calling for more to support the disrupters from @CPAC stage on 7 year anniversary of his passing #CPAC2019 @michellemalkin 🔥 pic.twitter.com/6XjLBe8Yo5
— Michelle Moons Dawi (@MichelleDiana) March 1, 2019
I was asked about my friend, political icon and happy warrior Andrew Breitbart, on the day he passed (perhaps the last civil discussion I had with Piers). He would have had a lot of fun with the way things are currently.https://t.co/W6uhEHi3Vx
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) March 1, 2019
Forever @AndrewBreitbart https://t.co/nZ64Mmehvw via @BreitbartNews
— Joel Pollak (@joelpollak) March 1, 2019
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Leaving the current POTUS out of this, Andrew Breitbart’s true claim to fame was that he shouted the obvious from the parapets.
Class warfare has always been a part of politics. Politicians, be they elected, appointed or hereditary, always pander to the group or class which supports them. Always. It is how they protect their positions and, therefor, their wealth.
Prior to 1965, there was little interest in race, outside of local politics. The African-American voting block was only 12% of the national population. In most locales, it was under 15% with White, Christian populations accounting for the majority of voters. So, nationally, Republicans really did not care about any civil rights movement, except to the extent that backing it would hurt Democrats, which were then solidly the party of white supremacy, because of their dominance in the Deep South. But, things changed, in 1965. The Republicans still thought little of Blacks as a national voting block and expected the African-American voting community to be grateful for their efforts in passing the Civil Rights Act. The Dems knew that they had to gain control of the Black vote or lose the South and most of their traditional dominance in national politics. So, they embarked on the traditional Democrat political course, buying the vote. But, an unexpected wrinkle arose in the scenario, the rise of the African-American dominated civil rights advocacy and racial grievance industry. This industry, predictably, gained significant influence within the Black community. Blacks knew that white politicians did not really care about their interests and they did not trust them to represent their interests. What the Dems did was to buy the leaders of the Civil Rights/racial grievance industry to further the Democrat agenda. Then, largely through the courts, which were then heavily populated with Dem appointees, they set about elevating minority groups to a higher legal status than the White Christian majority.
As time marched on, Dems continued to buy the support of voting groups through government largess. Medicare bought the elderly vote, which could not be held by Social Security payments alone. Welfare did the same thing, for the “impoverished”, as Social Security did for seniors. Medicaid did the same thing for the “impoverished” that Medicare did for the elderly vote.
To continue to add voting blocks to their stable, the Dems embarked upon an increased campaign to create other “victimized” minority groups to “protect”, with the sole purpose of securing the voted of those groups for Dems. To do this, they embarked upon a decades long program, via schools and the media, to indoctrinate the American people in the belief that racial discrimination against minority groups was rampant among the White, Christian majority and only the Dems could protect the minority members of society from these deprivations. The final stratagem was to destroy the domestic economy, forcing even more people to become dependent upon government largess.
All of this was designed to protect the power, position and wealth of members of the Progressive Democrat Party and their supporters.
Republican politicians have the same goals as most Democrat politicians. They want to increase, or maintain, their wealth and status in society. They care little about their constituents, except around election time. The rest of the time they cater to the desires of the power brokers, who are largely Progressives. This is the reason why the differences between the actions of Democrat and Republican politicians are so minuscule. They all serve the same masters, or those with congruent interests.
Now we get to Andrew Breitbart. All of the above was clearly visible to anyone who took even a cursory critical look at American politics and society. But, most Americans, having no real interest in how the political sausage was made, until it gave them a belly ache, relied entirely upon the media, particularly the main Stream Media for their information and insights and the media had a vested interest in supporting the status quo in the country. The MSM was not going to rock the Progressive boat. What Breitbart did was to embrace the coming expansion of alternative media, largely to release the choke hold which the MSM had on the dissemination of information. He used this new media to attempt to curtail the general movement to a totalitarian society largely control by wealthy Progressive interests. Breitbart’s activities allowed for a freer flow of accurate information, to the masses, which largely accounts for what we see happening today. The Dems no longer have the luxury of a hoodwinked electorate. So, they have to do anything and everything to hold onto their dependent base and encourage that base to support them at the polls. This includes fake news and other lies, public violence, and the promises of more free goodies, which the country can not afford.
Andrew Breitbart vs Arrogant Bastards video:
Given what was covered in this interview and his position on the media, “news” reporters, academia, and socialism, it is as if Andrew were still with us today and could give this as a speech at the at this years CPac and be as relevant today as it was in 2010. Stand Up and Call’em Out!
Leave a Comment