Standing up to bullies like Glenn Beck: An unpleasant but necessary chore
By David Neiwert Saturday Sep 12, 2009 7:00amJohn V. Santore at Media Matters makes a convincing case that what Glenn Beck is doing in attacking President Obama's appointees as "communists" and "Marxists" is simply a new form of McCarthyism.
Now, what do we do about it?
Step 1: Expose both Beck and his enablers for what they are: liars, smear artists, and political charlatans.
James Rucker of Color of Change has a superb post up about the nuances of dealing with hatemongers like Beck:
In the wake of Van’s resignation, some have wondered whether kicking the Beck hornet’s nest makes sense. I’ve got two thoughts in response. First, Beck and Fox trying to change the topic and counter-attacking with such force is probably a good indicator that we’re getting to them; if anything, now would be the time to go harder. Second, I believe we have no choice. Beck has promised to take his witch-hunt to others in the administration, and has set his sights on Cass Sunstein as his next target. He has no plans to stop, and neither should we.
But it’s not just “czar”-hunting that’s at stake here. The right wing media machine, of which Beck is now one of the leading members, is the single greatest force standing in the way of change. They have already helped derail the conversation on health care, elevating accusations of Obama’s alliance with the Third Reich to some semblance of credibility. And they will do the same to the upcoming debates over clean energy, immigration, and every progressive policy priority. We simply don’t have the luxury of ignoring them. We must challenge them head on, expose their distortions, take away their advertisers, and position their views where they belong: far outside the bounds of any rational political discourse.
Be sure to read the whole piece.
It's been patently self-evident that Van Jones was just the appetizer for the sharks at Fox, whose ultimate goal is to take down Obama himself.
Beck has been boasting that he took down Jones by simply using Jones' own words and repeating them.
Well, folks in glass houses ought to think carefully about the wisdom of throwing stones, if you know what I mean.
The catalog of Glenn Beck's toxic discourse is long and nasty. When it comes to giving advertisers something to think about, the well is deep and dark. No doubt a lot of it is going to be bubbling back up into public view soon.
Because nothing brings down the liars and crooks like the light of day, shining brightly under the rocks whence they crawl.
Login or Register to post comments.
that the only thing that makes this idiot a bully is his money and broadcasting power given to him by higher powers. If it were an even playing field, I venture to say he would run and hide behind his mother's apron strings at the first hint of a threat against him!
You are quite right, it is the higher powers that are the concern.
We have what Chris Hedges calls inverted totalitarianism.
The first Red scare was after the first manufactured world war. War is a racket, it always has been.
The second Red scare was after the second manufactured world war.
Reagan was the consolidation of the previous sixty five years of the corporate war against democracy.
Consider these clips from the work of the late (d 1988) Australian sociologist Alex Carey
The first and so far only scientifically drawn study of the history of the corporate war on democracy.
CORPORATIONS AND PROPAGANDA
The Attack on Democracy
Part 1 - history through WWII
Part 2 - history after WWII
Mariah Gilardian at TUC radio (user supported) here, produced the clips.
I gave you some other links here
Happy to put their own personal wealth before their country, or even democracy itself.
Not happy that INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS lead to Obama's victory, because their own contributions aren't enough to fight the will of the people, they use the power of their communications networks.
As was proven at the birth of the nation, the kings will fall.
You don't reason with them...ever. You make them realize that their tactics won't work. You do it firmly. Basically you have to make them feel like idiots for even believing they could get by with the bullying behavior.
Part of the deal here is that beck and O'Reily are being paid. I'm pretty convinced they are crying all the way to the bank and do they are told to keep the bankroll going. They aren't bullies. They're actors. Pull the plug on the show.
are actually scared, frightened individuals inside! When they know you are not intimidated by them, they cower!
blubber, whine, sniffle, and stomp dey widdle feets.
that's understood but everyday wow i'm bored/tired of his nonsense.
Where is Edward R. Murrow when we need him?
Olberman is no Murrow ...
that we have now! We need the Rathers, the Donahues, etc. also.
Bill Moyers.
he's a blowhard, and while i agree with him, his style is too bludgeony and lacking nuance, and like the Mancow debacle, all too ready to ignore research and facts in his haste to find allies.
For a Murrow, we'd need a trusted mainstream network journalist, the likes of which we will never have again.
Jon Stewart. The most trusted name in news.
and we can have more Jon Stewarts if those of us who can be honest and relatively unbiased journalists will get our voices out there on the internets, until more of us become the new Rachel Maddows and Jon Stewarts and Stephen Colberts. We have to do this, to address Teh Stoopid at the Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh/O'Reilly/Malkin/Coulter, etc ad nauseum level.
The difference between us and them is they are getting paid to do what they do. Big money with aligned interests finances them. There is no big money aligned with our interests except our own, collectively. That is why it is critical to redirect our spending so as not to benefit corporations.
"Bully" 2001
A better than average movie that plays like an instructional on how to deal with Bullies. Be sure to watch it to the end.
...he's got us between a rock and a hard place.
If we attempt to "bring him down", his way of thinking will be that
we're just trying to quash his "First Amendment" rights. He'll whine and cry and tell all his viewers that we are un-American and they'll all believe him and WE will be the bad guys, and that in turn, will only make him all the more correct in their eyes. Just this morning on Fox, Neil Cavuto was criticizing the president, saying that if anything negative is said about him (HA!) he lashes back, and laments that the president works for us and implies he should just lie down and take it! We all remember what happened during the Bush years when anyone criticized Bush. They were un-American and if "we weren't with him, we were against him". The hypocrisy is totally astounding, but the conservatives lap it up!
I honestly don't know what the answer is for any of those loons. I keep hoping that his insanity will eventually catch up to him and bring him down, but as time goes on, I'm getting ever more doubtful that will happen.
What has happened to us as a nation that people choose to believe his, and other conservatives' lies, rather than the truth? Somehow, the GOP has a way of manipulating people by turning anything wise and good into some sort of vendetta against them. Have we all lost our minds?
Cavuto actually said that, concerning criticizing Obama? Jeez, I think Obama has been remarkably restrained in responding to much of the hatred and criticism that has been directed towards him.
As far as beck and his "First Amendment" rights, we should remember what KO often says....the "First Amendment" refers to keeping the government away from your free speech; it does not refer to people like us bringing down beck.
without interfering with Freedom of Speech.
Anybody is free to say what they want. The issues at hand are:
a) monopoly regulations that give conglomerates too much control over the market
b) using an entire network as an ad for a political party surely falls under campaign finance regulations
c) inciting violence that has literally led to terrorism and death
d) the mislabeling of products and services (for example, Fox "News" and "Fair and balanced"
These are all legal issues that should have been dealt with by now.
All you have to do is look at the sign from the teabaggers' protest march that circles Fox news and crosses out all other news media and you have your answer right there. Talk about simple minds and indoctrination. Truly sad.
Beck's not the real problem, it's Murdoch's FOX news. You get rid of Beck and they'll just prop up another mouthpiece. Good luck sinking that juggernaut. The real solution would be a truth in broadcasting law.
are we going to do this with the corporate ran congress we have today. I think there are more of us that want change than the nuts out there. The question is how to get them to unite. I have been on protest when I was in my 20's. One thing back then, when we had a march, we had a march. You could count on at least 1500 to 2000 people comming. If you have a march today with that many people, it will never get on TV. The people in charge will not let it get on TV. If people don't see it, it never happned. In 2000 and when bush was lying the US into war, the TV had very little on the marches. The only anti-war shit that got on TV was payed for by the people that had money. The bottom line is the money. We do not have any TV in the us that is real News. Keith and Rachel trying but hell when you have 10 other stations putting out shit, how do we even come clost to wining.
The person who had the Idea of Truth in Broadcasting is great.
Confirmation bias is a formidable opponent.
"Are the people who believe Beck reachable? "
NO!
HELL, NO!
We are seeing Teh Stoopid escalating their hatreds and fears exponentially, and giving voice to their bigotry on television and on the internets. This makes them appear to be a majority, and--since we only see their perspective on the M$M--lends credibility to their insanity.
If we don't succeed in changing this reality, we are in for a very bumpy ride over the next two decades...
He seems to me like someone who got bullied as a kid and that helped him become a drunk. Now he has money (paid safety) so he likes wearing the bully hat himself. He hasn't learned a thing, so I question his sobriety too. He seems to be a white-knuckler or frustrated dry drunk (like bu$h is.)
(Courtesy: Dr.
TedEdwin)You can tell he was picked on a lot. I can't put my finger on it but something about him screams "bully bait."
You definitely got his number.
It's the same with all these creeps:underneath all the brag and bluster quivers the under developed spirit of an emotionally arrested,angry and vindictive little boy.
"Liberal" is simply the label they've chosen to target, to pour all their hate and fear,and inadequacies and self disgust into.
It's pathetic.
What is truly vile however are the wealthy interests that prop these clowns up for their own selfish motives.
If a President is assassinated in the offing,well that's simply the price of doing "business".Nothing else matters.
"...if they send one of yours to the hospital, you send one of their's to the morgue."
Why can't that apply to "news?" Every time someone like Beck goes after one of ours, Maddow and/or Olberman should go after two of theirs. After about three or four losses, their masters will tell them to back off.
But we all know our side "won't stoop to their level." You know, Capone also had a quote about using a gun if they have a knife. Well, the Cons have lots of knives and yet we don't even try to bring our own knives to the knife-fight.
It was Sean Connery's character in "The Untouchables" who says those lines to Eliot Ness about taking on Capone.
Oops. Thanks for correction.
I thought it was Doc Holliday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD0JzLlKr_U&fe...
How is it that someone who is so fringe and isolated and speaks to such a small audience has so much power?
I understand the need to counter these crazy arguments, but I don't understand why we are allowing ourselves to get so publicly apoplectic about it all. We've been clutching our pearls about Joe Wilson's outburst, talking about almost nothing else FOR DAYS -- to the exclusion of any of the substance of Obama's speech (it's almost like we're rewarding this behavior, yeah?), and now people who had never heard of him are giving him money for giving us conniptions.
It is true that the craziest bully in the room is going to set the agenda for the conversation. It happens in every social situation, from families to the workplace. And I tend to think that we're letting that happen with these people.
Why was Beck allowed to define the conversation, even while he was losing his advertisers for being such a whackjob? The only people he's talking to are already in his choir. He's not converting anyone. He's not talking to anyone who can be reasoned with anyway.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't expose him, and I signed on to the advertiser boycott myself, but... OK, here's what I want to know:
If we spend our time and effort to even acknowledge these people as a relevant part of the conversation, knowing that we're not going to convince them or their fans, then exactly who are we trying to reach?
that's right
you've made it.
If you look at the right you see cowards, clowns and idiots. people with no conscience. these people need someone to tell them when to think how to think when to speak and how to speak this offers confusion when they encounter a Critical thinker and a challenger to their ideals and beliefs. Notice how they cower and cringe and find fault in anything new and or different, they seek their mothers permission to talk to grandma who then gives them permission to talk to grandpa to see if they can ask a question or are aloud to think the thoughts they have. These are lowly self hating people who like a child understand nothing but themselves and their immediate needs. They are further empowered by the EUNIUCHS on the left who have NO understanding of what they are in the office of power and what they are suppose to do so now when you have 2 losers who are self absorbed you have the problems that you see being presented to the American people as both (writer gags) News and (writer throws up) leadership.
Do you also rank Palin down there with beck and limbaugh? I hope you do because Ms. Palin once saw a picture of Keith Olbermann and exclaimed, "that guy is evil!"
But, if you really mean what you said above about beck and limbaugh, I do applaud you. I may not agree with most conservative points of view, but it makes me ill to see people like beck, limbaugh, hannity, and palin spread the vile hatred that they do.
How about a book burning of the Beck tomes?
It's about time someone stood up to these authoritarian fear mongers.
This has little to do with conservatism and everything to do with a hostile takeover of our SOCIETY by a hard-core, minority group of Authoritarians.
The USA has tipped greatly to the Corporate-fascist right. We all must take every chance we can, wherever we engage others in conversation, to point out that these people are AUTHORITARIAN, not Republican or conservative. They want power, not because they know what to do with it, but because they want it, period. Veruka Salt syndrome?(Daddy, daddy I want an Oompa Loompa NOW!)
Dr. Robert Altemeyers' years of research into the authoritarian mindset has given us an incredible insight into their motives, and future actions. As mean spirited and yet intellectual as some of them may appear, they are an amazingly predictable group. Please, read "The Authoritarians" or " The Authoritarian Specter" by Dr. Altemeyer.
None of what Beck, or any other of these assclowns do suprises me anymore after reading his research. In fact, it's like having the opposing teams playbook in hand!!
Lets take our government, and country back from these Fascists.
Last night, I went to beck's 9-12 project web site. I looked at his posting on 9-11 and why we remember that day.
I tried to post on his site the fact that shortly after Hurricane Katrina hit, beck first of all said that he hated 9-11 victim families ("just" 10 of them) because they complain too much; then shortly afterwards, he called people at the New Orleans Superdome "scumbags."
I tried to point this out; however, my post was deleted. I was using facts; I was using beck's own words; I did not use any foul language or four letter words; I did not call beck or anyone else names.
So I was able to get through and post a question, asking why, if beck believes so much in the First Amendment, why did he censor my original post?
I got censored on Eric Cantor's site last night as well (republicanwhip.house.org). I got a couple of comments in, but when I asked Mr. Cantor why he, the only Jewish member of the House, hasn't condemned beck's and limbaugh's Nazi comparison, that comment showed up for a short while, but it was removed. I wanted to know if the reason why he didn't condemn the Nazi comparisons is that he might be very "partisan." Again, I used no foul language; I used no four letter words; I called no one names.
what did you think they were going to do. The only way is to confront them at a town hall. good luck, they ship nuts in to make they can out scream the the people who want thr truth.
There was a guy who posted before I did, and he somehow got his message posted. His message was the quote beck used about the 9-11 victims...he said that he hated the 9-11 victims families. So I thought perhaps I could reinforce that message by not only posting it again, but also by adding to it Beck's message about the New Orleans "scumbags" at the Superdome. My message was deleted.
I was able to get a message on beck's site that is still there....I asked him why he censored my original message, given that beck now claims he uses only "facts"....and that's what I did; I used "facts" about beck and in fact used his own words....alas, beck apparently didn't like those facts and therefore had them removed.
Pravda wants people to hear only the opinions Pravda wants you to hear.
The best response to Beck and his ilk is to attack -- directly, forcefully, with facts and rhetoric.
When he accuses Obama, Democrats, Progressives, etc. of being socialists, communists, fascists, etc. . . .
Respond by stating that his remarks are irresponsible and demonstrably false. For example, Nazis are notorious for resorting to the military, secret police, and other repressive apparatus of the state in order to beat, jail, destroy and murder. By comparison, as every child knows, the entire history of the so-called bleeding heart liberal-left is to urge peace, non-violence, the use of reason and negoitation rather than force for dispute resolution; progressives advocate tolerance, sharing, caring and so on . . . After all, isn't that precisely the stereotype that right-wingers love to use to paint their adversary? That we are all a bunch of naive peace-loving, non-violent, hippie, flower-children, pot-smoking, utopian layabouts? If so, then how can we also be Nazis?
When Beck describes or suggests that Obama is leading America down the road to socialism, respond by dismissing such a proposition as sheer nonsense and born of ignorance -- that, for example, hundreds of federal programs are socialist (usually for the rich), that they were advanced by rightwing and republican presidents and congressmen; that the corporate tax rate under Eisenhower, Nixon and even Regean was much higher than under Obama.
Ask: if Obama is a communist, then is it your opinion he will be implementing a Dictatorship of the Proletariat sometime soon? Does he embrace the Iron Laws Of History? Is he a Western Marxist or Orthodox Marxist? What five essays by Marx do you believe most closely reflect Obama's political practice? Explain how each such essay or book is reflected in a specific excecutive order made by Obama.
Ask: if Obama is a communist for advocating a state health-care program, then does that make Teddy Roosevelt a communist for implementing what became the FBI -- i.e., a socialistic government police force? What about the FAA? Is that a communistic, socialistic state-run organization? Should we get rid of it? If so, how do we operate purely privitized airports? Should the skies also be entirely privitized? What about water? If not, then isn't that communism? Why not?
In short, call the Becks of the world to task for their ignorance, naivete, and irresponsibility.
And here's a good one: ask your right-wing interlocutor: "You make some interesting points; would you mind recommending to me the last, say, five books on American History that you have read, so that I can further educate myself on the subject. I realize you probably have dozens in mind; but would you simply recommend the last five?" When they list a book by Coulter or Limbaugh or some other fatuous tool, state: "Oh, uh, sorry. I didn't mean a book of political commentary; I mean a history book -- you know, something like Parrington's history of the U.S., Charles Beard, etc."
In other emails I send, I also point out the fact that during the Bush administration, people were called "left wing loons" and "traitors" and "unpatriotic" if they protested the Iraq War. Bush said that you're either "with us or against us." He referred to the "left wing haters."
You also heard about the so-called "Bush haters" and "Bush derangement syndrome.
A primary reason people hated Bush is because he started an immoral war which was based at best on shoddy evidence; and at worst, it was based on lies. That war has killed hundreds of thousands of people, including over 4300 Americans and untold numbers of innocent Iraqis. It has maimed and seriously injured many more, both physically and mentally.
I point out that reports are that hatred against Obama is far greater than that of Bush; reports are that death threats against Obama are up 400% over those on Bush. Something is seriously wrong, and it is partially due to the hatred and lies that people like beck spread.
I point out that something is seriously wrong with the priorities in this country if we get criticized for protesting a war that kills people, but then the anger from the right seems far greater because they think their taxes will get raised; they mistakenly think that their "freedoms" will be lost.
The other day I was talking to a guy I suspected might be conservative, he's from Utah, about the "You lie," outburst during President Obama's speech.
I was talking about how that just isn't done. You certainly didn't see that with bush.
He said, "If bush lied, I'd like to see someone call him out on it."
I responded, "He lied all the time, or at best twisted the truth."
So he said, "At least the guy got attention."
So I responded, "That's what a two year old throwing a tantrum does, not someone whose supposed to be a leader. The yeller was trying to bring tea-baggery right into Congress."
Then our bus arrived.
and thank you!
I am just so fed up with these right wing haters. I relieve my anger by sending them emails, and usually, I am civil about it.
I have to leave soon, so I'll make this brief....maybe I'll follow up on it later.
But when I hear the "socialist" cries, I respond with the following: I personally have lived in "socialist" Europe; healthcare was good; I give examples of my own experience, and that of 2 of my Dutch friends who were seriously sick.
I ask people what "freedoms" they will lose. I tell them that I had no fewer "freedoms" living in Europe than I do here, other than I couldn't vote because I wasn't a Dutch citizen....yet they have free, open, and fair elections.
I tell them that in some aspects, I had more "freedoms" in Europe than I do here. For starters, I had 5 weeks of vacation a year, like most everyone else does, even those just starting a job for the first time....so I was much more free to enjoy life there than I am here; I didn't have to worry as much about the rat race.
took control of your life years ago while Americans got fat and let the repugs and corporations take over America. I don't get it. You get a job here and hell you must work for a fucking year just to get a week off. You talk to these people and try to tell them this is bullshit and they run from you. hell they run to management and rat you out as some union organizer. WTF. You try to tell people and they look at you as some king of Anti-American trying to desrtoy America. And talking to repug, fotget. I have never met a bunch of fucking retards like them. I guess this is what you get from a bunch of people who think the bible and god is real. Sants is real too!
for a most useful post, General Jack D.....
I think you should go post this in General Discussion on Democratic Underground. I'm sure it would flame.
If you don't want to do that, do you mind if I do? I will credit you for the verbiage.
When I sign petitions such as those coming from Color of Change, I do put comments in there to the advertisers, telling them that not only has beck called our President a "racist"; he has inferred that he is a Nazi; he has said he hates 9-11 victims; he has called those at the Superdome during Hurricane Katrina "scumbags."
but, unfortunately, these sort of psychologically warped petty tyrants usually have to explode of their own accord - like a supernova - and by that time a lot of damamge has usually occured. (I suggest Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style In American Politics" for those interested in this phenomenon.)
It is possible that it would be different now, what with the internet, but human nature has changed little over the last 5000 years.
Humans are far older than 5,000 years, unless you're a Creationist
Or implying that it's a by-product of patriarchialism.
I was just using it as a particular frame of time.
This is the first post I've seen from you that appears to have missed the point...
Homo sapien sapien is a relative newcomer, and has only in the last ~5,400 years left a mark on our planet, so to speak, if one accepts (as do most historians) identifying phonetic (cuneiform) alphabets as the 'beginning' of written history.
I find it interesting that our technological advances are now uber exponential (I know, I know...that's like saying 'I love you to infinity, plus 50 million times infinity!'--cute, but relatively meaningless beyond the hyperbole). In short (pardon the pun), our species has produced more verbiage in the last ten years than we produced in the preceding 5,000 years combined.
And, evolutionarily speaking, our species continues to slog through emotional and spiritual quicksand, having experienced almost no progress in those realms for the entire time we've been on this planet. Ergo, theWalrus' post...
BTW, Marilyn French has a great analysis of patriarchy, if you're interested (Beyond Power).
Very few people that I know enjoy going around being angry all the time. It isn't a sustainable emotion. Even I got tired of "hating" George Bush all the time, although it wasn't the man that I hated, it was his inexcusable lack of leadership and bad policies and indifference to his actual job that allowed Dick Cheney to drag this country into the mud.
But the people who continue to get spun up by Beck, need an authoritarian in their lives. Because Democracy is messy and you have to actually take responsibility for your actions in a democracy. In the Authoritarian world view, everything will be alright if we just turn it over to someone higher up the food chain, then one can wash one's hands of any decision making process.
Well I certainly wouldn't want to lay next to him
Or izzat lie?
Speaking of bullies look what law enforcement is rolling out in San Diego, the new L-RAD 500-x. State of the art crowd control for their town hall meetings. These are non-lethal weapons previously used in Iraq to disperse crowds.
http://eastcountymagazine.org/?q=node/1874
"He added, “Even more concerning is having these weapons for public order policing. I can imagine no situation, or am not aware of any situation that’s ever happened in San Diego County or is likely to happen that would justify using these weapons for public order policing to control a crowd. The main effect of having those weapons at public events is to chill people and chill free speech and free association.”"
I wish the Dems would GET how to deal with bullies. In the chicken yard, if one chicken goes down, the others peck it to death. Rising above bullies doesn't work unless you can get away from them. If you're stuck on the playground with them, day after day, you'd better have a way to get them to back off.
The book Coping with Difficult People has been a great resource for me. Sherman tanks try to roll right over ya out of disrespect for your abilities, but when you stand up to them, you have to be prepared to be best friends, 'cuz then you've earned their respect. There are a ton of these people watching Dems whimper and disrespecting them. Snipers need to be flushed out. Here's another flaw in the Dem response. I think we need to call these people out by name and say "This is a lie, they're counting on you NOT getting informed." Wet blankets, there are so many of those among political observers. I think Obama is trying to reach them with his exhortations.
We can't just sit back and feel superior, we've got to stay in the fight.
It doesn't matter if the differences are with the color of your skin, or your religious practices or your heritage. If all of America had magically turned Caucasian overnight, there are people, like Beck, who would then turn to the color of one's hair or one's height as a measure of the person to be discriminated against. We are all the same. We are all different. In Beck's view, we are all to be afraid of one another.
At day's end, this man has to live with himself. There are plenty of people willing to step into the void if Beck is forced out of his show. But I always like to return to this saying by Moahndas Gandhi:
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won.There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fail-think of it. Always."
And Dwight Eisenhower... "We seek peace, knowing that peace is the climate of freedom." "I think that people want peace so much that one of these days government had better get out of their way and let them have it."
for this post. I so needed to be reminded that the way of truth and love has always won. Always.
The real problem is that there is a viewing audience that takes him seriously. Even if he stripped away his McCarthy attitude he is just a lying showman. When he had his ass surgery he attacked the medical professionals that treated him. This year they are the best in the world. He will say whatever it takes that will get him ratings. He will say whatever Murdock wants him to say. It is very sad that there exist an audience that takes him seriously.
is a powerful motivator.
is the deadbolt of the narrow mind.
Unfortunately, our own leaders have allowed a Capitalist version of Pravda to be created under our noses. Fox News is the very thing we used to point to about what was wrong with Communism.
A perfect propaganda piece to distribute misinformation to control the people.
There I fixed it Dave. You misspelled "whore".
a whore is honest about her motives.
I'm sorry I thought about that after the post, I was denigrating a respectable profession.
Whores also charge less.
Rick Pearlstein's book gives incredible insight to how the right wing, starting with Nixon, figured out how to use the vocabulary of myth, fear, and sectarian pride to convince people to vote in ways that simply went against their own best interests (not to mention the best interests of the nation).
To allow Beck, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter, Ingraham, et al, to monopolize the momentum in populist rhetoric will simply result in another resurgence of the GOP idiocracy. It is critical that they be called out on facts, ridiculed if necessary, and presented as the kooks they are -in an entertaining manner that even movement conservatives will be able to appreciate. Keep in mind that despite all else, the conservative pundits know how to put on a compelling show. We need the same.
They may have a powerful corporate megaphone, but they speak only to the faithful. An extremist minority that has been soundly defeated in two elections. Yet they still serve as an excuse for why, for example, it is just so difficult to pass health care reform despite having the White House, sizable majorities in both Houses of Congress, and a clear majority of public opinion.
They provide the illusion of "opposition" which supposedly forces "compromise" despite there being no need to compromise. There is nearly 3 out 4 public support on one side and billions of dollars of bribe money on the other side. Extreme wingnuts simply provide the Dems with an excuse (and scape goat) for doing what they want to do any way. They also provide a terrifying "alternative" for any who may question the huge rightward shift in the Democratic Party.
The Democrats provide the illusion of victory.
We have two factions of the Party of Power and Privilege.
The senior faction and the junior faction.
See my links to the sociologist Alex Carey here
It's not just Beck it's every moron that repeats the BS they hear coming from the right. Each and every time I hear a co-worker repeat idiocy I laugh out loud at them point my finger and say " you really believe that garbage don't you". I belittle them until they are to embarrassed to speak in front of me.
And then they go fester in private until the next Teabagger convention comes to town, and they steal all media thunder from the President.
Belittling conservative individuals is only going to fuel resentment, and increase polarization. They may be fools for believing the crap but they are still your co-workers, neighbors, and fellow citizens.
the strategy for these types is to blur issues of the majority but more importantly to have the opposition(d) to constantly/consistently explain themselves. those explaining themselves are perceived to be hiding something/not truthful. in addition to this some in the media that favor the (r) will offer extreme rhetoric to end in the middle after opposition explaination. ending in the middle for many ends up being null and void. the (r) is very concerned about certain demographic/factions of their party realizing that they may be voting against their best interests.
I agree that we need more honest discourse and a method to expose the likes of Beck, but it's impossible if people only listen to or talk to those with whom they already agree.
Viewers of Fox tune in to Fox because they they hear what they like. Same with MSNBC. Same with those of us who post on C&L. Same with almost everybody, everwhere.
Seriously...when was the last time you observed somebody changing their mind about something serious because they actively sought out both sides of an issue and made and informed decision? I personally can't recall a single, recent instance.
I see it happen everyday in my classroom. And I actually convinced a group of people at a beach outing recently that the problems the country is facing today are the result of not enough Gov. It happens. Otherwise, why bother?
Fox has its adherents because Fox provides a compelling product. They aren't ashamed to exploit people's base instincts to get them to nod and say "Seig Heil!" It's like high-stakes wrassling. Roger Ailes was partly responsible for Nixon's successful media comeback strategy, and it was not a fluke. He is smart, and slimy. If we want to stop them we have to use what works and one up them (without selling out our souls of course...if that is even possible)
The key is to make a noise that they can't but help engage with. Start running skits that hammer at Bill O's predilection for sexual harassment. or Beck's idiocy. Rush's dark side. Cast aspersions on their personal credibility. Once they have to engage with their challengers, their audiences will be exposed to something outside the vacuum and at that point, it will be a test of entertainers: who can deliver the better punchline? Before Keith O, we really didn't have many. Still don't IMO.
Seriously, the people that subscribe to Fox are only good for their mindless voting patterns. They are people and deserve the universal love in the cosmic karmic sense, but, politically speaking, they just need to be moved (or confused, to use a Nixonian slant) enough to make them useless for the opposition.
And, she is both erudite and crafty.
The thing is,sites like this and say, MSNBC, spend most of their time reacting to right wing fabrications.So while I can't see any valid reason for anyone here to be suddenly swayed by something on FOX,I hold out hope(be it ever so dwindling)that someone on the Right will occasionally see the proverbial light and come over to the "reality side" of the equation.Which is not to say that Democrats don't lie-they do it all the time.The difference,I believe,is the Left is more likely to call them on it than the Right concerning FOX and the GOP.Or maybe I just have my own ideological blinders on too tight...
The problem is Dems and Progressives need to grow a pair. Quit throwing anyone the Right attacks under the bus and caving to their demands on policy. Stand up! Call them out by name and confront each of their lies and ignorant claims.The voters had the nads to take a chance and give us majorities almost everywhere because these clowns led them into disaster after stupid disaster.
The Right is scratching their heads in amazement that we act so weak and must be laughing their butts off that we insist on acting like the weak minority party. Quit insisting we must play nice with ignorant bullies. It doesn't work on the playgroung much less politics. They will always have the screaming, frothing support of 25% of the authortarian voters but for all their noise they offer nothing fear and hate. Their only power now is the power we give them and they remain amazed at our constant capitulations. If the voters ever gave them this much power again they sure know what they would do with it. The Right knows that our weakness will at some point cost us the voters respect. All they have to do is keep pointing it out. Sometimes it is flat embarassing to be a lefty...like now!
I think people on the internet, including Crooks and Liars, should check what they're doing. We are CREATING the monsters we write about. Notice how they make US DISAPPEAR BY IGNORING US? Does anyone know about the protest in Lafeyette park today? Does anyone know that Pelosi is having dinner with the INSURANCE PACS tonight and that we need to protest THAT?
We are wasting our time piddling around with the likes of the idiots at FOX while the whole barn burns down. This site should be talking about the REAL CROOKS AND LIARS IN WASHINGTON D.C. SITTING IN PUBLIC OFFICE instead of the ass holes on Faux TV.
Who watches TV anymore anyway? Jeezus the Cable man just left my house and HE DOESN'T EVEN WATCH ANYMORE.
Come on now. Unplug the TV and quit giving our money to THE ENEMY and start paying attention to WASHINGTON D.C. POLITICS CAN WE????
Otherwise, how would anybody know about teabagger parties?
As you pointed out yourself, "they made us disappear." Before any meaningful change can take place, we need a strong, effective media.
As we saw with the leadup to the Iraq war, they have the power to ignore protests with hundreds of thousands, much less other important news.
Without breaking up the powerful conglomerates and creating a stronger public media, everything else is lost, I'm afraid.
With a strong media, they can't hide. People will ask the right questions. They will have to answer. And if they answer incorrectly, THEN the voters are informed. As it stands, people merely tune into the channel that agrees with their preconceived notions to hear made-up facts and ill-informed opinion.
it's delusional to believe it.
I suspect Beck's position will be strengthened by the addition of Stossel, and probably "Savage"/Weiner who just lost his flagship anchor yesterday.
46 MILLION voters cast ballots for arguably the least qualified, least interested, least intelligent, least likable ticket in HISTORY.
That's Murdoch's audience: 92 MILLION eyes to sell to CorpoRat Murka, and neither one gives a rat's ass if the advertizers are Goody's Powders or UPS...The money spends EXACTLY the same...
most of this is bad theatre by design. the motive have "we the people" bicker over nonsense. the global financial elite know information is power. so the strategy is to provide half truths amd misinformation.
this is why the RIGHT uses the Culture Club strategy to get people to vote against their own best interest. this is global corporate interest vs. "we the people" same fight different actors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmQVWH9u8Xo
Now, if you have not joined Color of Change and signed the petition, please do it. Rucker's article is spot on and this is an organization that is active and deserves all the support it can get.
Time to draw a line in the sand and get active.
Thanks
Several weeks ago when the original boycott came out.
The next time Beck or any other asshat calls an elected official or staff member a Marxist or a communist, that person should file a lawsuit and haul that liar's ass into court.
Hit them in the pockets.
And the MSM will not expose Beck for what he is because they fear him just as much as they feared McCarthy back in the early fifties.
It does little good or Olbermann, Maddow or the rest on MSNBC to run segments because their audience already knows what Beck is. Liberal bloggers likewise preach to the choir. This is going to take a Senator to grow some balls like Maher said, and take the floor of the Senate naming names and quoting quotes.
Serious boycotts of any Fox advertiser should follow. Not just threats, but don't shop them, don't buy their products. The only thing those people understand is the bottom line. Shrink that and let them know supporting hate on Fox is not acceptable.
But none of this will happen. There is no Senator with the courage to take on Beck or his fellow hate mongers and the American public will continue to shop wherever they find what they perceive as the cheapest prices.
So Beck will continue until another James Earl Ray makes the rednecks cheer. This nation may yet see civil war.
Tomorrow I am going to cancel my subscription to the Wall Street Journal Online, which is now $197. When they ask me why, I will tell them "Because you're owned by News Corporation now, which owns Fox News. And I cannot support a company that provides a platform for lying, irresponsible demagogues like Glenn Beck."
Login or Register to post comments.