Was anyone listening to Tom Ashbrook this morning? There was a pretty interesting look into this new kind of collective psychosis consuming the American far right, especially among the conservative radio psychodrome ala Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and Glen Beck, but increasingly oozing onto cable news and major media outlets with purported legitimacy.
Im sure this thread will begin with a soundoff browbeating of Michelle Bachman and Rush Limbaugh, followed by a pale shriek of dittohead indignation, but Im hoping to get slightly beyond that. I mean if people really want to discuss the objective merits of claims that Obama Bin Laden has us well on our way to a Stalinist police state complete with concentration camps for political dissenters and forced child slavery, we can, but perhaps, just for the moment, it would be more productive to assume this is absolute stark raving lunacy.
Here are a few questions raised that I think are somewhat legitimate;
Is there a double standard at work here? Certainly the american left during the bush administration wasnt innocent of everything from playful hyperbole about nazism and the like to outright loose-change nutcasery. But is there something substantively different about whats going on from the other side now?
Also, do the programmers and presenters themselves bare some responsibility for the kind of messages theyre encouraging? Especially in the light of this whole thing with Glen Beck and the PA Shooter? Obviously there doesnt appear to be anything like a criminal culpability [yet], and I dont think anyone is talking about government censorship, but is there a professional and intellectual irresponsibility at work here to be out there stoking batshit paranoia and calling for armed revolution against elected leaders? Is there real social danger in giving shelter and legitimacy to arguments strait out of tinfoil-hat mccarthyite-schizophrenia and militant white supremacy? To intentionally feed into the psychosis of the obama-the-secret-muslim-antichrist crowd?
These people may well just be working themselves into a frenzy for ratings, but there are a LOT of people who believe this shit. Out of those millions how many really are dangerous? If something terrible were to happen are the people who are spreading this stuff, at least a moral level, complicit?
And lastly, how do you think government leaders should be reacting to this? Thus far it appears the consensus on the left is that this crap is actually good for them, that the nuttier the other side looks the more moderates will distance themselves, and just ignoring and mocking it is the best way to go. But is isnt this dangerous as well? To avoid a real public dialogue over issues that are just so massively false they border on pscychotic? Like mandatory youth service? Or repealing the 2nd amendment? Let alone the fucking birth-certificate quakery? Do we become such a divided country we risk a permanently irreconcilable political subclass so locked in its own echo-chamber it can never be reclaimed? I mean this is absolutely killing the republican party, dont conservative moderates have some responsibility [even survival interest] in bringing in some semblance of sanity to the situation?
I think the only thing the left -can- do, realistically, is the ignore/scoff method. Acknowledging certain right-wing, delusional media personalities with dialogue would only feed the fires. There will always be extremism, unfortunately.
But yea, I did watch the Glenn Beck show a few days ago where he compared Obama with Mussolini and proceeded to insinuate our president is a facist. Like, seriously, dude? Ludicrous. I especially enjoyed the montage of Obama and Nazi propoganda footage prior to commercial breaks.
Not to defend the right wing radio shows but have you listened to left wing radio shows? Same shit different channel. What disturbs me about this post OE is that you stop just shy of censoring the right. For 8 years the country endured shouts of Baby killer, hundreds of thousands protesting in the streets and burning the former president in effigy and a quite a few calls for outright dissent. How many "Not my President" bumper stickers have you seen? I have yet to see that much venom come from the right. The nature of free speech is to enable ALL sides to air their grievances and gripes. Why stop now? They have a few good points such as the blurring of the line between executive branch and treasury, the expansion of Federal authority over the states, the adoption of public policies concerning manufacturing based on theoretical sciences. Hell as I write this its occurring to me that the right is accusing the current admin of the exact same things Bush was accused of. I have caught a few of the Glen Beck shows - I haven't heard him specifically say Hes a far right supporter, nor do I recall him being a blindly pro-Bush supporter. If anything I think you are seeing a large segment of the country who feels democrat nor republicans no longer have the country's best interest at hand but rather their own party survival. Mark my words, the budget issues facing this country will lead to an amalgamating of the far right and left in do time.
I should add - a photo-montage of the president and mousilini is nothing. Every president gets lampooned like that. Bush as the devil, that kind of thing. Go back a hundred years and they printed stuff like Candidate A has syphilis and his wife is a prostitute. I think we are actualy quite tame by comparison now.
glenn beck does not encourage people to go out and shoot cops. just like marilyn manson did not encourage those kids at columbine.
there are plenty of policy decisions to criticize with the obama administration and at the rate it's going we'll see an easy swing back to fiscally conservative policies (hopefully, since bush was anything but a fiscal conservative) in four years.
Ah, yea - good point, EP. It's just an endless, zen-like cycle of criticism and rabbling. It'd probably be better for all of us if we stepped out of the "caring about what politicians say to each other" zone.
But people are still listening. Fox News' ratings have never been higher, listenership for people like Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck have never been higher. And as difficult as it is to measure how widespread it is, this whole nutty teaparty movement has certainly created a significant media buzz.
Are you worried about these people? What might happen when garbage like obamas citizenship and re-education camps are given an umbrella of social legitimacy?
And Evil, I think you would probably recognize that the bush-hitler montages were kind of tongue-in-cheek. The vastest majority of the people making these comparisons did not believe, nor were they seriously suggesting, that bush was literally as bad as hitler. I frankly dont feel that comfort from Glen Beck.
Also, I dont recall the left encouraging armed rebellion in order to rectify the situation.
I dont think its off base to say republicans are quite fortunate left wing loonies just dance around with puppets instead of shooting cops and blowing up federal buildings.
"It'd probably be better for all of us if we stepped out of the "caring about what politicians say to each other" zone."
Not at all - Its important to criticize these clowns. It keeps them somewhat reigned in. Most people who make it to that level of power are prob certifiably psychopaths. I supported Obama but I will out and out criticise the 50% of his policies I dont agree with.
So OE - your saying the left has the intelligence to differentiate a Hitler Bush montage but not the right? I can tell that the parnoid people Ive worked with thought GWB was behind 911 and that he is a secret global dominion of evil conspiracy to take over the world. Then they tune back into their Air America radio shows. Its no different right or left. My guess is the right has higher ratings because the left is more online.
I guess I wont be seeing you at the next tea party - which by the way is a non-partisan event and even denied Republican speakers access to the platform.
Air America caters to the simpleton left, right wing radio and Fox et al to simpleton right. It's a demographic thing. The people pulling the strings behind the scenes most certainly know it is all bs. Although, I suspect Al Franken is a hell of a lot more intelligent that Hannity and O'Reilly. Limbaugh I suspect is genius sociopath. Money, drugs, no wife or kids. He could found a nation.
Well, you tell me? Do you think Sean Hannity actually believes Obama is seeking totalitarian control over the country? Or is he just kidding? Aught we give Glen Beck an academy award for his on-air nervous breakdowns?
I'll fully concede the 9/11 people were out of their frigging minds, but I dont recall them mentioned outside of ridicule on major news networks, let alone given %80 airtime to rant and rave about it unchallenged.
And the teaparty? Seriously? While youre there ask around how many people believe Barack Obama has a valid birth certificate and get back to me.
Dont you think these people arent helping reasonable, rational conservatives? Wouldnt the republican message be better off without catering to this kind of neurosis?
Most republicans are too busy paying their taxes, meeting payroll to watch tv or protest. Although thats changing. Go to the tea party - you will be surprised how average everyone is.
of course limbaugh hannity oreily and beck dont aid the case of rational conservatives. They are notoriously righty and viewed as such by everyone but their most ardent supporters. None of them have any credibility outside their own base, and actually do a service to the left by further marginalizing and stigmatizing their rapidly decreasing demographic.
i really wouldnt worry too much about it. truth of the matter is that maybe 30% of the country are capital "R" Republicans. and of those 30%, no more than half of them are dumb enough to take any of those rabble rousers seriously. The centerists of this country, those that actually decide elections, understand what limbaugh or oreily does, and to be fair, what olberman does.
heres some footage from a tea party meeting...
if you can get to the part where they start talking about burning books and communism, you'll be rewarded...
huff post has an article about this and they seem to take it seriously... i swore it was a joke? anyone else think that women was being sarcastic? making fun of the lunatic talking about brain control devices??
oe: Also, I dont recall the left encouraging armed rebellion in order to rectify the situation.
when did fox news, limbaugh, hannity, and/or beck advocate this?
oe: I dont think its off base to say republicans are quite fortunate left wing loonies just dance around with puppets instead of shooting cops and blowing up federal buildings.
-the animal liberation front put a firebomb on researcher's car.
-the weather underground detonated a bomb in the pentagon
-the earth liberation front has destroyed lots of property such as a car dealership in california and a resort under construction in colorado.
Im sure you dont really want to line up the right-wing-nut bodycount over the last 30 years next to E.L.F.
And they had at least three quotes on On Point this morning, from Beck, Bachmann and Hannity that I remember specifically. I also dont think all the revolutionary war imagery in combination with this "The Bolsheviks are coming to take our guns!" horseshit is coincidental to support from people like Stormfront and the secessionists and the-government-put-a-chip-in-my-brain coalition.
Which brings the real question, if not a manchurian-candidate commie takeover, what the hell are you protesting?? Returning tax rates for people making a quarter of a million dollars a year to what they were in the 90s? Really? A stimulus package to keep mass lay-offs of cops and firemen? that the vastest majority of economists complain is almost certainly too small??
If half the people showing up to your rallies are paranoid schizophrenics, that should tell probably tell you something about whos buying that and what the real message is thats getting through.
oe, you claimed 'left wing loonies just dance around with puppets ..' and i gave proof that left wing loonies can be violent (and have also blown up federal buildings).
now you claim half the people attending a political demonstration are 'paranoid schizophrenics'? where do you get that data?
and the protest is quite simply that government is out of control with wasteful spending. it really started ramping up with george w. and now obama is continuing that policy of reckless spending. and many economists complain the stimulus will make the recession worse and draw it out for years longer then had we done nothing - not to mention the huge increase in the national debt.
I think you are seeing a large segment of the country who feels democrat nor republicans no longer have the country's best interest at hand but rather their own party survival.
i agree with you 100% evilp. i have a feeling that we're all just getting played for fools.
i identify as a liberal (with some libertarian leanings) and i voted for barack obama in the last election.
however, with what i'm reading about obama's DOJ position on spying and Bagram, plus his condescending joking about marijuana law reform, and i'm more than a little concerned. i'm not really seeing much "change".
also, i don't really believe that hannity, o'reilly, beck, malkin, etc. really believe everything they say. that doesn't matter. what does matter is whether people watching believe what they're saying. they are merely decanters, and there are a lot of empty vessels out there.
and as for the teabagging parties, well, i'm not going to attend one simply because i don't really understand why citizens are protesting a tax increase on a small percentage of the populace. plus i object to their hijacking of "tea party". that was an event that was specific to a time and place that has nothing to do with what's going on now. do you think the rebels in boston would've sold t-shirts and coffee mugs?
"But people are still listening. Fox News' ratings have never been higher, listenership for people like Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck have never been higher."
Though that's among the people who still care about said media--the unspoken secret being that a big swath of the mass audience that once might have cared has dissipated on behalf of new media. Essentially, the conservatives' share is spiked by a more limited sphere than what once might have been--and that's especially the case with radio; who do you know who still gives a f. about AM/FM anymore?
To say nothing about the means of gathering ratings, especially in the case of radio, where ratings services by Arbitron are only now awkwardly getting out of the mire of antiquated diary-based, dollar-gratuity-for-participants methods--a system seemingly calculated to appeal to the kinds of yokels who don't know how to delete spam.
The medium is the message. Talk radio (whether left or right) promotes extreme, bombastic voices. That's why people like Limbaugh, Savage, and Beck have risen to the top: they're loud and they shout things that are beyond the pale. The tragedy is that our culture has reached a point where their kind of idiocy is ok, and expected.
My problem right now with the talk radio culture that dominates the right is that it is both childish, and takes itself wayyy too seriously. At least Stewart and Colbert say once per show that they're comedians. But these right-wing blowhards believe in their own overblown mendacity. Whatever. They're all a part of the shout-erati.
I actually think the real problem is an elected official like Michelle Bachmann, who seems to incite her party to violence against a president who's only been in office for three months. Who calls for a latter-day McCarthyite witch-hunt in congress against anyone she decides is anti-American. Who has less brains than a plate of scrambled eggs.
and the protest is quite simply that government is out of control with wasteful spending. it really started ramping up with george w. and now obama is continuing that policy of reckless spending. and many economists complain the stimulus will make the recession worse and draw it out for years longer then had we done nothing - not to mention the huge increase in the national debt.
yea, "many" scientists believe theres no such thing as evolution and global warming. Doesnt make it so. Or their arguments any more compelling.
But wont bust your balls to hard on this one. Youre absolutely right deficits are a legitimate issue for debate. Discussing how to spend money (hopefully in a slightly more nuanced way than to just decide all spending is by definition "wasteful") is also completely legitimate.
Taxes though, are a fucking canard and you know it. All those sad fuckers throwing bags of lipton into the river are getting a tax cut right now, and unless theyre way dressed down for their tax bracket, that trend isnt going to change in the next 8 years.
however, with what i'm reading about obama's DOJ position on spying and Bagram, plus his condescending joking about marijuana law reform, and i'm more than a little concerned. i'm not really seeing much "change".
Im actually hugely concerned about the Bagram thing, and its really driving me crazy we havent heard a real explanation for it yet. Marijuana, assault-weapon control, are legitimate issues of debate, but I do understand why, politically, the dems dont want to go near that shit.
My real point is, we could be talking about Bagram and spending priorities and legitimate political discourse if we werent wasting our time with absolute raving psychos.
And again, to put it more strictly. If one of these nuts were to do something terrible, as many of them have threatened, and they had been verbally incited to that violence by these radio demagogues, how responsible do you think the presenters should be held?
Jon Stewart, i'm sorry to say, summed all this up last week on the Daily Show. Just because you lost, doesn't mean the winning side is the oppressor.
For the right wing lunatics on the radio to go on the air and essentially insight treasonous behavior, under the guise of personal liberties is patently hypocritical. Where have they been when the Patriot Act was enacted? This is an area where I am consistently against the last and the current administration, it should be repealed.
Obama has consistently said, and has shown by the JD's action/non-action, that gun control is not a federal issue - at this point, and perhaps tomorrow i'll be wrong.
Again though, the wing-nuts on the right pick and choose what is a "right" guaranteed by the Constitution. Never mind that equal protection is supposed to be left up to the will of the people, and not a Constitutional right. Excuse me, but where in the Constitution is "will of the people" guaranteed? Which amendment is that? Equal protection = all people, and therefore all people are guaranteed the right to marry.
"And again, to put it more strictly. If one of these nuts were to do something terrible, as many of them have threatened, and they had been verbally incited to that violence by these radio demagogues, how responsible do you think the presenters should be held?"
Sure you're ready to go down that road, oe?
Anyway, try it this way: Line up some of your posts from this thread next to some transcripts from either left or right wing radio hosts. Would your posts stand out as the voice of reason? They would not.
Maybe you could instead post a specific question relative to a specific issue. The "absolute raving psychos" broadbrush is pointless.
Marijuana, assault-weapon control, are legitimate issues of debate, but I do understand why, politically, the dems dont want to go near that shit.
yeah, i totally understand why no politician would want to touch these issues with a 10 foot pole. however, weren't we promised "change" and an end to "politics as usual"? isn't our country at a pretty important point in its history? to me that means there are no "third rails" and everything is up for legitimate debate. but i guess that was wishful thinking.
Many of those tax cuts have already been promised, by the admin to be temporary. In addition the tax cuts allow State's to raise their income taxes. Its essentially a Federal transfer to the states.
The bigger issue with the taxes is not the taxes per se, but the spending. Many people find this stimulus package to be anything but. It is loaded with union payouts. Plain and simple its a reward to labor in the middle of a crisis. I find it appalling.
oh yeah... totally guys..... cause honestly, i really dont care that much about a collapsing economic system... i dont really mind that my country will go bankrupt from medical bills in the next decade or so... and the oncoming wave of retiring boomers which will likely ruin any semblance of social safety net we have in place? not even worried about it... what im REALLY worried about is legalizing then taxing pot... totally a crucial issue, one which must be at the fore front of everyones mind...................
Oh Im sorry, youre absolutely right. That obama is a secret marxist plant using mind-control to lull the country into accepting a tyrannical communist police state and forced state child labor camps is a completely rational concern worthy of lengthy discussion on the merits.
The specific issue Im asking is whether it is morally irresponsible to give shelter and legitimacy to paranoia that could very well drive sick people to violence. If you want to frame it in a non-partisan way, imagine Kieth Olbermann were encouraging his viewers to arm themselves and revolt against the evil 9/11 Trilateral Commission? and the loose-change people suddenly started going on shooting rampages?
"The specific issue Im asking is whether it is morally irresponsible to give shelter and legitimacy to paranoia that could very well drive sick people to violence."
I'm not sure a more biased "question" could be crafted.
oe, again, you are simply doing the exact thing you are simultaneously raving against.
Why stop there? Lets ban all forms of leud and liciveus displays of human sexuality so the perverts dont get all horny and start molesting people. While we are at it, no more shoot them up video games and movies with excessive violence should be banned to. All these give shelter and legitimacy to the lunatics.
I don't want to alarm anyone, but when I read oe's irresponsible posts on this thread, I got all crazy and ran out of the office and killed a duck. Thanks a lot, oe. AFLAC!
^^^ No, I am not calling for violence against elected leaders or anyone else, (as I heard Michael Savage do last night). As I said in the beginning, Im also not calling for government censorship. I am asking where people think the line of moral culpability is, whether people like Beck and their programmers aught to consider the real-world consequences of what comes out of their mouths.
And biased how exactly? Is it more reasonable to suggest obama is a secret muslim manchurian candidate or that 9-11 was an inside job?
^^ No, they do not. Movies and videogams are self-described, unambiguous fantasies. People kissing on the street are not actively advocating child molestation.
Again, I sense no such comfort from the on-air ravings of Sean Hannity and Glen Beck.
I'll add that if Olberman or any left wing started a 9/11 conspiracy campaign, I have little doubt his superiors would quickly, and rightly, conclude he had lost his ever-loving mind and deem him no longer stable enough for main stream television.
Maybe they have a point? I mean if they get these types of viewers they must be hitting a nerve.
My guess is that the Attorny General was listening to you and issued a warning on "Right Wing Violence" or the new Admin is using this shooter in PA and the tea parties to paint the conservatives an lunatics. Maybe its because they play as dirty if not dirtier than the right? The new admin is only 100 days old and has an enemies list - wtf is that?
lletdownl, don't be so dismissive, and don't put words in my mouth either. you're doing yourself a disservice.
it's not even about "duuuude, i want legal pot!". it's much deeper than that. is it an issue that should be at the top of the list? of course not. i don't think anyone has said that. however, it is something that should be discussed and seriously at that. your casual dismissal is part of the problem.
It's interesting. I did a lot of work comparing the left with the right in 1930s Germany. The number of people murdered by the right outnumbered those murdered by the left something like 10 to 1. There was no symmetry when it came to violence.
Just think...
Who was behind the Oklahoma City bombing? A right wing terrorist. He killed more people than all of the 1960s radical leftists and then some. He, in fact, killed more people in a single act of terrorism by an American in US history.
As for Olbermann, he actually reports things that don't go in his favor. I haven't seen him make anything up like I have seen on Fox.
Calling the right and left two sides of the same coin has some validity. The problem with what the Fox News pundits are doing is that the American right is far, far to the right of most other democracies. People like Olbermann are middle of the road types in the UK, Germany, Japan and France. Fox News wants to claim that Olbermann and others like Obama are "Socialist." A real socialist would be offended. I have some idea because my father was a hard core Troskyite in the 1940s and people he knew (and I knew) were blacklisted and punished for it. If you think Olbermann or Obama is a socialist, then I'd like to invite you to join my world-class hedge fund for a limited time only. ;-)
There are socialists. They are the mirror image of the right wing radicals but they are neither Olbermann not Obama nor are they identified and have very little media exposure in the USA.
It's a bait and switch effort on the part of Fox News and the Republican party. They want to make the middle of the road look left. It's a losing battle.
actually lletdownl, strike the second half of my first sentence. you weren't exactly quoting me so you weren't "putting words in my mouth". but uh, yeah, don't be so dismissive.
make, i don't think many americans know what socialism actually means and wouldn't be able to distinguish it from communism (not that they'd know what communism actually is). they just know that it's "bad" because they've been told for most of their lives that socialism is wrong. they don't need to understand why, just that it is.
"I did a lot of work comparing the left with the right in 1930s Germany. The number of people murdered by the right outnumbered those murdered by the left something like 10 to 1."
The example of deaths at the hands of terrorists is easier to come by. Tim McVeigh singlehandedly killed 168 people. The Weather Underground only succeeded in killing a couple of their own members.
But the point is that Right Wing Radio wants you to believe that Obama is a socialist and the media is liberal. The problem is that the Obama is middle-of-road and the media usually spins the tale of whomever is in office. They want to make you think the middle of the road is far left. As I said, it's a losing battle.
Right Wing Radio
Was anyone listening to Tom Ashbrook this morning? There was a pretty interesting look into this new kind of collective psychosis consuming the American far right, especially among the conservative radio psychodrome ala Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and Glen Beck, but increasingly oozing onto cable news and major media outlets with purported legitimacy.
Im sure this thread will begin with a soundoff browbeating of Michelle Bachman and Rush Limbaugh, followed by a pale shriek of dittohead indignation, but Im hoping to get slightly beyond that. I mean if people really want to discuss the objective merits of claims that Obama Bin Laden has us well on our way to a Stalinist police state complete with concentration camps for political dissenters and forced child slavery, we can, but perhaps, just for the moment, it would be more productive to assume this is absolute stark raving lunacy.
Here are a few questions raised that I think are somewhat legitimate;
Is there a double standard at work here? Certainly the american left during the bush administration wasnt innocent of everything from playful hyperbole about nazism and the like to outright loose-change nutcasery. But is there something substantively different about whats going on from the other side now?
Also, do the programmers and presenters themselves bare some responsibility for the kind of messages theyre encouraging? Especially in the light of this whole thing with Glen Beck and the PA Shooter? Obviously there doesnt appear to be anything like a criminal culpability [yet], and I dont think anyone is talking about government censorship, but is there a professional and intellectual irresponsibility at work here to be out there stoking batshit paranoia and calling for armed revolution against elected leaders? Is there real social danger in giving shelter and legitimacy to arguments strait out of tinfoil-hat mccarthyite-schizophrenia and militant white supremacy? To intentionally feed into the psychosis of the obama-the-secret-muslim-antichrist crowd?
These people may well just be working themselves into a frenzy for ratings, but there are a LOT of people who believe this shit. Out of those millions how many really are dangerous? If something terrible were to happen are the people who are spreading this stuff, at least a moral level, complicit?
And lastly, how do you think government leaders should be reacting to this? Thus far it appears the consensus on the left is that this crap is actually good for them, that the nuttier the other side looks the more moderates will distance themselves, and just ignoring and mocking it is the best way to go. But is isnt this dangerous as well? To avoid a real public dialogue over issues that are just so massively false they border on pscychotic? Like mandatory youth service? Or repealing the 2nd amendment? Let alone the fucking birth-certificate quakery? Do we become such a divided country we risk a permanently irreconcilable political subclass so locked in its own echo-chamber it can never be reclaimed? I mean this is absolutely killing the republican party, dont conservative moderates have some responsibility [even survival interest] in bringing in some semblance of sanity to the situation?
right wing radio/talkshows in the US are hilarious, they turned Jon Stewart from a comedian into a journalist.
Great post.
I think the only thing the left -can- do, realistically, is the ignore/scoff method. Acknowledging certain right-wing, delusional media personalities with dialogue would only feed the fires. There will always be extremism, unfortunately.
But yea, I did watch the Glenn Beck show a few days ago where he compared Obama with Mussolini and proceeded to insinuate our president is a facist. Like, seriously, dude? Ludicrous. I especially enjoyed the montage of Obama and Nazi propoganda footage prior to commercial breaks.
Not to defend the right wing radio shows but have you listened to left wing radio shows? Same shit different channel. What disturbs me about this post OE is that you stop just shy of censoring the right. For 8 years the country endured shouts of Baby killer, hundreds of thousands protesting in the streets and burning the former president in effigy and a quite a few calls for outright dissent. How many "Not my President" bumper stickers have you seen? I have yet to see that much venom come from the right. The nature of free speech is to enable ALL sides to air their grievances and gripes. Why stop now? They have a few good points such as the blurring of the line between executive branch and treasury, the expansion of Federal authority over the states, the adoption of public policies concerning manufacturing based on theoretical sciences. Hell as I write this its occurring to me that the right is accusing the current admin of the exact same things Bush was accused of. I have caught a few of the Glen Beck shows - I haven't heard him specifically say Hes a far right supporter, nor do I recall him being a blindly pro-Bush supporter. If anything I think you are seeing a large segment of the country who feels democrat nor republicans no longer have the country's best interest at hand but rather their own party survival. Mark my words, the budget issues facing this country will lead to an amalgamating of the far right and left in do time.
I should add - a photo-montage of the president and mousilini is nothing. Every president gets lampooned like that. Bush as the devil, that kind of thing. Go back a hundred years and they printed stuff like Candidate A has syphilis and his wife is a prostitute. I think we are actualy quite tame by comparison now.
The right wing craze of the mid-2000s has been proven to be a bunch of horseshit. I'm surprised anyone is still listening.
glenn beck does not encourage people to go out and shoot cops. just like marilyn manson did not encourage those kids at columbine.
there are plenty of policy decisions to criticize with the obama administration and at the rate it's going we'll see an easy swing back to fiscally conservative policies (hopefully, since bush was anything but a fiscal conservative) in four years.
Ah, yea - good point, EP. It's just an endless, zen-like cycle of criticism and rabbling. It'd probably be better for all of us if we stepped out of the "caring about what politicians say to each other" zone.
But people are still listening. Fox News' ratings have never been higher, listenership for people like Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck have never been higher. And as difficult as it is to measure how widespread it is, this whole nutty teaparty movement has certainly created a significant media buzz.
Are you worried about these people? What might happen when garbage like obamas citizenship and re-education camps are given an umbrella of social legitimacy?
And Evil, I think you would probably recognize that the bush-hitler montages were kind of tongue-in-cheek. The vastest majority of the people making these comparisons did not believe, nor were they seriously suggesting, that bush was literally as bad as hitler. I frankly dont feel that comfort from Glen Beck.
Also, I dont recall the left encouraging armed rebellion in order to rectify the situation.
I dont think its off base to say republicans are quite fortunate left wing loonies just dance around with puppets instead of shooting cops and blowing up federal buildings.
"It'd probably be better for all of us if we stepped out of the "caring about what politicians say to each other" zone."
Not at all - Its important to criticize these clowns. It keeps them somewhat reigned in. Most people who make it to that level of power are prob certifiably psychopaths. I supported Obama but I will out and out criticise the 50% of his policies I dont agree with.
So OE - your saying the left has the intelligence to differentiate a Hitler Bush montage but not the right? I can tell that the parnoid people Ive worked with thought GWB was behind 911 and that he is a secret global dominion of evil conspiracy to take over the world. Then they tune back into their Air America radio shows. Its no different right or left. My guess is the right has higher ratings because the left is more online.
I guess I wont be seeing you at the next tea party - which by the way is a non-partisan event and even denied Republican speakers access to the platform.
Air America caters to the simpleton left, right wing radio and Fox et al to simpleton right. It's a demographic thing. The people pulling the strings behind the scenes most certainly know it is all bs. Although, I suspect Al Franken is a hell of a lot more intelligent that Hannity and O'Reilly. Limbaugh I suspect is genius sociopath. Money, drugs, no wife or kids. He could found a nation.
Well, you tell me? Do you think Sean Hannity actually believes Obama is seeking totalitarian control over the country? Or is he just kidding? Aught we give Glen Beck an academy award for his on-air nervous breakdowns?
I'll fully concede the 9/11 people were out of their frigging minds, but I dont recall them mentioned outside of ridicule on major news networks, let alone given %80 airtime to rant and rave about it unchallenged.
And the teaparty? Seriously? While youre there ask around how many people believe Barack Obama has a valid birth certificate and get back to me.
But let me be more fair;
Dont you think these people arent helping reasonable, rational conservatives? Wouldnt the republican message be better off without catering to this kind of neurosis?
Most republicans are too busy paying their taxes, meeting payroll to watch tv or protest. Although thats changing. Go to the tea party - you will be surprised how average everyone is.
of course limbaugh hannity oreily and beck dont aid the case of rational conservatives. They are notoriously righty and viewed as such by everyone but their most ardent supporters. None of them have any credibility outside their own base, and actually do a service to the left by further marginalizing and stigmatizing their rapidly decreasing demographic.
i really wouldnt worry too much about it. truth of the matter is that maybe 30% of the country are capital "R" Republicans. and of those 30%, no more than half of them are dumb enough to take any of those rabble rousers seriously. The centerists of this country, those that actually decide elections, understand what limbaugh or oreily does, and to be fair, what olberman does.
btw...
heres some footage from a tea party meeting...
if you can get to the part where they start talking about burning books and communism, you'll be rewarded...
hilarious....
huff post has an article about this and they seem to take it seriously... i swore it was a joke? anyone else think that women was being sarcastic? making fun of the lunatic talking about brain control devices??
oe: Also, I dont recall the left encouraging armed rebellion in order to rectify the situation.
when did fox news, limbaugh, hannity, and/or beck advocate this?
oe: I dont think its off base to say republicans are quite fortunate left wing loonies just dance around with puppets instead of shooting cops and blowing up federal buildings.
-the animal liberation front put a firebomb on researcher's car.
-the weather underground detonated a bomb in the pentagon
-the earth liberation front has destroyed lots of property such as a car dealership in california and a resort under construction in colorado.
Im sure you dont really want to line up the right-wing-nut bodycount over the last 30 years next to E.L.F.
And they had at least three quotes on On Point this morning, from Beck, Bachmann and Hannity that I remember specifically. I also dont think all the revolutionary war imagery in combination with this "The Bolsheviks are coming to take our guns!" horseshit is coincidental to support from people like Stormfront and the secessionists and the-government-put-a-chip-in-my-brain coalition.
Which brings the real question, if not a manchurian-candidate commie takeover, what the hell are you protesting?? Returning tax rates for people making a quarter of a million dollars a year to what they were in the 90s? Really? A stimulus package to keep mass lay-offs of cops and firemen? that the vastest majority of economists complain is almost certainly too small??
If half the people showing up to your rallies are paranoid schizophrenics, that should tell probably tell you something about whos buying that and what the real message is thats getting through.
oe, you claimed 'left wing loonies just dance around with puppets ..' and i gave proof that left wing loonies can be violent (and have also blown up federal buildings).
now you claim half the people attending a political demonstration are 'paranoid schizophrenics'? where do you get that data?
and the protest is quite simply that government is out of control with wasteful spending. it really started ramping up with george w. and now obama is continuing that policy of reckless spending. and many economists complain the stimulus will make the recession worse and draw it out for years longer then had we done nothing - not to mention the huge increase in the national debt.
i agree with you 100% evilp. i have a feeling that we're all just getting played for fools.
i identify as a liberal (with some libertarian leanings) and i voted for barack obama in the last election.
however, with what i'm reading about obama's DOJ position on spying and Bagram, plus his condescending joking about marijuana law reform, and i'm more than a little concerned. i'm not really seeing much "change".
also, i don't really believe that hannity, o'reilly, beck, malkin, etc. really believe everything they say. that doesn't matter. what does matter is whether people watching believe what they're saying. they are merely decanters, and there are a lot of empty vessels out there.
and as for the teabagging parties, well, i'm not going to attend one simply because i don't really understand why citizens are protesting a tax increase on a small percentage of the populace. plus i object to their hijacking of "tea party". that was an event that was specific to a time and place that has nothing to do with what's going on now. do you think the rebels in boston would've sold t-shirts and coffee mugs?
"But people are still listening. Fox News' ratings have never been higher, listenership for people like Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck have never been higher."
Though that's among the people who still care about said media--the unspoken secret being that a big swath of the mass audience that once might have cared has dissipated on behalf of new media. Essentially, the conservatives' share is spiked by a more limited sphere than what once might have been--and that's especially the case with radio; who do you know who still gives a f. about AM/FM anymore?
To say nothing about the means of gathering ratings, especially in the case of radio, where ratings services by Arbitron are only now awkwardly getting out of the mire of antiquated diary-based, dollar-gratuity-for-participants methods--a system seemingly calculated to appeal to the kinds of yokels who don't know how to delete spam.
The medium is the message. Talk radio (whether left or right) promotes extreme, bombastic voices. That's why people like Limbaugh, Savage, and Beck have risen to the top: they're loud and they shout things that are beyond the pale. The tragedy is that our culture has reached a point where their kind of idiocy is ok, and expected.
My problem right now with the talk radio culture that dominates the right is that it is both childish, and takes itself wayyy too seriously. At least Stewart and Colbert say once per show that they're comedians. But these right-wing blowhards believe in their own overblown mendacity. Whatever. They're all a part of the shout-erati.
I actually think the real problem is an elected official like Michelle Bachmann, who seems to incite her party to violence against a president who's only been in office for three months. Who calls for a latter-day McCarthyite witch-hunt in congress against anyone she decides is anti-American. Who has less brains than a plate of scrambled eggs.
yea, "many" scientists believe theres no such thing as evolution and global warming. Doesnt make it so. Or their arguments any more compelling.
But wont bust your balls to hard on this one. Youre absolutely right deficits are a legitimate issue for debate. Discussing how to spend money (hopefully in a slightly more nuanced way than to just decide all spending is by definition "wasteful") is also completely legitimate.
Taxes though, are a fucking canard and you know it. All those sad fuckers throwing bags of lipton into the river are getting a tax cut right now, and unless theyre way dressed down for their tax bracket, that trend isnt going to change in the next 8 years.
however, with what i'm reading about obama's DOJ position on spying and Bagram, plus his condescending joking about marijuana law reform, and i'm more than a little concerned. i'm not really seeing much "change".
Im actually hugely concerned about the Bagram thing, and its really driving me crazy we havent heard a real explanation for it yet. Marijuana, assault-weapon control, are legitimate issues of debate, but I do understand why, politically, the dems dont want to go near that shit.
My real point is, we could be talking about Bagram and spending priorities and legitimate political discourse if we werent wasting our time with absolute raving psychos.
And again, to put it more strictly. If one of these nuts were to do something terrible, as many of them have threatened, and they had been verbally incited to that violence by these radio demagogues, how responsible do you think the presenters should be held?
Jon Stewart, i'm sorry to say, summed all this up last week on the Daily Show. Just because you lost, doesn't mean the winning side is the oppressor.
For the right wing lunatics on the radio to go on the air and essentially insight treasonous behavior, under the guise of personal liberties is patently hypocritical. Where have they been when the Patriot Act was enacted? This is an area where I am consistently against the last and the current administration, it should be repealed.
Obama has consistently said, and has shown by the JD's action/non-action, that gun control is not a federal issue - at this point, and perhaps tomorrow i'll be wrong.
Again though, the wing-nuts on the right pick and choose what is a "right" guaranteed by the Constitution. Never mind that equal protection is supposed to be left up to the will of the people, and not a Constitutional right. Excuse me, but where in the Constitution is "will of the people" guaranteed? Which amendment is that? Equal protection = all people, and therefore all people are guaranteed the right to marry.
"And again, to put it more strictly. If one of these nuts were to do something terrible, as many of them have threatened, and they had been verbally incited to that violence by these radio demagogues, how responsible do you think the presenters should be held?"
Sure you're ready to go down that road, oe?
Anyway, try it this way: Line up some of your posts from this thread next to some transcripts from either left or right wing radio hosts. Would your posts stand out as the voice of reason? They would not.
Maybe you could instead post a specific question relative to a specific issue. The "absolute raving psychos" broadbrush is pointless.
yeah, i totally understand why no politician would want to touch these issues with a 10 foot pole. however, weren't we promised "change" and an end to "politics as usual"? isn't our country at a pretty important point in its history? to me that means there are no "third rails" and everything is up for legitimate debate. but i guess that was wishful thinking.
Many of those tax cuts have already been promised, by the admin to be temporary. In addition the tax cuts allow State's to raise their income taxes. Its essentially a Federal transfer to the states.
The bigger issue with the taxes is not the taxes per se, but the spending. Many people find this stimulus package to be anything but. It is loaded with union payouts. Plain and simple its a reward to labor in the middle of a crisis. I find it appalling.
hhhhhhhhhhhhhh....
oh yeah... totally guys..... cause honestly, i really dont care that much about a collapsing economic system... i dont really mind that my country will go bankrupt from medical bills in the next decade or so... and the oncoming wave of retiring boomers which will likely ruin any semblance of social safety net we have in place? not even worried about it... what im REALLY worried about is legalizing then taxing pot... totally a crucial issue, one which must be at the fore front of everyones mind...................
Oh Im sorry, youre absolutely right. That obama is a secret marxist plant using mind-control to lull the country into accepting a tyrannical communist police state and forced state child labor camps is a completely rational concern worthy of lengthy discussion on the merits.
The specific issue Im asking is whether it is morally irresponsible to give shelter and legitimacy to paranoia that could very well drive sick people to violence. If you want to frame it in a non-partisan way, imagine Kieth Olbermann were encouraging his viewers to arm themselves and revolt against the evil 9/11 Trilateral Commission? and the loose-change people suddenly started going on shooting rampages?
~ in response to kurt,^
"The specific issue Im asking is whether it is morally irresponsible to give shelter and legitimacy to paranoia that could very well drive sick people to violence."
I'm not sure a more biased "question" could be crafted.
oe, again, you are simply doing the exact thing you are simultaneously raving against.
Why stop there? Lets ban all forms of leud and liciveus displays of human sexuality so the perverts dont get all horny and start molesting people. While we are at it, no more shoot them up video games and movies with excessive violence should be banned to. All these give shelter and legitimacy to the lunatics.
I don't want to alarm anyone, but when I read oe's irresponsible posts on this thread, I got all crazy and ran out of the office and killed a duck. Thanks a lot, oe. AFLAC!
^^^ No, I am not calling for violence against elected leaders or anyone else, (as I heard Michael Savage do last night). As I said in the beginning, Im also not calling for government censorship. I am asking where people think the line of moral culpability is, whether people like Beck and their programmers aught to consider the real-world consequences of what comes out of their mouths.
And biased how exactly? Is it more reasonable to suggest obama is a secret muslim manchurian candidate or that 9-11 was an inside job?
^^ No, they do not. Movies and videogams are self-described, unambiguous fantasies. People kissing on the street are not actively advocating child molestation.
Again, I sense no such comfort from the on-air ravings of Sean Hannity and Glen Beck.
I'll add that if Olberman or any left wing started a 9/11 conspiracy campaign, I have little doubt his superiors would quickly, and rightly, conclude he had lost his ever-loving mind and deem him no longer stable enough for main stream television.
[left wing tv commentator]
Maybe they have a point? I mean if they get these types of viewers they must be hitting a nerve.
My guess is that the Attorny General was listening to you and issued a warning on "Right Wing Violence" or the new Admin is using this shooter in PA and the tea parties to paint the conservatives an lunatics. Maybe its because they play as dirty if not dirtier than the right? The new admin is only 100 days old and has an enemies list - wtf is that?
I take it back, oe -- you're views are completely rational.
lletdownl, don't be so dismissive, and don't put words in my mouth either. you're doing yourself a disservice.
it's not even about "duuuude, i want legal pot!". it's much deeper than that. is it an issue that should be at the top of the list? of course not. i don't think anyone has said that. however, it is something that should be discussed and seriously at that. your casual dismissal is part of the problem.
It's interesting. I did a lot of work comparing the left with the right in 1930s Germany. The number of people murdered by the right outnumbered those murdered by the left something like 10 to 1. There was no symmetry when it came to violence.
Just think...
Who was behind the Oklahoma City bombing? A right wing terrorist. He killed more people than all of the 1960s radical leftists and then some. He, in fact, killed more people in a single act of terrorism by an American in US history.
As for Olbermann, he actually reports things that don't go in his favor. I haven't seen him make anything up like I have seen on Fox.
Calling the right and left two sides of the same coin has some validity. The problem with what the Fox News pundits are doing is that the American right is far, far to the right of most other democracies. People like Olbermann are middle of the road types in the UK, Germany, Japan and France. Fox News wants to claim that Olbermann and others like Obama are "Socialist." A real socialist would be offended. I have some idea because my father was a hard core Troskyite in the 1940s and people he knew (and I knew) were blacklisted and punished for it. If you think Olbermann or Obama is a socialist, then I'd like to invite you to join my world-class hedge fund for a limited time only. ;-)
There are socialists. They are the mirror image of the right wing radicals but they are neither Olbermann not Obama nor are they identified and have very little media exposure in the USA.
It's a bait and switch effort on the part of Fox News and the Republican party. They want to make the middle of the road look left. It's a losing battle.
actually lletdownl, strike the second half of my first sentence. you weren't exactly quoting me so you weren't "putting words in my mouth". but uh, yeah, don't be so dismissive.
make, i don't think many americans know what socialism actually means and wouldn't be able to distinguish it from communism (not that they'd know what communism actually is). they just know that it's "bad" because they've been told for most of their lives that socialism is wrong. they don't need to understand why, just that it is.
speaking of the general public equating socialism with bad...
Aparently thats not entirely true...
wow, 53% huh?
well, 27% are unsure, but i can bet which way they're leaning.
"I did a lot of work comparing the left with the right in 1930s Germany. The number of people murdered by the right outnumbered those murdered by the left something like 10 to 1."
Reference?
I would start by reading Geoffery Herf. Look at the appendix.
The example of deaths at the hands of terrorists is easier to come by. Tim McVeigh singlehandedly killed 168 people. The Weather Underground only succeeded in killing a couple of their own members.
But the point is that Right Wing Radio wants you to believe that Obama is a socialist and the media is liberal. The problem is that the Obama is middle-of-road and the media usually spins the tale of whomever is in office. They want to make you think the middle of the road is far left. As I said, it's a losing battle.
I'm not looking to do research to back up your claims. Once you make a statement like that and can't produce a reference, I stop listening.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.