Washington D.C. based news outfit The Daily Caller has been pouring over the tax records of a group of George Soros funded “journalists” called Media Matters for America. Many moons ago, David Brock worked for The American Spectator, a feisty conservative magazine. Brock ultimately switched sides and started turning tricks for the left starting Media Matters, an operation he still runs. Its mission is to influence the media by providing sound bites and “research” that supports a left-leaning narrative. MM’s been largely successful, providing material to major media outlets – often wildly out of context – that gives any given hatchet job a thin patina of legitimacy. . .

Within the tax paperwork DC uncovered was a note indicating that over $600,000 was to be used to support gun and self defense issues. Being a coterie of leftist hacks, it seems safe to assume the $600 large was not used to support the Second Amendment as an individual right to self defense.

That said, David Brock has a flunky who carries a piece when his boss is at public events. Concealed. In Washington D.C.

“He had more security than a Third World dictator,” one employee said, explaining that Brock’s bodyguards would rarely leave his side, even accompanying him to his home in an affluent Washington neighborhood each night where they “stood post” to protect him. “What movement leader has a detail?” asked someone who saw it.

Extensive interviews with a number of Brock’s current and former colleagues at Media Matters, as well as with leaders from across the spectrum of Democratic politics, reveal an organization roiled by its leader’s volatile and erratic behavior and struggles with mental illness, and an office where Brock’s executive assistant carried a handgun to public events in order to defend his boss from unseen threats.

So next time you hear a news report that cites something from Media Matters for America, bear in mind the thundering hypocrisy of David Brock as he and he and his team work to funnel left-leaning anti-gun fertilizer to his clients in the media.

UPDATE: For a taste of Media Matter’s work in regard to the 2nd Amendment, check this out:  Right-Wing Media Rope Bush-Appointed Judge Into Obama’s Second Amendment “Assault”

25 Responses to Media Hypocrite of the Day: David Brock

  1. Amazing what a desire for money and fame, as well a being gay, will do for one’s perspective. As further evidence, I refer you to the life and times of Andrew Sullivan, particularly to his intellectual tour de force that Sarah Palin is the grandmother, and not the mother, of Trig Palin.

    On the other hand, the Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud are dedicated enough to the good of this nation that they are willing to tolerate the rejection they feel from many in the Republican party and try to change the social attitudes toward LGBTs from within, while still supporting a strong and vital America.

    [I wish some of the extreme social conservatives in the Republican party would be as concerned about the ultimate survival of our nation and system of government and embrace these patriots. Unfortunately, CPAC got into the internal squabbles in the right-wing LGBT community in excluding GOProud this year. The GOP is not called the party of stupid for nothing.]

    Of course, Sullivan doesn’t have to feel any allegiance to America. He is not an American citizen. But what about Brock. No wonder the man is allegedly neurotic, paranoiac, and a drug user.

    BTW, I would like to see a follow-up to your implication about his armed bodyguard. Does the guy have a CCL in Washington, DC?

    • Sullivan would’ve been a US citizen a long time ago if he wasn’t prevented from obtaining it because of 80’s era rules that prevent HIV-positive folks from getting it. He’s working on getting it now that the rule is revised… just saying…
      I don’t know what the point of your comment is though… what in the world does gay or straight have to do with his hypocrisy on guns? Don’t get me wrong, you clearly don’t have any hate for LGBT folks, but I just don’t see the correlation in this case.

      • My sense if that many people on the right, who are also LGBT, tend to move left – and even far left – because of the rejection they feel in the conservative community. See, e.g.,
        http://valley-of-the-shadow.blogspot.com/2010/02/four-horsemen-of-ablogalypse-2010.html

        that notes that originally Sullivan was considered far-right.

        Brock, in leaving, and blasting his right-wing origins, noted that he discovered that “his friends weren’t really his friends.” I find this significant. People need social acceptance, and it is one of the critical factors in Maslow’s pyramid of human needs. When the conflict between this and one’s beliefs becomes too great, rupture occurs.

        Another item in evidence is Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs, who was once so on-board with conservatives-libertarians that he was a co-founder of Pajamas Media. Today, he spends much of his effort in attacking conservatives and libertarians, and does not have a link to PJM on his site.

        It is sad that the conservative-libertarians cannot seem to find a place for this creative, intelligent people, and that these people ultimately reject who they were philosophically, in favor of who they are on the personal level.

        I am not these peoples’ therapist. However, I was a clergyman, and I feel I have developed a sensitivity to certain issues. This is what I sense here.

    • One can be an extreme right-wing religious conservative (I am, fo sho) and not get a hate-on after your fellow citizens who are LGBT.

      That said, there are many things that the “official” LGBT agenda that, if opposed, will get you branded as a “hater”. Those who wholeheartedly embrace that agenda are overwhelmingly progressive and do not cotton to dissent.

      Candidly, a member of GOProud is more likely to be flamed by a David Brock than by Andrew Breitbart.

      • “That said, there are many things that the “official” LGBT agenda that, if opposed, will get you branded as a “hater”. ”
        —–
        Okay, I’m genuinely curious. Do go on.

      • This is a gun website, not an argue about the LGBT agenda site. I do this out of respect for our editor, and to avoid the whole “Tim, why is yo’ dirt in Boss Dan’s ditch” conversation.

        • I am being serious. You’re not going to “spend a day in the box” for me.

          I will say this, all citizens have the same rights and ought to protect those rights. The second amendment is the foundation of defense of rights. Anyone who feels they are oppressed or may become oppressed by society should guard their RTKBA.

        • “all citizens have the same rights”
          —–
          Whew, what a relief. I thought for sure you were talking about something specific in your original post. Something 14th amendment related, perhaps? 😉

          Also, I’m not getting the “spend a day in the box” reference. [shrug]

        • Oh, yeah! Sorry. It’s been forever since I saw that. Great flick. What does that have to do with the discussion at hand, though?

  2. Any gay person who doesn’t have a gun must have a death wish. Gays with guns don’t get bashed — so my gay friends, get a gun, know how to use it and be strong. If you want to to be superliberals because you don’t like conservative company, go ahead and knock yourselves out. Just support 2A and be armed.

    The same goes for men and women of a certain age. Elders are prime targets for BGs. Elders with guns? Not so much.

    • +1. This goes for any group targeted by the crazy and the hateful. I wish there was more outreach along these lines, it would really help the 2A cause. I imagine it could be more than a bit uncomfortable for any obvious sexual minority making that first trip into the gun store.

  3. Snipers? If Brock keeps doing blow to sustain manic streaks his head will explode on its own. Sometimes, the meanest thing you can do to someone is to let them go until they self-destruct. Alan Dershowitz, no conservative, has already suggested that MM and other Soros-associated entities be thrown out of the respectable Democratic Party, for the good of the party.

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/15/dershowitz-media-matters-center-for-american-progress-the-david-duke-of-the-extreme-left/

    There’s an argument to be had about whether there is a “respectable” part of the Democratic Party in the first place, but if he’s already pushing away his putative friends on the left, the End is Near. Bipolar disorder and drug abuse make that a virtual guarantee.

    I couldn’t care less about his bedroom habits.

    • Dershowitz hates guns in the U.S., and is generally what I would call an authoritarian leftist, but he is an extreme and avowed pro-Israel hawk, and would likely prefer to throw anybody with a differing view out of the “respectable Democratic Party” as he defines it. I suspect this is at the heart of his beef with MM.

  4. If you’re looking for an apologist for David Brock, I’m not your guy, but Media Matters does some good work. They make no pretence of being unbiased. They are a dispenser of liberal inside-the-beltway orthodoxy, it’s true. They make their contribution to the partisan squabbling that passes for political discourse in this country. I certainly don’t agree with them on 2A.

    But you guys have Rupert Murdoch! I mean, come on!

    • ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, NYT, Washington Post, LA Times, Huffington Post, Miami Herald, Gannett, AP, Reuters…

      You’re right, we have an octogenarian Australian with a hot Chinese wife. I see your point.

      :eyeroll:

      • “ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, NYT, Washington Post, LA Times, Huffington Post, Miami Herald, Gannett, AP, Reuters…”

        We can argue endlessly about media bias. I take the position that the idea of unbiased reporting is ludicrous. I’d say that the above are left wing wanabees, in that the reporters are probably left-of-center, with the exception of the Huffpost, which is openly lefty, but is a serial abuser of bloggers. As for NPR, etc., any reporting that might rock the establishment boat is censored, either self-censored by the reporters or directly by the editors. I think most reporting, left or right, is basically pro-establishment, and pro business. I mean, we hear 20 times a day how the Dow Jones is doing, even though it has little effect on the lives of ordinary working people. The Tea Party got massive coverage relative to their numbers. I’m not saying their message isn’t significant, but they did get a lot of coverage compared to, say, anti-war groups with equal or larger numbers. Most coverage of the Occupy movement is negative, although politicians from both sides of the isle have suddenly learned the words “wealth inequality.”

        If you want real left-wing news, check out http://www.democracynow.org/ . Listen to a couple of podcasts, they do a packed hour every day. They’re left-of-left, very populist, and very seldom wrong on their facts.

      • Oh yeah, forgot to mention, Rupert Murdoch is no longer an Australian, he is a U.S. citizen, thanks to a special act of Congress. I think it was so he could own more TV stations, or some such.

        And don’t pretend R.M. is just some old dude. He does, in fact, control a vast global media empire.

Leave a Reply

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