Home » Posts tagged with » america (Page 76)

Science teams in both Europe and America are reporting promising new data in the hunt for the elusive Higgs boson particle —the so-called “God particle” believed to give mass to matter that remains the only particle predicted by the Standard Model of physics that has not yet been seen in…

Continue reading …

Now that’s harsh. Gossip Girl star Leighton Meester is suing her own mom. Meester, who plays snarky Blair, says she gave her mom money for medicine and treatments for little brother Lex, who suffers from major medical issues, reports TMZ . But her mother used it instead for plastic surgery, Botox,…

Continue reading …
ShowBiz Minute: Winehouse, Box Office, Glee

Winehouse’s mother: ‘She seemed out of it’; ‘Captain America’ knocks Harry from No. 1 spot; Producers: Kurt, Finn, Rachel not done with ‘Glee’, (July 25)

Continue reading …
John Boehner’s Double-Dealing on the Debt Ceiling

enlarge If it appears that John Boehner is suffering from multiple personality disorder over the debt ceiling stand-off , that’s because he is. Torn between his duty to the national interest as Speaker of the House and to the Tea Party caucus that put him there, for months Boehner has ping-ponged between truth and lies on the debt ceiling. Long before he breached faith with the President on Friday, John Boehner tried to have it both ways on virtually every aspect of the debt ceiling crisis manufactured by the Republican Party he struggles to lead. As Jed Lewison documented, Speaker Sybil couldn’t get his story straight on Friday’s walkout. While he insisted during his press conference afterward that “we had an agreement on a revenue number,” in a letter that same day to House Republicans Boehner insisted that “A deal was never reached, and was never really close.” As it turns out, John Boehner’s duplicity started long before he picked up the Speaker’s gavel. In the wake of the Republicans’ overwhelming triumph at the polls last fall, Speaker-to-be Boehner was his party’s voice of reason on the debt ceiling. As the Wall Street Journal reported on November 18 (“Boehner Warns GOP on Debt Ceiling”), Boehner pressed his newly enlarged Republican caucus on the need to raise the debt ceiling and so protect the full faith and credit of the United States. “I’ve made it pretty clear to them that as we get into next year, it’s pretty clear that Congress is going to have to deal with this,” Mr. Boehner, who is slated to become House speaker in January, told reporters. “We’re going to have to deal with it as adults,” he said, in what apparently are his most explicit comments to date. “Whether we like it or not, the federal government has obligations and we have obligations on our part.” If an increase in the current debt limit of $14.3 trillion does not pass, it would suggest the country may not meet its obligations and would shake the financial system. It could rock the bond market, rattle the dollar and scare away foreign buyers of U.S. debt. In January , Boehner echoed Paul Ryan’s warning that “you can’t not raise the debt ceiling” and Lindsey Graham’s dire prediction that failure to do so would produce “collapse and calamity throughout the world.” As Speaker Boehner put it then: “That would be a financial disaster, not only for our country but for the worldwide economy. Remember, the American people on Election Day said, ‘we want to cut spending and we want to create jobs.’ And you can’t create jobs if you default on the federal debt.” But that same month , Boehner was also insisting President Obama would have to make concessions to Republicans on the debt ceiling that George W. Bush, needless to say, never faced: The American people will not stand for such an increase unless it is accompanied by meaningful action by the President and Congress to cut spending and end the job-killing spending binge in Washington. After bringing the government to the brink of a shutdown over budget cuts demanded by the GOP in April, a newly confident Speaker Boehner made abundantly clear he would join the hardliners in the House and Senate holding the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling hostage. As Politico reported, Boehner set out to prove ” there’s no daylight between the Tea Party and me “: House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), fresh off the budget talks, told donors this weekend that if Obama wants an up or down vote on the debt ceiling he’s not going to get it. “The president says I want you to send me a clean bill,” Boehner said. “Well guess what, Mr. President, not a chance you’re going to get a clean bill.” “There will not be an increase in the debt limit without something really, really big attached to it,” he continued in a clip of his remarks at a fundraiser that was played during “Face the Nation.” That really, really big “something” turned out to be the draconian Paul Ryan budget . After refusing to endorse the Ryan Roadmap during the 2010 campaign, John Boehner joined 234 House Republicans and 40 GOP Senators in voting for the Ryan plan. But Ryan’s blueprint didn’t merely privatize Medicare, slash Medicaid and deliver yet another tax cut windfall for the wealthy; it would also add another $6 trillion in debt over the next decade . As a result, the GOP’s own Ryan budget not only violates the “Cut, Cap and Balance Act” spending targets they just voted for this week. It would also require the Republicans to raise the ceiling repeatedly in the future. In a rare moment of candor, Speaker John Boehner admitted as much. As Reuters detailed, Speaker Boehner told a gathering of Buckeye state Tea Partiers in April that the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling must be raised now – and not for the last time: The private April 25 meeting was convened by the Speaker of the House of Representatives at the request of Tea Party leaders, who were seething over recent Republican compromises, most notably on the 2011 budget. One of the 25 or so leaders, all from Boehner’s district, asked him if Republicans would raise America’s $14.3 trillion debt limit. According to half a dozen attendees interviewed by Reuters, the most powerful Republican in Washington said “yes.” “And we’re going to have to raise it again in the future,” he added. With the mass retirement of America’s Baby Boomers, he explained, it would take 20 years to balance the U.S. budget and 30 years after that to erase the nation’s huge fiscal deficit. If Congress doesn’t raise the debt limit by August 2nd, Speaker Boehner agreed with President Obama that the federal government could not guarantee that Social Security checks would sent out as required. And as Boehner explained just 10 days ago , that’s just the beginning of the dire consequences if the Treasury’s August 2 deadline is missed: “Missing August 2nd could spook the market. And you could have a real catastrophe. Nobody wants that to happen.” As it turns out, that’s precisely what many of his Republican colleagues want to happen. And in late June , Boehner joined the ” default deniers ” claiming the Obama administration’s warnings about that early August deadline were “scare tactics” and “outright blatant lies”: “Dealing with this deficit problem is far more important than meeting some artificial date created by the Treasury secretary.” Of course, John Boehner played a vital role in the creation of the massive national debt he now routinely decries. Leave aside for the moment that Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt and increased the debt ceiling 17 times . Forget also George W. Bush nearly doubled the debt or that the Bush tax cuts were the biggest driver of debt over the past decade, and if made permanent, would be continue to be so over the next. Pay no attention to the federal tax burden now at its lowest level in 60 years or income inequality at its highest level in 80 years after a decade of plummeting rates for America’s supposed job creators who don’t create jobs . Ignore for now that Republican majorities voted seven times to raise the debt ceiling under President Bush and the current GOP leadership team voted a combined 19 times to bump the debt limit $4 trillion during his tenure. Look away from the two unfunded wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the budget-busting Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 and the Medicare prescription drug program because, after all, John Boehner voted for all of it . Alas, that was then and this is now. And now, a Democrat is in the White House. Which means for John Boehner, raising the debt ceiling at all is now a ” concession .” As UPI reported two weeks ago: At a news conference Monday before heading to the White House for a meeting, Boehner said the only Republican concession Obama should expect is a vote raising the federal debt limit itself. “Most Americans would say that a ‘balanced’ approach is a simple one — the administration gets its debt-limit increase and the American people get their spending cuts and their reforms,” he said. “And adding tax increases to the equation doesn’t ‘balance’ anything.” Not, that is, for the unbalanced John Boehner. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Continue reading …

For those who felt like you went to school with a high quota of douchebags, here’s your confirmation: The Rogers & Littleton Guide to America’s Douchiest Colleges is the new authoritative guide to institutions of high education where a sheepskin amounts to a certificate in lifelong douchebaggery. The top five,…

Continue reading …
Norway terrorist Anders Breivik leaves written, video manifestoes to explain his motives: He’s a right-wing cultural warrior

Click here to view this media Anders Breivik — unlike his 92 (and counting) victims — is still very much alive and with us, so we will no doubt hear more from the man as his eventual trials progress to explain why he embarked on the worst terrorist attack in Norway’s history on Friday. And he is already explaining himself through his attorneys : Breivik’s lawyer, Geir Lippestad, said the 32-year-old accepts responsibility for his actions. “He thought it was gruesome having to commit these acts, but in his head they were necessary,” Lippestad said. Breivik claimed that he acted alone, wanting to attack Norwegian society in order to change it, Sponheim said. But police say the investigation still open to the possibility that Breivik had help. Moreover, Breivik already created an intentional record, perhaps to leave behind should he not survive the attacks, explaining his motives, as we noted yesterday in discussing his online postings. Now there’s more: namely, a pair of manifestoes. The first one is a 1,500-word document he claims he worked on for nine years, titled “A European Declaration of Independence” (VND.OPENXMLFORMATS-OFFICEDOCUMENT.WORDPROCESSINGML.DOCUMENT – 4.45 MB) . The second is a video, the entirety of which appears below the fold. From Canada’s National Post : Written under the name Andrew Berwick but believed to have been authored by the terror suspect, Anders Behring Breivik, it calls for a violent right wing revolution across Europe “before our major cities are completely demographically overwhelmed by Muslims.” The lengthy text, which is written entirely in English and displays a singular obsession with Muslims, is focused on European countries but also mentions Canada several times. It cites Canada as a country that uses hate speech laws “to silence infidels” who criticize Islam. The author claims to have spent nine years and hundreds of thousands of Euros on the manifesto. “Breivik’s goal with the book appears to be to convince others of his worldview and draw others to the cause,” the U.S.-based SITE said. The book, as well as a video in which Mr. Breivik appears holding an automatic weapon, were both titled “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence.” The white supremacist manifesto ends with a sign off that is chilling in retrospect. “I believe this will be my last entry. It is now Fri July 22nd, 12.51.” Breivik believed his rampage was the means to “market” these ideas — and no doubt they will gain many more readers than they ever would have. Having read and reviewed them, however, I’m fairly confident that the only thing he’ll have achieved is to permanently discredit views like his — which in fact are fairly widespread on the Right, both in Europe and in the USA. Breivik’s manifestoes remind me a great deal of the manifesto left behind by an American right-wing terrorist who tried to embark on a similar rampage targeting as many liberals as he could kill, but who was considerably less successful: Jim David Adkisson, the Knoxville church shooter, who exhorted his readers to “Go Kill Liberals”. His manifesto was functionally the logical absurdio ad reductum of the hatred spewed daily by the Fox News talking heads and radio pundits whose works filled his library — whose wording it rather closely reflected in the leadup to the exhortations to violence. Likewise, Breivik’s work is largely a regurgitation of ideas and claims that have been circulating on the Right for a long time, including mainstream sources such as Fox News and Andrew Breitbart . There’s nothing original here — except that he, like Adkisson, simply takes the “logic” (as it were) of the cultural warriors he parrots and ratchets it up the next logical step into violent action. Chip Berlet has been analyzing the written manifesto , and has some keen observations: Breivik thought Cultural Marxists=multiculturalists=Islamization of Europe. This racist right-wing conspiracy theory is tied to the Islamophobic “Demographic Winter” thesis. In his online posts, Breivik considered himself a cultural conservative and condemned “Cultural Marxism.” The idea of “Cultural Marxism” on the political right is an antisemitic conspiracy theory claiming that a small group of Marxist Jews formed the Frankfurt School and set out to destroy Western Culture through a conspiracy to promote multiculturalism and collectivist economic theories. Breivik’s video is really just a recap of his written manifesto: Click here to view this media Now comes the hard part: Convincing authorities, once again, that right-wing extremist terrorism really is a problem worth addressing adequately — both in Europe and the USA. As the Hindu Times reports, the problem has been steadily worsening in Europe and has been largely ignored: Europol’s 2010 report, in fact, presented a considerably less sanguine assessment of the situation. Noting the 2008 and 2009 arrests of British fascists for possession of explosives and toxins, the report flagged the danger from “individuals motivated by extreme right-wing views who act alone.” The report also pointed to the heating-up of a climate of hatred: large attendances at white-supremacist rock concerts, the growing muscle of fascist groups like Blood and Honour and the English Defence League, fire-bomb attacks on members of the Roma minority in several countries, and military training to the cadre. Yet, the authors of the 2011 Europol report saw little reason for alarm. In a thoughtful 2008 report, a consortium of Dutch organisations noted that “right-wing terrorism is not always labelled as such.” Because “right-wing movements use the local traditions, values, and characteristics to define their own identity,” the report argued, “many non-rightist citizens recognize and even sympathize with some of the organization’s political opinions”— a formulation which will be familiar to Indians, where communal violence is almost never referred to as a form of mass terrorism. Thomas Sheehan, who surveyed the Italian neo-fascist resurgence before the 1980 bombings, arrived at much the same conclusion decades ago. “In 1976 and again in 1978,” he wrote in the New York Review of Books, “judges in Rome, Turin and Milan fell over each other in their haste to absolve neo-fascists of crimes ranging from murdering a policeman to ‘reconstituting Fascism’ [a crime under post-war Italian law]”. “When it comes to fascist terrorism,” Mr. Sheehan wryly concluded, “Italian authorities seem to be a bit blind in the right eye.” The same could be said of American authorities, including the Obama administration, which actually cut its Homeland Security unit devoted to tracking right-wing extremism. The problem may well originate with the media, which have steadfastly ignored the problem , thereby creating no political constituency for addressing it. That may be the place to start pushing for a solution as well — especially before we get our own homegrown Anders Breiviks, acting out to defend white America from immigrant invaders.

Continue reading …
Paul Krugman Calls Out David Brooks for Playing the ‘Both Sides’ Game on Government Obstruction

Click here to view this media I was thankful to see Paul Krugman get some air time on PBS’s Charlie Rose on this Friday’s show, but sadly he got stuck debating David Brooks, who blathered on endlessly in the segment previous to what I clipped here, calling austerity measures reasonable and chastising Republicans for being unwilling to strike a deal with President Obama on spending cuts during this debt ceiling debate debacle. Krugman did a nice job of shooting down Brooks’ talking points defending the astroturf “tea partiers” on the size of government being too large and with pointing out the extreme level of obstructionism we’ve seen from Republicans since Obama took office. He also expressed his concerns that many of us have with President Obama governing way too far to the right and with being way too accommodating to Republicans while this madness from the other party is going on. ROSE: There are two questions. One, if you look at the dysfunctionality of government in this case, who’s responsible for them? BROOKS: I don’t pretend it’s symmetrical… I wouldn’t say it’s symmetrical here. I do think the president and the Democrats have been much more flexible than the Republicans have been. I say that with a little pain maybe, but that’s just simply the case. The president, to his credit has made his allies extremely uncomfortable, and if you were around in Washington yesterday when the entire Senate Democratic caucus erupted in fury, you saw that first hand. And so I think the Republicans are… it’s a good short term negotiating strategy, but they are not seizing a deal which should be out there for them. I’m sort of mystified why if the president is offering a $3 trillion in the reduction of government, why they’re not seizing upon that and potentially settling either for nothing or maybe $500 million. I mean, it’s just mystifying to me why they don’t take this deal. ROSE: Well, then take a guess. What’s the answer? BROOKS: Well, there are a lot of things. One, they will tell you they go home and nobody wants any more taxes. We ran on that, we pledged it. Second, and I think this part is bipartisan, the hatred is so strong, there is great personal resistance to doing a deal with the devil. And they regard Obama, or Boehner and Cantor as the devil. There’s just sort of this emotional resistance to getting in a room, shaking their hand and having your picture taken. And so even beneath the substance of it there’s a great deal of emotional resistance, and when… even when the president makes an offer, which is a pretty good offer for Republicans, they’re always looking for the weaknesses in it. (crosstalk) KRUGMAN: This is a longer term story. It’s not just what’s happened during these negotiations. The underlying reason we have dysfunctional politics right now is the radicalization of the Republican Party. I mean, Bruce Bartlett, a Republican, or maybe now an excommunicated Republican just said basically Obama is a moderate conservative. He’s basically governing to the right of Richard Nixon. But what’s happened is that the Republican Party has gone so far off into an extreme right wing position that we have gridlock because basically one party cannot say yes. They cannot say yes to anything that might be coming from the other party. In a basic sense they don’t accept the legitimacy of government by the other party. BROOKS: To be fair to them, they would say that we’ve had government at a certain level of GDP for decade after decades, and roughly the same, and over the last couple of years its leapt up significantly, so if we want to bring it back to that level, to the 2008 level (crosstalk) that’s the argument they would make. KRUGMAN: David, all of that is the recession. All of that is that the ratio of government to GDP is higher because GDP is down and safety net programs; unemployment insurance and Medicaid and a few other programs that respond to hard times are up. If you take that out, there has been no increase in the size of government. That’s an entire myth. BROOKS: There is a long term trend of health care spending. I mean this is, and Paul and I have come back to this a couple of times in this conversation… KRUGMAN: Right. BROOKS: Health care spending is the problem. KRUGMAN: Yeah. BROOKS: And so there are two wildly different views of how you address that issue. And Republicans look out and see health care spending increasing, swallowing up everything else and they say we need something like the Ryan plan in order to fundamentally reform the structure of the program. And that’s not a radically irresponsible position. It’s a position you can disagree with, but it doesn’t make them loons, I would say. KRUGMAN: Well… we can go on. We should also point out that we have an enormous amount of obstructionism at all levels. Right? There’s a tremendous number of unfilled positions. To a large extent Obama is trying to govern now with a hollow administration because he can’t get officials approved. We had my former MIT colleague, Nobel Laureate Peter Diamond rejected for the Federal Reserve Board. This is a crazy… uhh… this is what is making America ungovernable. It is the extremism of one party. You actually have an extremely accommodating, I would say alarmingly accommodating Democratic president, but a Republican Party that just won’t deal. I found Brooks’ doublespeak on these “tea party” Republicans amusing – and I use that term loosely, because there is no “tea party”, it’s the extreme right wing of the Republican base – where he had to admit that they’re completely incapable of governing because of their deep-seated hatred for President Obama, but he felt compelled to defend them anyway after that admission. Naturally Brooks played the Villager game of “both sides” are equal in this segment where he tried to pretend that there is some visceral hatred by Democrats of Boehner and Cantor that somehow compares to the right wing literally losing their minds from day one after our first black president got elected, which is just nonsense. When Brooks can find some Democrats out there with posters of Boehner and Cantor as witch doctors with bones through their noses or something similarly crazed and just downright hateful someone let me know, will they?

Continue reading …
Kristof Claims Republicans Are ‘Biggest Threat To America’s National Security’

Latest dispatch from the Department of Dissent Is No Longer Patriotic: because they won't raise taxes, Republican “maniacs” are more dangerous to US national security than al Qaeda. That is the view of Nicholas Kristof, as expressed in his New York Times column of today, “Republicans, Zealots and Our Security.” View excerpts after the jump. From the Kristof column [emphasis added]: If China or Iran threatened our national credit rating and tried to drive up our interest rates, or if they sought to damage our education system, we would erupt in outrage. Well, wake up to the national security threat. Only it’s not coming from abroad, but from our own domestic extremists . . . the blunt truth is that t he biggest threat to America’s national security this summer doesn’t come from China, Iran or any other foreign power. It comes from budget machinations, and budget maniacs , at home. So let’s remember not only the national security risks posed by Iran and Al Qaeda . Let’s also focus on the risks, however unintentional, from domestic zealots. Kristof has apparently chosen not to heed President Obama's pious prayers for “civil debate.”

Continue reading …
Captain America Harry Potter

Episode111_WTF_CarmageDUD.mp4 Action Movie Montage – “Derezzed” Daft Punk & Glitch Mob Remix (HD) Films 2011 [Madjimmy Edit] DestinyWRice says: I wanna go see Captain America , Harry Potter .. Same night .

Continue reading …
Norway terrorist Breivik was an ardent subscriber to theories of ‘Cultural Marxism’

enlarge We’re starting to get a clearer portrait of Anders Breivik, the right-wing extremist whose rampage in Norway yesterday took at least 95 lives, the vast majority of them young people attending a youth camp. The picture that’s emerging is of an ordinary right-wing man stoked into anger by theories about “Cultural Marxism” that originated on the anti-Semitic far right but have in recent years been spreading into more mainstream venues, promoted by the likes of Andrew Breitbart, among others. You can read for yourself Breivik’s postings to the Norwegian site Document.No (PDF – 211.61 KB) (translated here), which should give you a clear enough picture. Chip Berlet, who specializes in analyzing right-wing extremism, has been going through them, and here are his initial thoughts: Based on online posts apparently by Anders Behring Breivik circulated in Norway, the alleged terrorist opposed multiculturalism and Muslim immigrants in Norway. Breivik championed opposition to “Cultural Marxism,” a right-wing antisemitic concept developed primarily by William Lind of the US-based Free Congress Foundation, but also the Lyndon LaRouche network. … The idea is that a small group of Marxist Jews who formed the Frankfurt School set out to destroy Western Culture through a conspiracy to promote multiculturalism and collectivist economic theories. A key “Cultural Marxist” guru William Lind spoke at a Holocaust Denial conference, and worked at Free Congress Fdn. which sponsored a former Nazi collaborator, the late Laszlo Pasztor. See Bill Berkowitz article on Cultural Marxism for Intelligence Report at SPLC website . Bill Berkowitz reported on “Cultural Marxism” as a far-right organizing concept for the SPLC back in the summer of 2003: At the core of the far right’s concept of cultural Marxism are the Jews. Lind made this plain in June 2002, when he gave a speech on the subject to a Washington Holocaust denial conference hosted by the anti-Semitic journal, Barnes Review. Although he told his audience that his Free Congress Foundation was “not among those who question whether the Holocaust occurred,” he went on to lay out just who the cultural conspirators were: “These guys,” he explained, “were all Jewish.” Like Jews in general, the Frankfurt School makes a convenient antagonist — one that is basically seen as antithetical to all things American. The school, says social psychology professor Richard Lichtman of the Berkeley-based Wright Institute, is “a convenient target that very few people really know anything about. “By grounding their critique in Marxism and using the Frankfurt School, [cultural conservatives] make it seem like it’s quite foreign to anything American. It takes on a mysterious cast and translates as an incomprehensible, anti-American, foreign movement that is only interested in undermining the U.S.,” he said. “The idea being transmitted is that we are being infected from the outside.” Not everyone who uses the cultural Marxism construct sees Jews in general at the center of the plot. But a 1998 book by California State University-Long Beach evolutionary biologist Kevin MacDonald — one of just two witnesses to testify on behalf of Holocaust denier David Irving in a famous 2000 libel trial — makes plain that Jews in general are implicated in what is seen as an attack on the West. In The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Social Movements, MacDonald says that while all Jews are not guilty, the movements he attacks are indeed “Jewishly motivated.” In a chapter devoted to the Frankfurt School, MacDonald suggests that Jews criticize non-Jews’ desire to form “cohesive, nationalistic, corporate gentile groups based on conformity to group norms” — with Frankfurt School principals painting this desire as a psychopathology — while they hypocritically pursue cohesiveness in their own group. As Berlet explains: The trope of Cultural Marxism combines this view of political economy with a narrow view of Christian superiority and an ethnocentric White Nationalism. In both sectors–Christian superiority and ethnocentric White Nationalism–there is a great fear of Muslim immigration. . Among right-wing Christians who fear Muslims there are some that see Islam as the false religion of the Antichrist in the End Times in their idiosyncratic reading of Biblical prophecy. This apocalyptic view is widespread in some areas. For example a poll found that 15% of Republicans in New Jersey though President Barack Obama might be the “Antichrist” who is Satan’s chief henchman in the End Times. Another 14% were convinced Obama was the Antichrist. Whether it is based on religious or secular themes, the idea of a vast longstanding conspiracy of Cultural Marxists to destroy Western Culture creates apocalyptic aggression, in which believers in the conspiracy theory decide to act first against the named enemies. The concept has been mainstreamed in recent years, promoted — in a form stripped of its anti-Semitic elements — by a number of supposedly mainstream conservatives. We knew we had heard the phrase bandied about the past couple of years on Fox News, and went looking in Google to find out where we had heard it. Originally we thought the chief culprit would be Glenn Beck, who has indeed made a fetish out of Marxism on his show. But the chief promoter of the concept of “Cultural Marxism” on Fox News was none other than Andrew Breitbart: Click here to view this media Breitbart has made a number of attacks on “Cultural Marxism” as a liberal phenomenon — such as his insistence that “political correctness is Cultural Marxism” . Indeed, Breitbart has made something of a fetish about using the phrase. Likewise he has made something of a fetish out of “Frankfurt School” theories . And as you can see from the above video, he got a nice national platform to promote the concept back in 2009 on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show — twice. This is a classic form of what acting as a “media transmitter,” repackaging ideas that originated on the racist/anti-Semitic Far Right and injecting them into the mainstream. This is not to suggest in any way, of course, that Breitbart is connected directly to the Norway terrorist attacks nor even that he by any means responsible for them. It’s clear, however, from Friday’s events that the ideology he promotes radicalizes people and indeed ultimately invites and inspires extremist violence. Considering his legion of right-wing fanboys in America, that’s cause for concern.

Continue reading …