About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

Beck's historical cherry-picking

September 23, 2009 4:49 pm ET by Simon Maloy

Knowing who Glenn Beck is, and the type of discourse he engages in, it would be the height of foolishness to expect a reasoned discussion of U.S. history within the pages of Arguing with Idiots. But this is getting absurd.

In his chapter titled, "U.S. Presidents: A Steady Progression of Progressives," Beck treats us to his list of the "Top Ten Bastards of All Time." The occupants of that list, in ascending order, are Pol Pot, Robert Mugabe, Teddy Roosevelt, Bernie Madoff, Adolf Hitler, Keith Olbermann, Pontius Pilate, FDR, Tiger Woods, and Woodrow Wilson. That's right, in Beck's book, mass slaughter of millions of innocents makes you a less reprehensible person than the presidents who won both World Wars for the United States.

The whole reason the list exists is so Beck can go on an extended tirade against Woodrow Wilson, who earned the top spot because he "[s]hredded our First Amendment by arresting thousands of people for speaking against U.S. involvement in WWI." This, of course, is in reference to the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918. And Beck is right -- both acts were horrible offenses against the First Amendment and resulted in the unjust imprisonment of many Americans, including, ironically, many members of socialist-leaning industrial unions that Beck finds so objectionable.

But if the Sedition Act was so heinous an offense as to make Wilson history's greatest "bastard," then shouldn't John Adams be on Beck's list as well? After all, Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which made it illegal for anyone to "write, print, utter or publish" anything "false, scandalous and malicious" about the government. Does that not count as "shred[ing] the First Amendment"? You could even make the case that Adams was worse than Wilson, because he was actually there when the First Amendment was drafted and ratified.

That wouldn't fit into Beck's theology, though, which is borrowed from his intellectual guide, the discredited far-right conspiracy theorist W. Cleon Skousen, and will not entertain even the slightest criticism of the Founding Fathers. In Beck's and Skousen's view, the Founders were divinely inspired and infallible, whereas Dwight Eisenhower was a communist and Woodrow Wilson was worse than Hitler.

But in fairness to Beck, if he had included John Adams, that wouldn't have left room on the list for Tiger Woods, who's on there because "[h]e's got a Swedish-supermodel wife, a gazillion dollars, and he plays golf for a living... bastard!"

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by reanna-mator (September 23, 2009 4:55 pm ET)
      3  
      It's practically a compliment to be considered a top ten bastard by Beck.

      Also, laughing at the addition of Pontius Pilate.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (September 23, 2009 5:11 pm ET)
      2  
      When I looked up and saw the title of this article, I thought it said, "Beck's HYSTERICAL cherry-picking." Seriously. LOL!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Hepatica (September 23, 2009 5:16 pm ET)
         
      Tiger Woods made the list and Stalin, Lennin, Mao didn't. Dumb.It's so dumb as to be quite funny actually. My labrary has ordered a copy so maybe I'll read it for the laughs. Or not ...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (September 23, 2009 5:25 pm ET)
      1  
      Wow...! Tiger Woods and Pontius Pilate on the same bastard list. Glennn is bizarre...

      Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (September 23, 2009 5:27 pm ET)
      1  
      Tiger Woods? WTF?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Ecotopian (September 23, 2009 7:50 pm ET)
           
        Hmmm, could his major concern be Tiger's interracial marriage?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by overmars jr. (September 23, 2009 8:16 pm ET)
             
          Well... he is a black man taking a Ryder Cup spot away from a white man. :D
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Brabantio (September 24, 2009 12:35 am ET)
             
          I'm wondering. Why couldn't he have picked any number of white baseball players? Or even any black baseball, football or basketball players? Why pick on the black guy in a sport where almost all of the professional players are white, and who is married to a white woman? That seems very strange. It sounds like it's written as a joke, but there's something about that choice that's making me wonder if there's something real behind it.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by fawltylogic (September 24, 2009 3:26 am ET)
               
            It's clearly meant as a joke. Equally clearly, it's pretty obvious why Beck picked Woods as the butt of this joke.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by tangaroa (September 23, 2009 5:29 pm ET)
      2  
      Yet more proof that Glenn Beck is flat-out crazy.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (September 23, 2009 5:50 pm ET)
      3  
      Didn't Bush and Darth Vader pick up a thousand people or so right after 9/11 too?

      I would have thought at least an honorable mention would have been in order.

      Just so you know Simon, I appreciate your reading Becks book. I really couldn't read it and keep from killing myself.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by 912watchdog55 (September 23, 2009 5:56 pm ET)
         
      My point of view is: Do not quash our (conservative) voices. Whatever happened to free speech, anyway. As a conservative, though at times, I strongly disagree with the liberal viewpoint, I would fight along side of them if anybody tried to abrige that right.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Brabantio (September 24, 2009 8:20 am ET)
           
        So if some liberal was making wild-eyed conspiratorial rants about Bush and how he might be the end of the entire country, you wouldn't want him fired? You would say there's some Constitutional protection from your employer kicking you out of a job for what you say, especially if your job is to speak to millions of people?

        Beck can speak all he wants. Nobody's obligated to pay him for it.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Brabantio (September 23, 2009 6:09 pm ET)
      1  
      Even besides the lame attempt at humor that the Tiger Woods reference seems to be, why is Teddy Roosevelt on the list? I would disagree with including FDR and Olbermann, of course, but for someone of Beck's persuasion I'm not too surprised. But Teddy? What did he do?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (September 23, 2009 7:09 pm ET)
           
        Teddy was an environmentalist.

        Also, I think MMFA should maybe check their history. I'm not too sure Adams took part in the writing of the US Constitution, as he was in France / Netherlands / England at the time of the writing of the US Constitution, and didn't take part in that.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Brabantio (September 24, 2009 12:20 am ET)
             
          Teddy was an environmentalist.
          That's the only thing that came to mind, yes. I know Beck is nuts and all, but it just strikes me as odd that even his readers would agree with the idea that an environmentalist is worse than Pol Pot. It's just a philosophical disagreement, not something wrong or evil. It would be like me putting Ted Nugent on such a list for the sole reason that he likes to hunt and I don't. I would have to think that liberals reading would think "um, there's a lot of people that hunt..."

          But I'm probably putting much more thought into this than Beck did, all within the last twenty seconds or so.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by thomej (September 24, 2009 12:25 am ET)
             
          Unless they edited the article since you posted, they mention the First Amendment specifically - a part of the Bill of Rights which was presented To the first US Congress in 1789 which as Vice President at the time, he was the President of the Senate.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Ecotopian (September 23, 2009 7:55 pm ET)
           
        What did Teddy do? That's just the problem, from Beck's standpoint. He was a doer---an activist president leading a program of progressive reform. Doesn't sound like Glenn's cup of tea, does it?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Major Tom (September 23, 2009 6:15 pm ET)
         
      Arguing with idiots... Very apropos.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (September 23, 2009 7:04 pm ET)
      1  
      I'm sure that Keith will be falling over laughing when he sees his name on the list, gee, denting Harold Hill's ego is a worse offense than murdering half the Jews in Europe! And where is Stalin, who actually had death camps. And Tiger? What did he do to Becky?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by peace4all (September 23, 2009 7:05 pm ET)
      1  
      i know that beck has people that watch and listen to him, and i understand that these are the most anti-intellecual people on the planet. but by and large they are a small group when compared to the overall population. the trouble is that MMfA wants to point out the mis-information that beck puts out, but the problem with beck is that he feeds off this. i read the articles on salon about him and i really think that if we want him to go away the best we can do is ignore him. if you read the article you will see that he thrives on attention, ANY kind of attention, and when he does not get it he becomes even more unhinged. so i think we on the left should just ignore him. let him go on about his crazy rants but don't make him relevent by giving him the attention he so desperatly seeks. the other option might be to only report what he gets right. maybe to get the attention back he will at least make an attenpt at rational thought so that he gets the attention back. probably not as i really don't think this "man" is in the least bit rational. but, it's something to try.

      on a side note, if you have not read the piece on salon.com, please do as you will find beck to be one of the crulest people you have ever seen. that this man has a "bastards list" is beyond ironic as with his sociapathic and cruel mentality he would have fit right in with hitler, pol pot and yes, even Pontius Pilate.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by epkklk851 (September 23, 2009 7:23 pm ET)
           
        I read it, you're right, we need to ignore him. That will provoke him and he eventually looses credibility based on his own actions. Like several others here, I do not think the Beck fall from grace will be pretty.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by SAR (September 23, 2009 11:15 pm ET)
             
          Had Beck being some kind of small, local DJ, with few or no influence, I'd agree with ignoring him. However, he has a strong influence on the right wing nuts, and ignoring him would be perfect for him.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by peace4all (September 24, 2009 12:00 am ET)
            1  
            i think that ignoring him could prove a more useful tool to get him off the major airwaves at least. if you look at his history you will see that he is all about ratings at any cost. the more extreme he becomes and the more he knows it makes the left angry the more we lash back. yes we have facts on our side but that does not matter to him. the man is true Narcissist. if we ignore what anything he says, he will become more extreme to try and get that attention back. if we ignore him long enough the people that like watching the battle between him and the "liberal media" will start to drift away. and maybe, if were lucky, when he sees the ratings drop he will melt down completely and do something so stupid that his only gig would be at some remote radio station in "real" america. where he can hide for the rest of his days in obscurity, cursing at the would that could not grasp his true genius.

            just my opinion, i just really dislike the man, especially after this.
            -----------------------------------------------------------------
            Kelly told a local reporter that the bit was a stupid rip-off of a syndicated gag. The slight outraged Beck, who got his revenge with what may rank as one of the cruelest bits in the history of morning radio. "A couple days after Kelly's wife, Terry, had a miscarriage, Beck called her live on the air and says, 'We hear you had a miscarriage,' " remembers Brad Miller, a former Y95 DJ and Clear Channel programmer. "When Terry said, 'Yes,' Beck proceeded to joke about how Bruce [Kelly] apparently can't do anything right -- about he can't even have a baby."

            source:http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/09/16/beck_skousen/print.html
            Report Abuse
    • Author by terrapin53 (September 23, 2009 7:16 pm ET)
      1  
      Tiger Woods? LMFAO. Beck is a putz to the highest degree possible.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by DellDolly (September 23, 2009 7:19 pm ET)
      1  
      In a similar vein, Beck has the 9/12 crap. Supposedly there are "exactly" 9 principles and 12 values. That's it. And it's just coincidence that these numbers make up the numbers in the day after 9/11.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (September 23, 2009 7:53 pm ET)
        1  
        Not to be thick here, but does "ascending order" mean lowest to highest number (Pol Pot at #1,Wilson at #10) or ascending up the list to #1 (Wilson is the worst, Tiger Woods is a bigger bastard than Hitler)?

        Not that either way makes any sense, but you would think that with most top ten lists of anything you would be able to see a clear progression between 1 and 10.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (September 23, 2009 11:17 pm ET)
             
          I think Pol Pot is the worst.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Brabantio (September 24, 2009 12:22 am ET)
             
          That's right, in Beck's book, mass slaughter of millions of innocents makes you a less reprehensible person than the presidents who won both World Wars for the United States.
          Pol Pot at #10, Wilson at #1.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (September 24, 2009 3:47 am ET)
               
            OK, then, Teddy Roosevelt is two spots worse than Hitler. Interesting list.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Brabantio (September 24, 2009 8:11 am ET)
                 
              Teddy Roosevelt is two spots better than Hitler. FDR is three spots worse than Hitler. Olbermann is one notch worse than the guy who tried to eliminate an entire race in Europe.

              What really surprises me is that Stalin isn't on the list, considering all of the time Beck worries about communists.
              Report Abuse
    • Author by bilbo_dies (September 23, 2009 9:06 pm ET)
         
      But in fairness to Beck, if he had included John Adams, that wouldn't have left room on the list for Tiger Woods, who's on there because "[h]e's got a Swedish-supermodel wife, a gazillion dollars, and he plays golf for a living... bastard!"

      I'm jealous of Tiger too but; he doesn't make my top 10 most hated list though.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Midnight Kevin (September 24, 2009 2:30 am ET)
         
      Did he not like Wilson's 14 points? Beats 9.12 any day...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by beatnikbob (September 24, 2009 5:19 am ET)
         
      I helped my daughter with her homework some years ago. The assignment was to compare a Ronald Reagan speech to a Teddy Roosevelt speech given in 1912, when he was running on the Bullmoose ticket. The Reagan speech was the usual "government is the problem" drivel. The Roosevelt speech was a suprise. The one thing I remember from it was him saying something like "We don't want to nationalize the railroads, but we will if they don't behave". TR was anti-trust and pro-environment. Beck probably would have called the Bullmoosers "communists". Or "fascists". Even if it was 1912.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by goesto11 (September 24, 2009 8:10 am ET)
         
      The chapter is called "U.S. Presidents: A Steady Progression of Progressives"?

      Does Beck realize that only 3 people on his list were US presidents?

      And Keith Olbermann ranks higher than Hitler. That's probably because Hitler never criticized Glen Beck.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jousting123 (September 25, 2009 7:19 am ET)
         
      "But if the Sedition Act was so heinous an offense as to make Wilson history's greatest "bastard," then shouldn't John Adams be on Beck's list as well? After all, Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which made it illegal for anyone to "write, print, utter or publish" anything "false, scandalous and malicious" about the government. Does that not count as "shred[ing] the First Amendment"? You could even make the case that Adams was worse than Wilson, because he was actually there when the First Amendment was drafted and ratified." Frist of all, journalism today is NOTHING LIKE IT WAS back in 50'a 60's etc...We have as a country allowed our gov't to go Progressive. We pring $ that we don't have. The gov't taught americans to get what you want, pay later..Stalin thought and the Criticing John Adams...John Adams had the write idea because we lived then, in a principled and valued society more or less so the belief was respected. Why tear apart something whole and good and make it evil. Bravo to G.Beck he has the gonads to tell the truth. Journalists anymore are just paper pushing administrative assistants who've forgotten how to report fair and balanced news. It is obvios, look at the ratings of all other media including newspapers, now these entity's are going to cry me a river to gov/t to bail them out. Get real people, if you did your job you wouldn't be in this position.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

About the Blog

Feed Icon
  • County Fair is a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web as well as original commentary, breaking news and rapid response updates to major media events from Media Matters senior fellows and other staff.