Beck's stated goal: Get administration officials fired, "take the administration down"
In recent days, Glenn Beck has said that something he is "working on" will "take the administration down" and that White House interim communications director Anita Dunn "will have to go away" after "what we show you tonight." Beck and his fellow Fox News personalities have repeatedly called for Obama administration officials to be fired, asked people to dig up information on administration officials, and fearmongered about President Obama, his advisers, and his policies.
Beck: Working on something that will "take the administration down"
Beck: One of the things I'm working on, if proven, will "take the administration down." From the October 16 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: I think there is going to come a time soon, and when you see what we have in -- that we're working on now, if -- if especially one of these things come to true -- come to fruition, and is actually true. We're working on four different stories right now that if any of them are true, it's big, big trouble. All of them appear to be, but we have to be able to nail everything down. One of which I think will take the administration down. There comes a point to where people have to say, "OK. Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. This was right, this was right, this was right. These people had to go away." Now they won't answer this charge, this charge, or this charge. They won't -- they can't even address them without smears. [10/16/09]
Beck vows that Anita Dunn will "have to go away" after "what we show you tonight." From the October 19 edition of The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod were on television this week, and they were talking about Fox News. And they were talking about how Fox News is -- is not really even news. Now, this is an important story, because it has now been bumped up one level. Before they put Anita Dunn out there -- this is the woman who was extolling the virtues of Mao Zedong -- you know, just a guy who killed 70 million people -- and said it was one of her two favorite political philosophers -- Mao. She has since said that she was joking. We also have some new audio for you we'll play in a second. But now what's happened is, she's being jettisoned.
[...]
BECK: Now that we've exposed Anita as yet another radical in the White House, they're gonna need to jettison Anita Dunn, especially after what we show you tonight. She'll have to go away, because we're asking too many questions about Anita. So now we get up to the big boys. [10/19/09]
Beck-led Fox News "czar" witch hunt moves to ridiculous smear of Dunn. Throughout most of his October 15 Fox News program, Beck falsely claimed that Dunn "worships" and "idolizes" "her hero" Mao Zedong. In fact, in the video that Beck aired as evidence to support his claims, Dunn offered no endorsement of Mao's ideology or atrocities -- rather, she commented that Mao and Mother Teresa were two of her "favorite political philosophers," and based on short quotes from them, she offered the advice that "you don't have to follow other people's choices and paths" or "let external definition define how good you are internally." Beck ignored numerous conservatives -- including Barry Goldwater's "alter ego" Stephen C. Shadegg, Cato Institute president Edward H. Crane, and GOP strategist Ralph Reed -- who have approvingly cited the tactics of Mao, Vladimir Lenin, and the Viet Cong, stating that they had used those tactics in their political work, or have otherwise highlighted their philosophies.
Beck, other Fox News personalities have repeatedly called for administration officials to be fired
Beck smeared Van Jones with falsehood, asked, "Do we want communists in the United States government as special advisers to the president?" On August 11, Beck falsely accused Van Jones, who he described as Obama's "green jobs czar," of being a "convicted felon ... who spent, I think, six months in prison after the Rodney King beating." In fact, as Eva Paterson, president and founder of the Equal Justice Society, has explained, "Van [Jones] has never served time in any prison. He has never been convicted of any crime." On September 1, Beck said of Jones: "How much more evidence do you need that we have radicals in the White House? Oh, we haven't even begun. If you think you need more, we need to -- at least in this country -- start having the necessary discussion of: Do we want communists in the United States government as special advisers to the president?" On September 3, Beck said that Jones' place in the Obama administration "says that the president has an agenda that is radical, revolutionary, and in some cases, Marxist."
Following Van Jones resignation, Beck urged followers to "Find everything you can on Cass Sunstein, Mark Lloyd and Carol Browner." From Beck's Twitter feed:
Fox Business' Bolling stated, "Van Jones resigns. ... How about J Holdren Science Czar (mass sterilization) and Cass Susstein [sic]." From Eric Bolling's Twitter feed:
Sean Hannity: "[W]e got rid of one [czar], and my job starting tomorrow night is to get rid of every other one. I promise you that." As Think Progress noted, at a September 7 rally in West Virginia, Hannity said:
HANNITY: Do you want another czar?
CROWD: No!
HANNITY: I don't think so. By the way, we got one -- we got rid of one, and my job starting tomorrow night is to get rid of every other one. I promise you that.
Hannity smears Jennings with falsehoods, calls for him to be fired. During the September 30 edition of his Fox News show, Hannity said of Jennings, "I want him fired. I think he's inappropriate. I think anybody that has that kind of judgment does not belong to be the safe schools czar." Hannity repeated his call for Jennings to be fired during the October 6 edition of his radio show.
Hannity asks which Obama "czars" should be fired. During the September 18 edition of his Fox news program, Hannity aired a list of "10 people who President Obama has appointed or nominated to work on your behalf in your government," and asked, "Should any of them be fired?" Hannity's case for dismissing the advisers largely consisted of false attacks, distortions, and trivial guilt by association.
Fox conducts witch hunt for Obama "czars." Hannity's declaration that "my job starting tomorrow night is to get rid of every other ['czar']" is just one example of Fox News personalities leading the charge against numerous Obama administration officials and nominees they have described as "czars" -- often by unearthing and criticizing statements the officials had made in the past rather than critiquing their job performance or credentials for those positions.
Beck fearmongers about Obama administration personnel, policies
Beck: Obama is a "racist" and "has a deep-seated hatred for white people, or the white culture." Beck previously said: "This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy -- over and over and over again -- who has a deep-seated hatred for white people, or the white culture -- I don't know what it is. But you can't sit in a pew with Jeremiah Wright for 20 years and not hear some of that stuff and not have it wash over." He later added, "I'm not saying that he doesn't like white people. I'm saying he has a problem. He has a -- this guy is, I believe, a racist. Look at the way -- look at the things he has been surrounded by." [Fox News' Fox & Friends, 7/28/09]
Beck repeatedly compares Obama administration, people to Nazis. Beck has previously said that "the Germans" during Hitler's rise "were an awful lot like we are now" and that "[w]e are really truly stepping beyond socialism and starting to look at fascism," comparing Obama administration proposals to Nazi Germany. Beck also claimed that Obama's "civilian national security force" is "what Hitler did with the SS," "what Saddam Hussein" did and stated, "I'm not comparing" Obama to Hitler, but "please read Mein Kampf" and learn from Germany's mistakes.
Beck repeatedly red-baits Obama administration. In addition to spending an entire hour of his Fox News show attacking Dunn because she once cited Mao as a "favorite political philosopher" and claiming that "the president has an agenda that is radical, revolutionary, and in some cases, Marxist," Beck previously stated that Obama's "radical advisers" like "communist" Van Jones are "fighting a revolution."
Public opinion is useless in fighting this. Obama supporters won't believe Beck, Obama opponents will believe Beck and friends. It's the middle ground you have to fight for, and you have to fight. If you don't you lose. End of story.
The First Amendent is very broad concerning political speech, and it is almost impossible to hold someone to the defamation standard.
But I am interested in what you would consider "pretty shaky ground, legally" that Beck Said.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not all negative statements constitute 'defamation.'
It boggles the mind.
Beck said, "when you implement a national health care system you are left with not other choice, everywhere in the world." That is a lie. Some countries let you opt out if you can cover your own health care. And he said "Rationing is inevitable", that is a lie. Oh, and He said Ezekial Emanuel used to believe in rationing. Emanuel believed rationing might be necessary, but he is Catholic, and believes in the Catholic position of pro-life from conception to natural death. He believed it might not be possible to provide all health care, but he believes not it is possible.
Oh, and Beck cited his Jan 2009 article as proof Emanuel supports rationing, but that was an article on *TRIAGE*, which is what hospitals do when they are swamped in an emergency, like 9-11 or another major disaster. Every hospital and every doctor does that, selecting who gets treated first.
Yes, Beck lied.
OK, she said "My favorite political philosopher" and "one of the two people I turn to most"...Dunn
Then she goes on to quote Mao. She didn't actually say it (idolize), but it sure looks like "idolization" to me.
Do your own research. Look for words like baseless, or falsely when you do your search on MMFA regarding FoxNews.
Look around on this site and you will find a whole SLEW of lies, hate and innuendo.
Fox doesn't ask "hard questions," they make up crap and then ask if that crap is real.
I remember a time when the media were the watchdogs of politicians not the lapdogs. Media used to keep politicians honest as much as they could--which, granted, is a task worthy of Sisyphus. A time when people could agree to disagree, and have spirited debates without resorting to name calling. A time when people were actually interested in the truth not interested in protecting their ideology in the face of verifiable facts.
Grow up! This isn't a schoolyard brawl--it's the future of our country.
Of course you don't.
Obviously your mind is made up so I'll stop confusing you with facts.
You are absolutely correct about that. Lies, hate and innuendo seem to be what this site is all about.
You should get a doctor to help you with that.
Your use of the word "hatred" is a bit misguided. Hatred is a very, very strong emotion. The overuse of the word to describe criticism of GWB weakened its meaning. That's a shame.
People on the left hated Bush for what he actually DID. People on the right hate Obama because of WHO he is and what he MIGHT do in the future.
Justice Concludes Black Voters Need Dem Party
Tuesday, October 20, 2009 10:02 AM
By: Ben Conery, The Washington Times Article Font Size
Voters in Kinston, N.C. decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.
The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.
Because this location has historically discriminated against blacks, they have to follow more stringent rules in order to prove that they aren't continuing to do this! Because there are always a few white Democrats who vote a straight party line ticket, occasionally a white person votes for a black candidate. However, when voting without a political party, white people in this town almost never vote for a black candidate. So, if you remove the Democratic ticket, no blacks are likely to get elected, since virtually no whites will vote for the black candidate. It's sad, but true.
But what does this have to do with Beck's comments, anyway?
Or were you just trying to derail the thread?
Do you paid trolls get paid MORE per post when you successfully derail a thread?
The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. Many localities have been removed from restrictions by the Dept of Justice over the years, after they have proven that they are trustworthy and will protect minority voting rights. Other municipalities haven't been removed from that scrutiny yet.
The Justice Dept will let good guys go. Clearly this community hasn't shown that good behavior yet. Once they do, then they'll be released from that scrutiny.
Why would you object to fair scrutiny of groups that had discriminated against minorities in the past and hadn't shown that they won't do it again if allowed?
Can you provide any proof of this discrimination? Specifically in the post Voting Rights Act of 1965. My guess is you can't and you're spouting off the typical left wing "racist" line.
Credible links only please! ;)
You won't fool us. You might fool yourself, but we've seen it before. The evidence is there for anyone to see. Your stance is is built on quicksand, not concrete. Your pretense that you're on solid ground is faulty and unsubstainable.
If she doesn't endorse Mao then Mao isn't one of her favorite philosophers.
Media Matters failed on this one.
People can admire a certain statement by a person but not the actual person.
You're aware I assume that many republicans have quoted Mao ?
Beck, fear mongering for the ignorant masses once again.
Mao the Philosopher and Mao the Revolutionary Leader were a bit distinct from one another. To put it in clearer terms, Mao was ultimately a bit of a hypocrite when it came to practicing what he preached. He expressed a great many lofty and nice sounding ideas that, when he tried to put into place in order to modernize a very backwards nation, did not work out at all as he thought they would. One can easily admire his ideas without admiring the ways he betrayed those ideas in attempting to implement them. Such tended to be the inevitable dilemma faced by Communist revolutionaries - reality never quite meshes with their ideological dreams. It does not mean that the dreams themselves weren't good... just that they were only dreams.
There is always room for nuance when it comes to opinions about human beings and their thoughts.
Socrates is regarded as a great philosophical mind. He also pursued sexual relationships with teenage boys. If I say that Socrates is one of my "favorite philosophers", does that mean I endorse all of his behaviors (including having sex with teenage boys). Obviously not.
Please don't feed the troll.
She compared Socrates, a person who had sex with boys, and Mao, who was a ruthless leader.
She compared liking some of what Socrates said without approving of his sex with boys to liking one thing Mao said without approving his ruthless leadership.
Again, you need to learn what an analogy is.
Stop digging!
Disclaimer: I'm not calling conservatives Nazis. I'm just making a comparison that some people might make. Honest.
Glen Beck is spitting on democracy, and we know why. You see, he have a problem with a black President. Which is what all of this hate is about. Beck and Fox News is out to please their confederate friends by brining down this adminstration. Their confederate friends have a problem with a black President too. If we had a white President in the oval Office and a TV talk show host said he wanted to bring down the Presidency, Beck would lose his job and they would have his head on a sliver platter. You better believe that.
You think Beck & Co. see it that way? They believe that the Constitution was written with a coded message that says that neocons shall rule the world entire! (attn: That's a joke.) Since we liberals are in charge, they forsee the end of the world approaching, and they're not far off. It'll be the end of a world of Bush/Cheny, and the birth of a world where everything works.
But there are a few thing Obama has done that are unconstitutional:
1. Obama has expanded those unconstitutional expansions of power concerning the wire taps. (I hear nothing from the left about that)
2. There is no power under the Constitution that allows Federal government control over health care, Automobiles, or any other industry except mail. And if you diagree please give me the sections that allow it.
3. There is an absolute prohibition on the regulation of speech. Obama created the FCC Chief Diversity Officer position and appointed Mark LLoyd - Lloyd believes it Constiotutional to control radio speech, a blatant violation of the 1st Amendment. Please expalin to me what part of the Constituion allows control over speech content in any way.
So far, Obama has blatantly subverted the contituion as much, if not more than Bush.
No. 2: This was decided by the Supreme Court in Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937).
No. 3: Creating a Chief Diversity Officer and appointing someone who believes it is in your words "Constitutional to control radio speech" is not unconstitutional. It would only be "unconstitutional" if the government actually created law to abridge free speech.
I will agree with you regarding No. 1. It was one of my huge gripes about Bush and continues to be so with Obama.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html
I think it has to do with the general welfare section 7.
For numbers 2 and 3, you are clearly not up to date on your Supreme Court rulings. Once again, please stop using Fox News to get your news. They are failing you.
My theory is that Beck wants to skirt that line as closely as he can.
I'm going to go out on a limb. This is all just hypothesis, mind you, and not necessarily representative of what I actually believe.
I am starting to wonder if Beck perhaps actually wants to be arrested on sedition charges. He knows he would get to be a martyr for a cause without actually being executed. His people would shout out about the repression of free speech. At best, Democrats would come out looking very bad. At worst, if we're really unlucky, Beck's teabaggers might start acting on the revolutionary rhetoric he's been so busy spreading and spark off something really bad that some of these folks have been wanting for a long time.
It's Revenge of the Nerds. The Alpha-Betas just lost the election for the Greek Council last year and the Coach Harrises of the political scene would love to see nothing more than to provoke them into "doing something" about it.
# We shall support whatever our enemies oppose and oppose whatever our enemies support.
Gee... Mao sounds like a Neocon!
c/o WikiQuote
When the leaders of the D party decide to show this handful of cons (FOX) who has the numbers and brains, Becky will be done. The cons will decide he is not good for the party and dismiss him.
Then, Fox will see what 2 millions people look like.
Go ahead and thumbs down this post, but it won't change the facts.
Now that's funny.
Anyone who thinks Obama is too far left is either grossly uninformed or an idiot.
Which one are you?
I'm sorry Fog, but you've jumped the shark on this one. You can't possibly believe that Obama is not too far left. Please tell me you're joking.
Interestingly, Beck made this same poor point himself when confronted about his "Obama is a racist" fiasco--he claimed that he was simply "asking questions" about whether Obama was a racist or not. That was, of course, a gross lie. Beck made a statement, he didn't ask a question.
And so it appears--as if there were any doubt--that Beck's hostility toward the truth is reflected in the sheep of his flock. It's not a nice thing to say, dclayton, but Beck's followers are even dumber than Beck is. Please consider rising above that.
He had one expert in favor of the vaccine. Nothing he said was contradicted by the other side.
He had one expert opposed to the vaccine. That 'expert' was contradicted on almost everything he said.
At the end of the show, Beck still wouldn't commit, wouldn't judge, wouldn't come to a conclusion. Of course, when it hurts the Obama Administration, he's more than willing to look at some of the facts and evidence and come to a conclusion that puts the Obama Administration in a bad light.
What does this mean...? Where is your truth. Explain it and show Becks mistakes maybe you can be making the $20M a year...
Yes Beck has bias, but rather than pretend he doesn't he lays it out there, while everyone else is living under this PC veil. He does it without too much name calling. I challenge you to do the same. Then we can have a very productive conversation about the future of America.
Or maybe you prefer to sit in the corner and call people dumb...hmhmhm
What does this mean...? Where is your truth. [sic] Explain it and show Becks [sic] mistakes
The search button is near the top of the page. Type in "Beck." Click the little arrow button. Watch the mistakes, the lies, the gross distortions pour out by the hundreds.
maybe you can be making the $20M a year...
Ah, so now truth is judged by income. Just remember, dclayton, Judas had the money bag, but he didn't have the truth.
Yes Beck has bias, but rather than pretend he doesn't he lays it out there, while everyone else is living under this PC veil.
Not being PC is no excuse for Beck's history of falsehoods. Only a fool would think otherwise.
He does it without too much name calling. I challenge you to do the same. Then we can have a very productive conversation about the future of America.
I doubt it. To know the future, you first have to understand the past and present, and Beck doesn't come within a mile of it.
Or maybe you prefer to sit in the corner and call people dumb...hmhmhm
I have no problem in calling dumb people dumb, if that's what you're wondering.
And you still haven't addressed the point I made, which was that Beck was making statements, where you claimed he was merely "asking questions." I'm not surprised that you don't try to defend yourself.
Look what the Paula Jones suit did to Clinton. File one against Beck. Get him to sign a false statement a false deposition. Get him to lie in court or even in a deposition.
Or force him to tell the truth. Tie him up with twenty lawsuits. Put him in a position where lying is a criminal offense.
IOW, FIGHT BACK!
There is the very common defense that it's just one's opinion. There's almost no chance of a victory when one uses that defense successfully.
It's a huge hurdle to be overcome.
Not in the previous misadministration, you weren't.
Thank god that's passed by.
Are there no homosexual children in America's schools? Are they not to be represented and guided in life? Or are only the values and lifestyle of you, your husband and children paramount?
If you truly 'decide what I want my children to know' you should want your children to know that families come in all colors and are diversified.
Open your mind and EDUCATE YOURSELF about Professor Jennings. Google his credentials and change the fox channel. If you truly researched Professor Jennings, you would know he did NOT 'introduce' homosexuality into our classrooms. Homosexuals were in our classrooms before the school foundations were excavated.
BTW, All parents know that they're NOT in charge of what their children know. Kids do their own research and then they LIE LIKE RUGS!!
But isn't that what kids do, LIE. How can one pretend to 'control everything that comes into their child's mind' especially if you have a son. Dream on tarang, you live in a fantasyland if you think you'll control your child's thinking. You'll lose them very young . .
Tarang, ever think about reading 'Heather Has Two Mommies' to your children?
Just asking but I think I know the answer . .