The Opportunity At CNN: Replace Campbell Brown With The Daily Show

CNN Daily ShowNow that Campbell Brown has announced that she will be signing off of her CNN show, CNN has an opportunity to advance the state of journalism. They are the network that claims to be the champions of straight news and they dismiss the partisanship that is so deeply ingrained in Fox News and, to a lesser extent, MSNBC. So if they are serious, they need to take a long, hard look at themselves and begin to construct the sort of ethical news enterprise to which they claim to aspire.

The first thing they need to recognize is that they presently have no exclusive claim to being non-partisan. The only difference between them and their competition is that their hosts are not overtly partisan. But the substance of many of their programs is just mashed together panels of left and right pundits who argue with one another. That’s not non-partisan, it’s multi-partisan. More importantly, it’s not journalism.

If they are serious, CNN needs to fill this timeslot with a program that doesn’t seek to attain some sort of fabled balance. Balance is a phony metric. Journalism is not served when you balance reporting about say, the dangers of cigarettes, with a segment about how smoking cures cancer. The standard should not be balance, it should be truth.

One of the best examples of truth-telling in the media today is The Daily Show. Sure it’s funny and the correspondents are clowns (which is something they have in common with Fox News correspondents), but there is a determined effort to cast aside bullshit and back up their humor with facts. The technique of juxtaposing video of a politician making contradictory statements was a Daily Show innovation that has been picked up by some “real” news programs.

Am I seriously proposing that The Daily Show replace Campbell Brown? Let’s just say that I’m only half joking. It’s important to note that The Daily Show is not a news information show, in that it is not a collection of reports about what happened during the day. There is a presumption that their viewers already know what’s going on. It is also not political satire. It is media satire. Almost every segment is about how the media covers stories rather than the content of the stories themselves.

I think that a daily program that addresses the way news is presented would be a welcome addition to CNN’s schedule. By eight o’clock in the evening there has been plenty of time to observe and critique the reporting that occurred during the day. If they need additional time they could do the previous day. This would be more than a dry exercise in fact-checking. While taking a more sober tone than Jon Stewart, it could still be a raucous affair that would be both fun and enlightening. They could use dynamic and fast-paced Entertainment Tonight style graphics and charming, but well informed, hosts. They could even bring in special correspondents on occasion (I would recommend Stewart or other actual Daily Show personalities).

This show could provide true competition to the O’Reilly/Olbermann/Grace block that dominates the time period. It could also be a bellwether program that holds the media feet to the fire. They would have to play fair and include CNN’s flubs. Preferably it would be produced independently. But if they executed it right, I think many viewers would find it a refreshing change from the shoutfests on the other cable nets. Then CNN could use it to anchor a slate of truly responsible newscasts.

The only question is: Are the program executives at CNN smart enough to listen to me? Of course, they probably don’t even know I exist. Consequently, look for CNN to add another interminable hour of John King.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox Nation’s Wishful Thinking: Obama Rejected

Once again the Fox Nationalists are demonstrating their preference for fantasy (i.e. lies) over reality. Their top featured post-electoral story is a pathetic attempt to spin the results of yesterday’s voting. Fox Nation headlines their story: Obama Rejected, Coattails Disappear, Americans Empowered.

You really have to admire the chutzpah of Fox News. Here’s a quick recap of the election results: Joe Sestak, an Obama supporter, wins in Pennsylvania. Bill Halter, an Obama supporter, wins in Arkansas. Trey Grayson, the Republican establishment’s candidate in Kentucky loses to Tea Bagger Rand Paul. Republican Tim Burns loses in the race to replace John Murtha, a race that Republicans bragged would be evidence of their strength in November. And Fox still spins this as a rejection of Obama? That’s a pretty severe case of denial on their part.

I would agree, however, that Americans were empowered. They rejected some of the party-approved candidates and made their own choices as to who would best represent them. In the case of Sestak and Halter, they demonstrated exceedingly good judgment. In the case of Paul, I’m sure that the Tea Baggers in Kentucky are happy now, but they may have hamstrung themselves for November. But it was still their choice. The insiders in Washington and the press had better start to pay attention to the sentiment in the populace if they want to avoid becoming entirely irrelevant.


Fox News Democrats: Dumb As Doorknobs

Fox News Trap

I have long advocated that Democrats and progressives refrain from appearing on Fox News (see Starve the Beast). To some extent that advice has been heeded and many prominent Democrats are staying away or curtailing their visits.

Consequently, Fox has had to fabricate their own version of Democrats and they have created them in their own image. They start by wrangling has-beens who are probably desperate for attention and then promise them airtime and the respect of Fox viewers who love to hear bad things about Democrats, especially from reputed Democrats.

Tonight’s analysis of the primary in Pennsylvania provides a good example of this. On Greta Van Susteren’s show, “Democratic” pollster Doug Schoen appeared to offer this cretinous take on Joe Sestak’s victory over Arlen Specter:

Van Susteren: This Specter loss is a huge shift, is it not?
Schoen: Absolutely Greta. This is an anti-Washington, probably anti-Obama vote that makes clear that incumbency and being a Washington insider or a political insider is just not good.
Van Susteren: So what does it mean? I mean you have Sen.Bennett losing a few weeks ago. So is it anti-Washington or anti-Democrat?
Schoen: It’s both. I mean there’s clearly anti-Washington sentiment. On the Republican side it’s the Tea Party movement. On the Democratic side it’s more liberal anti-systemic sentiment. In November I think what we’re going to see is anti-Democratic sentiment because the Democrats control the executive branch and congress but there’s a lot of anger on both sides of the aisle, that’s for sure.

Where does Schoen get the idea that Sestak’s win is anti-Obama? The President and the Democratic establishment in Pennsylvania only backed Specter out of loyalty for his having switched parties. But Sestak ran as an Obama Democrat pledging to support health care, financial regulation, job creation, energy reform, and other White House initiatives. He was not against the President by any stretch of the imagination, and the White House will surely support him in the general election in November.

The vote for Sestak was an affirmation of Democratic principles, not a repudiation. Pennsylvanians were not interested in giving Specter, a Republican senator for over thirty years, another term based on his decades of support for the GOP. They had a real Democrat to vote for in Sestak, so they did. But somehow Schoen took that to be an anti-Obama, anti-Democrat position. And he added a warning that Democrats had better “move to the center” or they will “pay a huge, huge, price in the midterm election.” That advice is as bad as his election analysis.

Another Fox News Dem, Pat Caddell, delivered an opinion that was so harebrained that Rush Limbaugh quoted it:

“The Democratic Party is purging the Democrats. A lot of it is just anger, and this is anti-establishment. […] We have never had, in my experience of studying alienation – I started when I was 20 years old in polling, 19 in doing national politics, and I want to tell you: Never have I seen anger as great as it is.”

Wrong again. As I noted above, Spector’s loss was the purging of a Republican who had flipped to the Dems in a cynical attempt to retain his seat. And how can Caddell, who is 60 years old, say that he has never seen anger like this? If he was 20 when he started out, then he went through the Vietnam years and Watergate, as well as the Clinton impeachment. Does he really think that Tea Baggers are more angry than anti-war protesters or civil rights marchers were?

The truth is that Schoen and Caddell have been wrong for a long time. They co-authored an op-ed for the Washington Post in February that concluded with an ominous warning for Democrats:

“Unless the Democrats fundamentally change their approach, they will produce not just a march of folly but also run the risk of unmitigated disaster in November. “

Well, to the extent that the primaries held today represent a preview of November, Schoen and Caddell have completely missed the boat. Sestak’s win is a win for Democratic principles and gives Pennsylvania Dems a better chance at winning in November. And Jack Conway’s victory in Kentucky, and Bill Halter forcing Blanche Lincoln into a runoff in Arkansas, are further repudiations of the Schoen-Caddell cabal.

Schoen’s and Caddell’s careers consist almost entirely of repeated appearances on Fox. They frequently show up on Cavuto and Beck, and recently appeared together on Hannity’s show. They seem to have discovered that they can make a couple of bucks by pretending to be Democrats and advising the party to be more like Republicans. Their advice, however, has proven to be wrong time and time again. So the only thing stupider than the advice these phonies peddle would be for any Democrat to take it.


Tea Baggers Told To Leave Their Nazi Regalia At Home

This should tell you all you need to know about the Tea Party crowd. President Obama is scheduled to appear at a fundraiser for Barbara Boxer in San Francisco on May 25. So a local SF Tea Party faction, the Bay Area Patriots, has posted instructions for attending their protest. Included in the instructions is this:

“Keep distracting shirts and signs about his citizenship status home and any references to HItler [sic], Nazis, etc. are not welcome.”

That’s bound to disappoint a lot of Tea Baggers. They may have to go shopping before the protest or else they won’t have a thing to wear. This is a little like telling Klan rallyers not to wear their sheets.


Glenn Beck And The Gun Nuts At The NRA Conference

The Mad Glenn BeckGlenn Beck has been pretty busy this weekend. After delivering the commencement speech at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University in Virginia, where he told the graduating class to “shoot to kill,” he jetted off to North Carolina to deliver the same message to the National Rifle Association. He began is address by appropriately greeting the crowd with a hearty “Hello gun nuts.”

It is interesting to note that Beck could barely get through a couple of paragraphs of his speech at LU without sobbing. But at the NRA he didn’t even mist up once in 45 minutes. But as always, the most interesting part of Beck’s performance is the shockingly ignorant and repulsive things he says. And the NRA speech was no exception – starting with this:

“We have to think of something, because the Titanic is going down. We need to save the passengers, that’s what we need to worry about. Let the ship sink if we have to. We have a great plan: It’s called the Constitution, and we’ll build another one.”

What a hideous notion. Does he have no conception of how many lives would be ruined were his fantasy to come true? Of course, he wouldn’t have to worry about himself because, like the Titanic, the wealthy were given priority access to the lifeboats while everyone else was locked away in steerage until the ship’s fate was sealed.

Along with his striking indifference to the suffering of others, he also affirmed his reputation as a flaming hypocrite. Beck has spent months castigating Ron Bloom, a Treasury Department advisor, for an off-hand remark (which Beck takes out of context) wherein he said that he agrees with Mao’s quote that power comes from the barrel of a gun. Well, at the NRA affair Beck said that he agrees with Mao (and Bloom) as well, and that that’s why “they” want to take your guns away.

Now that Beck has aligned himself with Mao, I’m sure we can expect him to do a week of shows about himself with blackboard illustrations tying him to radical communism. He could link it to his assertion at the NRA conference that there aren’t any Democrats anymore, they are all revolutionary Marxists. All of them. Along with media reform activists, Free Press, and your church.

On the religious front, Beck was unambiguous about the need for you to abandon your church and follow him. He declared that we have “lost faith in faith.”

“Our faith is down. Our churches are emptying. Do you know why? Because our churches don’t stand for anything anymore.”

Beck asked his audience what they still believed in. He ran down a list of institutions that he implied were no longer worthy of our trust: congress, politics, big business, capitalism, etc. Then he listed the three things that we could still believe in: each other, our troops, and cops. No mention of the church. Now if you note that his audience is a few thousand people gathered to celebrate gun ownership, then all three of Beck’s beacons of trustworthiness are armed, and two of them are enforcers of authority. What exactly is his message? He obviously values the use of force and fear over democracy.

As Beck might say, does that sound familiar? Despite his complaint early on in this speech that he is tired of being called a Nazi, that is precisely what he sounds like. And he even made excuses for the German regime by completely mischaracterizing what drove them to war:

“Now who did they blame? World War II and the fascists came in, Adolf Hitler came in, because the Germans looked at the Jewish banker. Then they also looked at, who else? Oh, France. France and Great Britain. They forced them to pay – at our bidding. We, through Woodrow Wilson said, ‘Make ’em pay. Make ’em pay.’ And France said ‘Make ’em pay.’

So it was our fault that the Germans invaded Poland and Czechoslovakia and England and France and Russia? It was our fault that they massacred millions in cold blood? It was because of our president in cahoots with western Europeans and Jews? And Beck doesn’t want us to call him a Nazi?

To describe these ravings as lunacy and ignorance simply doesn’t go far enough. But as usual, Beck went to great lengths to glorify ignorance. That’s a position he can take with authority given that his background consists mainly of being an alcoholic, drug abusing, college dropout, who rose to fame as a morning zoo, AM radio shock-jock. But it’s not enough for him to pay tribute to the self-educated, he has to go further and denigrate those with real academic achievements:

“I’m a self-educated man, and proud of it. If you have a Harvard degree, or a law degree from Yale or Princeton, what the hell do I care? What difference does that make? I can sit down with the best of them one-on-one.”

I have no problem with an individual’s ability to acquire knowledge. And I don’t believe that a college diploma is the only measure of intellect. But neither do I disparage those who demonstrated the commitment and intellectual fortitude to endure the rigorous years of learning and testing one’s limits that occurs throughout a college career. It’s funny that Beck thinks that he could “sit down with the best of them” despite the fact that he never does so. If he did, he would be thoroughly demolished. His grasp of reason is as brittle as egg shell, and he has a severe aversion to facts. But perhaps my favorite part of Beck’s fantastical philosophical misadventures was this:

“Quite honestly, I never understood the free love, smoking dope, having sex in the mud, Woodstock hippies, then. I don’t understand them now. But that’s who’s running our country now. Personally I liked them better when they were in the mud naked having sex than running our country.”

Personally, I rather liked it better myself. However, Beck is lying when he says it, because he was five years old when Woodstock took place in 1969. How could he have understood it then? But to be fair, with his warped perspective of the world, how could he understand it now either? He has a long history of animosity toward youth. He regards them as stupid and easily manipulated. But even setting that aside, his impression that hippies grew up to take over the country is ludicrous. Hippies were a minority at the time and, while most of them did become contributing members of society, the vast majority of today’s leaders were never hippies.

This speech was another example of Beck’s failure to comprehend modern society – or reality. It incorporates his trademark idiocy with ever lower and more disgusting insults to decent people and institutions. He reaffirms his devotion to authoritarianism, militarism, and the Church of Beck. Along with his speech at Liberty University, Beck made this a weekend of extremist conservatism that is little more than warmed over Randian exaltation of selfishness. I hope he takes a couple of days off now. I’m getting nauseous.


Glenn Beck To Liberty University Grads: Shoot To Kill

Glenn Beck CommencementA week ago President Barack Obama gave the commencement speech at Hampton College in Virginia, and unleashed a torrent of criticism from the rightist punditry. Most of it centered around his warning that students not let themselves be overcome by the information overload of the Internet Age. But most of the speech, that was ignored by these critics, was uplifting, as was his conclusion:

“A dream of brighter days ahead, a faith in things not seen, a belief that here, in this country, we are the authors of our own destiny. That is what Hampton is all about. And it now falls to you, the Class of 2010, to write the next great chapter in America’s story; to meet the tests of your own time; to take up the ongoing work of fulfilling our founding promise. I’m looking forward to watching.”

I wonder what the reaction will be to Glenn Beck’s commencement speech at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University. When Beck’s engagement was announced I noted the good fortune of LU’s student body for having secured an alcoholic, drug-abusing, rodeo clown, college dropout to inspire the graduates by advising them on how to succeed in life by making goofy faces on TV while lying about your political adversaries.

Beck did not disappoint. His speech was a litany of cliched platitudes (Turn the other cheek) mixed with attempts at humor (Taxicabs smell worse in the summer). And for someone whose grasp on reality is tenuous, he may have been engaging in a little projection at times (Your job is to remember who you are). But here are a few notable excerpts, presented as advice that he intended to give to his daughter as she entered college (but never did), that are surely going to inspire these young folks for years to come:

Life is hard. And then it gets harder. And then you die.

There are no coincidences in life. Look for them.

Sleep hard, but sleep less.

Only date those who love you as much as I do.

[Weeping] Only date those who will treat you as I have tried.

Anyone who wants to take your choice away is evil.

Shoot to kill.

I’m not quite sure how you go about looking for coincidences that don’t exist. And I’m pretty sure his admonition about those taking away your choice doesn’t apply to his daughter or any other woman. And tonight I will likely stay awake wondering how to sleep harder. But I don’t envy the LU grads who will have to bear with the memory of this spectacular loser sobbing through his embarrassingly bad remarks.

How will these young people evaluate their prospective dates based on the criteria supplied by Beck? This could have been dismissed as a joke except that it brought him to tears as he said it. And of what use is it to a graduating class, who are looking forward to a boundless future, to draw their attention to shooting and killing? This is the same Glenn Beck who bristles whenever he is accused of inciting violence.

A commencement speech is supposed to be the highpoint of one’s academic experience and something that will last as a cherished memory. But this will have the lasting power of a chunk of Limburger that managed to roll unnoticed under the sofa to ferment for a few weeks. I think I would rather ride in a taxicab in the middle of summer than have to sit through Beck’s speech again.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Glenn Beck Fears The Rise Of Obama Cannibalism Or Something

In an attempt to deprive Jon Stewart the opportunity to mock Glenn Beck’s paranoidal delusions, and to prevent Stephen Colbert from further exploiting Bill O’Reilly’s egotistical sanctimony, Beck and O’Reilly came together to deliver their own satirical presentation of each others psychoses. And it’s comedy gold.

While discussing Miranda and terror policy, Beck veers off into his familiar frenzied hysterics over the Obama administration and Cass Sunstein – whom he has called the most dangerous man in America – but O’Reilly doesn’t care.

Glenn Beck: You should care.
Bill O’Reilly: Tell me the reason.
GB: Because they are setting up the American people.
BO: Setting us up for what?
GB: What do you think?
BO: I have no idea. What’s the conspiracy of the day?
GB: There is no conspiracy.
BO: What is he setting us up for?
GB: There is not a conspiracy here. They are already talking about silencing free speech.
BO: Silencing free speech?
GB: They are already doing it. They already are. Did you see the President’s speech on Saturday?
BO: I’m not buying it.
GB: Bill, you didn’t buy a year ago that the guy was a Marxist.
BO: And I’m still yapping, and so are you.

When O’Reilly asked Beck what we are being set up for and Beck answered with a suggestive “What do you think?” there was a knowing tone to his voice that invoked images of the Twilight Zone’s “To Serve Man.” It’s a cookbook! Beck never actually answered O’Reilly’s question, but he did assert that Obama has already begun unraveling freedom of speech. As evidence, Beck pointed to a commencement speech that Obama gave last weekend in which he warned students about being overcome by the information glut. Beck took this to mean that Obama wanted to suppress information, an interpretation that could only make sense to Beck and his devotees. And as a measure of how removed from reality Beck is, even O’Reilly didn’t think it made sense.

Equally funny was Beck’s response to O’Reilly not buying into his dementia. As proof of his predictive accuracy, Beck threw back in O’Reilly’s face the fact that O’Reilly never bought Beck’s accusations that Obama is a Marxist. The implication being that Obama’s Marxism has since been definitively confirmed. Once again, the confirmation for that exists only in Beck’s diseased head. However, O’Reilly didn’t bother to disassociate himself with that bit of nonsense.

O’Reilly hit the nail squarely on the diseased head by making the simple declaration that both he and Beck are “still yapping.” Yapping is a pretty good description of what they do and there has been no effort whatsoever to restrict them from continuing to do so. In the end, all this segment was was an extended infomercial for their Bold/Fresh tour that is currently in progress. Both O’Reilly and Beck stand to gain by hyping the melodrama in order to boost ticket sales. And they have ample airtime with which to promote their wingnut road trip. But the unintentional comedy they provide may be the best entertainment of all, despite how frustrating it must be to the folks at Comedy Central.


Glenn Beck Suffering From Nazi Tourette’s (Via Lewis Black)

On yesterday’s episode of the Glenn Beck Acute Paranoia Revue, Beck managed to squeeze in classic examples of several of his most venerated complexes: narcissism, persecution, paranoia, and conspiracy theory, all made the cut as Beck wove one of his most absurd and unintentionally funny rants to date. Now, comedian Lewis Black has disclosed a previously undiagnosed malady that is ravaging Beck’s brain: Nazi Tourette’s. More on that later.

Beck began yesterday’s program by displaying what he portrayed as an ominous quote from a dangerous person whose name he withheld:

“What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? In order to save the planet the group decides: isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

That’s troubling, isn’t it? Who would say such a thing? And what position of influence does this person hold? Is it President Obama? Or maybe Van Jones? How far along is this plot to destroy industrialized civilizations? Beck will make his audience wait almost twenty minutes for the answer. When he finally gets back to it, Beck reveals that it was former United Nations environmental official, Maurice Strong. But here’s the funny part: Strong made these remarks twenty years ago in an interview wherein he was describing to the reporter an idea for a novel. It wasn’t a plot to bring down civilization at all. It wasn’t even an initiative that Strong advocated. It was fiction.

Beck eventually got around to admitting that Strong’s comments were not part of some evil scheme, but his admission was disingenuous and sarcastic. Employing air quotes, Beck said with a knowing wink that Strong was merely “fantasizing” about the plot of a novel. He followed up by noting that no novel was ever actually written. The implication was that the novel story was just a cover and that Strong was secretly pursuing this plot. In fact, it was more than an implication. Beck actually said it explicitly:

“He hasn’t had time to do it [the novel] because he’s involved in collapsing the global economies into the hands of a global government. Isn’t that interesting? It’s almost like his book.”

Actually it’s not particularly interesting. And Beck doesn’t bother to support his allegation that Strong is busy “collapsing the global economies.” But if Beck believes that a speculative storyline for a novel is need to worry about the prospective novelist’s real life intentions, then he needs to explain his own intentions as articulated in his upcoming novel The Overton Window. In his book he “fantasizes” about “A plan to destroy America, a hundred years in the making.” Hmm. What exactly is Beck plotting?

Beck then ups the ante by implicating the White House in Strong’s conspiracy. He beseeches his viewers to fan out across the Internet to scrounge up information about Strong. He literally tells them to drop what they’re doing (which is watching his show, so that might be good advice) and to commence their research because the President was working furiously – at this very moment – to expunge the evidence of the plot. Beck invokes his silly prop phone to the White House and urgently warns that…

“The reason why this phone is not ringing now is because there are phone calls being made and they are scouring the Internet. They are sanitizing and taking it all off. Find it now, before it’s gone.”

So the White House has abandoned its whole agenda, health care, financial reform, immigration, cap and trade, and two wars, to devote their time to scrubbing information about a former UN official’s twenty year old idea for a book. I can just picture the BeckPods pausing their DVRs and scurrying to their computers to scrutinize everything they can find on Strong. It’s like a scavenger hunt for Lex Luther’s blueprint for world domination. The Cheetos bag that flew off their lap can be recovered later. Right now they are needed to march into Google at their master’s command. This is a matter of life or death. And don’t dismiss the death part. Beck is still convinced that “they” are out to get him.

“This is why the Washington Post slash Huffington Post slash Jim Wallis slash Obama advisor have been dropping bags of hammers on me for months, smearing me. Why? Because I brought your attention to the lie of social justice.”

See? They’re all in it together. I’m quite sure that Arianna has Barack on speed dial so they can order more hammers as necessary. All of Beck’s conspiracies are perfect loops, and now he has come back around to social justice, which he once again equates to Marxism. Adding to the hilarity of this episode, Beck issues a challenge to find the words “social justice” in the bible or any of America’s founding documents. The implication is that if they are not there, then his characterization of them as evil is affirmed. What does that say about “free market,” “intelligent design,” or “family values,” none of which are mentioned in the bible or founding documents either (so far as I know). Yet I suspect that Beck is not preparing a program to renounce them.

As a counterpoint to Beck’s comedy routine, I offer this bit of brilliance from The Daily Show. Lewis Black is always funny, but this is off the charts. Black reveals Beck’s hypocrisy, plus a little known malady from which Beck suffers: Nazi Tourette’s.



Robin Hood vs. The Tea Baggers

When CNBC’s Rick Santelli roused his mob of commodities traders to indiscriminately oppose any sort of taxation (even though they have representation), he set off a campaign that hitched its identity to the revolutionary war era activists who came to be known as the tea party. Unfortunately, there was very little forethought to this aborning movement and the participants began referring to themselves as Tea Baggers. When they learned of some of the other less flattering connotations of the term, they tried to distance themselves from it. But it was too late and besides, some of their comrades decided to embrace it.

The progressive community never really countered this crowd with anything organized. There was an awkward attempt to launch a Coffee Party, but it, so far, has not gained much traction.

Well now we may have a far better branding opportunity, with a far more appealing image. And it is all thanks to the new movie Robin Hood, and its star Russell Crowe. At a press conference for the opening of the film at the Cannes Film Festival in France (oh no, not France), the discussion turned to what Robin Hood would be doing were he to be present and wandering in the woods today. Crowe offered a damn good theory that was aimed directly at the media audience he was addressing:

“Would he be political? Would he aim at certain figures and try to bring them down? Would his aim be economic? Would he be looking at Wall Street and the huge sums of money that people have been patting themselves on the back with, and the subprime mortgage collapse?

“Or would he be looking at what you guys do for a living and realizing that the true wealth lies in the dissemination of information? And my theory would be, if Robin Hood was alive today, he would be looking at the monopolization of media as the greatest enemy.”

Exactly! If there is any authority in the 21st century that is brazenly exploiting the masses for its own benefit; if there is any institution that considers itself to be above the peasants and entitled to the power and money they hoard, it is the media. They travel in elite circles and cover for one another. Once in the club you can never be ejected. That’s why so many pundits are still given airtime despite how often they are wrong. And the Sheriff of Nottingham, known to his friends as Rupert Murdoch, keeps a tight reign on the fiefdom he rules.

Crowe’s insight is not merely recognizing the threat that media consolidation and monopolization represents, but he explicitly rejected the easy analogy of Robin Hood being a Tea Bagger himself due to his opposition to the then-current administration. No, Robin is much more likely to be a liberal as evidenced by his distaste for the opulently wealthy who have no concern for working people. Robin’s policy of taking from the rich and giving to the poor made him an early practitioner of “redistribution of wealth.” He certainly would have battled the Wall Street barons, the environmental abusers, and he would have demanded that all subjects of the realm receive adequate health care, food, and housing.

Tea CrusadesSo get ready for the Tea Crusaders to mount up in opposition to Robin and his Merry Men and Women. Brace yourselves for the 9/12ers and Glenn Beck’s Army of the Delusional. Be vigilant as Fox News amasses the troops on the border of Sanity. Robin Hood, the movie and the legend, will soon come under attack because the Dark Ageists won’t abide this champion of social justice and enemy of free market greed. And if you think they won’t go after a beloved cultural icon like Robin Hood, remember, the Tea Baggers already denounced Captain America.

The progressive movement, however, would be wise to embrace Robin Hood and build our future on the philosophy he represents. It is an ethical and moral philosophy, and an appealing and inspirational tale of heroism and beneficence. And it’s way better than Tea Bagging.


Fox News: Obama Hates The iPad

Last weekend President Obama gave a commencement speech at the historically African-American Hampton College in Virginia. But, as has become routine, any utterances of the President are merely new opportunities for the rightist deception machine to misconstrue his remarks. This speech was no exception.

Much of the right-wing media eagerly ignored 95% of Obama’s speech to focus on a short passage that was partly humorous and entirely true. The President told the graduating students that…

>”…you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t rank all that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations – none of which I know how to work – information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.”

“With so many voices clamoring for attention on blogs, and on cable, on talk radio, it can be difficult, at times, to sift through it all; to know what to believe; to figure out who’s telling the truth and who’s not. Let’s face it, even some of the craziest claims can quickly gain traction. I’ve had some experience in that regard.”

This common sense observation of modern media has stirred up the wingnut faction from one end to the other. Everyone from David Horowitz to the John Birch Society to BigGovernment to RedState, and on and on, set about picking apart this soundbite to accuse Obama of being anti-technology. And to no one’s surprise, Fox News was all over it.

The consensus amongst these psycho-Chicken Littles is that Obama was warning students that all technology is dangerous and evil, and that information is bad. They start by registering shock that the President would assert that not everything on the Internet is true (oh my). Glenn Beck went down this path, staring incredulously into the camera after playing Obama’s remark about the “truth meter.” Beck couldn’t believe what he was hearing. In his response he accused the President of advocating censorship and the banning of information.

Beck: Name the president in the history of America that has said, “information is a…it’s a diversion. It’s distracting. There can be too much information out there. Some information is…we’ve gotta stop it.”

Then Beck said that he has never before heard a president say these things. Well, he hasn’t seen this president say them either. Obama never even implied that any information should be stopped. He simply said that there’s a lot of it and information consumers need to be discriminating. The funny thing is that Beck says the same thing almost every day. Beck is constantly criticizing the media as a purveyor of lies, and warning his disciples to pay close attention so that they don’t get duped. But if Obama says it, he is somehow crossing over into suppression of free speech. Beck even compared it to book burning.

Beck might want to consult Dr. Keith Ablow, a psychiatrist and a frequent guest on his show. Ablow wrote a column on the Fox News web site that agreed with Obama:

“President Obama has apparently had a moment of epiphany and realized that new media and new technology can cleave young people from the truth and render them addicted to gadgets and entertainment. He said as much – attacking the iPod and iPad – at a speech to graduates of a college in Virginia last week.

The president is doubly correct. First of all, he is right (as I have written a number of times) that the Internet, Facebook and, yes, the new iPad and many other devices can interfere with people becoming wise and knowledgeable, rather than simply deluged with facts. They can also become estranged from real relationships and from themselves as they become obsessed with pretending to be stars on YouTube or worthy of ‘followers’ on Twitter or popular with thousands of ‘friends’ on Facebook.”

Of course, Obama didn’t actually “attack” any gadgets. He simply noted that they should be used sensibly. Then, because he is a Fox News contributor, Ablow went on to make some rather predictable criticisms of Obama that had no relevance to the topic before conceding that “None of this discounts Obama’s astute observations.”

It is remarkable how determined Obama’s critics are, that they can find so many straws on which to grasp. And now that they have declared Obama a foe of iPads and other technology, perhaps they will stop accusing him of using technology to thrust decent, patriotic citizens into slavery. That is another of the current falsehoods that the right is spewing with regard to Network Neutrality. And they have just launched a $1.4 million campaign to convince people that giant corporations should be able to decide what you can and cannot access online.

Feel free to visit FreePress.net and help them in their efforts to keep the Internet open, free and independent of the crushing influence of government and business. And don’t forget the iPad burning tonight that will start at 8:00pm in front of Rockefeller Center.