It sure does...

schultz is still kickin'.

Not natural...divine intervention.

Wow, "Oduma"? I mean seriously, Judd, ...."Oduma"?

You're 12-years-old, right?

he loved america, hated commies

Conservative firebrand Andrew Breitbart, a blogger and commentator who frequently said his life's goal was to "destroy the institutional left," died of heart failure...

His goal was destruction, he failed at that, and then his heart failed too. It's easy to tear things down as opposed to building something.

Breitbart was a failure.

If hate kills, then when can we expect your marxist president and all his supporters to die?

MSNBC is certainly the place to read from low class bloggers that would spew vile words to eulogize a thinker, husband, and family man and someone who faught socialism and the liars that lionize it

I can come up with a lot of words that describe Breitbart. "Thinker" is not one of them.

http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/200907280002

The
Definitive Birther Takedown

July 28, 2009 10:07 am ET

A growing chorus of fringe conservatives, ranging from members
of Congress to Lou Dobbs, have started echoing the "birthers'" claims
that Barack Obama's eligibility for office needs to be examined. Media
Matters Action Network decided to take up the challenge. Needless to say, we found
their evidence rather uncompelling.

MYTH: The
Certification Of Live Birth Is Not Enough Evidence To Confirm His Birth In
Hawaii

Birther Movement Claim:

Obama has NOT provided a certified copy of an original, typed,
vault copy, long-form, birth certificate, signed by his mother and delivering
doctor with the name of the hospital thereon, to be used to conclusively prove
one of the two key elements used in determining his "natural born"
citizenship status per the U.S. Constitution, i.e., where he was born. All he
has provided to the electorate and public to see is a digital image on the
internet of a purported copy of a short, summary, computer printed form called
a Certification of Live Birth, aka COLB, which is not a Birth Certificate. No
one in any controlling legal authority and official expert capacity has ever
been allowed to examine the purported computer made paper document displayed in
the digital images and digital pictures on the internet.
[ObamaCitizenshipFacts.org, accessed 7/27/09]

FACT: Not Only Has The Certificate Of Live Birth Been Verified
By Numerous Officials, Other Primary Source Documents Verify Contents

FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and
photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of
the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims
that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted
high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents"
to this article. [Factcheck.org, 11/1/08]

But the evidence of Barack Obama's birth in Hawaii does not stop
there. Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii's State Health Director, examined the
document. As reported by the Honolulu Advertiser:

So, in what likely will be a vain attempt to halt the inquiries,
Fukino yesterday issued a statement saying that she and the registrar of vital
statistics personally inspected Obama's birth certificate and found it to be
valid. . . .

Fukino issued her statement to try to stomp out persistent
rumors that Obama was not born in Honolulu - and is therefore not a U.S.
citizen and thus ineligible to run for president.

Fukino, however, repeated the Health Department's position that
state law prohibits her or any other officials from actually releasing the
birth certificate, which Obama's campaign says shows he was born in Honolulu on
Aug. 4, 1961.

"There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein
Obama's official birth certificate," Fukino said in the statement.
"State law (Hawai'i Revised Statutes¤338-18) prohibits the release of a
certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in
the vital record. ... No state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, has ever
instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any
other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai'i." [Honolulu
Advertiser,
11/1/08]

MYTH: Barack Obama Can
Direct The State Of Hawaii To Release His Long Form Birth Certificate

Birther Movement Claim:

The lawsuit has not been dismissed (and others, including one in
Hawaii, have been filed). But it could be quickly settled by Obama and the DNC.
All they need to do is show a certified, long form "Certificate of Live Birth" to the court. [WorldNetDaily, 10/28/08]

FACT: The State Department Of Health No Longer Issues Copies Of
Paper Birth Certificates

As reported by the Honolulu Star Bulletin:

No, you can't obtain a "certificate of live birth"
anymore.

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth
certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live
births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the
state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in
2001.

"At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on)
was put into electronic files for consistent reporting," she said. [Honolulu
Star Bulletin, 6/6/09]

MYTH: The Certificate
Of Live Birth Posted By The Obama Campaign (And Above) Is Forged

Birther Movement Claim:

Additionally, statements by Ron Polarik and private investigator
Jose Barro, showed numerous signs of forgery on the short version COLB posted
by Obama/Soetoro, and Forensic Document expert Sandra Line has issued an
affidavit that Obama's place of birth cannot be ascertained without seeing the
original birth certificate. [DefendOurFreedoms.org, accessed 7/27/09]

FACT: FactCheck.org Viewed The Original Document, Attested To
Its Authenticity

Recently FactCheck representatives got a chance to spend some
time with the birth certificate, and we can attest to the fact that it is real
and three-dimensional and resides at the Obama headquarters in Chicago. We can
assure readers that the certificate does bear a raised seal, and that it's
stamped on the back by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T. Onaka (who uses a
signature stamp rather than signing individual birth certificates). We even
brought home a few photographs. [FactCheck.org, 11/1/08]

MYTH: Foreign-Born
Children Could Acquire Hawaiian Certificates Of Live Birth (COLB)

Birther Movement Claim: According to the Orange
County Weekly:

Taitz and others say they have reason to doubt the veracity of
Obama's COLB. Forensic experts have set up web pages and signed affidavits
saying it's a forgery. There's a law on the books in Hawaii that allows
foreign-born children to obtain a Hawaiian COLB. And the information on a
late-registered COLB doesn't need to be verified by anyone; it's based solely
on the testimony of one parent. [Orange County Weekly, 6/18/09]

FACT: The Law In Question Did Not Exist Until 20 Years Later

The law allowing foreign-born children to obtain Hawaiian COLBs
didn't exist until 20 years after Obama was born, while Obama's published COLB
says his birth information was recorded four days after his birth in 1961. [OC
Weekly,6/18/09]

MYTH: Obama Renounced
His Citizenship While In Indonesia

Birther Movement Claim:

The problem Obama has with that issue is whether his
step-father, who moved the family to Indonesia after marrying his mother,
legally "adopted" him or "acknowledged" him as his son in
Indonesia with the mother's concurrence, thereby renouncing his U.S.
citizenship while living in Indonesia. [ObamaCitizenshipFacts.org, accessed 7/27/09]

FACT: Barack Obama Never Renounced His Citizenship

The primary piece of evidence birthers cite to support this
claim is Barack Obama's Indonesian School Record referenced above. Line 3 of
the document does ask for Barack Obama's country of citizenship and does say
Indonesia. However, Barack Obama's parents' completion of this document does
not mean he renounced his citizenship. In fact, Title
8 > Chapter 12 > Subchapter III > Part III > Section 1481
of the U.S. Code is very clear on this point:

§ 1481. Loss of
nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of
proof; presumptions

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by
birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing
any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States
nationality-

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own
application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after
having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal
declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision
thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state
if

(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the
United States, or

(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned
officer; or

(4)

(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any
office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a
political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he
has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or

(B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any
office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a
political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for
which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of
allegiance is required; or

(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a
diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such
form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or

(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of
nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as
may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be
in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as
not contrary to the interests of national defense; or

(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by
force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or
conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383of
title 18,
or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385of
title 18,
or violating section 2384of
title 18by
engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the
Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is
convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

In addition, according to the State Department website:

B. ELEMENTS OF
RENUNCIATION

A person wishing to
renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to
relinquish U.S. citizenship:

1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic
officer,

2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or
Consulate); and

3. sign an oath of renunciation

Renunciations that do
not meet the conditions described above have no legal effect. [State.gov, accessed 7/27/09;
emphasis added]

Furthermore:

Parents Cannot
Renounce U.S. Citizenship On Behalf Of Their Minor Children. Before an oath of
renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person
under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer
that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of
renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily
seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship. [State.gov, accessed 7/27/09;
emphasis added]

Update: The relevant law at the time was the 1952 Immigration
and Naturalization Act. (However the conclusions are the same.)

LOSS OF NATIONALITY BY NATIVE-BORN OR NATURALIZED CITIZEN

SEC. 349. (a) From and after the effective date of this Act a
person is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization,
shall lose his nationality by

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own
application, upon an application filed in his behalf by a parent, guardian, or
duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization of a parent having legal
custody of such person: Provided, That nationality shall not be lost by any
person under this section as the result of the naturalization of a parent or
parents while such person is under the age of twenty-one years, or as the
result of a naturalization obtained on behalf of a person under twenty-one
years of age by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, unless such
person shall fail to enter the United States to establish a permanent residence
prior to his twenty-fifth birthday:

Since a school application filled out by his parents meets none
of the above requirements, and a parent cannot renounce citizenship on behalf
of a minor, the birthers' point is moot.

MYTH: Barack Obama Is
Not Eligible To Become President Because Only One Of His Parents Is A U.S.
Citizen

Birther Movement Claim: According to the Orange
County Weekly:

Even if Obama's long-form, original birth certificate were to be
made public, though, the questions from Taitz and others wouldn't stop. There's
a second argument: that there's no way that Obama could fit the definition of a
"natural-born citizen." By turning to Swiss philosophy texts read by
the Founding Fathers, citing the infamous Scott v. Sanford Supreme Court
decision as precedent (which denied citizenship to former slave Dred Scott and
was later overturned) and disqualifying the presidency of Chester A. Arthur,
Taitz is able to claim that a baby can only be a natural-born citizen if both
parents were American citizens at the time of the baby's birth. [OC
Weekly,
6/18/09]

FACT: Barack Obama Qualifies As A Natural Born Citizen Under The
Constitution And Court Precedents

Article 1
Section 2 of the Constitution:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to
that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and
been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

14^thAmendment:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

In addition,United States v.
Wong Kim Ark established the precedent in this case:

Wong Kim Ark's demand for a writ ofhabeas
corpus,
however, was granted because of his contention that he was a United States
citizen. He charged that the Collector of Customs of the Port of San Francisco
and the manager of the steamship company had deprived him of his liberty
without due process. The U.S. District Court for Northern California agreed
that Wong's Fourteenth Amendment rights had been violated. His detention was
ruled illegal and he was released.

The U.S. government appealed the writ, implicitly challenging
Wong's citizenship before the Supreme Court on 5 and 8 March 1897. Ironically,
both sides accepted most of the basic facts of Wong's life. It was agreed that
he had been born in San Francisco in 1873, while his Chinese parents were
considered permanent residents of the city. He had visited China temporarily in
1890 and had returned to San Francisco with no difficulty in passing through
customs. It was further agreed that since his birth, Wong had never had any
other place of residence except California nor had he ever claimed to be
anything other than a United States citizen. Although his parents had returned
to China in 1890, Wong worked in San Francisco, paid his taxes, and had never
participated in any criminal acts. Most significantly, the government's appeal
conceded that the Chinese Exclusion Acts under which Wong had been detained
should not apply to him if he was indeed a U.S. citizen.

A Question of
Birthright

The government claimed that Wong's parentage should determine
his citizenship. Wong's parents were subjects of the Emperor of China at the
time of his birth. Therefore, Wong was likewise a foreign subject. According to
the appeal, Wong was also Chinese by reason of his "race, language, color
and dress." Because he did not belong to any of the classes of Chinese
allowed entry under immigration rules, he was technically considered to be a
laborer and liable to the terms of the Chinese Exclusion Act.

These arguments were no more successful in Washington D.C. than
they had been in San Francisco. The Court rejected the appeal on 28 March 1898,
over a year after hearing the case. Writing for the majority, Justice Gray
noted the Constitution's deep roots in English common law. By this tradition,
all persons born within England's domain could expect protection from the King,
to whom they were expected to owe their allegiance. Gray traced the lineage of
this concept of determining citizenship by birthplace from its English origins
to standard practice in the American states.

The Court found its strongest reason for affirming Wong's
citizenship in the Fourteenth Amendment. Ratified by Congress in 1868, the
amendment was designed to grant the rights of citizenship to persons of African
descent who had been slaves prior to the Civil War. To the majority, Section I
of the amendment was unequivocal:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
the State in which they reside.

It should be noted that the Dred Scott case cited by Taitz and
other birthers was decided in 1857,
a decade before the 14^th amendment was ratified.

MYTH: Barack Obama's
Grandmother Witnessed His Birth in Kenya

Birther Movement Claim:

The Pennsylvania Democrat who has sued Sen. Barack Obama
demanding he prove his American citizenship - and therefore qualification to
run for president - has confirmed he has a recording of a telephone call from
the senator's paternal grandmother confirming his birthin Kenya. . .

"This has been a real sham he's pulled off for the last 20
months," Berg told Savage. "I'll release it [the tape] in a day or
two, affidavits from her talking to a certain person. I heard
the tape. She was speaking [to someone] here in the United States." He
said the telephone call was from Obama's paternal grandmother affirming she
"was in the delivery room in Kenya when he was born Aug. 4, 1961." [WorldNetDaily,October 23, 2008]

FACT: This Is A Myth Based On A Cropped Version Of An Interview
With Obama's Grandmother Sarah:

From Salon.com's War Room:

In that interview, Sarah Obama does in fact say at one point
that she was there for her grandson's birth. But that was a mistake, a
confusion in translation. As soon as a jubilant McRae began to press her for
further details about her grandson being born in Kenya, the family realized the
mistake and corrected him. And corrected him. (The audio is available for
download here.)

No matter, though, because people who believe in a conspiracy
theory simply hear what
they want to hear. So some Birther sites have posted transcripts
and YouTube clips that end abruptly with the mistranslation
and don't include the corrections. McRae, for his part, included the full
translation in his affidavit -- he thinks it's all just part of the conspiracy.
"Some few younger relatives, including [translator Vitalis Akech
Ogombe]," McRae wrote in his court filing, "have obviously been
versed to counter such facts with the common purported information from the
American news media that Obama was born in Hawaii."

Here's the conversation:

MCRAE: Could I ask her about his actual birthplace? I would like
to see his birthplace when I come to Kenya in December. Was she present when he
was born in Kenya?

OGOMBE: Yes. She says, yes, she was, she was present when Obama
was born.

MCRAE: When I come in December. I would like to come by the
place, the hospital, where he was born. Could you tell me where he was born?
Was he born in Mombasa?

OGOMBE: No, Obama was not born in Mombasa. He was born in
America.

MCRAE: Whereabouts was he born? I thought he was born in Kenya.

OGOMBE: No, he was born in America, not in Mombasa.

MCRAE: Do you know where he was born? I thought he was born in
Kenya. I was going to go by and see where he was born.

OGOMBE: Hawaii. Hawaii. Sir, she says he was born in Hawaii. In
the state of Hawaii, where his father was also learning, there. The state of
Hawaii. [Salon.com, 6/27/09]

MYTH: Obama Travelled
To Pakistan At A Time When There Was A Ban On U.S. Passport Holders Entering
That Country.

Birther Movement Claim: Obama Traveled to
Indonesia, Pakistan and India in 1981, when he was Twenty (20) Years Old on his
Indonesian Passport

Obama traveled to Indonesia, Pakistan and Southern India in
1981. The relations between Pakistan and India were extremely tense and
Pakistan was in turmoil and under martial law. The country was filled with
Afghan refugees; and Pakistan's Islamist-leaning Interservices Intelligence
Agency (ISI) had begun to provide arms to the Afghan mujahideen and to assist
the process of recruiting radicalized Muslim men--jihadists-from around the
world to fight against the Soviet Union. Pakistan was so dangerous that it was
on the State Department's travel ban list for U.S. Citizens. [ObamaCrimes.com,
accessed 7/26/09]

FACT: No Such Ban Existed

From FactCheck.org:

But that claim is quite false. There was no such ban. Americans
traveled there without incident, as shown by a travel piece
that appeared in the New
York Times in 1981, dated June 14. Barbara Crossette,
an assistant news editor of the Times, told her mostly
American readers they could travel to Lahore, Pakistan, by air, rail or road,
adding: "Tourists can obtain a free, 30-day visa (necessary for Americans)
at border crossings and airports."

Her article prompted a letter to the Times from the U.S. consul
general in Lahore saying he would "welcome an influx of Americans" to
Lahore. He cautioned only that in addition to getting a visa for Pakistan,
American visitors also should be careful to line up an Indian visa for the
return trip if they planned to travel overland. The letter is dated Aug. 23,
1981.

Also, a travel advisory from the State Department dated Aug. 17,
1981 notes that Americans traveling to Pakistan require a 30-day visa, and that
any staying longer must check in with Pakistan's Foreigner Registration Office.
A digital copy of
the advisory is archived at the Electronic Research Collection,
a partnership between the State Department and the Federal Depository Library
at the University of Illinois at Chicago. [FactCheck.org, 6/5/09]

MYTH: The Military
Revoked The Deployment Papers Of A Major Scheduled To Deploy To Afghanistan
After Arguing He Should Not Be Required To Serve Under A President Who Has Not
Proven His Eligibility For Office.

Birther Movement Claim: WorldNetDaily
wrote:

A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for
deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after
arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven
his eligibility for office.

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has
rescinded his impending deployment orders. [WorldNetDaily, 7/14/09]

FACT: Major Cook Volunteered For A One-Year Assignment In
Afghanistan In May And Only Brought His Suit In June.

Lt. Comm. William Speaks, a spokesman for Centcom stated:

"Maj. Cook volunteered for the one year assignment to
Afghanistan, in May of this year," said Speaks. "After he brought
this stuff to the fore, the unit that owned his billet canceled his
orders."

Speaks dismissed comments that Cook's attorney Orly Taitz, made
to WorldNetDaily, specifically her claim that "the military has directly
responded by saying Obama is illegitimate."

"This in no way
validates any of the outlandish claims made by Maj. Cook or his attorney,"
said Speaks. "The idea that this validates those charges about the
president's fitness for office is simply false." [Washington
Independent, 7/15/09]

If hate kills, why are so many liberals still breathing our air?

How in the world did this thread get hijacked by a moronic Birther?

On the subject: Studies have PROVEN that hate/anger = Stress and coronary problems/disease. Add some genetics for a predisposition to high cholesterol issues et.al. and you have a walking cardio problem waiting to happen.

It is a mystery however why Darth Cheney is still among us, other than he has lots o'money to buy the best treatment/heart/electronics in America.

Mike: You haters own the air too??? Go back to faux snooze where you belong.

Excellent comment, Wade!

How do the birthers explain that it's OK for Willard Mitt Romney to run for president, when his father was born in Mexico?

Big Jim: I agree. I couldn't stand Breitbart, but I'm sorry he died so young, and for his loved ones. Of course, Breitbart was dancing on Ted Kennedy's grave the day Kennedy died, so maybe total civility re: Breitbart's passing is an unrealistic hope. He was one of the most intentionally polarizing figures in the country.

Fortunately, there are way fewer heartless libs than heartless "conservatives." Probably a few of those "heartless libs" are happy he died.

But most of us liberals do have hearts, and like Astro we feel for his loved ones. Breitbart himself was engaged in cold-hearted, ruthless and vindictive manner behavior. Maybe his heart (turns out he did have one) just couldn't handle it...

A lot of people have signs of heart problems and don't know it and drop dead. Athletes who drop dead at practice, during a game, there was a cheerleader who dropped dead at a game, etc. Nothing surprises me.

I was sorry for his family while he was alive.

Also, this reptile had some pretty disgusting things to say about Kennedy after his death. I won't repeat them.

I am as liberal as they come and I am not happy he died. But I truly feel sorry for the dog he was walking.

LL

You got that right. At least now he can't ruin any more lives.

That guy was 43? He looked 60.

I have lived long enough to observe that it is not the good who die young.

big jim...........boo hoo hoo. Mean ol libbies hurt your widdow feelers??? Bah!!

We should all remember the lesson of Andrew Breitbart:

We are all in this together. Hatred divides. Hatred kills.

We are all Americans, and this country rises or falls by all our efforts, and for the good or ill of everyone.

Guess you came away disappointed.

Not at all, I have enjoyed several posts explaining how the man was a living saint.

You are confused steven....obama is the one always blaming everyone else. But have another glass of kool-aide and enjoy your illlusions.

.... thanks for the laugh.

USA/Canuck........what is that some sort of oxymoron or your own illusion?

IIRC , Acorn was pretty corrupt. They needed to be outed.

scylla1----What corruption are you speaking? Could you, please, cite some form of, actual, proof to back up your comment?

Dave, I think scylla1 misspoke- ALEC is corrupt.

Arbuckle_Doc

from one old man to another, I personally think it was a bad thing. The right has devolved from the intellectualism of William F. Buckley, to the hatemongering of Breitbart and others of his ilk. They would have you believe that people are unfortunate only by their own doing and that health and the economic connections that family afford have no bearing on one's personal success. It is ironic that he would die from a problem with his heart.

Breitbart was a hatemongering SOB. The world won't miss him.

Steve you are right on Target. I was a swing voter and voted Republican a number of times. Never again after seeing the hate, pandering and obstructionism of the past 4 years. Add the war that still has not been paid for that G.W. brought us and this continuing pandering of the wealthy in this country....I could go on for hours.

Rangers lead the way!

New Centurion

YES THEY DO!! Hoorah!

I feel sorry for the dog.

LL

Truth-teller? Naw! He saw an avenue on how to make large amounts of money off ignorant people and went down that path. His family is now rich and they're still ignorant.

LL

Nice try.

No, 'LiitleI56', we'll always find endless amusing nourishment in reading asinine drivel like yours. You wouldn't recognize "truth" if you tripped over it (which is not likely in the intellectual world you inhabit).

there is a difference between creating propaganda and doing a documentary. The editing and clipping of the Acorn film and the shirly Bassert(sic) film had one intention and it was not truth seeking. That is what made him a vile man.

Oh my, Little, I guess you told us! Wow.

Liitle: The truth, the truth? You can't handle the truth.

BTW: Please run back and read this repeatedly (to see if anyone agrees with you).

"The least any of you could do is contribute to Breitbart's foundation so his kid's don't have to go on the Governments dime."

Hmmm. The least people who disliked Breitbart in life can do is to give money to his foundation? Anyone else see the logical problem with that statement?

Sure little I'll contribute WHEN YOU contribute to the Obama campaign. Fair enough???

headhoncho----So what is your theory of how this joker died? Come on, enlighten us all with your knowledge.

Anyone who is dumb enough to believe this joker didn't die just as the Coroner said is ..........just dumb.

Oh, you know, he was probably knocked off by Obama, the vast left-wing assassination network, or the Saucer Nazis. Because Breitbart was getting too close to... the Truth!

StandUpJokeOff

Hate kills.

laughingcat

Seems like karma at work. Apparently deliberate cruelty can kill a person.

hummbird-3359530

Sometimes you do reap what you sow, I know Teds smiling down on him!

colormepurple

Feel sorry for him? Not at all. I would guess his constant ranting brought about his untimely death.

My dad was:

the meanest - upending the dining room table, including all of the food and dishes after a Thanksgiving meal because the table didn't get cleared fast enough; punching me in the face and giving me a bloody nose in front of the next door neighbors when I was an 11 year old girl

the most racist - one of his most frequent sayings, "I don't hate n.....s, I think everyone should own at least one!"

the most abusive - my siblings and I were beaten on a frequent basis; he hanged our dog on the front door with the same belt he beat us with (we risked our lives turning that dog loose, but it was all we had left to remind us of our deceased mother, as it was her dog); he was a pedophile until I was 15 years old and I very calmly threatened to kill him in his sleep if he ever touched me in any way ever again

the most hate-filled man I have ever met or known and he died at an old age of 84 on May 4, 2006.

*As far as I know, have observed, and felt the effects of, karma is to be experienced while living. Karma is a fruit bearing tool, both positive and negative. The purpose of karma is for the recipient to reap the consequences or the benefits of their actions and deeds. To use death as a karmic consequence totally defeats its purpose. No lesson can be learned from or felt from karma by the dead.

If any of these character flaws or cosmic events could bring about an early or untimely death my dad should have been dead by the age of 48 and not the reverse!

I just thought you folks should have a dose of reality to go with all of your conjecture and wishful thinking.

Realist, it sounds as if you were raised by an abusive, emotionally disturbed father. I hope you have spoken to a counselor about the way you were treated by him. It's important to your own life and happiness to come to terms with that kind of abuse.

Very best wishes to you. I hope you know it wasn't your fault.

I am so sorry for the things that you had to endure as a child. NO ONE should have to go through that. That being said, I am sorry, but Mr Breitbart was not a hero, he lied when he edited out things that would show everything and not just what he wanted the world to see from his perspective. And let it be known that both sides of the extreme political spectrum do this, so I am not saying that one is better than the other. Acknowledge that the man had some evil and vile ways of working, that is not to say that he wasn't a good father and husband.

We don't know what Breitbart was like as a husband and father. Only his family knows that, and they likely won't say anything negative about him.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to assume he was totally able to leave his aggressive, hate-filled personality behind when he walked through his door, never mind his heavy drinking and drug use.

Realist: I agree. For any statement you can say about Karma offing a person, you can also balance with sayings like "only the good die young." I am sorry you had to go through all that with your father.

realist - actually, your quote about karma is very one sided and sounds like only one person's opinion on the subject relative to death. While sometimes karma does work out in this lifetime, that doesn't mean we get to see how it works out. I am sorry your dad was obviously twisted and took it out on everyone around him, and I hope you have gotten the help you need to live well.

But that has nothing to do with Breitbart who was filled with a different kind of hate. While you never saw the karma you would have liked to see, the fact is that Breitbart died from a heart problem. And he most definitely demonstrated he had a problem in showing heart (compassion, caring, empathy) to others. He was most definitely hateful. And that creates effects, whether we see them or know about them or not.

astro - perhaps when the "good die young" their karma is complete. Long life may or may not have much to do with the causes and effects we set into motion this life. While often they do, just as often they don't, at least as far as we can perceive it. And there is much we do not perceive in life.

Realist - Karma doesn't always come with death. Some people lead a miserable life with no one to love them and that is their Karma. Perhaps that was your dad's Karma

New World Order was brought to you by the GOP, Google Bush 1 talking about it in a speech.

Not to split hairs, but the first time the "New World Economic Order" was publicly mentioned was in three policy speeches Henry Kissinger made in June 1975 as reported on the front page of one of the major newspapers in the US. I stumbled across it years ago while researching a book I was writing. Of course, that still makes it the offspring of Republican/proto-neocon thinking. Cindi, you're an ignorant hack. Go take a history lesson. And please stop posting your partisan drivel. You just make yourself look stupid.

dmeans: You know what? You and your ilk are the most self serving, hateful and ignorant species in this country. Who are you and your kind to decide that the POTUS is vermin??? I voted for PRESIDENT OBAMA and shall do so again this election.

Bawl baby all you want. Stomp your foot....it won't change things.

Belittle my President but you also belittle me!! Sorry..but your and your

kind are mindless drones. Isn't that what you imply that I am for honoring the office of POTUS?

Stretching your vitriol clear back to the Clintons? WOW....but we dare not bring up your Bush the Beloved .........hypocrite!!!!

Karma? Please see post #16.1

Judgement is not passed on the earth, but in the heavenly realms.

Death is not a punishment, it is a relief. Do not pity the dead, pity the living.

We are all born with an expiration date, that is all.

realist - please reference my answer to your comment about karma. Judgment is passed by us on us with every breath we take, every thought we think, every act we do. Otherwise there's nothing to judge. I have learned that much can be chalked up to genetics and our free will to do good or bad things as we choose. I agree with your that death is not a punishment, but I suspect for some it's no relief when they have to view the "movie of their life" on the "other side" and see what damage they did to others.