Glenn Beck Thanks God For Fox News

In the past year Glenn Beck has lost over a hundred advertisers. In the last four months he has lost about a third of his viewers. He is being boycotted by African Americans for calling President Obama a racist, Christians for calling social justice Marxism, and union members for incessantly insulting workers who seek to organize in order to defend themselves from the abuses of industrial barons.

As his show becomes less profitable, and reaches fewer viewers, Beck must surely be worrying about how committed his bosses are to keeping him on the air. After all, what motivation would there be to do so if he were bringing in neither cash nor ratings?

Beck’s response to these circumstances has thus far has been to dial the crazy up another couple of degrees. His ravings have become less tethered to reality than ever, and his paranoid layering of conspiracies aimed at him by innumerable covert enemies has escalated to Apocalyptic proportions.

He is palpably afraid, but not of progressives or Muslims or community organizers under the bed. He is afraid that his empire is at risk of collapsing on top of him. And so he has taken the next illogical step in his descent by clutching desperately to his sugardaddies at Fox.

On his radio program today he winced at the thought of Fox News CEO Roger Ailes, or News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch, getting hit by a newspaper truck. He imagined that with them gone Fox News would would be a “scary” place. And then he commenced his holy benediction:

“Those two hold off the outside world. The beating that those guys take, the pressure that those guys are under, not just from me but almost every voice in Fox, is incredible. […] Fall to your knees and thank God for Fox News. Pray for Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch. Pray for them. Pray for strength and spine, and pray that everybody involved has chicken salad for lunch so it doesn’t clog anybody’s arteries. Keep them going.”

This outbreak of syncophantism has but one purpose for Beck: to plant a slobbering wet kiss on the mugs of the two people who hold his fate in their greedy hands. Beck knows that he is dead weight. After becoming anathema to advertisers, his saving grace was that he could deliver viewers to his leadout and jumpstart the primetime schedule. But now he is somewhat less than reliable in that role.

So what else is left for Beck? He is isolating himself from his colleagues who are often embarrassed by him. Former Fox contributor Jane Hall cited Beck as one of the reasons she left the network. Former Fox News anchor Eric Burns expressed gratitude that he doesn’t “have to face the ethical problem of sharing an employer with Glenn Beck.” He has also lost much of what remains of the sane conservative community. Right-wing blogger Charlses Johnson castigated Beck as “an alcoholic, weeping, ranting, creationist talk show host.” Respected conservatives David Brooks and David Frum have both been veering from the ideological excesses of Beck, with Frum lamenting the “reckless defamation” practiced by Beck.

For many of these conservative reprobates, Beck and Fox News have strayed so far into loony territory that they are harmful to the cause of conservatism. I composed a detailed analysis on that very subject almost a year ago: Fox News Is Killing The Republican Party. The question is, will Ailes and Murdoch come this realization, or will they succumb to Beck’s worshipful flattery?

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

News Corpse Software Upgrade

I just completed an upgrade of the software on this site. At this point there should be no visible difference to visitors, but the background technology is more current and will permit some innovations in the future.

In the next few weeks I’ll be working on enhancing some site features, both functional and aesthetic. I hope you all will appreciate the improvements. And if you encounter any glitches, please let me know.

This would be a good opportunity to thank you all for your continued support and for your concerns about the role of media in the world.


State Of Shock: An Artist Examines The Hatred In Media And Politics

Political commentators like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have been stretching the limits of civility for years. They compare their ideological adversaries to Nazis and Stalinists and assert that they are deliberately trying to destroy America and all that is good in the world. They openly hope for the nation to fail and even for it to be attacked by Osama Bin Laden again.

Fletcher Crossman, a British artist currently residing in the U.S., has opened an exhibit at the Eye Level Gallery in Charleston, SC, that explores this hostility and projects it out to its darkest conclusions. The pieces include Glenn Beck swinging from a noose over a gloomy New York skyline and Rush Limbaugh feasting on a pile of infant corpses. Interspersed are images of the media portrayal of similarly gruesome events including the assassination of President Obama. The media is not a peripheral addendum to the exhibit, but an integral part of the unfolding message. Crossman described the role of the media in comments to a local Charleston reporter:

“I use the media to not only progress the story, but to point the role that mainstream media has in adding spin to any issue,” said Crossman. “When you begin to study [media outlets] you begin to realize how even when they change a word or two, how twisted an idea can become to the public. It’s powerful.”

These works appear to be an inspirational and prophetic look at the consequences of hateful and irresponsible rhetoric. They are uncompromising in their judgments of fear mongering demagogues and their enablers in the press. They are beautifully presented in both concept and execution. Here is some video of the exhibit:

This is the sort of work that can have a profound effect on viewers. It can stimulate conversation and provoke action. It needs to be seen by as broad an audience as possible. I congratulate the artist for his insight and talent, and I hope that he can arrange for the exhibit to tour the country and gain exposure.


Throw The Bums Out

In the wake of last Tuesday’s elections the press has coalesced into a near monotonic dispenser of conventional witless-dom. Pundit after pundit repeated the hackneyed, lazy analysis that the election results reflect a single-minded expression of anti-incumbency on the part of voters. The headlines from newspapers and television shout the same shallow conclusion that the people just want to “throw the bums out.” Perhaps they do, but it isn’t the bums that you’re thinking about.

Whatever the media platform, the stories were uniform across every ideological slant. Here is short sampling of the so-called wisdom from Punditville:

  • Los Angeles Times: Tuesday elections: bad for incumbents
  • Washington Post: Incumbent Armageddon?
  • Fox News: Anti-Incumbent Fever Hits America
  • ABC News: Victories for Joe Sestak, Rand Paul Signal Voters’ Anti-Incumbent Mood
  • Baltimore Sun: Incumbents have reason to worry in November

The only problem with these analyses is that they are not founded in reality. To be sure, there are sectors of the electorate who are opposed to anyone tainted with the scent of Washington. But many of the victors in Tuesday’s primaries were veterans of public service who, therefore, could not have won because of some mythic Washington virginity.

If there is a problem with incumbency, it isn’t with office-holders. It’s with pundits. The very people who are complaining about how length of service is detrimental to the service provided have themselves been serving for decades as columnists and commentators. They accuse legislators of losing touch with the public, but ignore their own separation from the common folk they purport to be representing and informing.

How many decades have people like Bill Kristol, Fred Barnes, David Broder, Howard Kurtz, Judith Miller, David Gergen, Thomas Friedman, etc., been peddling their views? Why are they supposed to be considered immune to the DC infection, while lawmakers are presumed to suffer from it chronically? Most of these veteran pundits have been proven to wrong so often that it’s hard to fathom why anyone would take their opinions seriously.

The recurring spectacle of twenty year veteran pundits disparaging twenty year veteran politicians for having been around too long, without any hint of irony, is a symptom of our broken media. At least the politicians have to come before the voters from time to time to get their status renewed. The pundits just keep coming back, year after year, despite their tenure and their bias and their failures, simply because the only votes cast for them are by their colleagues who are all members of the same club.

It would be interesting if there were a way to democratize the press. Make the pundits stand for reelection every couple of years. Hold them accountable for their records. Allow smarter, more insightful analysts to campaign for the few jobs available in mass media. Can you imagine it? Bob Cesca or Joan Walsh could challenge Sean Hannity or Chris Matthews for control of those programs by comparing their political prognostications. Markos Moulitsas could run for James Carville’s job on the Situation Room. Maybe even I could take over Kurtz’s column at the Washington Post and begin hosting Reliable Sources.

Obviously, nothing like that is going to happen. The decision makers are too ensconced in their fiefdoms and would not relinquish that power. And in the event that somebody makes the argument that the market will decide these things, first explain to me how Wolf Blitzer still has a job. What market principle is responsible for that?

So the mantra in political circles to “throw the bums out” is a good one. So long as it applies to the bums in the press. That’s where the most damage is being done by people who weren’t elected to represent anyone and who are never subject to evaluation based on their work.

If we had professional, ethical, honest journalists populating the newsrooms in America, we wouldn’t have to wade through stories about “death panels” and lesbian Supreme Court nominees. We wouldn’t have to balance facts with fables. We wouldn’t be treating the Tea Party as if it were actually significant. And we wouldn’t have so many Americans misinformed about easily confirmable matters like the President’s national origins.


Crime Inc: Glenn Beck’s Corrupt Advertisers

Glenn Beck BlackboardThe past couple of weeks Glenn Beck has been raving about some sort of criminal enterprise that he imagines is being run from the White House. Even with the help of his blackboards he hasn’t ever been able to coherently explain it, but he is convinced that it exists and, as befits his Messianic hallucinations, it is out to get him.

The cabal that Beck has dubbed “Crime Inc” began as an alleged conspiracy contrived by the climate change gang, which includes everyone from Al Gore to General Electric to the United Nations. Lately the conspirators grew to include your church and any institution that embraces social justice (including Beck’s Mormon church). It’s a global syndicate that seeks to collapse international economies and install a one-world government. I assume it’s being run by the Lizard People (whose leader is Barack Obama) but Beck hasn’t gotten to that part yet.

However, it appears that the real Crime Inc is the assembly of advertisers who sponsor Beck’s show (the ones who haven’t yet fled in disgust). As it turns out, many of them are running less than reputable operations that have run afoul of the law. For instance…

Goldline International
This peddler of over-priced gold products is passing itself off as an investment advisor. They advertise prominently on right-wing radio and TV programs that spread fear of an economic meltdown, which they contend gold is a hedge against. The only problem is that they charge far more than the actual value of the gold in their products and employ high-pressure sales tactics. In many cases gold would have to increase in value over 200% for you to just break even. Rep. Anthony Weiner is requesting that federal regulators look into whether Goldline’s highly questionable business practices violate the law.

LifeLock
This is an identity security company that is famous for its CEO who parades his Social Security number around on a billboard mounted to a truck. He also includes it in his TV ads. But now the Federal Trade Commission has “accused Lifelock of operating a scam and con operation. The commission announced, along with 35 state attorneys general, that it had levied a fine of $12 million against the company for deceptive business practices and for failing to secure sensitive customer data.” In short, investigators found that LifeLock failed to provide any of the services they promised.

In addition, an investigation by the the Phoenix New Times revealed that LifeLock’s CEO has had his identity breached multiple times. Losses in the thousands were racked up for the company head who so confidently broadcast his ID to the world. The New Times also uncovered some nefarious activities by another company founder that included gambling debts, arrests, and even identity theft.

Tax Masters
Citing nearly 1,000 complaints, the Texas Attorney General filed an enforcement action against TaxMasters, charging them with unlawful conduct and misleading customers. The action asserts that Tax Masters “unlawfully misled customers about their service contract terms, failed to disclose its no-refunds policy, and falsely claimed that the firm’s employees would immediately begin work on a case.” In addition, the AG charged that Tax Masters failed to even provide the services they promised and refused to give refunds, yet pursued debt collection efforts against clients who canceled their contracts.

Free Score
The first thing you need to know about Free Score is that it is not free. Well, except for the score, that is. But the report that provides you with useful information will end up running you $29.95 per month. It’s a classic bait and switch operation that tags unwary customers for thirty bucks a month for a report that can actually be obtained for free at AnnualCreditReport.com. The company employed conservative hack Ben Stein as its spokesman. That relationship cost Stein his column for the New York Times which does not permit its employees to be commercial shills. Free Score is owned by a disreputable firm called Vertrue that has been the target of actions by both the New York Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission for deceptive business practices.

These are amongst the steadiest remaining advertisers on Beck’s show. And they appear to reflect the same disregard for ethics and honesty that Beck has made his trademark. It’s rather funny that Beck attacks his imaginary crime syndicate when he has such a close relationship with so many actual criminals. And it isn’t just as advertisers. Beck has long personally acted as a spokesman/shill for Goldline. Even when this violated the guidelines of his employer Fox News. You have to wonder how many of Beck’s other advertisers also have legal problems that have yet to surface. This would be another good reason for reputable companies to cease to associate themselves with Beck. Do they really want to be lumped in with the profligate companies listed above?

Beck’s latest hyperventilations feature a foursome who Beck fears are in cahoots with the White House in a plot to destroy him. Jim Wallis is the head of Sojourners, a progressive Christian organization. After Beck ordered his followers to “run as fast as they can” from any church that practiced social justice, Wallis wrote an item that called on Christians to run from Glenn Beck. Van Jones is the former presidential advisor on green jobs who was once affiliated with Color of Change, the group that initiated the advertiser boycott against Beck. Jones left the group two years before the boycott, which was in response to Beck calling the President a racist. Andy Stern is the former head of the union SEIU, which has joined with Color of Change and MoveOn.org to boycott Beck. These three EOGs (enemies of Glenn) have been portrayed by Beck as agents of the President. Never mind that none of them have any association with the White House or any other government office whatsoever. This is classic Beckian conspiracy mongering wherein everything he deems evil is connected to everything else he deems evil.

The fourth horseman of the Beckocalypse is Rep. Anthony Weiner, who just asked federal regulators to look into Goldline. Beck’s response was to launch a web site called WeinerFacts.com, where Beck’s disciples have been tasked with searching for dirt to smear on Weiner while making fun of his name. It’s all very mature.

Since Beck is so concerned about potential criminal activity, I wonder if he will look into the sordid histories of the people and companies that bankroll his show. And for that matter, his boss, Rupert Murdoch, has also been found guilty of improprieties ranging from corporate espionage to hacking into private email and phone systems of celebrities and politicians. Criminal behavior is part and parcel of the way these people do business. When you look at the big picture here, it’s obvious who the real Crime Inc is.


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.