Breitbart Was Scum

Sad when anyone dies before their time, but the motherfucker was unalloyed scum. Just because the fucken asshole died, doesn’t mean you should pretend that he wasn’t a fucken despicable piece of shitte.


  1. says

    He’s going to keep doing that no matter what we say. He’s dead. He’s not coming back.

    Besides, the hateful shit he did and enabled will long outlive him. Even if we could deprive him of ‘resting in peace’, why should we?

  2. wilsim says

    I feel somewhat the same about Michael Jackson. Yeah, he made some good music a long time ago… but the repeated pedo accusations and then the settlements he paid to stop lawsuits turned me away from him. Oh, and i shan’t forget the “platonic” sharing of his bed with preteen boys. Disgusting.

    Motherfuckers who do bad shit do not need to be respected or their legacy left alone just because they are dead. Fuck that noise.

    Breitbart is worm food now, and good riddance.

  3. says


    Oh… that guy. Yeah, whatevs. I imagine the “liberal” news media is just being respectful so the batshit crazy news media doesn’t have more fodder for its batshit craziness.

  4. says

    He’s dead and deserves all of the respect that he gave to Teddy Kennedy when Kennedy died. But fucken James O’Keefe is still alive, so we have won nothing.

  5. Lyra says

    First, let me say that I have no idea who Breitbart was. None. His name means nothing to me, and I have no feelings towards him, positive or negative. However, I fail to understand statements like this:

    “Let him rest in peace, jeez.”

    Why do people say things like this? From atheists to Christians, none of us believe that that Breitbart is going to be disturbed by the rumblings of mere mortals. Atheists believe that Breitbart is gone and thus can’t be bothered by anything, and Christians believe that Breitbart is either in Heaven or Hell, and as such he is occupied with either eternal joy or eternal pain, either of which would push, “And so and so said bad things about me!” down to a non-priority. So why keep talking like any of this has anything to do with the deceased Breitbart’s well being?

    Breitbart doesn’t care anymore. We can’t help him rest in peace or prevent him from doing so. He is now beyond our sphere of influence.

  6. Tom Robbins says

    on the one hand, he leaves behind loved ones, pets, friends…

    but on the other, fuck that guy in the fucking face.

  7. Mudpuddles says

    Let him rest in peace, jeez.

    Rest??? What does that mean? The prick is dead! Deceased. Inanimate. No more. Nothing. He’s not resting, sleeping, flying, carousing with angels or burning in hell (unfortunately). He’s just rotting. Quite simply, decaying and returning his atoms to the various earthly cycles from which he was formed.

  8. kraut says

    Never understood why you have to speak respectful of a dead arsehole. If he was one in life, his death only changes one thing: he cannot respond anymore, but his fucking disciples will. His arseholy legacy continues, so it is only fair to point out that this dead fucker was responsible for
    Is anybody concerned about speaking respectfully of Stalin, Franco or Hitler? I guess not. So why make any exceptions?
    There wasn’t any concern when among atheists the persona and legacy of C. Hitchens was analyzed, warts and all, showing that he could be an arsehole as well.

    Breitbart apparently was just an outright arsehole with no redeeming features. So – lets clearly say so.

  9. Chebag says

    I feel sorry for you Libbies who are so dead and decaying inside that you don’t understand RIP.

  10. Lyra says

    Well, Chebag, given that you did not feel moved to enlighten anyone as to how the irritated blogging of atheists on the internet may prevent someone from resting in peace, I did some searching, and I admit to finding nothing.

    If being a non-“Libbie” grants the belief that irritated atheist bloggers do have such an ability, I would be fascinated to hear about it. Just how do you think “Libbies” might wound the feelings of dead conservatives?

  11. thebookofdave says

    I feel nothing but pity and sorrow for Andrew’s family, who had to live with that jackass, and will continue to bear the humiliation of his name long after his passing.

  12. kraut says

    “I feel sorry for you Libbies who are so dead and decaying inside that you don’t understand RIP.”

    You fucker talk about “dead” inside? You are unable to feel the rage against any dead authoritarian shills and dead dictators whose legacy still affects us either through their deeds and/or writings.

    Let them rest in peace makes you implicitly a supporter.

  13. nmcc says

    “Sad when anyone dies before their time, but the motherfucker was unalloyed scum. Just because the fucken asshole died, doesn’t mean you should pretend that he wasn’t a fucken despicable piece of shitte.,”

    Crikey, you’re a bit behind the news on this. He did die on the 16th December or thereabouts after all.

    Oh, sorry, that was a different asshole.

  14. Chebag says

    Just like a Lib. Gotta always bring up Hitler. Who was a socialist, btw, just like “Comradde” and his sycophantic followers.

  15. says

    No Chebag, honey, it’s Glenn Beck (who, btw, is still not a liberal) that always brings up Hitler. Perhaps you mean, “Just like a Lib. Gotta always bring up Glenn Beck.”

    Also… Hitler was fascist. That’s actually the opposite of socialist. But I get that these complex topics are difficult for you to understand.

    Yes yes, I know, stop feeding the troll.

  16. Chebag says

    Really smart guy? It was the “national fascist” party was it? What was Nazi short for again, brain trust?

  17. says

    Chebag, you’re a waste of internet bandwidth, your postings are devoid of any useful content, and consist merely of juvenile ad hominems of the sort that would have gotten you laughed out of my elementary school playground. If you have anything useful to say, cut the sneering and say it, otherwise do us all a favor and go troll some place else.

  18. says

    My position on Breitbart is fairly simple. The guy was either a professional asshole polemicist in public, or played one very convincingly. For all I know he was a paragon of virtue when not being a jerk online or on television, but since I never saw any of that, I can only judge him on what I saw and heard of him while he was alive. Based on I that I concluded that he was an asshole of the first degree. His dying does not affect that either way. Given that he thought it was OK to slander Ted Kennedy after Kennedy passed away, I think that it is perfectly permissible to be rude about him, whether he is alive or dead. I feel for his family, but I have no positive feelings towards him.

  19. kraut says

    “Really smart guy? It was the “national fascist” party was it? What was Nazi short for again, brain trust?”
    You are nothing but a not very smart arsehole, shitbag.

    The party was called the : National Sozialistische Partei Deutschlands” for your fucking info, and actually included till the Roehm Putsch some members who combined some socialist ideas with fascist ideas.
    Basically the “socialist” was a smokescreen to get German workers to vote for the NSDAP, nothing else. Socialism at the time was an idea supporting workers rights, arguing for stronger unions, universal healthcare and unemployment insurance among other demands. All things the worker in the 1920s to30s saw as a necessity to enable them to be productive and able to support their families.
    The same way some countries call themselves “democratic” republics and are far from it, the German fascists appropriated the term.
    But a tea-partying fuckwad like you simply spouts off the limbag’s nonsense because his intellectual capacity is limited to retaining just a few slogans spoon fed by neocon propaganda.

  20. says


    while your point is valid, you got it wrong regarding the abbreviation, not accounting for the A.


    N – National (national)
    S – sozialistische (socialist)
    D – Deutsche (German)
    A – Arbeiter (workers’)
    P – Partei (party)

    Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

    In 1919, a locksmith founded the German Workers’ Party, trying to attract workers with a nationalist/fascist ideology. Hitler was originally sent to spy on that party, and joined and took it over, and the party was renamed to NSDAP in the process.


  21. mikelaing says

    Breitbart was a slimy, backstabbing slanderer. I wish people did rest in peace, just so I could fuck his up.

    Stunned fucke Chebag types have no problem with using Einstein(and other free thinkers/atheists) quotes out of context to support their shitstain religious beliefs, and purposely denigrating what they stood for. What, twisting dead peoples words and using them to lie is respecting them? Fuck you.

  22. kraut says

    “A – Arbeiter (workers’)”

    Ooops….A Freudian slip I guess; as a social democrat I like to deny any connection between any workers movement and THAT party. A criminal organization but not a party.

  23. nmcc says

    “I was on that news, too, shittewadde:”

    Indeed you were, my man. Though, unfortunately, (or fortunately, depending on one’s opinion of your writing) it appears that it was merely as an end to disproving the old adage that brevity is the soul of wit.

    Have you taken note anywhere of the genuflecting in the direction of the said Snitchens by that ‘free-thinking’ wanker Richard Dawkins? It’s about time someone in the free-thinking crowd started to do a bit of free-thinking in HIS direction.

  24. says

    “Just like a Lib. Gotta always bring up Hitler. Who was a socialist, btw, just like “Comradde” and his sycophantic followers.”

    If I were to sum up socialism in a sentence, it would be this:

    Popular control of the means of production, with democratically controlled economic decision making

    There are more drawn out definitions than that, but in general that is what socialism is about. How the shit was hitler a socialist? He could call himself whatever he wanted, his policies were fascist, not socialist. His point of view was that means of production, along with every other important thing in society, should only be controlled by a certain class of people because the rest were inferior. It is the opposite of socialism.

    Don’t take my word for it, read George Orwell’s Why I Write. It is a passionate account of why socialism is important, with examples relevant to the time.

  25. says


    here is a name to consider: Otto Strasser, the most prominent left wing leader and so-called “social revolutionary” of the NSDAP:

    Born in Bavaria, he took an active part in World War I. On 2 August 1914 Otto Strasser joined the Bavarian Army as a volunteer. He rose through the ranks to lieutenant and was twice wounded.[1] He returned to Germany in 1919 where he served in the Freikorps that put down the Bavarian Soviet Republic which was organized on the principles of workers’ councils. At the same time, he also joined the Social Democratic Party. In 1920 he participated in the opposition to the Kapp Putsch. However, he grew increasingly alienated with that reformist-socialist party’s stand, particularly when it put down a workers’ uprising in the Ruhr, and he left the party later that year. In 1925 he joined the NSDAP, which his brother had been a member of for several years, and worked for its newspaper as a journalist, ultimately taking it over with his brother. He took the ‘socialist’ element in the party’s programme seriously enough to lead a very socialist-inclined faction of the party in northern Germany together with his brother Gregor and Joseph Goebbels. His faction advocated support for strikes, nationalisation of banks and industry, and – despite acknowledged differences – closer ties with the Soviet Union. Some of these policies were opposed by Hitler, who thought they were too radical and too alienating from parts to the German people (middle class and some Nazi-supporting nationalist industrialists in particular), and the Strasser faction was defeated at the Bamberg Conference (1926), with Joseph Goebbels joining Hitler. Humiliated, he nonetheless, along with his brother Gregor, continued as a leading Left Nazi within the Party, until expelled from the NSDAP by Hitler in 1930.

    Even today there are some Neo-Nazis bemoaning the fact that the name National Socialism has been, shall we say, compromised. Anti-corporatist and anti-globalisation ideas also feed into the Nazi paranoia about the international conspiracy of Jewish finance.

    As a Social Democrat myself, I draw the distinction here that socialism and social democracy don’t operate along racial lines and are also strongly internationalist. Because one part of your definition,

    with democratically controlled economic decision making

    would hold true for social democracy, but not for certain types of socialist systems, I’d say.

  26. Mike Griswold says

    Not sure if this post or the thread is worthy of FTB. I would like to refer people to the site, but this makes me hesitant.

  27. d cwilson says


    The only reason I don’t like denigrating the recently deceased is out of sensitvity to the surviving family members, not because of any belief in the disposition of a “soul”.

    Breitbart was a lying, deceitful little man who was nothing short of toxic to our political discourse. He hurt many people in his time and he ruinned numerous careers with his doctored videos.

    But, I’m sure someone in his family loved him, so I’ll stop short of saying how I really feel about him.

  28. jakc says

    Not to belabor the point, but Hitler didn’t share the socialist leanings of some early Nazis, and in fact built the party on contributions from industrialists. His allies were conservatives who thought they could control him. After Hitler gained power, unions were outlawed.

  29. says


    we know that, in fact my post indicated that Strasser was expelled from the NSDAP in 1930. But the issue that came up here involved the name of a party that can be traced back to the DAP of 1919/20. Even though Hitler dropped the S and D parts of the Nazi platform, the name stayed.

  30. jamessweet says

    I wonder if chebag would find it insulting if we called him “conservy”….

  31. Aquaria says

    Not sure if this post or the thread is worthy of FTB. I would like to refer people to the site, but this makes me hesitant.

    Nobody’s going to lose any sleep if you don’t.

    Fuck off, you sniveling fuckface.

  32. Ray C. says

    So the Nazis were “soshulist” because they had “soshulist” in the name.


    And the Moral Majority was both of those things and the Holy Roman Empire all three.

    The derp is strong in this one.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *