It's Sunday Morning and on MSNBC, AM Joy addressed the Breitbartization of the Republican Party. Is it problematic to take a Stephen K. Bannon, head of Breitbart and the Donald Trump campaign, and allow him to set the agenda for an entire political party, given all his racist, sexist and bigoted leanings? Of course it is, but if the party is happily embracing that faction of the GOP, then Bannon is the right guy for the job. It is very clear that the alt-right and the right are indistinguishable.
Both-siderist GOP turd-polisher, Hugh Hewitt was predictably awful, as he doubled down on his lies from his earlier appearance on Meet the Press regarding the similarities between the Left and the Right. Joy Reid goaded Hewitt and he surprised her with his bizarre assertions.
REID: What do you think is the potential risk of linking this group of people, somebody like Bannon, to the Republican party?
HEWITT: Let me correct the record. Andrew Breitbart was a good friend of mine. I knew him very well. We worked together. I interviewed him on the day that he died. We had a mutual admiration society going on. Andrew was not a racist. Andrew was a good-hearted man and a terrific entrepreneur. Breitbart.com today is not what it was when Andrew died.
Larry O'Connor has left. Dana Loesch has left. There are still some good people there. Jeff Poor, who is one of their writers, is not a racist. I don't know Steve Bannon. I don't read Breitbart.com. I am concerned that the alt-right, and I define it much more broadly than many people do, because I think it's easy to say white supremacists and anti-Semites have nothing to do with the Republican party. We drove them out in the '50's. They should stay out.
It sure doesn't seem as if they drove them completely out, as guest Daryle Lamont Jenkins correctly pointed out that Ann Coulter aligns herself with White-supremacists and their publications, before Hewitt went on his rant. He continues:
HEWITT: The alt-right, some people use it to describe those people who are upset with Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, who oppose the wall on the border. I don't know what it means. I like to call white supremacists evil and anti-Semites evil and brand them. And by the way, I don't think James O'Keefe is a white supremacist either. (crosstalk)
But here's what I do agree on. The alt-right has a parallel on the alt-left. For every, and I said this on Meet the Press, for every Bannon and Breitbart, there's a David Brock and Media Matters. For every Milo there's a Maher. Absolutely.
The alt-right has to have a both-sides equivalent, so disingenuous liars like Hewitt are trying to make the 'alt-left' an actual thing. It's really a bunch of desperate propaganda created by the likes of Daniel Horowitz, Conservative Review editor-in-chief. He gives a pretty hyperbolic definition of this fictitious 'alt-left' invention.
“It’s actually quite a new phenomenon that every member of the party must be fanatically into transgenderism, boo God, the military, and Jerusalem at their convention, support full-blown cradle-to-grave Marxism (Hillary to Bernie: ‘your cause is our cause’) promote and defend every abortion on demand — including taxpayer funding for harvesting baby organs — embrace and idolize every form of sexual promiscuity, place illegal aliens ahead of Americans, coddle the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, cozy up to every Islamic totalitarian under the sun — from Mohamed Morsi and the Ayatollahs to Turkish President Recep Erdogan, and champion violent lawlessness and the crime agenda in our major cities.”
The commentator contends the Democrat Party of today, with its embrace of socialism and a radical social agenda, is the equivalent on the left of what the Republican Party would look like on the right, if it were somehow to become a bastion of Neo-Nazism.
As Biden would say, what a bunch of MALARKEY!
