« Why Marginalizing the Radical Right is the Right Thing To Do | J. Clarence's Blog | The Stupack Amendment played politics with women's lives and won. »
Not To Be Outdone by Beck, Coulter Labels Assassins as Liberals
It is obvious that since coming to Fox News Glenn Beck has sucked much of the hot air out of many radical-right commentators, like Ann Coulter, Michele Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, who now in the Beck Era are mere shells of their former selves. This of course is understandable, in the course of his one hour broadcast Glenn Beck provides viewers with their daily dose of demagoguery that former right-wing commentators needed a whole day to dispense.
Well, right-wing commentators are not sitting down accepting defeat (unlike many Congressional Democrats and their desire for a public option). They are stepping up their game and bringing out the extreme rhetoric to show to their fan base that in the world of right-wing pundetry they are still relevant.
Ann Coulter, the former star of the radical-right's ideological camp, in an attempt to outdo Beck's "progressives were once called 'slave-owners'" like comments and sell more copies of her book Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America made a stunning declaration in a recent segment for The Joy Behar Show. "Every presidential assassination or attempted presidential assassination was committed by some kind of left-wing loon, communist, anarchist, communitarian, or they had no politics at all." She said delightfully.
Behar, who is not a fan of social-conservatives (and I am sure the feeling is mutual), did not waste any time bouncing back, accusing Coulter of making illogical connections between liberals, murderers, and terrorists.
Coulter's guilt by association argument is not a new, and has been used by social-conservatives over the past decades to assualt liberals and progress not based on their ideas but rather intangible associations. Possibly most famously articulated in Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning. Of which as Eric Alterman of The Nation notes that the entire book is based on questionable ties between today's liberals and "progressives" like Hitler. Alterman writies, "Some fascists were vegetarians; some liberals are vegetarians; ergo... Some fascists were gay; some liberals are gay... Fascists cared about educating children; Hillary Clinton cares about educating children. Aha! ... This is a book that argues that Woodrow Wilson 'was the twentieth century's first fascist dictator' and that it is 'impossible to deny that the New Deal was objectively fascistic.'"
While scholars continue to debate whether or not one can accruately define fascism and figures as Adolf Hitler as extreme-left or extreme-right, right-wing pundits have had no trouble with making these associations to contemporary progressism with little regard for historical accuracy. The truth of the matter is while historical figures like Hilter or Mao Zedong have described themselves as forward-leaning for their time their ties to contempory maintstream progressivism in this country exist only in the minds of right-wing pundits like Glenn Beck.
It is a clever strategy. Right-wing punidts know that they cannot win an argument on ideas, such as cleaner energy, better schools, reproductive choice, health-care for all, equal-rights for all Americans; and as a result must rely on misinformation and deception to scare voters into thinking that the contempary progressive movement is a political effort to finish the work of the 20th century worst war criminals and dictators. Rather than debunking the tenants of contemporary progressism right-wing pundits have tried to smear the movement with falsehoods in an attempt to turn the word progressive effectively into a political bad-word. And they have largely been successful in this charge. However, despite this when we take a look at the issues more Americans are agreeing with more progressive views than before.
Coulter, like Beck and other prominent right-wing mainstream pundits, is not likely to stop the campaign to label every liberal proposal as a Marxist-communist-socialist-fascist take over anytime soon--it has been too profitable--however, their arguments which until Glenn Beck arrived merely hinged on the absurd has dived right in, and as a result more Americans are becoming tired of the illogical hyperbole rather than solutions.
Well, right-wing commentators are not sitting down accepting defeat (unlike many Congressional Democrats and their desire for a public option). They are stepping up their game and bringing out the extreme rhetoric to show to their fan base that in the world of right-wing pundetry they are still relevant.
Ann Coulter, the former star of the radical-right's ideological camp, in an attempt to outdo Beck's "progressives were once called 'slave-owners'" like comments and sell more copies of her book Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America made a stunning declaration in a recent segment for The Joy Behar Show. "Every presidential assassination or attempted presidential assassination was committed by some kind of left-wing loon, communist, anarchist, communitarian, or they had no politics at all." She said delightfully.
Behar, who is not a fan of social-conservatives (and I am sure the feeling is mutual), did not waste any time bouncing back, accusing Coulter of making illogical connections between liberals, murderers, and terrorists.
Coulter's guilt by association argument is not a new, and has been used by social-conservatives over the past decades to assualt liberals and progress not based on their ideas but rather intangible associations. Possibly most famously articulated in Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning. Of which as Eric Alterman of The Nation notes that the entire book is based on questionable ties between today's liberals and "progressives" like Hitler. Alterman writies, "Some fascists were vegetarians; some liberals are vegetarians; ergo... Some fascists were gay; some liberals are gay... Fascists cared about educating children; Hillary Clinton cares about educating children. Aha! ... This is a book that argues that Woodrow Wilson 'was the twentieth century's first fascist dictator' and that it is 'impossible to deny that the New Deal was objectively fascistic.'"
While scholars continue to debate whether or not one can accruately define fascism and figures as Adolf Hitler as extreme-left or extreme-right, right-wing pundits have had no trouble with making these associations to contemporary progressism with little regard for historical accuracy. The truth of the matter is while historical figures like Hilter or Mao Zedong have described themselves as forward-leaning for their time their ties to contempory maintstream progressivism in this country exist only in the minds of right-wing pundits like Glenn Beck.
It is a clever strategy. Right-wing punidts know that they cannot win an argument on ideas, such as cleaner energy, better schools, reproductive choice, health-care for all, equal-rights for all Americans; and as a result must rely on misinformation and deception to scare voters into thinking that the contempary progressive movement is a political effort to finish the work of the 20th century worst war criminals and dictators. Rather than debunking the tenants of contemporary progressism right-wing pundits have tried to smear the movement with falsehoods in an attempt to turn the word progressive effectively into a political bad-word. And they have largely been successful in this charge. However, despite this when we take a look at the issues more Americans are agreeing with more progressive views than before.
Coulter, like Beck and other prominent right-wing mainstream pundits, is not likely to stop the campaign to label every liberal proposal as a Marxist-communist-socialist-fascist take over anytime soon--it has been too profitable--however, their arguments which until Glenn Beck arrived merely hinged on the absurd has dived right in, and as a result more Americans are becoming tired of the illogical hyperbole rather than solutions.
Advertisement
















And this is what we are supposed to listen to?
By the way, Hitler was anti-abortion but perfectly willing to kill damaged children,whether or not they were Jewish.
October 23, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Republicans generally oppose universal health care and stem-cell research. Maybe you can see where I'm going with this.
October 23, 2009 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
This was the whole point of the JFK assassination cover-up. The right wing bumps off JFK, and then sets up Lee Harvey Oswald as a patsy so that the left wing gets the blame. Read James Douglass's JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE.
October 23, 2009 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, if I am a nazi fascist, the best I can do is simply call my enemies nazi fascist. At least a few decades ago, they would just call me a commie or a commie symp.
October 23, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had to read (or rather, skim) Goldberg's book for some research. Most of it is stupendously boring, but there are some gems. My favorite quote: “[Rudolf] Hess would bring his own vegetarian concoctions to meetings at the Chancellery and heat them up like the office vegan with some macrobiotic couscous.” Hess is rolling in his grave. Or his comment on the poetry class in Dead Poet's Society: "You can almost hear Hitler denouncing such a 'Jewish' way of gauging art." Almost.
Nice post. I think that most of it is spot on, but I think that your analysis of the rationale sells them short. Limbaugh, Beck, and co. are not afraid to take on ideas, and they often do so in their misleading and somewhat incoherent way, but the ideas aren't as interesting or compelling as the persecution narratives. It's those narratives that bring in the viewers and provide the glue that binds a growing movement.
October 23, 2009 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS If you haven't seen it, watch Goldberg on Beck's "The Government Is In My Computer" program. It's entertaining to watch him squirm before Beck's raging paranoia.
October 23, 2009 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forgot the link: http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/07/31/video-glenn-beck-the-cash-for-clunkers-website-is-evil-jonah-goldberg-maybe-theyre-just-dumb-glenn-beck-no-im-pretty-sure-theyre-evil/
October 23, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The people coulter speaks too need this kind of stuff to fuel their hate.
She like beck and rush etc, learned long ago that their audience is the white racist and least informed of society.
The real crime is the rest of the media as always demonstrate their irrelevance to integrity by accepting what these types say as being part of the normal discourse.
October 23, 2009 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like I give a shit what that she-male stick says.
October 24, 2009 6:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
bwahahahahahaha
October 24, 2009 8:42 AM | Reply | Permalink