Beck's Witch Hunt

Even though after the Wednesday speech approval of Obama's Health Care plan is back to robust levels, we ought to begin asking the question if we are not experiencing a return to one of the most disgraceful eras of American history--the McCarthy reign of terror in the early 1950's. As you can see from Herblock's classic cartoon, the Republican Party was a willing co-conspirator with Senator McCarthy. The scary part about our current witch hunt is that Joe McCarthy, unlike Glenn Beck, never had a billionaire media partner like Rupert Murdoch.
Beck, after successfully waving the scalps of supposed radicals Van Jones and Yosi Sergant has now turned his witch hunt on Mark Lloyd, associate General Council of the FCC; Cass Sunstein, head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Policy; and Carol Browner, a White House Advisor on Climate Policy. I Assume Beck has his boss Rupert's full permission to pursue the blacklisting and defamation of Lloyd, Sunstein and Browner. Both Fox News and Murdoch's Wall Street Journal are pushing this story so it would be a mistake to dismiss this as a single whack-job TV commentator.
But the lessons from the McCarthy era are important. For three years of the witch hunt, President Eisenhower stayed silent as did most of the majority of American citizens even though polls showed he had very little general support. The Majority was silent until one brave journalist, Edward R. Murrow decided to call the bully Senator out. What he had to say about McCarthy was instructive for our own moment.
His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind...We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men.
We have just witnessed a month in "the age of unreason", where a group of fanatic idealogues have succeeded in "confusing the public mind". They have no conscience as to whose life they ruin or what false charges they bring against our President. We can only assume that the corporations that finance them want their lies to be spread. So let's hear from Mr. Murdoch of News Corp (Fox News and the Wall Street Journal) and Mark Mays of Clear Channel (Limbaugh). Do you really support these views or is this some cynical view that it's just entertainment and not going to lead to tragic circumstances. I was lucky enough to meet the writer Waldo Salt who had been blacklisted in the 1950's. His livelihood was stolen from him. He was a far greater American than Joe McCarthy, just like mark Lloyd is a far greater American than Glenn Beck.
We cannot stay in the silent majority. Both the President and all of us need to make it clear to Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Mays (markpmays@clearchannel.com) that we will not condone another Blacklist.

















In a style made famous by Glen Beck, and featuring generous heaps of adjectives designed to generate a specific emotional response, Taplin presents his readers with a challenge: quick, what's the scariest part of today's witch-hunt?
A: Glenn Beck is a Joe McCarthy on television.
That's what Glen Beck would say if he was witch-hunting Glen Beck.
Meanwhile, what TPM does on its front page multiple times a day has no resemblance to an obsession, a witch-hunt or even a New York Post (hint: Murdoch, Rupert - owner).
No, no, no... it's Glen Beck who does witch-hunting. What Taplin and TPM do is called Serious Journalism and political reporting.
September 11, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but I bet Taplin could spell "Oligarchy".
September 11, 2009 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough.
Then I'd say that Taplin is Glen Beck, New! and Improved!
;-)
September 11, 2009 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dorn,
the "C" is silent, like he P in water.
September 11, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo,
you're so predictable you have become boring.
September 11, 2009 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, just for fun, why don't you give us a single, solitary example of TPM's witchhunting? And no, this circular "witchunting the witchunter" bit isn't it. Also, muckraking real transgressions (Chris Christie for instance) doesn't count either.
So, what you got?
September 12, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know. This doesn't seem much different from the usual partisan, opposition party sniping at vulnerable administration appointees. There are no hearings or "blacklists" at this point, are there?
It seems to be part of the usual partisan Washington game for the opposition party to hunt for potentially embarrassing or scandalous statements from administration appointees, to make a big fuss about them, to try to force the officials out and to disrupt the business of the executive branch.
It's up to the president to stand up for his people and issue a courteous "screw you" if he thinks it is important they stay. And if the harassment grows too intense, fight back.
September 11, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the Glen Beck of the left during the Bush years was.......?
September 11, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I take heart in just how close to the bottom of the barrel Beck and others are having to scrape. And what they're pulling up from the bottom of said barrel is pretty sad, frankly.
OMG, Jones signed a petition that might have changed after he signed it? OMG, he called Republicans *expletive deleted*?
What does worry me, though, is that the more people Beck takes down, the more bold he'll get, and the larger the lies he'll start to spew.
The common denominator of Murdoch is interesting, though. If Wikipedia is right, he holds dual American-Australian citizenship. He only holds American citizenship because he wanted to own TV stations here.
When asked in 2007 if the current Australian PM should be re-elected, he stated
Does that sound like a man who would be willing to advance a political agenda by using his media outlets?
September 11, 2009 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jon, I do not like Glen Beck. I think that he and similarly supported tools of the neocon-men corporatists are trying to ruin our republic. But I don't really see a direct analogy to what McCarthy did. Not yet, anyway.
The current set of tea-bagging townhall terrorists, and their media mouthpieces, seem focused directly on destroying the Obama administration, per se. It may be part of a larger plan, but it seems to me very specific to the current administration. So to me it feels more like the Clinton years revisited. Only much nastier.
There is a populist element to it, and that is new (compared to the Clinton Wars). But the goal is the same -- play defense and ruin the current Democratic champion, and as much as possible tar the rest of the Democratic party as a failure, so that the Republicans will get another 8- or 12-year chance to further dismantle the social safety net and loot the Treasury.
I wasn't alive for the McCarthy era. I understand it was a terrible time. But the targets of that witch hunt were journalists and individuals in the entertainment biz -- "famous" people, who were not really part of the mainstream political landscape. To me, McCarthyism seems more analagous to gay-bashing and the fear mongering over immigration today.
Still very nasty. And still in the service of a political agenda that I totally disagree with. But not quite a witch hunt like the McCarthy era yet.
-- ARG
September 11, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was alive (in my 20's) during the McCarthy era and although he targeted and managed to ruin the careers of a relatively small number of people, the effects of his witch hunt ended up having ramifications for much of the population in general.
In college at the time, I applied for and got a part-time job which was funded by the state of California. In order to get paid, I was required to sign a loyalty oath - to swear that I wasn't a communist, never had been and apparently never would be. I refused to sign. I didn't get paid.
We can write Beck off as a harmless nut case. However, the seisms that he creates do not necessarily stop at the door of his broadcasting studio.
September 11, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably true. But the anecdote you provide, which is only one of many that can be told about the McCarthy Era, helps show why it is important not to trivialize that era by comparing it with a phenomenon that, at least at this point, is not even in the ballbark.
Let's recall that McCarthy was an actual US Senator, who dragged people before his state-sanctioned inquisition for years, and was responsible for a gamut of oppressive legislation, prosecutions and purges. I don't think we want to yell, "McCarthy" every time some wingnut gets on his high horse and gets a few minor victories.
September 11, 2009 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
phelicity,
Beck feeds the same element that Ernst Rohm fed during the 30s.
September 11, 2009 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was alive for the McCarthy era, but only the tail-end (meaning: I was very young).
What I did get to experience in a more full manner was the resulting fear of the Red Menace that literally permeated most waking moments for even me, an adolescent apolitical little kid. The sense of fear was palpable, so much so I remember it clearly today. And this didn't relate just to the fact during the cold war that the Russians aimed nuclear missiles at it (though I did have the pleasure of doing duck-and-cover exercises in grade school).
It was because that sense that anybody, your neighbor, the kid you played with, the guy who ran the local candy store — anybody could be a secret Red.
With the hindsight of age I now know that is what McCarthy and his small, dour brand of extremists started. That's the ball he started rolling.
And he didn't just go after entertainers. Yes, there was a Hollywood Blacklist (some of whom had to act or write under pseudonyms until into the 1970s, so pervasive was that blacklisting).
He started out going after Harry Truman, saying that Truman's cabinet harbored communists. Sound familiar? And is it just coincidence that all this Red baiting hysteria arose around the time that Truman attempted to put in place limited health care?
Well, maybe. Certainly is an interesting parallel though.
Of course, what ultimately brought him down, beyond being challenged by Murrow, was that he started aggressive investigations of suspected Communists and security risks in the Army.
He went after the frigging Army, not the USO.
Still, I tend to agree that focusing on Beck's witch hunts themselves is to be distracted from the true threat he represents. And it's one that goes just slightly farther than McCarthy's worst excesses, or at least could ever so easily get there.
So McCarthy was an uncontrolled alcoholic and Glen Beck is an unmedicated bipolar, but chemical or non-chemical induced insanity does not alter the fact both men could generate a generous amount of fear and distrust in a statistically valid portion of the population.
Fear kills rationality, and it can spread beyond the small circle of the "early adopters" (the fear I felt as a zero-to-15 year old is testament).
That's what they have in common.
What is different is that, today, the fearful are arming themselves like never happened in the 50s and 60s. They're toting signs (I believe in deadly earnest, as last Saturday) that read "We came unarmed...this time.
And the general culture just shrugs it off as a few crazy radicals.
At the height of the McCarthy period and immediately after, if a person brought a concealed handgun or a blatantly displayed assault rifle to an event where a president — from either party — was speaking, that person would end up in a 4x8 concrete cube and likely never see daylight again. Ever.
Beck and his corporate masters are very consciously getting this "small" group of fringies to fear and hate the rising socialistic/Marxist/communistic threat and are just fine with them arming up.
After all, it was their likes that started the whisper campaign that if Obama was elected he would take all their guns away, causing a run on gun shops. And that the call for public service is a plan to "indoctrinate" (brainwash) people to his evil purposes.
And pull the plug on grandma.
What would you do if somebody was going to pull the plug on your grandma?
Armed to the teeth and convinced Obama hates all whites, wants to turn us all into totalitarian zombies (ironic, that) and is coming for grandma.
Yeah. That's all they're doing. McCarthy never made that call to arms, though. This is a whole new element to the fear mongering game they play.
September 16, 2009 12:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
The real question is, did Glenn Beck rape and murder a young girl in 1990? I don't know the answer to that, but it's a rumor floating around, so there must be something to it, and I think Beck needs to come clean about it.
http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/
September 11, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would not surprise me one bit. He most assuredly has the personality and temperament for it.
C
September 11, 2009 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks so much for the link to Did Glenn Beck Rape and Murder a Young Girl in 1990?
Classic example.
September 13, 2009 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
He could plead insanity and it would work!
September 16, 2009 12:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am so confused. Beck makes charges. Then the administration leaves these guys to twist in the wind. Before I get so very upset about Beck, I need to see someone in this administration oppose him, attack him, denigrate him, go after him. Until then, this wringing of hands just magnifies the decision that Obama, Emanuel and the gang have made to strike an impotent pose.
September 11, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem with the administration directly striking out at Beck is two-fold:
1. It will feed his ego and spur him on to ever-greater feats of idiocy.
2. It will give him legitimacy.
Basically, the administration is screwed either way. They can let him continue to take pot-shots, or attack him and arm him with a howitzer.
If you want to see what Beck could become, listen to Savage a bit. That guy already had an ego the size of a small solar system, and then the British Government put him on a list of 'do not admit' folks. Now his rabid fans have something to rally around, and he even got to write another book out of it. There was a time I could listen to that man and at least appreciate his differing viewpoints. Now he just spews his psycho opinions as 'facts', just like all the rest.
September 11, 2009 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am still confused. What in the situation prevents the administration from voicing confidence in Van jones and other Beck targets? (If I remember there were multiple scandals in the Bush administration and virtually no one was forced out.) Again...until this administration shows some spirit and willingness to fight, I find the whininess of Taplin and other Obama loyalists inappropriate and objectionable.
September 12, 2009 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not only were they not forced out, they got Medals of Freedom. If it isn't explicitly clear, I agree.
September 16, 2009 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oops. I don't totally agree. This "whininess" is focused on a real problem. That problem is partly shared by lack of bold action on the part of the administration. But the real problem is that Beck-as-corporate-mouthpiece-for-insurrection is a big and growing threat.
The manipulation of this not-insignificant band of authoritarian followers by these authoritarian leaders is unprecedented in my 57 years of memory.
And I remember Watts burning (a couple of times) and could almost smell the smoke from Detroit burning. I remember the Black Panthers and knew a couple of the White Panthers. I watched the Selma Riots live and in black and white in my living room. I remember the Birmingham Church bombings that killed innocent little girls, both Kennedy's, Martin King and Malcolm X assassinated. My Vietnam draft number was 73.
This has an all-new feel even compared to those times. The only thing I can find comparable to what is being ginned up by these corporate tyrants comes from history books, further in the past.
To me, this has the early charcoal-tinged scent of a modern John C. Calhoun and his rhetoric. It doesn't matter that Calhoun was the 7th vice president of the US or that he died 11 years before the Civil War.
He was a white supremacist and his strong opinions on states' rights nullifying laws of the federal government were key ingredients that led, inexorably, to that Civil War.
He thought slavery was an "ultimate good" because, after all, these "people," these slaves, were just capitalist fodder necessary to keep the neo-corporate plantation systems fertile and operating.
So, no: It's not whining. And I'm only loyal to Obama if he finally pulls it out of his hat and restores our Constitution (still waiting) and keeps these greed-blinded vampires from bleeding out the last drop from us corporate fodder (you know, the bottom 99%?).
September 16, 2009 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is it just coincidence that John Stossel is moving from ABC to FOX at the same time Beck is hemmorhaging sponsors?
September 11, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it time to really put pressure on all advertisers that use Rupert Murdoch media to step away. Surely there's enough noise out here to crimp his style. His cash flow can't be that great right now.
He wants to back racist, self-serving political interference. Everyone has a right to kick back.
September 12, 2009 12:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
That would be productive.
September 13, 2009 7:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Productive like saying someone was "like Joe McCarthy" for having an over-the-top TV program?
September 14, 2009 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
ARG wrote: "I wasn't alive for the McCarthy era. I understand it was a terrible time. But the targets of that witch hunt were journalists and individuals in the entertainment biz -- "famous" people, who were not really part of the mainstream political landscape. To me, McCarthyism seems more analagous to gay-bashing and the fear mongering over immigration today."
I'm sorry, but you need to learn more about McCarthy and his era if you think the witch hunt was just about journalists and entertainers. (The inquisition into Hollywood was actually carried out by the House Committee on Un-American Activities, allies of McCarthy.) Far more important, McCarthy and his minions systematically witch-hunted the Foreign Service and other government agencies, ruining the lives of hundreds of public servants, driving some as far as suicide. In doing so, he gave special attention to specialists in Asia, using the "Who lost China?" question to purge the State Department of any independent thinkers on that critical area. One result was that there were no real Asia experts left on board to tell Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson they were making terrible mistakes in Viet Nam. A national tragedy resulted, including 55,000+ American dead and over a million Vietnamese dead, and part of the blame can be laid on Joe McCarthy's witch-hunting.
Peace,
Paul
September 12, 2009 12:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I did realize that during this era there was an effort to "purge" the government of communists. I also know that the words "under God" made it into the Pledge of Allegiance during this period. So McCarthy himself was just the poster boy for this anti-communist movement that was pretty widespread.
But I still don't see a similar "movement" now.
Maybe the argument is that the rhetoric Glenn Beck spews may someday lead to some efforts within the actual government to "purify" or "purge" agencies of ... what? Obama supporters? (Or socialists?? If they look for honest-to-goodness socialists, they won't find very many!)
I just don't follow the analogy. Glenn Beck is not in the government, and the alleged "bad guys" Glenn Beck and his ilk are calling out cannot be identified or associated with any particular group or movement (except, perhaps, as Democrats or Obama supporters).
I think it's a real s-t-r-e-t-c-h to try to paint "GlennBeckism" as the new McCarthyism.
This is much more like the 1850s than the 1950s. (Except the teabaggers are mixed in with the rest of us, instead of being highly concentrated, geographically).
History doesn't repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes. To my ear, this sounds like an echo of the Civil War, not the Cold War.
-- ARG
September 13, 2009 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you Mr. Taplin for calling out Rupert Murdoch. It's rare to see this.
Maybe you and Josh Marshall will start a trend on the web.
When people criticize Beck, Hannity and the rest of them, they and Murdoch love it. Keeps the lies going. But I believe that Rupert Murdoch won't like lots of negative personal publicity.
I've emailed Newshounds and Media Matters about this, but they still leave Rupert out.
The web should go after Murdoch. These are Rupert Murdoch's liars, like Rupert Murdoch's multi-millionaire employee Glenn Beck, telling Rupert Murdoch's lies on Rupert Murdoch's Fox TV.
Let's watch Murdoch defend his liars telling his lies. Then, like notthere says, go after Rupert Murdoch's advertisers and ask them about how they like supporting Rupert Murdoch's liars like Rupert Murdoch's Glenn Beck, helping Rupert Murdoch poison our democracy for Rupert Murdoch's benefit.
Now repeat after me - and tell Newshounds, Media Matters, TPM and the rest of them - Rupert Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch.
September 12, 2009 6:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just a point of history: Edward Murrow was actually rather late to the game in attacking McCarthy. Jack Shafer at Slate wrote a nice piece about the wrongheadedness of valorizing Murrow too much when Clooney's "Good Night and Good Luck" was released. Here's an excerpt:
----
The McCarthy program "came very late in the day," said one of Murrow's brightest "boys," Eric Sevareid, in a January 1978 broadcast. "The youngsters read back and they think only one person in broadcasting and the press stood up to McCarthy," Sevareid said, "and this has made a lot of people feel very upset, including me, because that program came awfully late." Sevareid named Elmer Davis and Martin Agronsky as two broadcasters who had taken on McCarthy long before Murrow.
But don't take Sevareid's word for it, either. Listen to Murrow. Jack Gould, the New York Times television columnist whose Murrow praise is read aloud in the movie, took lunch with Murrow shortly after the McCarthy program. Murrow confessed his tardiness in taking on McCarthy, according to an interview Gould gave to Edwin R. Bayley for his 1981 book, Joe McCarthy and the Press. "My God," he recalls Murrow saying. "I didn't do anything. [Times columnist] Scotty Reston and lot of guys have been writing like this, saying the same things, for months, for years. We're bringing up the rear."
----
Not to diminish the necessity for folks to fight back against clowns like Beck, but it's important to keep the historical record clear. Valorizing one lone journalist when he was actually kind of slow to do anything doesn't help.
September 12, 2009 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
The irony is that David Frum gave perhaps the most sweeping indictment of Beck's tactics.
GOP Surrendering To Beck Mob Rule
http://rectonoverso.wordpress.com/2009/09/12/frum-vs-beck-gop-surrendering-to-beck-mob-rule/
September 12, 2009 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Glenn Beck and his ilk make an amateur of Joe McCarthy. They understand the level of hatred throughout The United States of America for this black man who has reached the pinnacle. Obama's accomplishments fly in the face of those who by accident of birth wear white skin and by virtue of skin color, hold fiercely to a sense of entitlement and superiority over all others. Their hatred is intensified because the Presidents success can't be blamed on affirmative action. He was elected convincingly over a white, conservative, military hero magnifying the agonizing frustration of the "white is right" crowd to desperate proportions.
In office for less than nine months, this President's appearances attract protestors with semi auto rifles in hand and Glocks strapped to their legs. Of course many of these cowards are compensating for anatomical inadequacies, else why bring a weapon into a crowd with unarmed women and children present. But the numerous and highly visible "protestors" with signs depicting the President as Hitler, calling out for his death and injury to his family are new to the American landscape. When the same picture is displayed concurrently in disparate locations around our country, there is clearly sinister direction from somewhere.
If Glenn Beck is not part of the source then he is exploiting hatred and the sentiment of violent tyranny for cash with potential ramifications more dangerous and dispicable than that wrought by McCarthy.
September 12, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stephen , you are right, Beck is concentrating on the President. There is almost an ethereal feeling of not if, but when is something really sinister going to happen.
I've been around a long time & do remember the Mc Carthy era. It was a very trying time & seemed to go on forever. The Beck-Murdoch undoing of President Obama has barely begun & to me it has an eerie, evil feel. Pray we never have to hear "We should have paid more attention to the crazies".
September 12, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
LQ, You make the point more succinctly than I do. But that's it.... much of the evil that has beset this country is historically recent. We can, if we choose to face it, disrupt the arc of this nascent, "erie" trend before it gains unstoppable momentum.
We have witnessed this before....
September 12, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It’s not Obama’s business to be an “asshole.” (Offensive word, that) It’s the media’s business to be an asshole for him -- in this Clown Show now with silly Glen Beck called the “media” now. Let’s say, that it’s the “liberal entertainment” industry’s business to be an asshole for Obama.
And Obama has no heroes that will be “assholes” for him in the liberal entertainment industry. Where is his Rush Limbaugh? His Sean Hannity? Where are those who would stubbornly contrive half-truths for him? Google conspiracy theories?
Such a liberal-entertainment-media-asshole could add to the frothy mix, for example, by first pointing out that this tiny urine-puddle of Republican racist rage is misplaced and in reality directed at the previous Administration. From there, there are a lot of scary talking points and many conspiracy theories to draw from about the (previous) “take over” of America, as you each know.
Calling childish, ranting Glen Beck a "McCarthy" might qualify the Essayist Taplin for this singular role.
September 12, 2009 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had to mention that there actually was a media giant that supported McCarthy. McCarthy was well connected with right wing media of the time and none were stronger than the ones who worked for William Randolph Hearst...the original Rupert Murdoch. Hearst's son, Bill Jr., was also an avid supporter of the HUAC era and Hearst himself, while old and frail by the early 1950's was a stauch anti-communist that did his best to flame the witchhunt and had been one of the first to start it when he became enraged by Roosevelt's New Deal...So really, Murdoch and his band of merrymen going after Obama are all just following in the footsteps of Hearst...the blueprint is all laid out for them to follow with Hearst's constant barrage of attacks on Roosevelt, but with a television audience and an entertainment factor that Hearst would have envied. It is so much more powerful to have Beck weeping into the camera rather than just depend on written columns and radio broadcasts.
And though it has probably been said multiple times, I cannot help but picture Glenn Beck as the Howard Beal character from Network sitting in Rupert Murdoch's office getting schooled on the "primal forces of nature"...if it wasn't so sad, it would be astonishingly funny and absurd...These media giants have too much power and it is past time that we do something about it.
September 12, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Want to shut him up do ya? Hate he's telling the truth do ya? You don't want the truth to see the light of day do you? You aren't fooling anyone. The public is on to you. They don't believe you anymore. We see your bias. We see your spin. We see your hypocrisy. It's all very loud and clear. The corruption in this administration is unprecedented. The corruption in this congress is unprecedented. The arrogance is hard to take. I wish I could say the media's complicity in keeping the crimes committed by the radical left a secret from the public was unprecedented. It's not the first time the media has been part of the problem. The majority of the media is as corrupt as the Deems. Only Fox, one or two newspapers and some loggers covered the biggest stories of the year, Van Jones and Acorn. Dobbs reported these stories too. You make me sick and I am not alone. Everyone I know feels the same way. Lick your lips with envy, Fox continues to climb. Beck has over 3 million viewers per night or to put it another way, one out of every 100 people watch him every night in this country.
We are on to you mister. Now, now that beck is so popular you want to break up these media giants??? I just know you have felt the same way about CNN. You'll be gone long before Beck. Count on it!
September 12, 2009 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Riffenberg: "Beck has over 3 million viewers per night or to put it another way, one out of every 100 people watch him every night in this country"...
Sir, you do understand that when you PROUDLY display the fact that one (1)out of one hundred (100) individuals watch Mr. Beck, that this number shows him to be statistically irrelevant - don't you?
Let me break it down, simplistically: That means while you are watching Mr, Breck, another ninety-nine (99) people are NOT... (only 1% of the viewing audience, by your numbers, are being reached by him...)
Additionally, I might add that Mr. Beck, describes himself as an "entertainer", and NOT a journalist/news reporter... You do understand that, right?
Also, you make some rather broad allegations against individuals, branches of government, and corporations each of which lacks ancillary, supporting documentation... (Just because an "entertainer" says something is (or might be) true, AND YOU REPEAT IT, does not make it so...(nor immune from potential liability from applicable libel and/or slander statutes)...
Further, no one is "trying to shut him up" - His opinions, however erroneous they may be, and the ability to express them, are what Liberals and Progressives have fought for since the inception of the United States...
I could refer you to some recent Supreme Court cases to illuminate that fact, but somehow, after reading your post, I think that would be rather pointless...
Let me just say that no matter how venomous your statements might be, regardless, I would fight to the death for you to have the right to express them...
Semper Fi...
Respectfully,
Don JD
September 13, 2009 1:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, one taco short of a conspiracy combination plate. No wonder you like Beck.
September 12, 2009 10:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Couldn't concur with you more, Riffenberg, I think you and I share the same rare 6th sense - that ability to tell when someone's lying. I guess I can now divulge this very patriotic technique to the rest of these confused dupes, ok?
The secret is: if someone is saying what I want to hear, I instinctively know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that person is telling the truth. It's as simple as that. So, when GB states, as I heard him say the other night, these words: "our country is burning to the ground", then, goddammit, our country is burning to the ground. Or when he says we're experiencing inflation, then we are. This is because I want to hear bad things for which to blame Obama (or, before him, Bill Clinton - not missing anyone, am I?)
For me and my buddy and fellow victim Riffenberg, that settles it. We want our country back - from reality. Conversation over, commies.
September 13, 2009 9:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
thevandal.
I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK! ( sob sob )
September 13, 2009 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I found yesterday's event a real eye popper. It is undeniably clear that this is the new face of Racism in America. But now it is openly corporate funded. Fascism is indeed here, and Glenn Beck is the new right great white messiah.
September 13, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
You'll know enough Mr. Taplin to sift through the social fits and low-information commenters who weighed in.
I like corporate-sponsored racism; got a good ring and it's a clear message. Thank you for putting down your thought-provoking comments.
September 15, 2009 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks you for sharing. This information is very useful.
Best regards, Katya, CEO of facebook, iscsi initiator vista
March 25, 2011 5:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of windows high availability
April 27, 2011 5:53 AM | Reply | Permalink