Shared publicly  - 
Coroner says commentator Andrew Breitbart died of heart failure, hardening of arteries
Los Angeles, Calif., USA

Fri Apr 20, 5:30 p.m. PDT: The +Los Angeles Times reports that commentator and editor Andrew Breitbart, a polarizing website publisher who once helped edit the Drudge Report and found his way to tea party stardom in recent years, died of heart failure and hardening of the arteries, according to the Los Angeles County coroner's office.

Officials deemed the death "natural," and toxicology tests detected no illicit drugs in Breitbart's system. His blood-alcohol level was 0.04%.

Breitbart collapsed near his Westwood home March 1. He was 43.

Read more:

Photo: +The Associated Press


Get real-time breaking news updates on your Android, iPhone or Windows Phone 7 with one of our free apps:
Nellie K. Adaba's profile photoMitzi Hoorenbeek's profile photoRue Mara's profile photoBrianAmelia Laneville's profile photo
To be fair, his heart failed long before his death...
I strongly disapprove of anyone ridiculing their political and/or ideological opponents personally. While I typically found Breitbart's behavior reprehensible I will not insult or belittle his memory out of respect for the people who simply and sincerely loved him. However, I do recognize that there is a certain percentage of any group that can't do much else besides make schoolyard insults and believe that makes them pundits.
Death should earn no one instant respect. If you want respect in death, earn it in life.
I'm just a touch surprised he had a heart. Not that surprised that it was hard.
I didnt know him but from what I see here he looks like a man who believed as a constitutionalist. Not a bad thing?
Mitzi, define constitutionalist. Because I do not think that word means, what you think it means.
He had some good ideas, as most people do, but he had a poor way of emphasizing his ideas, as most people do.
Please. List his good ideas. The man was a megalomaniac, channeled anger as a political device and a liar. What is with the praise for him?
He was effective, he was innovative about getting the truth, even though his means were usually despicable.
@Rue Mara....I said I didnt know him. Hence I cant comment on that. I am not here to judge the world, its fucked up enough without my uninformed judgement on topics I dont have expertise in. I was making a general comment. Nothing more nothing less. :)
Except, Brian, he never got near the truth. He pushed an agenda and it was an agenda that was more harmful and hateful than good.
Did he not prove that there was a culture of corruption inside ACORN? I feel that taking down one organization that flagrantly wastes the money I earn is a positive, even if his means were not.
NO. He proved that if you say a lie, an outrageous lie, repeatedly, with enough spectacle, people will believe it. Nothing that was said about ACORN was true and it did not waste any money, have any sort of culture of corruption. What Breitbart did is a great representation of the supposed moral authority acting in a completely immoral way.
Sorry, Rue, that is a false statement on your part. He had uncut video that showed ACORN representatives telling him and his "prostitute" partner how to evade tax laws, I've watched both the uncut and cut versions. He also showed that they were willing to give money to people in illegal enterprises. I make no claim to his morality, because I fell that his lack of ethics and sometimes illegal behavior makes a loud enough statement of his morality. He also exposed Anthony Weiner exposing himself.
The video was cut, and frankly, you show your own ignorance. That was not Andrew Breitbart in the video. I tell you what, you go google it, then post. He lied thoroughly and you are proof that the lies live on past the truth. There was nothing wrong at ACORN and an organization that worked with poor neighborhoods to teach them how to pull together, register to vote and navigate legal and political hurdles, was destroyed.
I made a mistake, it was Breitbart that distributed the video on his website. That and your reading skills are lacking, I have watched both videos, the cut and UNCUT. Did you catch it that time?
Links to ACORNs benevolence:

Whereas the last link is suspect, being FOXNEWS and all, the rest are generally unbiased. And the full version of the tape (uncut, for you media types) shows that some of the representatives did, in fact, provide information on tax evasion.
Oh good god. World Nut Daily, Judicial Watch and Fox News. My reading skills are perfect, because at least I know enough facts to understand that Breitbart was not in the videos in question. And to say particularly WorldNet is unbiased, along with Judicial Watch? Puhleeze. That's like saying Conservapedia doesn't have bias.

Your WND link heads to an article that's a thinly veiled advertisment for subversion inc, a book that is also the reference used to back up the "reporter's" story. Self referencing promotional pieces are not investigative journalism. Buzz, try again.

Judicial Watch is breathless with joy at posting a 131 page pdf of...chicken scrawl. Ok, I read through the excerpts, because I can
and something struck me. I deal with official agencies all the time. These guys are sticklers, they kinda have to be, if they want a case to stick. No where is there any sort of indication that this document is official. Even handwritten notes that are part of any evidenciary hearing are stamped, or in some way annoted that they belong to an agency. An official briefing is usually looks more like something and less like what is being presented as evidence. Case in point, So I did a little poking around the webs, because anyone can research. If they're not married to an outcome. has a clear case of voting registration fraud. These are true and if there is any truth to the Judicial Watch cases, this is where things are correct. Now, where it gets off the rails is because Americans don't understand a damned thing about American law. You can fill out Daffy Duck as a voter registration name. You are only defrauding your employer of valid names. You can get paid to collect signatures or register voters, but you cannot legally destroy any of those collected signatures or registration cards. The employees that were convicted in the case I cited, did defraud, but they only defrauded ACORN, there was no voting fraud. ACORN does what any agency that does registration must do, they have to turn in all cards and flag suspect ones for the canvassing board and elections officers. That is where the registration is put to the test. Not with those who collect the registrations and if they attempt to fake cards, they face prosecution because the collector is held to accountability under the law. I would continue but you are either capable of logical thought and can read the articles to see the difference or, you're committed to your thought pattern. ACORN, League of Women Voters and even your local Republican/Tea Party groups must abide by all Federal and local election laws. This means that if they have employees who are faking cards, they must turn in the cards to be reviewed by the board and turn those employees in to the authorities. That is registration fraud, actual voting fraud is committed at a very low rate in America because of the gatekeeping protocols at the registration level, but things like this: - show that it was not due to the mythological ACORN/Union/Whatever your right wing news source has determined is a boogeyman today. While I am sure this will be considered nonsense from the liberal media because they are not as unbiased as WND or Fox, if you made it this far, congratulations. At the very least, we have had an engaging debate.
Your reading skills are perfect? Still you haven't acknowledged your error, with the fact I wrote cut and uncut. Still with that you feel you are above reproof, which shows your lack of openness regarding facts. Then you assail my choice of media, when you choose the NYT, which had to retract stories, because they didn't follow basic journalism rules, that you fact check. So yes, I am suspect of the NYT ability to get things right at least Fox News makes corrections quickly. Interestingly enough you seem to have followed the NYT lead and not acknowledging your error.

Maybe you will trust this source, even though you will not appreciate what it contains: I am particularly drawn to the statement by the prosecutor “Acorn's training manuals "clearly detail, condone and . . . require illegal acts,"” So are you still standing by the great need of prescence of the “organization” (more likely a soft gang)? Here’s another article:
and another:


Illegal alien arrested, charged with voter fraud

LAKE COUNTY, Ill.- An illegal alien from the Philippines was arrested Thursday morning on a felony complaint charging her with 17 counts related to voter fraud in Lake County. The state charges resulted from a joint investigation conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the Lake County State's Attorneys Office. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) also provided assistance.

Maria Azada, 53, of Grayslake, Ill., was arrested March 17 by ICE HSI agents and a Lake County State's Attorneys special investigator. Azada faces 17 felony counts in Lake County Circuit Court of perjury, mutilation of election materials, and tampering with voting machines in connection with illegal voting by a non-U.S. citizen.

The investigation began in February 2009 when Azada admitted to a USCIS officer during an interview for an immigration benefit that she had voted in an election. It is illegal for foreign nationals to vote in national or state elections in the United States.

A subsequent investigation revealed that Azada allegedly voted nine times in primary, general and consolidated elections between 2003 and 2009. According to the arrest warrant, Azada allegedly falsely claimed to be a U.S. citizen on two Illinois Voter Registration application obtained from an ACORN employee.
So you won’t cite a lack of evidence:

As to your argument that they cannot destroy the registration cards that they believe to be fraudulent, this is true in most states, but (BUT) they are required to flag them(it's actually an ACORN rule too), which they don’t always do. As a side note I didn’t claim that my sources were 100% unbiased, but you cannot claim that your sources are either. And your side hints that I might lean towards Fox and conservative media sources would be generally wrong. Unfortunately there are very few unbiased media sources, though USA Today was listed as the most unbiased, by a fact checking organization recently. I do not subscribe to Republican ideology, nor Democrat ideology--I am one of those determined moderates that both sides hate.
I've already explained to you that ACORN has nothing to do with individual voter fraud because they only register people, the local boards do the vetting because they are responsible. And whether or not you like it, your sources are very much republican conservative, whereas I not only pulled from the NYT (liberal, really? not even slightly.) and the local paper. Why you persist in believing that somehow I can't read and won't acknowledge my "error", I do not know. At no point in those "uncut" videos do they show that O'Keefe and his partner were not even dressed how they seemed in what was released. The people within the videos, when asked to present their side of what happened, were often collecting the information to turn it over to the cops. I don't have to accept your sources to be considered open to facts. I have to read and review your source. I find them biased and lacking. I found other sources that are more thorough. As far as Opinion Journal, you are aware that an op ed column is the writer's opinion, correct? And that John Fund is the editor for the American Spectator, a conservative magazine? Low voter turnout is a very good development for elections, fairly sure that taking down the largest network of community organizers who focus on working with poor populations to vote is a feature, not a bug. Whatever man. Breitbart was a horrible person, a liar and he's spawned a bunch of very stupid people who do criminal things on tape and proclaim it activism. You can post about my stubbornness as much as you'd like. We can agree to disagree but I'm right.
Except, I sent you links that showed that ACORN employees directing were involved in voting multiple times, plus they don’t even enforce or follow the guidelines they set up. It is a culture of corruption with ACORN. Just check out Darnell Nash or Maria Azada (the illegal, that ACORN registered to vote, on Google if you need more evidence.
As For my republican sources, was the source “republican”? I think you are just filled with such contempt for anything not trumpeted by liberals you cannot be objective. “In mid-2004, the newspaper's then public editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, wrote an opinion piece in which he said that The New York Times did have a liberal bias in coverage of certain issues such as permitting gay marriage. He stated that this bias reflected the paper's cosmopolitanism, which arose naturally from its roots as a hometown paper of New York City.” This is from a mouthpiece of the NYT, dispute the liberal slant now.
Why I persist on your error, is because until now you haven’t acknowledged my statement about viewing the uncut video, which proves that they (the two persons “needing” advice) asked questions about evasion techniques and they were given them by more than one ACORN employees.
The only place you are right is that we can agree to disagree, but you bullheaded approach to the gov’t documents bolstering my view shows that you cannot be right.
Add a comment...