The Smoking Gun: Here Is Why Glenn Beck Should Be Fired NOW!

Glenn BeckI have documented numerous examples of right-wing advocacy of violence, as have many others. But nobody crosses further over the line, or more often, than Glenn Beck. And here is the ultimate display of deliberate hostile intent. It is an overt call for violence and an instruction to viewers:

“Tea parties believe in small government. We believe in returning to the principles of our Founding Fathers. We respect them. We revere them. Shoot me in the head before I stop talking about the Founders. Shoot me in the head if you try to change our government.

I will stand against you and so will millions of others. We believe in something. You in the media and most in Washington don’t. The radicals that you and Washington have co-opted and brought in wearing sheep’s clothing — change the pose. You will get the ends.

You’ve been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You’re going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.

They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind.” ~ Fox News, June 10, 2010

This cannot possibly be justified as acceptable political discourse. This is not merely an expression of opinion. It is not metaphorical. It is a call to arms. And Beck’s audience is listening. They have heard him say that “The country will be washed with blood.” They have heard him warn that he may have to speak in code:

“I fear that there will come a time when I cannot say things that I am currently saying. I fear that it will come to television and to radio, and I will stop saying these things. Understand me clearly. Hear me now. If I ever stop saying these things, you will know why. Because I will have made a choice that I can only say certain things, and I haven’t lost all of the rights. But know that these things are true. And if you hear me stop saying these things, it’s because I can no longer say them to you. But hear them between the sentences. Hear them, please. I will be screaming them to you.

One of those to whom Beck was screaming was Byron Williams who was apprehended following a police shootout as he was on his way to San Francisco to kill people at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation. In a prison interview he said…

“Beck is gonna deny everything about violent approach and deny everything about conspiracies, but he’ll give you every reason to believe it. He’s protecting himself, and you can’t blame him for that. So, I understand what he’s doing.”

That’s right, Byron understands what Beck is doing, and so do I. A new poll by Public Policy Polling reports that 13% of Tea Partiers say the that violence against the current American government is justifiable. While that may sound like a small percentage, there are two things to keep in mind: 1) It’s more than three times the percentage of non-Tea Partiers who say violence is justifiable. And 2) It only takes one lone nut to wreak havoc. One lone nut like Byron Williams or, perhaps, Jared Loughner, as we learned in Tucson a week ago.

Let me be crystal clear. I am not associating Loughner to Glenn Beck. There has been no evidence (yet) to link the two. However, there have been other lone gunmen in addition to Williams who were indisputably linked to Beck.

It is because of statements like the one above that Beck has forfeited his privilege of hosting national broadcasts. His language is brazenly irresponsible and he knows it. He cannot escape accountability for the tragic consequences it produces. And neither can Roger Ailes or Rupert Murdoch.

In addition to his hostile streak, Beck also has demonstrated a flagrant prejudice against blacks and Jews. I previously noted that a rather large proportion of Beck’s targets are black, beginning, of course, with Barack Obama. Media Matters recently made note of Beck’s program on “The Big Lie” wherein Beck cited nine individuals whom he implicated in a tyrannical plot to control the minds of Americans in order to advance a socialist agenda. Was it just a coincidence that eight of them were Jewish?

This racist, anti-Semitic, provocateur must not be be permitted to conduct his terror campaign on America’s airwaves. Now that does not mean that he should be subjected to censorship or suppression of his First Amendment rights, but the First Amendment does not guarantee everyone a television show. Radio and television networks, and the advertisers and audience that support them, must be persuaded to act responsibly. And that is our job.

You can go to Glenn Beck Unhinged and click on “Take Action” for a list of organizations that are working to hold the media accountable. Then pass the links around to spread the word.

The quote above is not an isolated incident. The results of such rhetoric are predictable. His disciples believe that he is giving them covert directions, and he encourages that belief. So we have to redouble our efforts to make people like Glenn Beck pay for the harm they do to our nation. And we have to do it before there is further violence or loss of life.

[Update to Inquire] Eric Fuller, a victim of the Tucson shooting, was arrested and involuntarily committed to a mental facility for psychiatric examination. This occurred after he attended a town hall meeting and said “You’re dead,” to a Tea Party leader while snapping his picture. That’s it. Just words. He had no weapon and made no threatening gestures or movements toward anyone. If that warrants arrest and commitment then why isn’t Beck undergoing a similar examination after explicitly advising his viewers to shoot their political adversaries in the head?

[Glenn Beck Responds] On his radio program Friday he complained bitterly that his remarks were taken out of context. That’s a pretty gargantuan heaping of irony from the reigning king of contextual misrepresentation. Without out of context references Beck’s show would be shorter than his commercials.

Beck’s contextual explanation is that he isn’t telling his viewers to shoot people in the head, he is telling people in the administration (and the media) to shoot people in the head. Is that really better? He’s advising government officials to murder American citizens. Thanks for clearing that up, Glenn.

However, the broader context of these remarks has to include Beck’s warning to his viewers that they have to “listen between the sentences,” as Byron Williams did. So Beck is still narrowing the context to fit his demented vision.

Advertisement:

30 thoughts on “The Smoking Gun: Here Is Why Glenn Beck Should Be Fired NOW!

  1. Get bent. Deal with free speech of GTFO

    • Classic rightist hypocrite: You defend free speech while telling me to GTFO.

      Free speech includes the freedom to rebut and the freedom to protest.

          • Not that I was telling you to, I was just letting you know what it stood for.

      • Classic left wing hypocrite. You don’t like people telling you to GTFO. Free speech includes the right to tell you to GTFO.

        • He…made no such comment. All he said was that YOU claim unlimited free speech while telling others to go away. Unlike you, he didnt say anything to imply that YOU should be striken of your rights. Just that you seem to have no problem telling other people to “deal” with it or go away. Infact he said quite clearly

          “Free speech includes the freedom to rebut and the freedom to protest.” which is what you are trying to stifle. You could try *a little bit* to make it seem like you’re not ultrapartisan. You certainly wont win over anyone by immediatly attacking, then whining and lying (absurdly, as the comment is plainly visible.) when someone calls you out.

    • Freedom of speech does not extend to falsely crying “fire” in a crowded theater. Seems like the statement that follows might fall into that category: “They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You’re going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.”

      At any rate, it would be interesting to see what a court of law decides.

      • Here in NC nearly everybody seems to be packing heat. You don’t really expect SCOTUS to shut Beck down, do you??? His is the mouth and hands to their brains and philosophy, judging from what I’ve seen lately. And yes, Ives, Beck does have the right to a radio or TV program, so long as the Murdochs and Aileses of the world hold the real power. It’s the rest of us that have no rights anymore. We just have to lay back and let them kick us in the head with their revolting rants…….

    • Glenn Beck has a right to free speech. So do those that criticize him.

      Glenn Beck does not have a right to a radio or TV program, nor does anyone else.

      It’s a simple distinction.

  2. Deal with Free speech, okay. Hey Sigh, fuck you you fucking fuck. And fuck that whore mother of yours. Oh yeah that’s right she’s fucking a dog right now. There, all better :)

    • No, but Zeppo Marx is my Denzel Washington. DICK.

      • That’s really fucked up dude, I have no idea what that means.

        • If you dont know what it means, then how is it “Really fucked up?” Wouldnt that claim require some knowledge on the subject? Which you admit to not having?

  3. Nice reply Vaughn… Very well thought out! Par for the course on this site!

    • Nancy didnt get fired you jackass. Her pay hasnt gone down, she still has her job, she’s still a member of congress. The only difference is her and the alcoholic/tanaholic “bone her” is now in her position and she in his dumb ass. Now bend over and get ready to get fucked because unless you’re super rich the people you’re obviously so proud of electing are gonna steal everything they can from working class Americans.

      Dumb ass!!!!!

      • I liked how Boehner said, immediatly after the election that he would raise the deficit. its like the first thign he said.

        And Im sure that we’ll solve alll the economic problems by having congress do nothing except waste millions of taxpayer dollars on fantasy prosecution attempts. The rightwingers know its complete nonsense, at least the ones in power do, and as long as they make these fake attacks their side will do anything. Including giving up their stated values by raising the deficit.

        It must be nice to have a gaggle of fanatics who will follow your whim without question even as they spout their demand for policies that their leaders have trashed. The republicans arent going to lower the deficit, they’ll raise it. They wont ban abortion. They wont repeal healthcare reform. They wont reinstate DADT. First, they cant (no veto-proof majority.) Second, if the right actually did any of this, their rapidly complacent voters wont come back.

        The rightwingers always think their reign is permanetn, and so the vast majority of them stop showing up after one or two elections, only to go insane later when the guy they didnt bother to show up for the vote on gets elected. And if any of those things WERE enacted into law, well heck, they’d have to discard all that focus group anti-abortion language and imagery theyve spent the last 30 years focus-grouping.

        Since they’re gonna waste it all on false attacks against the left, the right wont have any left to do anything like try and find a subject of importance.

        But since rightwingers never seem to realise that the rightwing politicians always rail against abortion but never vote to nationally ban it, I suppose they dont really need to.

  4. “It is not metaphorical…”

    Yes, it is, junior. Furthermore, I don’t trust the quotes from any of these websites.

    “This racist, anti-Semitic provocateur…”

    Another laughable lie – unless you’re talking about Al Sharpton.

    “…forfeited his privilege of hosting national broadcasts…”

    Says who? You? Who died and appointed you God?

    “..stations and advertisers must be persuaded…”

    Advertisers and radio stations will continue to tell you to go Cheney yourself. You will not kick Glenn Beck off. Period. End of story.

    • FYI: The quote of Beck is from his own page on the the Fox News web site.

      Also, hundreds of advertisers have already pledged not to buy time on Beck’s show.

  5. “…hundreds of adverisers…”

    Out of how many countless companies? I have also seen that those boycott-Glenn movements have been thoroughly overblown.

  6. This is specific to Glenn Beck, but if anything, conservative talk should get louder not quieter.

    • ok, I made a mistake, the first few words should be “This is not specific to Glenn Beck”..oops

  7. I think Scott’s man crush on Beck is kind of sweet. And I can sort of understand why he thinks, “You’re going to have to shoot them in the head” is a metaphor for…uh…debate them reasonably?

    I don’t think anything Beck says is legally prohibited, and I’m not even sure it can be a direct call to general violence. However, Beck knows as well as anyone that there are violent mentally unstable individuals out there. There is no way he can deny his responsibility in directing their violence with the kind of rhetoric cited above. While he has the right to free speech like Scott and Steve and Sigh, he also has the responsibility of someone in a position of power whose actions carry meaning. If we, as a society, can punish and heap recrimination on an athlete for failing to be a perfect role model, how can we excuse Beck’s excesses?

    • A very much expected response – sounds like someone is proposing having another citizen practice some self imposed censorship – that would make things easier for you, but not a good precedent. How exactly do you propose holding one person responsible for anothers actions? How do you prove that? This is no surprise, As I said before, conservatives should speak even louder in this environment. You can believe what you want and you can hate Glenn Beck all you want, but this is exactly the trap to avoid.

      • Steve in York says:
        1/18/2011 at 3:39 pm
        A very much expected response – sounds like someone is proposing having another citizen practice some self imposed censorship – that would make things easier for you, but not a good precedent. How exactly do you propose holding one person responsible for anothers actions? How do you prove that? This is no surprise, As I said before, conservatives should speak even louder in this environment. You can believe what you want and you can hate Glenn Beck all you want, but this is exactly the trap to avoid.

        Yeaa, how do you hold someone else responsible for the actions of others? -Charles Manson

Comments are closed.