Reply #16: Who the hell is taking on Beck? [View All]

Okay, the answer might seem obvious - Keith and Rachel. I know they slay this demagogue every chance they get but - forgive me for saying this - you could call them the usual suspects. They are preaching to the converted (i.e. us). And I am GLAD they are. But who out in the wider national conversation is really gunning for Beck and landing some punches. Taking him on face to face and dissecting his murky distortions?

If you go through the list of his, each and every point of his can be broken down. It doesn't mean some - just SOME - of the dirt doesn't stick a little bit (as in, there is a factual basis buried deep below the steaming piles of lies that Beck stands atop of). But if we were to honestly look at pretty much every every administration of the last 100 years, we could cherrypick some of the very worst characters imaginable.

Shit, Olly North was (and remains) a terrorist-supporting son of a bitch and he was working out of the goddamn Whitehouse under Reagan! As we all know he directly coordinated with Contra terrorists who specifically targeted and murdered civilians with CIA hitlists. North still pontificates on Fox News, does he not? The man IS a terrorist (if he directed terrorism, he is one).

Such a list of the murky figures in any administration could be endless and revealing. And yes, it would apply to Democratic administrations just as much (perhaps a lesson for all there), just as numerous crimes do. Cosying up to foreign dictators, for example, was never the preserve of soley Republican presidents. Similarly, Clinton's policy of genocidal sanctions in Iraq (which profited Saddam directly while wiping out hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, according to UNICEF) is nothing any Democrat should sweep under the carpet or defend.

But Van Jones? A low-level progressive player in the administration that had moved away from his earlier radicalism and become a highly respected figure. WHO did Van Jones direct to be murdered like Olly North did? What blood does he have on his hands? None. Zero. It is a ridiculous and wilful distortion that Beck makes obviously - but sadly, it is one that works (because of the aforementioned kernel of truth to the general accusations - i.e. that he used to belong to such and such a movement).

Is this why the Democrats have been letting Beck away with this claptrap and nonsense? Are they afraid to be the ones accused of defening the "radical". I guess so.

But there is something that can be done, which is for somebody to go into the leper's den (i.e. the Glenn Beck show) and lay it on the line with this souped up suicide-case-in-waiting. I want to see an Anthony Wiener-style assault on the distortions and twisted logic and zero-journalistic-standards he is blasting out every night. It is no answer to say Beck should be banned or whatever. A boycott (different from banning) on the other hand is good and proper but where too is the point by point rebuttal to the man? Why does he get away with his lies constantly?

He begs for answers in the clip above simply because he knows he is not going to get any. That's because of a combination of asking questions so ridiculous that nobody can answer them AND because it seems nobody is willing to go take him on with a full frontal assault. Again, I know people like Color of Change are doing excellent work but I am referring specifically here to someone (and I mean this with NO disrespect, just pragmatism) with national profile and who cannot be dismissed as a usual suspect. Plus, it is worth keeping in mind that boycotting the prat does not rebutt his lies - it just makes him look like a martyr to his drones. I am for the boycott (because that is a legitimate form of protest) but I want to see Democratic rebuttals too.

It is the flipside to what many are saying of the Republicans: where are the so-called moderates of the Republican party in taking on the nutjobs on the right? And true, a few discredited conservative columnists are twittering away against Palin/Beck etc but they are being dismissed by the militia-minded as part of the elite problem (and hence are being ignored). Well, the same could be said of the Democrats - WHERE is the Anthony Wiener for the issue of fighting back against rightwing fearmongering. Like Anthony does so brilliantly on healthcare, we need someone who will go to these liars and take them apart point by point. Beck, if he is cornered correctly, would easily be exposed by a sharp mind. But that sharp mind needs to keep the pressure on and be backed up across the board (which is a given).

I just HATE to see this mental prick gob off like he is asking reasonable questions and then sit smugly in the (mainstream) silence that follows as though that amounted to vindication. Yes, there was some initial uproar over his "Obama is a racist" comments - but the bile keeps coming and the mainstream attention has moved elsewhere (to the Joe Wilson circus).

The man is too dangerous to ignore. He is too confident in his lies. This guy is not simply O'Reilly or Hannity. He is something else - something even more dangerous. He is the next generation of wingnut and manipulator and he seems like he is out for blood. He cannot go unchallenged.

p.s. I hope I have put across that I DO value Keith and Rachel and Color of Change's work against Beck. But I think that having a forceful and consistent rebuttal from a Democratic reprentative would get ten times more notice (and so be ten times more effective). Who will take it on though?

(sorry for long rant :))