Dylan Ratigan: "If Breitbart Comes On Again, He'll Be Identified As "Race-Baiter" & "Liar"

[sabrina 1]

Many people have been outraged over the MSM legitimizing race-baiters and deceivers like Andrew Breitbart and James O'Keefe by bringing them on the air without informing the public about their history of deceptions, libel, slander and in the case O'Keefe, outright criminal activities.

The activist organization www.colorofchange.org which has launched successful campaigns against the likes of Glenn Beck eg has worked to end the practice of giving a platform to the likes of Breitbart and has apparently succeeded.



After seeing the Dylan Ratigan interview with Breitbart which you can see here, if you can stand it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NEYsYgjnrg&feature=player_embedded people were furious, and Color For Change took action as reported by Crooks and Liars:



Dylan Ratigan Tells Color of Change If Breitbart Comes On Again, He'll Be Identified As "Race-Baiter" And "Liar"

Boy, was I ready to kick in my TV when this aired. I -- and many of my fellow liberals -- furiously sent off angry emails and tweets to Dylan Ratigan for this fawning piece that ignored what a festering pustule on humanity that Breitbart truly is. James Rucker of Color of Change also found it reprehensible and led a campaign to make sure Dylan Ratigan understood how irresponsible it was to not provide context to let the average viewer know exactly how much credibility should be lent to Breitbart.

From Color Of Change's James Rucker

As you may know, ColorOfChange members led the charge to ensure that Breitbart's credibility and image weren't sanitized by ABC News or the Huffington Post. After we saw Breitbart on Ratigan's show, with Ratigan seemingly praising Breitbart as "smart" and a "sharp shooter who gets results," we were deeply concerned.

When I spoke with Ratigan, he explained what he was trying to do. He quickly agreed that Breitbart was a race-baiter, dishonest, and undeserving of credibility -- without question. And he frankly hadn't thought about the legitimizing effect that having Breitbart on his show -- without clearly labeling him as the race-baiter and deceiver he is -- would have.

......

Moving forward, Ratigan said that if he deals with Breitbart at all in the future, it will be with the explicit disclaimer that Breibart is someone who deceives and race-baits. Ratigan recognizes and respects the argument that there's a problem with giving Breitbart a mainstream platform, and he's committed to making sure that his show is not used to lend Breitbart the appearance of legitimacy and credibility.

He also spoke to MSNBC spokesperson, Jeremy Gaines and believes that they understand that presenting people like Breitbart as legitimate political analysts can only harm the integrity of the network:

Given my conversations, the writing is on the wall. I think it's quite likely you won't see Breitbart on any show of MSNBC's again, without some pretty clear disclaimers that the guy is a liar and a race-baiter.

Yes, let Breitbart and O'Keefe stay on Fox where they belong!

Kudos to www.colorofchange.org for all that they do. :applause:

[fascisthunter]

1. He'll Go Down in History as a Loser Tool

hahahaha... oh the irony the man creates for himself.

[maxsolomon]

2. No they won't. Ratigan's placating Rucker.

they'll have him on again and again, so will Bill Maher because he wants to be seen taking on the toughest the RW has got.

it just legitimizes them and their tactics.

[sabrina 1]

4. Well, he's on the record now so we'll see. Color of Change plans

to 'keep an eye on them' to make sure.

And I don't think Ratigan will want them going after his advertisers considering their success with Glenn Beck.

[Overseas]

3. K&R.

[eleny]

5. I just can't believe that Ratigan was in the dark about Breitbart's deeds and reputation

I couldn't even bring myself to watch Bill Maher last Friday night when Breitbart was a guest. Ratigan isn't fooling many.

[sabrina 1]

10. Yes, I know, he's either pretty dumb, or thought that having

a moron like Breitbart on would get ratings. Now he knows, most people just turn off or kick their TVs when they see Not-so-Brightbart.

He says he KNEW he was a race-baiter and liar but didn't want to get him all riled up. He wanted to question him about it, without having him go insane, as he often does.

I'm beginning to think that what we thought was deliberate coddling of the radical right, is just plain stupidity sometimes.

Ratigan's ratings would be sky-high IF he told Breitbart the truth about himself and his audience got to see Breitbart's insane reaction which he's famous for.

[eleny]

14. Ratigan doesn't mind grilling others

That excuse was hooey. DR was slammed into a corner and now he's all "hamina-hamina-hamina"...



:hi:

[sabrina 1]

37. Lol!

[6000eliot]

15. You missed John Waters asking if he was a teabagger top or bottom.

[eleny]

23. Found the video....

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/real-time-indie-icon-john-waters-to-andrew-breitbart-are-you-a-tea-bag-top-or-bottom/

[fascisthunter]

26. lol... THAT WAS AWESOME!!!!

[eleny]

29. John Waters has some of the best timing

[sabrina 1]

31. Lol, that was hilarious!

:rofl:

[Catherine Vincent]

39. LOL. You can tell Maher's audience is biased

They hardly laughed at Breitbart's joke.

[The Wizard]

38. Has Breitbart come out of the closet yet? (NT)

[sabrina 1]

40. That would be a great question to ask him next time they

get him on TV. He would go ballistic, but at least he would have to stop talking about how the left are all 'racers'!! He would probably have to be hospitalized :rofl:

[madamesilverspurs]

6. Have they pressured MSNBC

to get rid of Pat Buchannan? He's a well-known racist, too.

-

[sabrina 1]

30. I don't know. Remember it was the Breitbart gang and whoever

funds them who went after Van Jones, so I imagine Color of Change has a personal reason for going after them. But I wouldn't be surprised if they have tried.

[AtomicKitten]

7. The douche is also a deather.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/02/breitbart-bin-laden-deathers/

[sabrina 1]

32. And he apparently tweeted back to say he isn't!

He's getting sensitive these days. :-)

[calimary]

8. Glad this was brought to his attention, maybe it got through his thick skull.

"And he frankly hadn't thought about the legitimizing effect that having Breitbart on his show -- without clearly labeling him as the race-baiter and deceiver he is -- would have."

No DUH, Dylan! What the hell is the matter with you??? Honest to God, this really hadn't occurred to you?

VERY glad it was brought to his attention, especially if he's a lunkhead, or he was trying to slip something past his viewers. Think we're not paying attention, Dylan? Think again. Or how 'bout - just THINK?

:banghead:

[Spinny Liberal]

9. Um then why

did he have Breitbart on in the first place?

[sabrina 1]

18. He claims he was trying to get him to explain why

he, Breitbart et al, focus so much on people like Shirley Sherrod and ACORN and the NAACP rather than on what he and the teabaggers CLAIM to be most concerned about, the Banks and Wall St and Bailouts eg. He claims he did know Breitbart is a race baiter and a liar, and he was trying to expose that by asking the kind of questions he asked.

If he really thinks you can be that nice and subtle with the likes of Breitbart, then he's clueless. Most people would just see that and view Breitbart as legitimate. He says that was not his intention but he understands now how it could happen that way.

[Spinny Liberal]

20. I saw the interview

And you are right about the subtlety. All he did was bring up a TEA Party founder who said it was all about fiscal Conservatism. Of course, Breitbart said, "I agree." He didn't bring up specific incidents of racism in the party for him to address.

[karnac]

11. the complaint is that breitbart is SELECT what he complains about

that is absolutely true. but WHO isn't? how often here on DU do we complain about the discretions of the left or democrats? do we "generally" only complain about the stupidities/wrongness of the right?

arguably, one can say there is more to complain on the right. but do you even TRY about the left? or do you wait till it's so egregious that you have no choice? interesting.,

There is a role for a Media Matters. it is not their job to point out the indiscretions of the left/democrats.

So don't be surprised that breitbart is selective.
try
go ahead. be angry. just don't be surprised. we do it too.

That what makes democracy. Both sides outraged. Hopefully sanity wins out in the end.

[sabrina 1]

13. We don't lie or racebait or edit tapes to deceive people.

We ARE selective, and yes, mostly do go after the right, but we do it with facts. Breitbart and O'Keefe do it with lies and deception, as with Shirley Sherrod eg.

[eleny]

16. +1

[karnac]

17. Yes we do! we are selective with facts.

Since when do ANY of our media friends dont do otherwise?

Have you EVERY heard about media matters put up ANYTHING conservative/repug right UNLESS he/she denounces at least some aspect of his side?

I never saw Olbermann, EVER put up something a repuglican congressman said in FULL context. that would take 5-30 minutes. no. because HE decided the context had not enough merit. HE decided. not YOU, the listener.

Does mike malloy EVER present the opposite side in a credible manner? NEVER.

Does Maddow? do so? no.

when you see it done is is most likely by the the seediest the ugliest, the most racist. Screw putting up the Repug/conservative that can actually defend his position and is not batwing crazy! bad for ratings.

nothing wrong with that. that's politics. thats feeding the minions that pay the advertising bill.

[sabrina 1]

19. Again, I have never seen Rachel Maddow or Olbermann

eg, alter a video to completely change the context of what was said in order to make someone look bad.

Also, you are forgetting why we now have the Maddow and Olbermann and Ed shows. It is because for years the far right dominated the media, on radio and with Fox TV. There was no one responding to their lies and propaganda.

The only way to counter it, after more than a decade of giving them a complete free rein, was to take them on. They started this kind of partisan programming.

I wish we could find some rational Republicans and talk show hosts that we could have actual discussions with but all we have are rightwingers who hate anyone who disagree with them and who go from there. They attack 'liberal's 24/7 and talk very little about policies. I don't believe they care about this country. It's all just a big fight to them between the left and the right.

[Erose999]

22. I think Olbermann does a well enough job of explaining things in context. I mean he doesn't edit

videos to the point that people appear to say the opposite of what they actually said. He doesn't do bullshit "hidden camera" hitjobs. He's never been arrested for entering a senators office to illegally install a wiretap, or called on on a hairbrained and sexist plot to seduce a reporter.

To hell with BriteFart. I hope Shirley Sherrod takes every red cent he has, and that he finds himself penniless and alone on Skid Row.

[sabrina 1]

34. Exactly! There is simply no comparison

There are facts, which is what you get from Rachel, Keith and Ed, and lies, which is what Breitbart and O'Keefe rely on.

I wish Democrats would not cave into them the way they do though, like firing Van Jones, and voting to defund ACORN. Are they afraid of these weasels or what? It's disgusting and gives them far more power than they should have.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

25. "we"

"our media friends"

:eyes:

[Blue-Jay]

33. It's almost like they're not trying anymore.

[fascisthunter]

27. um, no

[Pigheaded]

28. This is why I prefer BBC or AlJazeera for my infoNT

NT

[AlabamaLibrul]

12. Kudos to James Rucker and Color of Change.

AND Dylan Ratigan for being a stand-up guy. I followed him from Fast Money to MSNBC and he hasn't disappointed.

[Erose999]

21. Listening to the interview now. Seems like the damage has already been done. All BriteFart has do

now is just say that M$NBC is intolerant of conservative views (or some other bullshit like that).

They need to put him face to face with Maddow instead of a milquetoast like Ratigan or O'Donnel. Maddow will eat his goddamn lunch.

[sabrina 1]

24. Yes, that's exactly what Breitbart is trying to do.

Here's one of his quotes on Color of Change's campaign against him.

This is what the left does, they don’t believe in free speech. They want to shut up Fox News, they want to shut up people that disagree with them, they want to shut up the Tea Party

Lol, you got his number. Color of Change's Van Jones is a favorite target of the Breitbart/O'Keefe gang. They went after Huffington Post also for featuring him as a columnist there and ABC when they were going to use him as a commentator for the election. So, he's pretty mad at them. But his record is clear, he and O'Keefe always have a racial proponent to their little, lying stunts. ACORN, Van Jones, Black women getting abortions, Shirley Sherrod, the NAACP etc. They are obsessed and I'm glad to see something being done about it. The media has given them a free pass until now.

[ChoppinBroccoli]

35. This A-Hole Was On "Make It Plain" With Mark Thompson (Sirius Left) Tonight Too

He filibustered the ENTIRE time. He never let the host speak. He never let the callers speak. Whenever ANYONE tried to speak, he literally just started shouting out words so that nobody could be heard. At one point, he called Mark Thompson a "Racer" (his term for someone who blames everything bad that happens to him on racism), and when Mark tried to delve into that subject, he just started yelling, "Racer! Racer! You're a Racer! Racer! You're a Racer! Racer! Racer! You proved my point! You're a Racer! You Racer! You're a Racer! Thanks for proving my point for me! Racer! Racer! You're a Racer!" And then he did it again when a call was taken. The caller didn't even get out his name before Breitbart was shouting "Racer!" over and over so the caller couldn't speak.

I don't know how anyone, even people who agree with him, could take him seriously. He clearly has no ability to defend his positions, and that's why he chooses to go the Faux News route and just yell over the people who would try to shoot him down. It was actually pretty embarrassing.

[sabrina 1]

36. Wow, he really is nuts, isn't he? Which is why I always

wondered why the MSM gave him any time at all, especially presenting him as if he was normal. Eg, when Ted Kennedy died, he tweeted some of the vilest garbage, filled with hatred about Kennedy, it was like the rantings of an insane man. Yet, the media never challenges him on his raving lunacy.

And Ratigan handled him with kid gloves, admitting he didn't want to get him riled, when getting him riled is EXACTLY what they should do if they are going to give him all this airtime. They won't have to tell the public how crazy he is. It will be obvious.

I'm glad that Mark Thomson got him going. Now, everyone listening knows what a lunatic he is.

They are obsessed with 'race'. They hate the fact that racism is no longer acceptable. So, they came up with this convoluted and what they thought, brilliant idea to 'expose' the left as as the real racists. In all of O'Keefe's stunts there is a racial component. Under the pretext of 'exposing the left' they use all the old race baiting techniques, eg, in the ACORN stunt, they chose a pimp and a prostitute who were planning on using young girls for money, because 'wink', wink', everyone knows that African Americans would be familiar with pimps and prositutes!! It's really not even subtle. I could not believe the media was going along with it. Shame on all of them.

[the_chinuk]

41. Put 'em On FOX where they belong? No, how about …

… putting them in the unemployment lines, where they belong. The campaign against Breitbart and O'Keefe won't be complete until they only way they can get employment is to put in applications everywhere and sit by the phone while nobody calls them back.

Just like a lot of people I know.

Let them get along in the Real World, not Planet Supportive Conservative, let them make their way in the world they created for the rest of us. That, my friends, is TRUe justice, and nothing less.

On second thought, let O'Keefe become a checker and Breitbart become a greeter at WalMart.

That way, at least, I'll never have to see or hear from them again.

[sabrina 1]

44. I can't say I disagree with you. The world would be a better

place if these sick weasels were never heard from in the first place. It shows how low our standards are that they get any airtime whatsoever. And how much money is being poured into the destruction of this country by far-right, wealthy fascists like the Koch brothers, Scaiffe et al. Without that financing, O'Keefe et al would never be heard from.

[davidwparker]

42. Laura Flanders called him a con man on Real Time last

week. It was good. The comment was. That particular Real Time stunk really badly.

[RamboLiberal]

43. Color of change needs to go after CBS next

Andrew Breitbart on mainstream media's "contempt" for Americans

Conservative publisher Andrew Brietbart sat down for an extensive interview with CBSNews.com Friday in which he discussed his disdain for the mainstream media, offered his perspective on the Republican presidential field, said President Obama should have released a post-mortem photo of Osama bin Laden, and complained that men have been turned into eunuchs by political correctness.

Breitbart, author of "Righteous Indignation," said reporters don't respect the people they see as "middle Americans from flyover country."

People in the mainstream media and Hollywood, he said, see such people as "heathens" who are "beneath contempt."

Breitbart said the United States should move toward a British model in which mainstream media outlets acknowledge that "of course we have a liberal bent, everybody knows that." He said the objectivity claimed by mainstream media outlets does not exist.



Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20060610-503544.html#ixzz1LhjJu0bT

[sabrina 1]

45. What is wrong with them?? He must have some kind of

highly funded agency that promotes him, because if he was just a regular blogger, no one would ever seek him out to put on the air.

He should at least be asked who is funding him. He really is a very emotionally disturbed person who is more in need of psychological help than most people I know.

And yes, Color of Change needs to contact CBS also.

I see he's still baiting the media with that insane 'liberal media' taunt. How about we just have a media that reports facts? That is what they do not want, facts. Which is why they use this 'liberal media' garbage to silence the press, to keep from reporting the truth.

[NICO9000]

46. Looks like he's channeling his inner Cheney in the pic with this thread

Grrrrrrr, grrrrrr, grrrrr! I'm a mean little pussy - fear me!

:evilgrin: