Ok, we already knew that Breitbart was insane, but his article in on the Washington Time's website (I don't know whether it was in the printed version or not) removes any possible doubt or pretense that he was anything other than delusional.
Put down anything you might be drinking because it's pretty good right off the bat:
The Democratic Party's attitude to elections is admirable: Win. And recent history has shown it will do anything to do so.
When, if not now, will Republicans develop such a fighting spirit?
Except for that "let's try to keep people who probably vote for Democrats from voting" thing.
Breitbart then packs enough stupid and crazy into his article that I'm surprised that the Washington Times web server hasn't collapsed into a black hole yet.
He starts out with the old dead horse ACORN, making them part of a new evil axis of evil trinity, along with "pop culture" and the - and he puts it in quotes - "education system" which makes "[makes] 'D' the default choice on Election Day."
I'm so glad that he thinks that society should be kept dumb so that they'll keep voting Republican.
So how far do Democrats go to win elections? Why, they'd be willing to get everyone stoned if they could:
Democrats brazenly take policy positions - think government services and even amnesty for illegal immigrants - not because they are the right thing to do, but because they are time-tested demographic bribes. Forget cigarettes and beer, Democrats would distribute needles, methadone, medical marijuana and biscotti in voter goodie bags if they could get away with it.
People everywhere would vote for Democrats if only they could get free drugs along the way, which are of course morally equivalent to rational immigration reform.
Edit: Gangster Octopus makes a good point too. Republicans offer bribes too: they just offer tax cuts without bothering to cut spending in response. So they're basically offering to give people their cake and let them eat it too.
Oh yeah, and it's the Democrats who separate people into their separate races in order to win. The GOP is just trying to treat everyone in a color-blind fashion, but those damn Democrats just won't let that race thing go.
So what has Obama done to further consolidate Democrat's obviously illegitimate electoral majority?
One of the first things President Obama attempted to do after taking office was to take control of the Census Bureau, an act that could redraw congressional districts and ensure Democratic majorities for years to come.
Because, apparently, only Republicans are allowed to run the census, regardless of whoever is, you know, President.
And of course he's doing this along with his other evil liberal partners MoveOn and George Soros and "the ghost of Saul Alinsky" (I had to look up who he even was).
So who all support Obama? Well, how about this:
Self-avowed anarchists and open socialists proudly brandished Obama placards at well-attended May Day parades.
Um, wouldn't those two groups be diametrically opposed to each other? How can one be fore highly consolidated state power and anarchy at the same time?
Breitbart also apparently fails to grasp the idea of democracy:
One would be hard pressed to name a Democratic policy that is motivated more by principle than by winning.
You know, parties usually "win" because they have "policies" that people "support" and "vote" for. You know, unless we should institute a dictatorship because those pesky voters don't know what's good for them and can't be trusted to make sound decisions.
He then complains that the GOP is getting all the exposure (oh wait, we're complaining about that too!)
With Democrats holding comfortable majorities in the House and Senate, as well as controlling the executive branch, it's only logical that the mainstream media to focus their scrutiny on Mr. Limbaugh, ex-Rep. Tom DeLay, former President George W. Bush and Sarah Palin, the governor of one of the least populous states. Right?
Except, of course, a good bulk of this "scrutiny" is actually "letting them talk without opposition and refusing to actually fact check anything they say." I'm at least glad that he admits that Palin is irrelevant, though.
However, perhaps nothing has to put into question whether Breitbart has even been paying attention for the past....15 years, than this quote:
Most disturbing, Republicans seem to think Democrats can be their friends. Not only does the Republican Party not have a Ronald Reagan, the Democratic Party has no Tip O'Neill. Washington doesn't have end-of-the-day, cross-party social sessions over single-malt scotches. There is no bipartisanship that doesn't end in Republicans acquiescing in defeat of their core principles.
Yeah, that's why the Republicans are filibustering everything, because they're too weak in the knees to oppose anything the Democrats are doing.
Update
Oh yeah, the link if anyone dares read the whole thing:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/...
