Joan Walsh: The Smoker She Drinks, The Player She Gets

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

Joan Walsh has posted the most risible dismissal of Andrew Breitbart imaginable. Emphasis mine:

Andrew Breitbart isn’t fit to spit-shine the shoes of civil rights hero and Congressman John Lewis. It’s ludicrous to think that the right-wing bully believed he had the moral or political standing to call Lewis a liar, after Lewis and two other black congressmen reported they were called “nigger” by tea partiers during the healthcare reform vote March 20. Lewis’s word on the confrontation is good enough for me.

What about personality-free facts? Videos shot on the spot? What about the fact that Breitbart backs up his claims with money? What about the fact that Breitbart, while arguably abrasive, as truth can be at times, has a sterling reputation?

Now comes news that Breitbart is the liar – or at least the misleader. Video he’s been peddling to “prove” the congressmen were not called the N-word was actually after the slurs occurred. As a friend notes, “It’s like running video of the Twin Towers on 9/10 to prove 9/11 didn’t happen.” Of course the videos Breitbart peddled to claim ACORN helped a supposed pimp and prostitute set up a child-prostitution ring have also been found misleading, at best. The California Attorney General’s review said they were “severely edited” and in fact “showed no violation of the law.” New York authorities concluded the same thing.

Was the video from after the alleged incident? You must have a hard timestamp for the purported event yourself to back up this claim of time shenanigans, Walsh. Why not trot out some facts to back up your claim? Could there be a total lack of facts on your side of the argument?

The video of the perp walk is not like running two different September 2001 videos, Walsh. 9/11 actually happened, with mass casualties.
Your attempt to link an unproven, suspect allegation of a bad word to an act of terrorism is sad, gross, and demonstrates a lack of both judgement and proportionality on your part. Boo, hiss, Walsh.

And don’t even bring up Jerry Brown in defense of ACORN. If ACORN was even slightly innocent, and Breitbart even vaguely in the wrong, do you think that Federal funding would have been cut, and ACORN putting forth so much effort to rebrand itself?

Forget the rhetoric, Walsh: the money talks in both the racial epithet and the ACORN cases, and your insipid attempts at smearing Andrew Breitbart mark you a sad little tool. And now, for therapy, let’s shift from Joan to Joe:

39 comments

  2. Wow. If that is the best Breitbart “take down” Walsh is capable of then its no wonder the left is losing so badly. Weak Joan. Very weak.

  3. Wow. If that is the best Breitbart “take down” Walsh is capable of then its no wonder the left is losing so badly. Weak Joan. Very weak.

  4. Pretty disappointing effort by Walsh. If you’re supposed to be a heavyweight, I’d expect a better argument – supported by facts – than whatever that was she put up. Hardly worth the effort. She needs to read Stacy’s masthead.

  5. Pretty disappointing effort by Walsh. If you’re supposed to be a heavyweight, I’d expect a better argument – supported by facts – than whatever that was she put up. Hardly worth the effort. She needs to read Stacy’s masthead.

  6. Smitty:

    I propose that the more proper Joe Walsh reference would have been the 1976 album “You Can’t Argue With A Sick Mind”.

    Fits Joan to a “T”…

    -LTB

  7. Smitty:

    I propose that the more proper Joe Walsh reference would have been the 1976 album “You Can’t Argue With A Sick Mind”.

    Fits Joan to a “T”…

    -LTB

  13. I don’t think Walsh has read the California DOJ report on ACORN, which says at one point

    “The recordings establish ACORN employees across the country were willing to discuss with O’Keefe and Giles their plan to conduct a prostitution business, and a few even made suggestions for disguising profits and avoiding detection by law enforcement agencies.”

  14. I don’t think Walsh has read the California DOJ report on ACORN, which says at one point

    “The recordings establish ACORN employees across the country were willing to discuss with O’Keefe and Giles their plan to conduct a prostitution business, and a few even made suggestions for disguising profits and avoiding detection by law enforcement agencies.”

  15. As I was sitting back watching the video, it dawned on me that I own every single Joe Walsh album shown.

    Now, if I could just get them transferred to digital format. . . .

  16. As I was sitting back watching the video, it dawned on me that I own every single Joe Walsh album shown.

    Now, if I could just get them transferred to digital format. . . .

  17. Breitbart is a tool. Let me ask you wackos this: can Breitbart prove that the n-word WASN’T used?
    Walsh’s point, which not surprisingly you all seem willing to look past ( surprise surprise)is that Breitbart tries to prove nothing happened by peddling video that had nothing to do with the incident in question.
    Yeah, that’s Breitbart’s m.o. and his bread and butter.
    Mislead. Rant. Hissy fit. Repeat.
    Breitbart fails again.

  18. Breitbart is a tool. Let me ask you wackos this: can Breitbart prove that the n-word WASN’T used?
    Walsh’s point, which not surprisingly you all seem willing to look past ( surprise surprise)is that Breitbart tries to prove nothing happened by peddling video that had nothing to do with the incident in question.
    Yeah, that’s Breitbart’s m.o. and his bread and butter.
    Mislead. Rant. Hissy fit. Repeat.
    Breitbart fails again.

  22. Young4eyes

    Breitbart is merely asking for proof that things happened as claimed. He doesn’t have to prove anything.
    But don’t let me stop you from demolishing that straw man, you’re doing so well.

  23. Young4eyes

    Breitbart is merely asking for proof that things happened as claimed. He doesn’t have to prove anything.
    But don’t let me stop you from demolishing that straw man, you’re doing so well.

  24. @Y4E,
    When making serious accusations, as the Left has done, it is helpful to provide facts.
    Mislead. Rant. Hissy fit. Repeat.
    Yes, you do. It has taken weeks for the Left to concoct this notion that our lying eyes and cel phone cameras don’t state what occurred, in a positive way.
    What will come next? Will there be an ‘unprecedented’ discovery of a clip supporting the allegations? Are you telegraphing the next move of the Left when you say ‘peddling video that had nothing to do with the incident in question’?
    The Left’s commitment to alternative forms of truth continues to astound. If the cultural and economic stakes were not so high, it might even be amusing to watch the contortions.

  25. @Y4E,
    When making serious accusations, as the Left has done, it is helpful to provide facts.
    Mislead. Rant. Hissy fit. Repeat.
    Yes, you do. It has taken weeks for the Left to concoct this notion that our lying eyes and cel phone cameras don’t state what occurred, in a positive way.
    What will come next? Will there be an ‘unprecedented’ discovery of a clip supporting the allegations? Are you telegraphing the next move of the Left when you say ‘peddling video that had nothing to do with the incident in question’?
    The Left’s commitment to alternative forms of truth continues to astound. If the cultural and economic stakes were not so high, it might even be amusing to watch the contortions.

  26. Lewis’s word on the confrontation is good enough for me.

    That seals it, because we all know Dems are above racial demagoguery.

  27. Lewis’s word on the confrontation is good enough for me.

    That seals it, because we all know Dems are above racial demagoguery.

  28. “Let me ask you wackos this: can Breitbart prove that the n-word WASN’T used?”

    No, because it’s impossible to prove a negative. Which is why we assume people are innocent until proven guilty: it forces the state to prove a positive (the accused committed the act) rather than the accused prove a negative (they did not commit the act).

    What do you have against innocent until proven guilty, Y4E? Why are you so insistent on believing unsupported charges?

  29. “Let me ask you wackos this: can Breitbart prove that the n-word WASN’T used?”

    No, because it’s impossible to prove a negative. Which is why we assume people are innocent until proven guilty: it forces the state to prove a positive (the accused committed the act) rather than the accused prove a negative (they did not commit the act).

    What do you have against innocent until proven guilty, Y4E? Why are you so insistent on believing unsupported charges?

  33. Well, since Joan Walsh has absolutely no credibility with me, and as far as I’m concerned, she’s just another loud mouth, I think she used the “N”-word, and let’s see her prove she didn’t. And you know what, I think I saw Lewis use the “H” word and the “J” word on that video. Prove otherwise.

    That’s the tricky part about trying to make accusations based upon your personal opinion of someone’s character. It’s still just an opinion. And since I have no personal experience with any of them, none of them have a “pass” when it comes to proving what was said or not said. If there aren’t any facts to support an accusation from some of you “famous writer people”…go stick it where it doesn’t shine.

  34. Well, since Joan Walsh has absolutely no credibility with me, and as far as I’m concerned, she’s just another loud mouth, I think she used the “N”-word, and let’s see her prove she didn’t. And you know what, I think I saw Lewis use the “H” word and the “J” word on that video. Prove otherwise.

    That’s the tricky part about trying to make accusations based upon your personal opinion of someone’s character. It’s still just an opinion. And since I have no personal experience with any of them, none of them have a “pass” when it comes to proving what was said or not said. If there aren’t any facts to support an accusation from some of you “famous writer people”…go stick it where it doesn’t shine.

  35. Walsh:
    “It’s ludicrous to think that the right-wing bully believed he had the moral or political standing to call Lewis a liar, after Lewis and two other black congressmen reported they were called “nigger” by tea partiers during the healthcare reform vote March 20. Lewis’s word on the confrontation is good enough for me.”

    Wow- what an amazing argument! (/sarc)

    Yeah, and a bunch of faceless, amateur bloggers had absolutely no “standing” to take on distinguished pro Dan Rather in 2004. And what of those white people who doubted the black accusers’ story in the Duke lacrosse case?- no racial standing there either- just a basic questioning of proof.

    Dan Rather was forced out in disgrace, and the Duke-lax D.A. was disbarred. Lie at your own peril, Lib.s

  36. Walsh:
    “It’s ludicrous to think that the right-wing bully believed he had the moral or political standing to call Lewis a liar, after Lewis and two other black congressmen reported they were called “nigger” by tea partiers during the healthcare reform vote March 20. Lewis’s word on the confrontation is good enough for me.”

    Wow- what an amazing argument! (/sarc)

    Yeah, and a bunch of faceless, amateur bloggers had absolutely no “standing” to take on distinguished pro Dan Rather in 2004. And what of those white people who doubted the black accusers’ story in the Duke lacrosse case?- no racial standing there either- just a basic questioning of proof.

    Dan Rather was forced out in disgrace, and the Duke-lax D.A. was disbarred. Lie at your own peril, Lib.s

  37. Y4E:
    “Let me ask you wackos this: can Breitbart prove that the n-word WASN’T used?”

    Rob:
    No, because it’s impossible to prove a negative.

    LMAO!!! Rob, u r making the assumption that the lefty has actually studied classical logic. But most lefty curricula these days is far more er- “soft-skill” (ifuknowhuddamean) oriented; they wouldn’t know classical logic and therefore the ditz wouldn’t recognize that the question he asked be proven is unprovable by definition. What a dumba**! Typical…

  38. Y4E:
    “Let me ask you wackos this: can Breitbart prove that the n-word WASN’T used?”

    Rob:
    No, because it’s impossible to prove a negative.

    LMAO!!! Rob, u r making the assumption that the lefty has actually studied classical logic. But most lefty curricula these days is far more er- “soft-skill” (ifuknowhuddamean) oriented; they wouldn’t know classical logic and therefore the ditz wouldn’t recognize that the question he asked be proven is unprovable by definition. What a dumba**! Typical…

Comments are closed.