Media Extremism
Tally Grows of Viewers Moved to Violence by Beck’s Rants
0Through countless diagrams and diatribes, chalk-wielding Fox News commentator Glenn Beck has made it his mission to inform his audience that left-wing progressives are purportedly on the brink of revolution. Many of Beck’s fans take him seriously. In the past two years, at least three have decided the best response to his warnings is violence.
Kenneth B. Kimbley Jr. of Spirit Lake, Idaho, is the latest to face prison time for interpreting Beck’s rants as a call to action.
Kimbley claims to be the leader of the Brotherhood of America Patriots, an extreme-right militia whose mission, he says, is to “resist in the event the government started rounding up the patriots” and to stand up in the face of foreign invasions or societal breakdowns. (Authorities believe Kimbley’s group was tiny.) At the time of his arrest in July, Kimbley had 20,000 rounds of ammunition, a stock of firearms, and materials he planned to use to construct grenades, according to court documents.
According to the Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Wash., Kimbley’s lawyer described her client as a man with strong political views who posed no real danger to society. “In fact, everything said by Mr. Kimbley is no different than what his idol, TV commentator Glenn Beck, typically states on the air,” public defender Kim Deater wrote in court papers.
Byron Williams and Richard Poplawski, also Beck fans, got a lot farther in their alleged antigovernment actions before being caught.
Williams, who likened Beck to a “schoolteacher,” is charged with shooting and wounding two members of the California Highway Patrol during a July confrontation that occurred on his way to San Francisco, where he allegedly planned to start a revolution by assassinating leaders at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation, both regular targets of Beck’s furious rants. (The Tides Foundation, in fact, would be barely known if not for at least 29 mentions made by Beck, including two in the week before the shootout, according to Media Matters.)
Poplawski, for his part, allegedly shot three police officers to death in April 2009 after his mother called them to the Pittsburgh home they shared.
“Rich, like myself, loved Glenn Beck,” Eddie Perkovic, Poplawski’s best friend told reporter Will Bunch of Media Matters, among others. Prior to the shooting, Poplawski reportedly was “obsessed” with two of Beck’s pet theories: that there is an imminent food crisis and that paper money will soon be worthless. Like Kimbley and Williams, Poplawski worried that the government planned to intern dissidents in concentration camps.
Although Beck in the past has denied responsibility for the extreme actions of his viewers, it isn’t surprising his inflammatory expositions about what the government and its “progressive” allies are doing could push certain people over the edge and into violence.
Dubbing himself a “progressive hunter,” Beck proclaimed in January that like the “Israeli Nazi hunters … I’m going to expose what [progressives] have done and make sure that people understand.” In June, he said “anarchists, Marxists, communists, revolutionaries, Maoists” would need to “eliminate 10% of the population” to “gain control.” In July, he said that “[t]he army… of the extreme left is gathering” and that it believes that “cops are bad, kill the cops, they’re the oppressors.” In September, he warned, “Violence will come. And violence will come from the left. Violence is part of the plan.”
The connection between Kimbley’s beliefs and Beck’s provocative on-air statements seems clear, especially his fear that the government plans to round up and intern liberty-loving Americans, a fear that was also expressed by Poplawski and Byron.
One of Beck’s earliest public flirtations with the idea that government concentration camps might be real came in March 2009, exactly a month to the day before Poplawski allegedly opened fire on officers responding to a domestic dispute at his home. (Alex Jones, a far-right antigovernment conspiracy theorist and repeat FOX guest who Williams cited as an additional influence, also had trumpeted the theory for some time.) Beck has since claimed to debunk the idea of government camps, but the rest of his rhetoric is hardly even-handed. And though he tempers his endless alarms with reminders that “it is not time to pick up guns” or “blow anything up,” his most volatile fans apparently take these admonitions with a grain of salt.
“Beck is gonna deny everything about a violent approach and deny everything about conspiracies,” Williams told John Hamilton of Media Matters. “But he’ll give you every reason to believe it.”
Glenn Beck: A Quarter of Americans May Face Starvation
0Cranking up his doomsday predictions to a new fever pitch, Glenn Beck this week warned that by January some 75 million Americans could be starving.
“[B]race yourself. We went to two or three experts yesterday,” the Fox News Channel host said in his Wednesday radio broacast. “[O]ne of them said that by next year a quarter of this nation will not be able to afford food. … [I]s it going to happen? At some point, yes. When? I don’t know. I just ask you to please prepare. … Experts are now telling me that it’s happening next year.”
Beck, who for years has counseled listeners to hoard food, has long been warning that a shortage could be right around the corner — just one of many dire predictions, typically related to government malfeasance or related end-times scenarios, that have made Beck a hero of much of the radical right. Now he’s suggesting that the scary corner could be a mere six weeks away.
This time, Beck claimed that certain experts are saying that the Fed’s latest round of “quantitative easing” — a strategy that would effectively put about $600 billion into circulation during the next 12 months — is going to cause hyperinflation, the collapse of the dollar, and ultimately lead to staggeringly high food prices. He cited predictions published Nov. 5 by a group called the National Inflation Association (NIA), one of whose stated goals is to help Americans prepare for “the upcoming hyperinflationary crisis.”
The NIA — and Beck, who recited its statistics breathlessly — predicts that two pounds of sugar will “soon” go for $62.21, while 64 ounces of orange juice will be $45.71. An 11.5-ounce can of Folgers coffee will cost $77.71; and a single 1.55-ounce Hershey bar will run you $15.50. (A check at an Alabama supermarket today turned up a two-pound container of sugar for $1.89; 64 ounces of orange juice for $2.99; Folger’s coffee for $4.09; and a Hershey’s bar for 89 cents.)
The group does not explain how it reached its estimates. “Agricultural prices have gotten so far our of control,” it says, “that if corporations do start passing them along, they will simply go out of business.”
Economists dismiss this kind of sky-is-falling alarmism. “Fears of high (not to mention hyper-) inflation are severely overblown,” Eric Michael Leeper, a professor of economics at Indiana University at Bloomington, told Hatewatch via E-mail. “There are essentially NO indicators that suggest markets are expecting substantially higher inflation in the next 5 to 10 years” — let alone in a month and a half.
As for quantitative easing, Leeper said the Fed is simply doing what it always does — tinkering with the money supply to manage economic growth. At the first sign of accelerating inflation, the Fed can quickly reverse policy and drain money from the banking system, he said. “Once the economy picks up and unemployment begins to decline, the Fed will then gradually sell those long-term Treasuries back on the open market. As it sells them, it will ‘destroy money.’ Viewed this way, the Fed’s plans are NOT to permanently increase the money supply.”
But Beck insists that this isn’t just some kooky theory he dreamed up or found on a website somewhere. “We have had our financial advisors, the guys who are stat-related guys, they are not politicians, they’re more like the David Walkers of the world,” he said on his show. [David Walker is a former U.S. comptroller general who now advises the conservative-leaning Peter G. Petersen Foundation.]
Who were these advisors ? Beck, unusually bashful, declined to say. “[I]t’s not David Walker, but it’s somebody like David Walker, who’s just a bean guy, a bean-counter. This is what they do for a living.” Beck declined to name names because, he said, “quite honestly, I think many of them don’t want to be associated with me because they don’t want all the trouble.”
In the NIA, Beck seems to have found a partner in fear-mongering. “In our opinion,” the NIA’s site states, “the wealth of most Americans could get wiped out during the next decade.” Beck said he had NIA “checked out six ways to Sunday.” He’s sure they are “credible people.”
Yet the NIA does not provide much information about itself beyond the name of its president, Gerard Adams. It doesn’t offer any economic or other credentials, or give any other hint as to the basis for its alleged expertise. According to its website, this is because it is “an unbiased organization” and “it would be a conflict of interest to promote or endorse their personal businesses.” The NIA, like Beck himself, speaks highly favorably of gold as an inflation hedge, and provides information on precious metals investing on its website. Indeed, it says that one of its “missions” is “to discover and profile companies that we believe will prosper in an inflationary environment,” mainly gold and silver firms. And it predicts that America faces “hyperinflation and a complete societal collapse.” For his part, Beck has been accused of profiting from the gold sales that his doomsday economic prognostications help promote; his television show also features regular advertising pitches from firms that sell gold.
Statistics from the Bureau of Economic analysis show that grocery prices increased by only 0.06% overall in the third quarter (July-September) of 2010. And prices for fruits and vegetables, bakery, and canned goods actually declined. If hyperinflation is imminent, it is getting off to a colossally slow start.
So in a way, Beck got it right when, stunned by the NIA’s predictions, he paused a moment and said: “This is unbelievable!”
9.12 Project Paranoia: Obama Wants to See You… Naked!
0Unsurprisingly, Glenn Beck’s 9.12 Project has absorbed much of its founder’s famous paranoia. Based on Beck’s fevered lectures and paid endorsements, legions of 9.12’ers have eagerly bought up overpriced gold coins, non-hybrid seeds, and lots of ammo for use in 9.12 Project practice shoots. But not even the most skeptical and bemused observer of 9.12 culture could have seen the latest trend which may see 9.12’ers stocking up on an unlikely survival tool in preparation for the coming Obamapocalypse: very thick underwear.
On his Sept. 27 show, Beck found time in between exercises in connect-the-dots conspiracizing to discuss something called the Z Backscatter Van (ZBV), a mobile X-ray scanning device produced by the Massachusetts firm American Science & Engineering. After reading about the product in Forbes, Beck was confident that the Obama Administration had ordered intelligence and law enforcement agencies to purchase this technology — which can determine from a distance the general contents of parked cars and duffle bags — with nefarious ends in mind.
“They’re using them now in your neighborhoods,” warned Beck. “And the Obama administration won’t say exactly why we’re buying their vans and driving them down our streets.”
Luckily for Beck, he has an army of constitutional watchdogs scattered throughout the country in the form hundreds of 9.12 Project chapters. The clearinghouse for its intelligence efforts is the 9.12 Project Network. It was here that 9.12’er Jared Law offered the real reason the government is interested in the ZBV: To better understand what conservative activists look like in the buff.
“Any progressive in government, whether it’s your local city mayor, all the way up to an Obama regime bureaucrat, can now see you and your family, totally nude (through your clothes),” writes Law. “They have sold enough of these now that every single 9.12′er, Tea Partier, and conservative leader in America could potentially have dozens of photos of themselves and their families in the nude on Obama Regime hard drives… Yet another reason to throw out the ‘progressives,’ and to Turn To God!!”
Because if there’s one thing God hates more than totalitarian progressive peeping Toms, surely it’s nudity.
Fox News Host Embraces Conspiracist With Race War Theory
0Gravelly voiced conspiracy theorist Alex Jones touts himself as one of the few daring souls willing to tell the “truth” about 9/11 being an inside job, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s plans to intern dissidents in “death camps,” and the “New World Order” plot to exterminate 80% of the world’s population. The Austin, Texas-based radio host suggests that he is a lone voice “in the wilderness” of a corporate media too cowardly to tell the truth about looming disaster.
But at least one member of that media has shown Jones nothing but love. Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst for Fox News and host of the Fox Business program “Freedom Watch,” calls Jones a “dear friend” who is “doing more than anybody I know” to “educate the public” with “courage and fearlessness.” Jones responds by calling Napolitano the “best person” on national TV. Last Friday, according to liberal watchdog Media Matters for America, Napolitano was on Jones’ show for at least the sixth time, and promised to soon bring Jones on to “Freedom Watch,” which he announced was expanding from the weekend to weekdays.
Maybe they’ll get a chance to discuss a Jones theory that’s a little more racially charged than much of his usual fare: a purported secret plan on the part of undocumented Mexican immigrants to murder all whites over 16.
Jones has been railing on about the so-called Plan de San Diego since 2005, when he began to talk about the genocidal plot by radical Mexican immigrants — a “Hispanic Klan,” in Jones’ words — to start a race war against U.S. whites. As Jones described it then in his “Nightmare Racism and Open Call for Revolution” blog post, he found out about the plot at an Austin event where a number of Latinos were wearing “Plan de San Diego” T-shirts. A group of Jones’ unnamed pals — including a “Hispanic friend,” a Spanish-speaking University of Texas professor and someone “who has taken Latin-American studies” — told him the rest: A “powerful revolutionary core” of “extremist Mexican hate groups” is currently “dedicated to overthrowing Texas and setting up a racial state.” Jones did not name the groups.
Buzz about the purported conspiracy is still making the rounds today. It’s hit the message board of Stormfront.org, the world’s premiere white supremacist website; bounced to a racist Facebook page calling for the boycott of Robert Rodriguez’s movie “Machete,” and showed up on the nativist hate site VDARE.com.
In his September 2005 blog post, Jones claimed that a third of the Latinos he spoke to at the Austin event “said that Texas was [part of] Mexico and that they were taking over.” Some, Jones claimed, even said that “all whites would be killed and that the entirety of the Americas would be only for ‘indigenous peoples.’” Jones doesn’t explain why the people he spoke to would share all of these details of the anti-white conspiracy with an obvious Anglo.
As it happens, there was a real Plan de San Diego. But it emerged from a Monterey, Mexico, jailhouse in 1915, during the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1920. The plan called for Mexicans to kill whites over 16 in Texas, which had been part of Mexico until 1848. Several dozen U.S. citizens were murdered, but the U.S. hit back hard. A 1919 Texas legislative inquiry found that between 300 and 5,000 Mexicans were killed by the Texas Rangers, an elite police force, in retaliation.
And that was the end of that.
What Jones later described as the “illegal alien rally” in Austin where he learned of the purported Latino conspiracy was actually a Mexican Independence Day celebration. If anyone there was wearing a Plan of San Diego shirt, it was at worst a statement of nationalistic pride in a lost cause, basically akin to a Confederate flag T-shirt. Poor taste bordering on the offensive, yes, but hardly a coded call to arms.
And the “frothing and screaming” Jones says he encountered at the hands of the Latino celebrants? Jones brought a bullhorn and a crowd of “Texans for Freedom” — an antigovernment group he heads — “to educate other well-meaning celebrants” of Mexican Independence Day about the “racist groups that were preaching their message in the Hispanic community.” The “well-meaning celebrants,” apparently, did not welcome Jones’ message.
So far, Jones’ main platform has been his radio show and two Internet websites. But now, thanks to Napolitano, that may be changing. In a March 2009 appearance on Napolitano’s “Freedom Watch,” which then was only on Foxnews.com, Jones expressed appreciation for the Fox website’s decision to have him as a guest. “Thank you, Fox,” he said, “you guys are getting radical having me on over there.”
It isn’t clear if Napolitano knows about Jones’ ideas about a murderous Mexican plot to kill whites and bring Texas back into the Mexican fold. But last Friday, on Jones’ show, he did bring up the topic of Texas secession. “Guess what?” he told Jones. “That time has come. That may actually happen.”
Report: Would-Be Terrorist Inspired by ‘Schoolteacher’ Glenn Beck
0The media watchdog Media Matters for America today released audio of an interview conducted with Byron Williams, the would-be terrorist who last July was arrested after a shootout with cops on his way to San Francisco, where he allegedly planned to kill employees at the offices of the ACLU and the Tides Foundation.
The interview and the accompanying article, by Pacifica Radio producer John Hamilton, illuminates the role Fox News and specifically Fox host Glenn Beck played in turning Williams’ attention toward the groups and convincing him that they were at the center of a vast plot to destroy the country.
“I would have never started watching Fox News if it wasn’t for the fact that Beck was on there,” Williams tells Hamilton. “And it was the things that he did, it was the things he exposed that blew my mind.”
Beck’s influence seems especially salient with regards to Williams’ strange obsession with the Tides Foundation, a low-profile group that dispenses grants to liberal causes. According to Hamilton, Beck had attacked Tides 29 times on his Fox News show in the year-and-a-half leading up to the shooting, often placing it at the center of fantastical diagrams depicting liberal-socialist plots to wreck America.
In the interview from prison, Williams describes Beck as being “like a schoolteacher on TV.” This contradicts statements made by Williams in another interview with the Examiner, in which he claims he already knew everything Beck discussed on his show.
In his conversation with Hamilton, Williams also mentions the influence of David Horowitz, whose Discover The Networks website is the source of much of Beck’s material, and Alex Jones, the Austin-based radio conspiracist whose friend Andrew Napolitano will soon host a daily show on Fox Business.
Beck’s breathless demonization of Tides and other liberal groups has not occurred in a vacuum. The rhetoric that helped inspire Williams to pack his car with guns and ammo and head toward San Francisco finds echo throughout the rightwing media world. Media Matters has a compiled a useful archive of this material here.
Author Interview: Journalist Probes ‘Backlash’ Under Obama
0After Barack Obama’s 2008 election as the nation’s 44th president, the Tea Party movement sprang up, as did increasingly shrill assertions that the president was a socialist, a communist, a Muslim and more. Gun-rights advocates fretted that the new administration would impose draconian gun controls, while others insisted that the president wasn’t born in America and therefore was in office unlawfully.
Philadelphia Daily News senior writer and Media Matters for America senior fellow Will Bunch decided to investigate what gave rise to this vociferous movement. He traveled throughout the country, attending Tea Party and other conservative gatherings and interviewing activists. He talked to people such as right-wing Georgia congressman Paul Broun and Oath Keepers founding member Celia Hyde. He went to the semi-annual Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot in Kentucky and to Phoenix, the epicenter of the nativist anti-immigration movement.
What Bunch learned is the subject of his third book, The Backlash: Right-Wing Radicals, High-Def Hucksters, and Paranoid Politics in the Age of Obama, which goes on sale on Tuesday. He spoke to Hatewatch on the eve of the book’s release:
Why did you choose this topic for a book? Was there a particular event that was a catalyst?
In the waning days of the 2008 campaign, I was fascinated with the rise of Sarah Palin and the drift of the American conservative movement into a kind of blissful know-nothingness about everything from big issues like climate change to Barack Obama’s religion and where he was born. I thought Obama’s supporters of “change” were really calling out for a return to reason. Thus, it was stunning to see the angry and often irrational forces gain strength and influence in those first months of the Obama presidency. And as a career journalist, I thought this was a kind of a story of a lifetime that I wanted to hit the road and latch onto as this backlash was unfolding.
Have you seen anything in the past comparable to the accusations against President Obama, such as that he wasn’t born in the United States, he’s a socialist, and so on?
The first presidential race I covered was in 1984 as a reporter for The Birmingham News in Alabama, watching Jesse Jackson tilt at the windmills of the Reagan revolution before the first-ever “Super Tuesday.” Clearly, the increasing ideological polarization of the two parties — triggered by the shift of the Deep South to the GOP during the ’80s, when I worked there — has made over-the-top demonizing of the other party more of a reality. The seeds were planted with some of the crazier talk about Bill Clinton, things like accusing him of murdering his aide Vince Foster.
But one thing has changed dramatically since the early 1990s. The more insane Clinton allegations were things like underground VHS videos or pamphlets, while the allegations about Obama not only spread 100 times faster on the Internet, but are amplified by talk radio and a coast-to-coast cable powerhouse, Fox News, that gives these low ideas great power. The other difference with Obama is that he is viewed as a symbol of cultural upheaval and fear, of the projections that whites will become a minority in America by the year 2050. These fears are making partisans grasp at the most outlandish theory, that the president is in some way not American.
Should we be concerned by this rhetoric? Or is it merely democracy in action?
I’m a strong believer in unfettered free speech, and so that would include the ability of citizens to advocate any and all nature of conspiracy theories. What I find appalling is that supposed leaders — major media personalities like [Fox New host] Glenn Beck, of course, but also members of Congress and other top pols who are not only educated but employ large staffs — gladly help spread political claptrap in search of higher ratings or more votes in their heavily gerrymandered districts. While free speech certainly applies to a Beck or congressional extremists like Michele Bachmann [R-Minn.] or Georgia’s Paul Broun [R], they also have a responsibility to act like adults, and to not influence their most unhinged followers who may be drawn to violence.
As you note in your book, the radical right and conspiracy theories are not a new phenomenon. What factors have contributed to the rise of the Tea Party movement and the resurgence of right-wing politics?
Major elements of the Tea Party/9-12/Oath Keeper movements are 50- and 60-somethings who harbor resentments that date back to the Vietnam era and other 1960s upheavals, as well as “the paranoid style” so eloquently described by Richard Hofstadter in the era of the John Birch Society — which, as an aside, is undergoing a resurgence. On the other hand, I sensed that the recruitment pool for this movement is growing — in part because of the size of the boomer age population [cohort], but mainly because of the growing fear in this country both over the cultural changes taking place [and] the rising class of permanently unemployed, middle-class, middle-aged Americans.
How does the far right today differ from in the past?
[There are t]wo related factors. One is the existence of a media structure that didn’t exist until the late 1990s — the Internet, where conspiracy theories are easily promulgated and validated; social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook, which are powerful tools that allow groups like the Oath Keepers to grow quickly; and the conservative bent of coast-to-coast talk radio, finally topped off with the rise of Fox. One thing I discovered about the anti-Obama backlash is that this is a class of people — retirees, middle-aged layoff victims, part-time workers, etc. — with more free time than other people, and many are immersed for hours a day in Beck and [radio host Rush] Limbaugh Land.
But it’s also important to note that as Beck and Limbaugh became the de facto leaders of the Republican Party, they created a new class of political “leaders” who kowtowed to talk radio and even developed sound-bite platforms lacking in constructive solutions or any potential for negotiation or compromise. This has led to gridlock on Capitol Hill for everything from energy and climate change to immigration reform.
What surprised you the most in researching this book?
The rank and file of the Tea Party — with little attention being paid by the rest of us — is actively engaged in a quest for a certain kind of knowledge and education, which in part explains the rise of Glenn Beck, who has been enormously successful in pandering to that by recommending books and devoting entire shows to “history.” It’s good when people are interested in learning, but the problems are: a) many Tea Party types aren’t seeking unbiased American history but tomes that sometimes validate narrow-minded views about America and our traditions; and, b) leaders like Beck are peddling phony ideas about our alleged founding as a Christian nation or [claiming] that the progressive reforms of the 20th Century were really a march to totalitarianism.
What disturbed you the most in researching this book?
The villains of the story are what I call “the high-def hucksters.” These are the kind of people who look out at a fearful populace and instead of promoting calm — remember FDR? — see an opportunity for big bucks. This includes Beck, who made $32 million last year by marketing to America’s worst fears, and Sarah Palin, who ditched her chance to make a difference as a governor to make $12 million as a media celebrity. But there are others — I profile a businessman named Bill Heid who openly brags of the money he earns selling “survival seed banks” and solar generators to fearful Americans.
You single Glenn Beck out for a good deal of attention. How important is he in the emergence of the Tea Party and the far right’s revival?
Glenn Beck is huge, because with his background in entertainment — he is a student of Orson Welles and his fear-epic War of the Worlds — rather than raw politics, [he] has been able to tap into the raw emotions of an anxious middle America. As noted above, he also understands the desire for a kind of “education.” A recent poll showed that Beck is the most liked and most trusted figure in the Tea Party by far, and in my travels I met many who said they were moved to action by his broadcasts.
There has been debate as to whether or not the Tea Party movement is racist or contains racist elements. If voters in 2008 had elected a white man rather than Obama, would there still be a Tea Party?
There would certainly be anger and resentment from those long engaged in “the paranoid style” — one can look at some of the allegations about Bill Clinton and imagine that a President Hillary Clinton would have received, arguably, even worse treatment. That said, I think that Barack Obama — as the first black president, with an unusual life story and heritage and, of course, that infamous middle name — is a symbol for broader anxiety about major cultural change in America. This summer we’ve seen a powerful conflating of xenophobia about Mexican immigrants and Muslims and these notions that Obama is a Muslim or a Kenyan. That has helped to weaken the Obama presidency, and I don’t think it would have played out the same way with a white president.
A common refrain of the Tea Partiers and the far right is that they want to “take back America.” What do they want to take the country back to?
An America where they felt secure that the dominant culture would remain white, Christian and non-urban long after they are gone. Rapid change has overwhelmed many of these people in a way that futurist Alvin Toffler predicted with remarkable prescience in his 1970 book Future Shock. Some scientists even link these ideas to our broader fear of death, [arguing] that the kind of cultural unity and, arguably, purity sought by the “I want my country back” crowd is a form of immortality.
Do you think the Tea Party movement and the extreme right’s power have peaked, or will it continue to grow?
It’s complicated. In the short run, the Tea Party has been the tail wagging the American dog, exerting enough influence over the 41 [Republican] senators who represent just 37% of the population to block most meaningful legislation that would get the country moving forward. What’s more, the movement’s extreme rhetoric amid frustration over the march of a multicultural [society] raises the most unfortunate potential for more violent incidents like the killing of three Pittsburgh police officers by Beck fan Richard Poplawski, which I chronicle in The Backlash.
However, inexorably, the forces that rallied behind Obama in the 2008 election are still on the rise. While the 2010 election looks like an angry blip, over time America will continue to grow more racially diverse and also become more educated and most likely less religious, more tolerant on social issues like gay marriage. This would seem to not bode well for the Tea Party over time, but it’s still likely that the “last throes” of this movement may play over for a number of years.
Annals of Hypocrisy: ‘Political Cesspool’ and ‘Vulgarity’
0When he’s not bemoaning the white man’s plight, “The Political Cesspool” radio host James Edwards often expresses intimate interest on another subject: homosexuals. Like so many who rant about gays, Edwards apparently can’t stop thinking about them. Even when he’s not overtly musing about them, gay double entendres and phrases creep into his writings almost as routinely as racial slurs.
Edwards is best known, of course, for the white nationalist, anti-Semitic views he and his guests express on Memphis-based “Cesspool,” whose statement of principles includes the expected white nationalist pining to revive the white birth rate and to increase the percentage of whites in the world relative to other races, coupled with opposition to feminism, abortion and “primitivism.” But another of Edwards’ founding principles is that he and his show are opposed to “vulgarity” (along with homosexuality, “loveless sex and masochism”).
He has an unusual way of showing that. Consider:
— Last month, the “Cesspool” website carried a story about a black woman running for office in Wisconsin who wanted to declare on the ballot that she is “not the white man’s bitch.” Edwards commented, “There’s no way she could be ‘the white man’s bitch.’ That would be Senator Lindsey Graham.” (In April, William Gheen, who heads Americans for Legal Immigration PAC — ALIPAC — called on Graham to acknowledge he is gay, claiming that Democrats could be using the senator’s supposed sexual orientation to blackmail him into cooperating on immigration reform. Graham later told The New York Times: “I’m sure it’s really gonna upset a lot of gay men — I’m sure hundreds of ’em are gonna be jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge — but I ain’t available. I ain’t gay. Sorry.”)
— After University of Hawaii football coach Greg McMackin apologized for a slur against gays, Edwards wrote, “Greg McMackin. What a faggot.”
— Of MSNBC host Keith Olbermann, Edwards wrote, “Tell me this guy doesn’t take it up the butt.” He went at it again in another screed, writing, “Keith Olbermann must’ve accidentally sat on his butt plug again.” (Olbermann has dated, among other women, conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham.)
— When Russ Weiner, the son of hate radio host Michael Savage (original name Michael Weiner), gave $25,000 to the then-gubernatorial campaign of San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, the liberal Newsom returned the donation. Wrote Edwards: “That’s something you don’t see every day — a man in San Francisco saying no to a Weiner.”
— Commenting on a story that O.J. Simpson and a white supremacist Nevada prison cellmate had befriended one another, Edwards wrote, “Heck, in a few years, the two of them will probably be able to get married.”
— When some leaders in the Tea Party movement said their organizations are not racist despite an NAACP resolution calling on movement leaders to oust racist elements, Edwards wrote that “they predictably went into their usual bend over and grab their ankles mode.”
— In a story headlined “Trouble in Pervtown,” a “Cesspool” writer said the “pervert community … have begun eating their own,” and added, “Well, that’s when the buttplug hit the fan.”
— “Cesspool” headlined an item about openly gay Democratic congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts this way: “A GOP candidate Barney Frank can get behind.”
— Of a white California city councilman who denied he was racist after making a racist statement, Edwards commented, “You may be white, but you’re no man. Men have testicles.” He also complained that Republicans who are accused of racism get “on their knees kissing every non-white ass in the vicinity.”
— Returning to the subject of testicles, Edwards wrote in another commentary that to work for the mainstream media “you’ve got to check your spine, testicles, and self respect at the door as part of the deal.” And in an unrelated witticism, he referred to the political blog site “Little Green Footballs” as “Little Green Testicles.”
So there you have it. James Edwards and “Political Cesspool” — opposed to homosexuality and vulgarity and happily, it seems, immersed in it.
Shirley Sherrod and the Right: A Day That Will Live in Infamy
0The entire Shirley Sherrod affair is so disgusting, such a stomach-churning episode of right-wing lies, propagandists posing as “journalists,” and craven political cowardice and gullibility, that it’s hard to know who to be most enraged at.
Andrew Breitbart, a particularly vile propagandist of the American right who presented a severely edited videotape of a speech by the Agriculture Department official to falsely label her an anti-white racist? Fox News, several of whose miserable excuses for journalists relentlessly plugged the entirely false story before and after Sherrod was fired? Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who had a minion call Sherrod on a cell phone and insist that she pull over to the side of the road and text in her resignation before any of the relevant background facts about the “scandal” emerged? The White House, which, apparently frightened of appearing in any way linked to black racism, stood by the forced resignation even when it became clear that Sherrod’s speech was nothing like what Breitbart suggested? Even the NAACP acted poorly in this sorry episode, saying it was “appalled” by Sherrod’s words and later “concurring” with her firing. (To its credit, the civil rights group quickly recognized its error, retracting its comments yesterday and saying it had been “snookered” by Breitbart and Fox’s falsehoods.)
Here’s the story in brief, for those few people who still don’t know about it. On Monday, Breitbart — the same loathsome character who publicly called Ted Kennedy a “pile of human excrement” a few hours after the senator’s death — aired a video of Sherrod speaking to an NAACP banquet in Georgia last March. In his edited version, Sherrod is shown talking about initially not wanting to help a white man who was facing the loss of his farm because of her anger toward white racists. But the tape presented by Breitbart, who was furious about the NAACP’s recent criticism of racism within the ranks of the Tea Parties, left out the crucial conclusion of what was really Sherrod’s tale of redemption — that in the course of the 1986 case she was discussing, she came to realize that “the struggle is really about poor people,” and that her anti-white feelings were wrong. She said the case changed her entire outlook. (And in fact the farmer and his wife were all over the media yesterday, saying that Sherrod had saved their farm, was a fine and caring woman, and should get her job back.)
FoxNews.com and Fox Nation, both parts of Fox News, immediately picked up Breitbart’s fairy tale and began plugging it, as did Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly (who demanded Sherrod’s resignation in taped comments run after she quit) and a number of other right-wing media outlets. (Many of these reports, following Breitbart, claimed that Sherrod’s actions in the 1986 case had occurred while she was an Agriculture employee — a complete falsehood.) That prompted Vilsack to have her thrown out of her job as the department’s director of rural development in Georgia (to the applause of an array of Fox hosts and guests) — an act that Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen rightly described today as pure political “cowardice.” Vilsack didn’t bother to hear Sherrod’s side of the story first, and he didn’t watch the full videotape. Incredibly, even as the true story began to emerge, Vilsack said he was sticking by Sherrod’s ouster, because, “rightly or wrongly,” perceptions about her comments could make her job more difficult. Then, early this morning, the Associated Press quoted an unnamed White House official saying President Obama had been briefed on the situation but was supporting Vilsack’s decision.
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen this kind of wilting of White House officials under pressure from the political right. They fired Van Jones, a White House environmental advisor, after Fox’s Glenn Beck made false claims that he was a “black nationalist” and former “radical communist” who was using green jobs as a form of “stealth reparations.” They repudiated an accurate 2009 Department of Homeland Security report that was leaked and then attacked by right wingers for supposedly defaming conservatives — a charge that was patently false.
Let’s take a closer look at a couple of the other actors in this nasty little episode.
Andrew Breitbart is a former editor for the right-wing Drudge Report (which also participated in the plugging of Breitbart’s video) and a columnist for the arch-conservative Washington Times who sometimes substitutes for Michael Savage, a radio talk show host who regularly makes racist remarks on the air (and who, I should say in the interest of full disclosure, has attacked me personally many times). It was one of Breitbart’s websites that aired videos made by right-wing activists of ACORN employees giving advice concerning prostitution, and that later suggested that ACORN was destroying incriminating documents. (California Attorney General Jerry Brown investigated, concluding there was no criminal activity depicted on the “severely edited” tapes Breitbart aired.) Breitbart also has claimed that Congressmen John Lewis and Andre Carson “made up” a story about being repeatedly called “niggers” during a walk through a Tea Party rally. His evidence? There was no videotape of the insults.
Breitbart recently blogged about the “insufferable assholes” he claims populate the mainstream media. Ironically enough, given the revolting role he played in the defaming of Shirley Sherrod, John Lewis and others, he described “the racket that is modern journalism,” saying that journalists “lie when they claim to be objective.” Elsewhere, in his first column about Sherrod, he crowed that “the new media will not be silenced.”
Which brings us to Fox News, that infamous purveyor of falsehoods, wildly skewed reporting and propaganda posing as real facts (some of Fox’s “journalists” even later suggested that Fox had never plugged the Sherrod tape story). As my colleague Alexander Zaitchik wrote on this blog Monday, the network has “a long history of crude and transparent race-baiting.” And Zaitchik wasn’t even talking about the Sherrod spectacle — he was writing about Fox’s current obsession with the “scandal” of the Justice Department dismissing part of a voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party, a black racist hate group. On MSNBC last night, Rachel Maddow did a serious takedown of Fox’s rantings about Sherrod.
The United States faces many serious problems in the year 2010, from a crashed economy to the largest oil spill in our history. But no American should ignore another serious threat to our integrity as a nation and a culture: the far-right propagandists, their media and political enablers, and the political cowardice that allows complete falsehoods to destroy perfectly innocent human beings.
Another Long, Hot Black Nationalist Summer at Fox News
0It must be July, because Fox News is once again hyperventilating over a racially charged non-story. One year ago, it was Glenn Beck’s crusade against Van Jones, the White House environmental advisor who, the host charged, day after day and against all available evidence, was a black nationalist using green jobs as a form of “stealth reparations.”
One year later, the channel’s marquee hosts and anchors are tag-teaming a new fear-mongering race fantasy — the idea that the New Black Panther Party, with the assistance of the Obama Administration, is currently hanging its black militant fangs directly over the arteries of the republic.
On nearly 100 occasions since June 30, Fox News anchors and hosts have breathlessly discussed the marginal group and the “scandal” of the Justice Department’s dismissal of a voter intimidation case filed against two of its members who were videotaped standing outside a Philadelphia poll station on Election Day 2008. (For more sober accounts of the events, read here and here and here.)
Nobody familiar with the Fox network’s long history of crude and transparent race-baiting should be surprised by the conclusion of Abigail Thernstrom, a conservative George W. Bush appointee on the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. “This doesn’t have to do with the Black Panthers,” Thernstrom told Politico. “This has to do with their fantasies about how they could use this issue to topple the [Obama] administration.”
And what better way to do that than play sensationalized loops of militant-looking black men with zero political power or connections to the White House?
We’ve seen this before. Here’s Glenn Beck announcing his fatwa against Van Jones, one year ago this week:
“[Obama's] new science czar, Van Jones, is a guy that was all caught up in the Rodney King trial and he was actually arrested. He was a radical communist. … He is still a black nationalist. He is also now your green job czar. … Your country is being hijacked. They are using things like green jobs as a front. In the context of Obama-style reparations, that’s what they’re doing. [Jones] is yet another community organizer. This is yet another black nationalist in the same way that Reverend Jeremiah Wright is a black nationalist. … America, you need to wake up, because this country is being transformed. It is way beyond socialism. It is into black nationalism.”
None of which was true. But the campaign served its purpose.
By pounding this drum and inflaming existing (but mostly low-intensity) anxiety over the election of a black president, Beck and his FNC colleagues have steadily and deliberately helped create a new generation of hysterical, racially paranoid political activism across the country. Over the last couple of years, Hatewatch has chronicled this growth, which shows no sign of slowing down. Typical of the numerous examples of FNC-inspired literature that continues to pop up across the land is a flyer distributed for a meeting organized last week in Suches, Ga., by a self-styled “Patriot” named R. Keith Martin. Among the subjects discussed at Martin’s meeting were “Race-Based Tyranny” and “Our Black Imbroglio.”
“White racism is rare,” explains the flyer, “but black racism is raging.”
Of course, there is no evidence that this is true. Which raises the rhetorical question of where on earth Martin could possibly have gotten the idea.
An Irritated World Net Daily Denounces Terrible Reviews
0For an organization that loathes the mainstream media, World Net Daily sure craves their acceptance. The book publishing division of the far-right, Obama-obsessed organization released a new title about the president last week and it’s furious about the contempt with which major news organizations have greeted it. So much so that WND sent out two E-mail alerts last week to complain bitterly about the hostility. And, in a novel marketing ploy, the publisher urges people to buy the book as a means of defying the same traditional media whose approval it covets.
The book — The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists by Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott — was among Amazon.com’s top 10 sellers last week; it had fallen to 16th as of this morning. It claims to have uncovered “copious new details” about Obama’s ties to one-time Weather Underground co-founder William Ayers and to a “radical, far-left church” during his childhood, as well as his supposed associations with the Nation of Islam and black political extremists. There also are claims linking Obama senior advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod to communist activists.
“The book seeks to expose an extremist coalition of communists, socialists and other radicals working both inside and outside the administration to draft and advance current White House policy goals,” says a WND press release.
This is standard fare at WND, which continues to obsess over Obama’s birthplace, even though there is no credible evidence he was born anywhere but Hawaii, making him a U.S. citizen.
Klein’s publicist was greeted, not with mere indifference, but downright hostility after she sent press releases pitching The Manchurian President to her list of media contacts. She couldn’t even give the book to some of them. Here were some responses she received, according to WND:
• “Ridiculous crap” — a New York Daily News editor
• “Absolute crap” — a Huffington Post editor
• “Never, ever contact me again” — a Time magazine writer
• “Sensational rubbish” — a Newsweek editor
• “Seriously, get a life” — an AOL writer
Some might see these responses as merely reflecting a lack of interest in searching for dubious links floated by often anonymous sources to draw predictable conclusions. WND, however, sees it as proof of that the media is protecting an undeserving president. The Web-based publisher breezily dismisses the mainstream news organizations as “the dying, dinosaur media” who are “not even interested in a good story! That’s why it’s important for you to crush the gatekeepers, stomp on them, destroy their temples, burn their groves, smash their false idols. You can do that by doing the opposite of what they want you to do. In this case, they don’t want you to know about Manchurian President, apparently because it dethrones one of their political icons. So be sure to read it.”
And then, WND helpfully displays a link and a telephone number to order the book and “poke them right in the eye by being aware of their efforts to control you and what you know” — and, of course, to help WND’s bottom line.