> For example, see the reviews of the book mentioned in the article on amazon
He got lots of bad reviews because he pissed off some right-wing folks who showed up in droves to write bad reviews about the book out of spite, not because they'd actually read it or thought about it:
The subject of his competence came up (not by me) and as someone familiar with his writings I attempt to contribute both my own view (based on a good understanding of his work and not one sided) and a link to others views. I'm not sure what in this is wrong.... I can see you like the guy - perhaps you'd like to explain why?
I just pointed out that the bad reviews were not there because a lot of people disliked his book after reading it and considering what he had to say, but because a lot of people were angry at him and found that writing nasty reviews was a good way of venting their rage.
He got lots of bad reviews because he pissed off some right-wing folks who showed up in droves to write bad reviews about the book out of spite, not because they'd actually read it or thought about it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/andrew-breitbart-fa...
Discussions of the propriety of his comments are probably best left to other web sites, and kept off of this one.