Awhile back a friend of mine spent some time with Andrew Breitbart.

[TheWraith]

She'd accidentally run into him in the area of a political event she was attending, and he was vulturing around, and she and her friends ended up sitting and talking with him for quite awhile. When relating it later, she described him as actually being very friendly and not conservative, painting a picture of a guy who whose public image was basically a schtick, a performance character designed to get himself a rabidly loyal fan base and to exploit that fan base for his own self promotion and personal profit.

[annabanana]

1. "for his own self promotion and personal profit"

Not really interested in why he did it. The damage he did to good and valuable people is too high a price.

[JI7]

2. what did they talk about? what she describes sounds more like Rush Limbaugh

but Breitbart was wayyy too emotional to have it all just be an act. i'm sure he looked for his own profit . but he actually did hate liberals also.

[monmouth]

3. I've been in the same room with Rush socially and he talks rarely to anyone because

he cannot hear them. Only those very physically close to him does he speak with. At a dinner table he cannot hear the conversation so doesn't participate.

[Mira]

9. This explains the non-existent learning curve of the man. n't

[saras]

4. So what? Why should anyone harmed by him give a shit why he did it?

When your "schtick" involves people killing and people dying, it's WAY past "entertainment" being used as an excuse.

Frankly, it's NOT MY BUSINESS why he did it - that's his internal private consciousness. STOPPING HIM - that's my business.

[TheWraith]

8. "So what" is that I thought it was an interesting story.

Would you like to snap a little more?

[myrna minx]

5. I'm sure he was a real swell guy who's only fault was ruining people's lives for profit.

[brewens]

6. Like the Grizzley Bear Guy. When he was back home, all he wanted to talk about was girls and

football.

You know some of those right-wingers are like that. It's just a job, raking in money off the half-wits. We might have some on our side like that, but it would take a lot more education and they'd have to be smarter.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

7. I think it's a shtick with a lot of them, and they don't care about the consequences

On a mailing list for my professions, a conservative troll admitted that his "madman" shtick was just that, a shtick that he used when arguing with liberals.

[backscatter712]

10. Makes me think Breitbart is a bona-fide psychopath.

In person, psychopaths are glib and superficially friendly. They put on a great face to convince people they're great guys.

They're very, very good at putting on that mask.

They gain your trust, then they screw you without remorse.

[TroglodyteScholar]

11. Am I supposed to stop being glad he's gone now?

If it was a schtick, that's far worse than if he were genuinely that big of an asshole.

[Wind Dancer]

12. Really???

Not buying it!

[renate]

13. thank you!

I always think it's interesting to get behind-the-scenes reports about famous people. I know you weren't saying anything about the effects his schtick had on the world, just sharing a little background information, and the possibility that he wasn't even sincere about what he was doing is... intriguing. In a way, that makes his actions worse--it's certainly food for thought. Thanks!

[Rex]

14. Is that the guy last seen screaming RAPE at an OWS protest?

Cops had to drag him away? That guy?

[Maine-ah]

15. honestly then,

imho, he's actually worse than what he portrayed himself to be. Selfish prick, who didn't care who he stepped on, destroyed, or defamed, in order to make money and get 15 minutes of fame.

yup. That just made him worse in my book.

[RainDog]

16. Sandusky was very personable too

when he wasn't raping middle school boys

[deutsey]

17. Lawence O'Donnell basically said the same thing last night

He basically said what a nice guy Breitbart was when you met him. O'Donnell even took him to a party and everyone had a wonderful time.



O'Donnell's commentary confirmed for me my suspicion that many of these mainstream pundits--left, right, in-between--are all part of the same cozy little country club when they're not putting on their dog and pony show in the virtual world. That's great for the punditry, I suppose, but unfortunately for the rest of us, the words and actions of people like Breitbart have real-world consequences outside that cozy club of theirs.

Breitbart may have been a swell guy offline (and I'm not celebrating his death, nor am I saddened by it), but he was directly responsible for destroying much-needed resources for people who desparately needed them. He stoked the flames of hatred, ignorance, and prejudice and he did so through deception, fear-mongering, and an ugly mean-spiritedness.

That's some shtick.

Having said all that, I still agreed with O'Donnell and his guests that we only diminish ourselves when we behave as Breitbart did (as when he wrote all those horrible things after Ted Kennedy died).

If I were on O'Donnell's show (fat chance), I wouldn't have been gloating about Breitbart's death, but I would've pointed out that, nice guy or not, he helped to coarsen our culture and made the lives of people who are already suffering a lot more difficult.

[frylock]

20. i think we diminish ourselves by lying to ourselves..

why should i change who i am to comport with someone's perception of how liberals should act? this fuckstain was a cancer and this world will certainly be better off without him.

[deutsey]

21. I've lost no sleep grieving his death, but

also I speak for myself when I say I think behaving like that jerk behaved when he was alive isn't how I want to be. Still, I can understand why people are glad he's gone.

[spanone]

18. if it walks like a duck.....

[lunatica]

19. Hitler was really nice to his dog

n/t