Streams

Opinion: Goodbye Andrew Breitbart, Happy Warrior

Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 05:15 PM

I knew Andrew Breitbart.  These are words a lot of other people will be writing today too because he was so uniquely knowable. 

The first time I met him was in 2005 with his wife Susie.  They were one of those couples with a ton of chemistry and a comfort with each other that made other people feel comfortable too.  I was a 26-year-old cynic, and they were open and welcoming to me

I'd run into him from time to time at various conservative functions in New York or DC.  He was always affable, good-humored and kind. 

I saw him a few weeks ago at CPAC.  My friend Claudio Simpkins, his wife Paloma and I were holding up a wall at a crowded party.  He saw me and came over.  He asked "how's things in New York?" and then "Is this your New York crew?" I said they were. "I could tell, you're all so stylish."  We might have collectively blushed.  That was his easy, friendly way.

He'll be remembered for many things. One in particular will be his 13 minute impromptu press conference preceding the press conference where Anthony Weiner admitted to doing exactly what Breitbart maintained Weiner had done while the mainstream media believed Weiner.

Another thing will be his exposing blatant corruption at the ACORN organization.

One of my personal favorite memories of him, though, is this story, where he lets what he thinks is an anti-war march ruin his good time out with his wife - and then apologizes in the Los Angeles Times that he was wrong and he's sorry. I loved that he could take responsibility when he did something wrong. I think he just wanted the same from his targets.

I interviewed Andrew last May in NYC about his book Righteous Indignation. The book was mostly an autobiography about how he found himself a fighter on the right after growing up a liberal in Los Angeles.

We talked for awhile about politics, about family (he wouldn't even touch on the subject of his enemies targeting his family, he didn't want to think about it at all) and about media. 

I told him I was doing the interview for WNYC and asked him what he thought of that as NPR was a target of James O'Keefe, Breitbart's frequent partner in pranksterdom.

He said "My message to NPR is sorry, don't take it personally.  David Folkenflik did one of the fairest profiles of me ever and I consider him a good journalist.  I treat all journalists as innocent until proven guilty."

Most interesting to me, as I learned in his book, and through our interview, was that Breitbart borrowed money from his father to start his website Big Government.  I always assumed he was rich, having helped launch Huffington Post, but he wasn't. 

"I'm a scrappy capitalist.  I have such middle class behavioral tendencies, no big aspirations to make the money. Costco is enough for me, my SUV and minivan are enough for me, our house in LA, our children going to public school and parochial school is enough for me.  My father-in-law wrote a book called Too Much Is Not Enough, constant aspiration in LA is debilitating.  I have a pedestrian appetite when it comes to money.  That said, I want to own the Dodgers."

With that he laughed his amazing, open laugh.  He was thinking about a black-tie event he had that night, an event for which he had forgotten to bring black tie attire, or any tie, yet he was leaning back in his seat cracking jokes with me.  He was that kind of easy-going guy.

The last question I asked him was who he liked for president in 2012.  It was still early enough that there was Sarah Palin speculation.  He said he didn't have a candidate but that he wanted "to watch them all fight it out Simon Cowell American political idol style and the candidate with best media skills will win.  This is an existential battle for the soul of the country." 

He might not get to own the Dodgers but he got the political fight he wanted.  Rest in peace, Andrew Breitbart.

Tags:

More in:

Comments [4]

"The rest is indisputable"?

Wrong.

The ACORN sting was misrepresented and debunked. The NPR sting was misrepresented. Shirley Sherrod's statements were edited and taken out of context. Indeed the full context makes true the point antithetical to Breitbart and O'Keefes.

Those "scandals" were only successful though dishonesty and agitprop. Not journalism.

Thus, because they have been roundly disputed they are not indisputable. Conservatives and the radical the right have long maintained that they are entitled to their own set of facts. They are not, however, entitled to their own set of definitions.

Only Anthony Weiner's tweets were faithful to something called truth, but ultimately that is neither a political nor an institutional failure. It was a personal choice or mistake and one to which Anthony Weiner must only answer to his wife.

Two months on, are you willing to reconsider your eulogy of Andrew Breitbart? Being an apologist for a schill is as bad as being a schill.

Take responsibility for being wrong.

May. 16 2012 03:05 PM

And that explains the difference between the looney Right and the rest of us. You believe that Breitbart was 3 for 4...The rest of us think he was 1 for 4. Presenting a story as true that had obviously been edited for effect and withholding the full version from peer scrutiny is not journalism. The word for it is propaganda. Face it.

This is how real journalists deal with a liar in their midst...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/16/this-american-life-mike-daisey-retraction-foxconn_n_1353933.html

Mar. 17 2012 12:29 PM
Karol from NYC

If you mean one out of four was incorrect then yes, one for four. The rest is indisputable.

Mar. 05 2012 10:20 AM
Jack Jackson from Central New Jersey

The ACORN sting...
The NPR sting...
Shirley Sherrod's statements...
Andrew Weiner's 'exposure'...

Any way you look at it, Breitbart was one for four.

In my view, Mr. Breitbart was a serial fraudster who felt that editing for impact presented a fair representation of the truth. Once it became clear to the consumers of his 'product' that there wasn't a story from his 'sources' that could be independently trusted his chances of deriving an income from his chosen field got smaller and smaller.

I feel for his wife and children and hope they manage to stay strong and together.

Mar. 04 2012 05:15 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.

Sponsored

About It's A Free Blog

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a blog, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Supported by

WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public.  Learn more at revsonfoundation.org.

Authors

Feeds

Supported by