Video: Breitbart v. Max Blumenthal at CPAC
This clip is gold. While it’s enjoyable watching Breitbart simply unload on a cretin like Max Blumenthal, for my money the best stuff comes at the end, when Larry O’Connor catches Blumenthal in an outright falsehood about whether he called James O’Keefe a racist.
Cathartic unleashing on a turd: good. Evisceration of a turd with his own words: priceless.
It’s a more dramatic instance of O’Connor repeating the exact same coup de grace that he pulled off with Brad Friedman the other night, when he caught Friedman in an almost identical lie.
Larry O’Connor is my new favorite conservative. (Breitbart is an old favorite. The one-two punch here works beautifully.)
Via Hot Air. I really wish I were there this year. Maybe next year.
UPDATE: More from O’Connor here.
UPDATE x2: Blumenthal cries here.
Both Breitbart and O’Conner shredded whatever dignity Blumenthal imagined he had left. Blumenthal had absolutely nothing to say in his own defense, weasel that he is.
That apple didn’t fall far from the poisoned tree.
GeneralMalaise (0428a9) — 2/20/2010 @ 2:55 pmBlumenthal’s definitely a chip off the old block – nasty, full of lies and more than willing to tar and smear anyone he deems insuffiently Liberal. This is going to happen more and more – the idiot went there with his camera crew obviously looking for something, anything to film that would make this gathering look ugly – but who looks ugly in the end?
Dmac (799abd) — 2/20/2010 @ 2:58 pmAre they so dense as to not realize that what they put into type, or on tape, will survive to indict them?
Too many, for far too long, have led cloistered lives of privilege. Time to wake up.
11-02-10 –
AD - RtR/OS! (e05987) — 2/20/2010 @ 3:00 pmIt’s Coming!
You’re wrong – they’re full of wacists and scawy people who confuse and frighten me! Eeeek! Someone get me my Depends ASAP!
Comment by Smiley
Dmac (799abd) — 2/20/2010 @ 3:00 pmWas I the only one put off by Breitbart’s display? He was just spewing invective. No irrefutable arguments presented, no damning evidence offered; all he did was attribute bad names and traits to Blumenthal.
Now O’Connor? That shit was golden.
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
CliveStaples (0c7505) — 2/20/2010 @ 4:09 pm[…] MORE […]
Video: Breitbart v. Max Blumenthal at CPAC « THE BLACK KETTLE (44368e) — 2/20/2010 @ 4:17 pmWait, so I heard Breitbart make reference to Max Blumenthal’s father. Is he talking about Sidney Blumenthal — “Sid Vicious” of the Clinton years? I never realized they were pere and fils. I guess the turd doesn’t fall too far from the bunghole, does it?
JVW (fd30ab) — 2/20/2010 @ 4:54 pmBut James O’Keefe is a racist and and so is Breitbart, and they’re both going to jail.
Nah..nah..nah nah….hey hey hey FBI FBI FBI…
Breitbart is a complete hypocrite. COMPLETE AND UTTER HYPOCRITE AND ALPACA molester.
Assclown doodyheads (f0d390) — 2/20/2010 @ 4:54 pmNot only that but he’s a peon pissboy buttsniffing turdboy for the poor elites in this country. THe oligarchy that considers itself the true exceptional America, and HE Breitbart is the lowest of the low doing and saying anything he can to get tickets to the show where he eat more power turds and get some of that sweet power and influence to rub off on him.
He certainly a big big man challenging someone about their BLOG at a shithole for turnsniffing oloigarchs such as the CPAC. Just like a coward too. Exact M.O. i bet if you met Breitbart in a parking lot or on the street he’d piss his pants.
Assclown doodyheads (f0d390) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:10 pmCliveStaples,
I agree O’Connor was more effective but what strikes me is how passionate conservatives like Breitbart and others have become who were content to stay in the background or even on the sidelines in the past.
For years, liberals and even liberal Presidents have claimed conservatives are bitter, gun-clingers just waiting to go off half-cocked. IMO they were and still are wrong that conservatives are just inches from going postal, but I’m over 50 and I can’t remember a time when conservatives were more passionate or mobilized to take political action. It could be a very powerful political movement.
DRJ (6a8003) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:11 pm“That internet’s a motherfucker…”
Ain’t it just? 🙂
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:22 pmClive Stapesl @ #5, I tend to agree with you. It’s easy to understand Breitbart’s frustration and anger toward Blumenthal and that when faced with an opportunity to confront him he unleashes pent up anger and vitriol. Yet in the end it seemed far less effective than the fiercely powerful and quiet confrontation of O’Connor. He struck the right note sticking to facts and wholly avoiding any messy emotional spillage.
I don’t think it did any short term harm to Breitbart’s cause reacting this way because enough people (especially at CPAC) sympathize and cheer him on. But for the long term, it would be good if he could take some points from O’Connnor and others who can argue facts, facts, facts – without deviation – and stay as far away as possible from making it personal and emotional.
Breitbart writes a mean argument on paper, sticks to the facts, makes solid points and I’m grateful we have him as a voice of clarity and soundness.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:23 pmIn their defense, most days I’m about half a pack of cigarettes away from being the subject of Bill Kurtis’s next A&E special…
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:24 pmBreitbart may have been more circumspect, but I can certainly understand his anger.
Using the terms “racism” or “racist” as a method of political expediency to silence your critics diminishes the power of the words.
Ag80 (f67beb) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:29 pmI notice, too, that at the Blumenthal cries link above (Update X2), Blumenthal doesn’t mention O’Connor at all but does mention Breitbart by name, saying “then came unhinged and unleashed a tirade of insults, refusing to let me speak.“.
It’s much easier to counter-attack emotional spillage and vitriol rather than address the hard facts squarely and without hesitation shoved under one’s nose. Breitbart may have momentarily weakened himself reacting the way he did as evidenced by the little man Blumenthal counter-attacking him rather than taking on the red meat of O’Connor.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:32 pmSo Breitbart was angry, he certainly made his point, O’Connor may have been more persuasive. I identify more with Breitbart.
Many of us are feeling threatened, the damage these creeps have done is serious, long-lasting, and personal. We have done polite and mild-mannered for way too long.
I agree, DRJ, this isn’t going away, we aren’t going to forget.
jodetoad (7a7b8a) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:33 pmI’m with you DRJ. For too long, conservatives have insisted on “taking the high road” as if it were beneath them to fight. Meanwhile lefty numpties have never restricted themselves in such a manner. It is about time to fight fire with fire. It also brings the added advantage that most Libs have never encountered any type of resistance before, existing mostly in self-serving echo chambers as they do, thus are ill-equipped to deal with it.
Gazzer (fe2281) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:34 pmIn fairness to AB, it was tough to discern what Max was saying so it is hard to gauge whether AB’s response was correct, or over the top. Either way, I liked it.
I would be nice if we were engaged in a war of ideas with these people. But we’re not. The left long ago declared literal, by any means necessary war on us. Slimy maggots like Blumenthal live such insular lives that I can only cheer when someone like Breitbart rattles them. The one-two punch was glorious but don’t discount the value of act one.
usually a lurker (682c85) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:36 pmEarlier at the conference, when he called out the NYT reporter, Breibart said clearly he was no longer going to be nice in dealing with members of the media.
Looks as if he’s keeping his word. How will it work out? I don’t know. Conventional media has been diminished, but it remains a powerful force. Should be entertaining, though.
Ag80 (f67beb) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:39 pmAg80, certainly it’s a plus to take the gloves off but if one’s going that route, wouldn’t it be best to always be prepared with a deliberative and methodical argument? Facts are irrefutable. Anything else easily disintegrates into a food fight.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:43 pmDana:
No disagreement from me.
But in the ever-shifting political discourse of the left, facts tend to be treated more as paradigms. How can you argue facts with people who make them to be whatever they want them to be?
Ag80 (f67beb) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:56 pmI enjoyed seeing O’Connor make Blumenthal his bitch. I don’t think either Breitbart or Maxie were prepared for the first part of the encounter, which looked like it occurred by chance, and were both a little flustered. O’Connor could see Breitbart engaging and collect himself.
From Maxie’s blog it looks like O’Keefe’s dress while in ACORN’s offices is becoming the nonstory story of the day in liberal lalaland.
daleyrocks (718861) — 2/20/2010 @ 5:56 pmyou say that like its a bad thing.
i even got the President one time: it was a Catholic School, and he lived on campus and ate with us on occasion, although, after that, not so much….. %-)
got my RA too, right in the face with a scoop of sherbet, as he was trying to duck under the table. he never saw it coming.
yeah: if we’d had frats, i would have been in Animal House….
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 2/20/2010 @ 6:09 pmI saw that too. Very odd.
I think that these people think that O’Keefe’s pimp suit will prove to be the proportionally-spaced font that they have been looking for that will derail the ACORN story.
Pious Agnostic (b2c3ab) — 2/20/2010 @ 6:11 pmConsidering the narrative the media’s pushing on the Conservative Renaissance–that they’re angry ignorant racist white people–I think it’s a bad idea for the man leading the charge against the liberal message machine to make this sort of scene.
I would much prefer a William F. Buckley or a Christopher Hitchens to a Conservative Keith Olbermann or Michael Moore. I hope Breitbart sticks to the substance in future media appearances.
CliveStaples (0c7505) — 2/20/2010 @ 6:38 pmredc1c4 – We nailed a few of the Trustees at college one time after an open bar cocktail party. They usually made the mistake of eating with the students once a quarter when they met, after cosktails. HUGE mistake.
daleyrocks (718861) — 2/20/2010 @ 6:40 pm“Considering the narrative the media’s pushing on the Conservative Renaissance–that they’re angry ignorant racist white people–I think it’s a bad idea for the man leading the charge against the liberal message machine to make this sort of scene.”
I suspect most of America gives a flying fig about what “narrative the media’s pushing” on any major issue these days. They’ve been exposed for what they are: agenda-driven, biased flacks who operate in an echo-chamber.
GeneralMalaise (0428a9) — 2/20/2010 @ 6:53 pmAll Breitbart did was give the liberal media more evidence to support their caricature. Do you think Breitbart persuaded anyone who didn’t already agree with him? Do you think that anyone who didn’t already agree with Breitbart would come away form this confrontation with a good opinion of the man?
It just seems like a missed opportunity to really put the screws to the liberal media. Breitbart could have expressed his disrespect and disdain with coldly rational arguments instead of invective.
CliveStaples (0c7505) — 2/20/2010 @ 7:09 pmAll Breitbart did was give the liberal media more evidence to support their caricature. Do you think Breitbart persuaded anyone who didn’t already agree with him? Do you think that anyone who didn’t already agree with Breitbart would come away form this confrontation with a good opinion of the man?
That’s idiotic. It’s pussies like yourself who keep conservatives painted into a corner. Grow a pair already.
usually a lurker (682c85) — 2/20/2010 @ 7:20 pmLook, genius, the idea is to convince more people to agree with you. Do you think Breitbart did that? Do you think he persuaded anyone that didn’t already agree with him?
You don’t have to have balls to think that yelling insults at people is a good idea; you just have to be shortsighted.
CliveStaples (0c7505) — 2/20/2010 @ 7:30 pm“You don’t have to have balls to think that yelling insults at people is a good idea”
Clive – Olbermann makes an entire show out of it, but then again hardly anyone watches it so maybe you have a point.
daleyrocks (718861) — 2/20/2010 @ 7:37 pmIt’s pussies like yourself who keep conservatives painted into a corner. Grow a pair already.
usually a lurker, do you think there is a reason Blumenthal, in his CPAC recap and whine didn’t specifically address O’Connor, but did Breitbart? Isn’t a loud chaotic sort of rant much easier to counter-attack than a quiet, forceful articulation of the truth? With the former, one can avoid the facts and the gut of the matter and keep it on an emotional level of verbal slapping. Anything but address the facts.
There is a certain level relentless force necessary to get one’s voice heard in order to make a dent but if it’s a screaming rant, you’ve lost those smart, thoughtful people who are looking for irrefutable facts and logic to persuade them. And it’s those sorts that the right needs.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 2/20/2010 @ 7:47 pm“You don’t have to have balls to think that yelling insults at people is a good idea; you just have to be shortsighted.”
Clive – Are you calling Howard Dean’s campaign shortsighted?
daleyrocks (718861) — 2/20/2010 @ 7:51 pmThe internet interferes with my sarcasm detection algorithm…that was a rhetorical question, yes?
CliveStaples (0c7505) — 2/20/2010 @ 8:05 pmI think that what restrains most conservatives, or at least yours’ truly, from “going Postal” is that most of the Leftists that deserve to be shot aren’t worth the cost of ammo (yet).
AD - RtR/OS! (e05987) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:04 pmUgh, can we dispense with the thinly-veiled allusions to violent revolution?
CliveStaples (0c7505) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:05 pmClive Staples @ #5, I tend to agree with you also but what’s important and what’s extremely important really is that Mr. B pushes back and does so in a way that our hapless and feeble Team R is not at all accustomed to seeing.
Good for him I think.
happyfeet (713679) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:08 pmI hear the head chimp yelling at someone and looking unhinged (almost as much as Breitbart did when he gave that drunk speech in that bar in Washington) I heard several other chimps flinging poo and then some jackass jumps in to play gotcha? This is your new hero, Patterico? A gang of bullies grandstanding for cameras?
How the mighty have fallen
timb (8f04c0) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:09 pmWith the offspring of Sid Vicious you would normally expect a regression to the mean and that his son might be a little less slimy. Except Max seems intent on proving he is even worse than his dad.
He has a long way to go but at his current pace he will be more despicable than his dad when all is said and done. Sid must get a little teary-eyed when he thinks of little Max.
And I liked how the comments on his post all accuse Max of being a whiny-ass baby.
MU789 (fe58f9) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:09 pmYes, we’ve grown beyond that vile manner of disagreement – we’re phuqueing civilized now.
AD - RtR/OS! (e05987) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:10 pmtimb:
poo-flinging is such a relative term:
https://patterico.com/2010/02/18/help-amy-alkon-beat-the-scum-at-sadly-no/#comment-627902
Ag80 (f67beb) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:36 pmUgh, can we dispense with the thinly-veiled allusions to violent revolution?
Ugh, can we dispense with the hyperbole?
If you want to see incitements to violent revolution, go look at the archives of DU or Kos. Or Free Republic for that matter. If they have them.
And, yes, I think your sarcasm detection algorithms may need resetting, internet or not.
Ag80 (f67beb) — 2/20/2010 @ 9:48 pmMy gods… A drunken speech at a bar?
I’m shocked!!
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/21/2010 @ 1:24 amI don’t think anyone is inciting violence. But I occasionally see conservatives alluding to violent rebellions and putting liberals against the wall. I don’t think it helps anything.
CliveStaples (ca0774) — 2/21/2010 @ 1:40 amFrom Max’s blog:
Projection.
It’s what’s for dinner.
:azarus Long (a4f63e) — 2/21/2010 @ 5:47 amIf you had any clue as to who Breitbart really is you wouldn’t be saying that. He’s spent years debating the liberal press in a “coldly rational” way, only to have them ignore him.
Breitbart.com and his sister sites are all a response to the ignorance of the liberal press.
If this is too much for you, you’d better hide under the bed, because he’s not done yet.
TomB (67ef7f) — 2/21/2010 @ 6:41 amTom, coming here and insulting the intelligence of a regular commenter isn’t the best of ideas…
Regardless of past success with the method, it still comes across as more rational and more responsible when you go after someone in the manner of O’Conner, instead of the manner of Breibart.
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/21/2010 @ 7:04 am[…] this from Patterico’s Pontifications: This clip is gold. While it’s enjoyable watching Breitbart simply unload on a cretin like Max […]
Alinsky Smear Tactic FAIL: Andrew Breitbart KO’s Leftist Max Blumenthal at CPAC (video) « Frugal CafĂ© Blog Zone (a66042) — 2/21/2010 @ 7:38 amIt would be counterproductive for every proponent of conservatism to argue in the same way. Different tactics to reach different audiences.
In my opinion, the bad cop/good cop routine here was made more effective by Breitbart’s initial bluster. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he had coordinated with O’Connor before the confrontation.
Hadlowe (061332) — 2/21/2010 @ 7:40 amFirst of all, where did I do that?
Second of all, why am I a second class citizen here because I only post occasionally?
To call out Breitbart because he offends some people is just plain silly. Conservatives have been sitting there getting the crap kicked out of them for years and almost always took it. Its about time they start hitting back, and hitting back hard. The Blumenthals are political hit-men, and they don’t care who they destroy in order to further their agenda.
I say bravo to Andrew.
Here’s more to upset some refined sensibilities:
Breitbart Gets Hit, Punches Back Twice as Hard
TomB (67ef7f) — 2/21/2010 @ 7:45 amAmazing smackdown!
Now I know why leftists don’t debate. 🙂
Patricia (e1047e) — 2/21/2010 @ 7:51 amIf Breitbart’s sites consisted only of insults directed at media personalities, then he would be far less effective than he is today.
Why are you framing this as an issue of bravery? My problem isn’t that Breitbart is being too confrontational; my problem is that he wasn’t using good arguments that were readily available to him.
CliveStaples (f50b1c) — 2/21/2010 @ 12:46 pmWho called Breitbart out because he “offends some people?” I called him out for engaging in invective instead of sticking to the facts; whether or not he offended anyone is immaterial to my argument.
CliveStaples (f50b1c) — 2/21/2010 @ 12:48 pmComment by CliveStaples — 2/21/2010 @ 1:40 am
At least we know what we will be fighting for:
The continuation of the American Republic, dedicated to the Liberty & Freedom of individuals, and a limited form of government.
The Anarchists/Progressives of the Left, OTOH, only have an ephemeral vision of a dream that they espouse, that will bring “fairness”, “equality”, and “compassion” to a world of socialized squallor and despair.
Pardon me if I don’t sign on to that vision, as I have seen it before; it didn’t work then, doesn’t work now, and will not work in the future, for it is anti-thetical to the very concept of Freedom & Liberty of the Individual.
AD - RtR/OS! (b35340) — 2/21/2010 @ 1:20 pm[…] From an update from Patterico, we get this link to Max Blumenthal forgetting the first rule of holes (quit digging) as he […]
Liberals Have To Lie To Win « Truth Before Dishonor (05b5a7) — 2/21/2010 @ 2:08 pm[…] on Saturday. Sid Blumenthal, son of Max, showed up with a camera crew to do God-alone-knows-what, and Breitbart pounced.After making Blumenthal shrink off with his tail between his legs, Breitbart fended off yet another […]
Breitbart Goes to the Mattresses (78f46f) — 2/21/2010 @ 2:21 pmJared Taylor is a racist.
Marcus Epstein is a friend of O’keefe and has an assault charge for punching a woman and calling here a “n-r” [fill the blanks yourself]
O’Keefe’s pimp outfit.
Breitbart in the video above: “Are you saying that Georgetown law school would have a white supremacist…”
Taylor actually calls himself a “racial realist”
Why don’t you link to the man Breitbart is defending?
You people really are a vile bunch of losers.
Seltzer (ccf7a1) — 2/21/2010 @ 3:25 pmHis sites consist of quite a lot of insults. He makes it quite clear that is what his approach is.
You’re the one weak at the knees because of his “insults”. And if you listened to his diatribe against Blumenthal, he was quite in control of the facts of the case, calling out Max for calling O’Keefe a racist. Just because he was confrontational doesn’t mean he didn’t have command of his facts.
in·vec·tive   [in-vek-tiv] –noun
1.vehement or violent denunciation, censure, or reproach.
2.a railing accusation; vituperation.
3.an insulting or abusive word or expression.
I’d say by definition, using “invective” is offending someone.
And I for one support Andrew for finally going on the offensive. I you are looking for navel-gazers, there’s plenty on our side of the aisle, and I’m sure they’ll be easily found denouncing Breitbart in the next few days for being too confrontational, or some such.
TomB (67ef7f) — 2/21/2010 @ 3:35 pmSeltzer, try finishing one “thought” before starting on your next one. Your post makes even less sense than a Max Blumenthal article.
TomB (67ef7f) — 2/21/2010 @ 3:40 pmI’m sorry, was that invective???
TomB (67ef7f) — 2/21/2010 @ 3:53 pmI would call “If you had any clue as to who Breitbart really is” insulting to Clive’s intelligence, and you damn well know it. Don’t play cute with me, son. I’m an old hand and backhand, so don’t think you’re going to slide by because you didn’t out-right call him a moron.
You confuse being treated as second class due to your posting frequency with being treated as second class because you’re a tool. There’s a world of difference, and you really should learn to tell them apart.
Neither I nor anyone else have “called him out”, and I freely admit that I would have probably reacted in a very similar fashion as Breibart, only with more profanity and more references to Blumenthal’s mother. That doesn’t change the fact that Clive is right – Andrew went to the loud and emotional display when he had a litany of far more powerful arguments he could have made.
Watch the video again… While people seems supportive of Andrew’s tirade, it is O’Connor who gets the verbal reaction from the crowd as he causes a forced error on Blumenthal’s part, and catches him in a blatant lie.
Andrew’s method is more satisfying, O’Connor’s is more effective.
So which would you prefer? To be entertaining and satisfying, or effective?
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/21/2010 @ 9:45 pmActually, definition 2 is exactly what Andrew did.
Again, I prefer effective take-downs as opposed to good theater. It is telling which got under Max’s skin more – which did he fail to mention in his blog post?
The one he doesn’t talk about is the one he doesn’t want anyone to know about, because while just standing there and letting a guy yell and insult you is bad, it is far, FAR worse to be caught in a flat-out lie and be unable to anything but stutter and mumble your way around an attempt to walk-back your own stupidity.
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/21/2010 @ 9:48 pm[…] Jimmie Bise has more on Breitbart. Patterico scores the pin for Breitbart tag-teamer O’Connell. Kind of related: “Okay. I’m really sorry I boinked you. Really. Sorry. It’ll […]
Daryle Jenkins Appears Disoriented at CPAC | POWIP (d65a4c) — 12/21/2010 @ 9:43 am