Beck's bosses in denial about his inflammatory and racially charged rhetoric
Fox News president Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, have both been confronted by journalists about Glenn Beck's inflammatory and often racially charged attacks on progressives and President Obama. Ailes and Murdoch have defended, rewritten, or falsely denied the existence of Beck's claims in an attempt to downplay his reckless rhetoric.
Ailes revises Beck's claim that progressives "are taking you to a place to be slaughtered" to assert that Beck "was probably accurate"
Beck asserted that progressives "are taking you to a place to be slaughtered." After naming SEIU president Andy Stern, George Soros, "anyone else around this White House," and "progressives," Beck stated on the November 3, 2009, edition of his Fox News program, "You are going to see this economy come up -- we're already seeing it - - and now it's going to start coming back down again. And when you see the effects of what they're doing to the economy, remember these words: we will survive. We know we'll do better than survive. We will thrive -- as long as these people are not in control. They are taking you to a place to be slaughtered."
Ailes falsely claimed Beck "was talking about Hitler and Stalin slaughtering people. So I think he was probably accurate." From the January 31 edition of ABC's This Week:
ARIANNA HUFFINGTON (Huffington Post co-founder and editor-in-chief): Well, Roger, it's not a question of picking a fight. And aren't you concerned about the language that Glenn Beck is using, which is, after all, inciting the American people? There is a lot of suffering out there, as you know, and when he talks about people being slaughtered, about who is going to be the next in the killing spree ...
(CROSSTALK)
AILES: Well, he was talking about Hitler and Stalin slaughtering people. So I think he was probably accurate. Also, I'm a little....
HUFFINGTON: No, no, he was talking about this administration.
February 1: Beck misrepresented his "slaughtered" comment. On the February 1 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that his comments were either in the "context of Mao, Stalin, or Hitler," or "the idea that the truth is being slaughtered by this administration":
BECK: I don't even know if I've ever used the word "slaughtered." And if I used the word "slaughtered," if it wasn't in a context of Mao, Stalin, or Hitler, it was in the idea that the truth is being slaughtered by this administration, not saying that this administration is going to slaughter anyone. [...] I have said that progressives, this ideology has lead to the slaughtering of millions. It has, it has. In particular: eugenics.
February 2: Beck claims he "was talking about Andy Stern." Responding to Huffington's criticism of his remarks, Beck claimed during his February 2 radio program that in his original comments, he "was talking about Andy Stern."
Murdoch on Beck's claim that Obama is "racist": "[H]e was right"
Beck: Obama a "racist" who has "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture." On the July 28, 2009, broadcast of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Beck discussed remarks Obama had made about the controversial arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates and declared that in his response to the arrest, Obama "exposed himself as a guy" with "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture." Beck added that Obama is a "racist." Fox News senior vice president of programming Bill Shine stated later that day that Beck "expressed a personal opinion which represented his own views, not those of the Fox News Channel. And as with all commentators in the cable news arena, he is given the freedom to express his opinions."
Murdoch on Beck's claim that Obama is "racist": "[H]e was right." In a November 6, 2009, interview with Sky News Australia political editor David Speers, Murdoch declared that while Beck "perhaps shouldn't have" said it, Beck was "right." From the interview:
SPEERS: Glenn Beck, who you mentioned, has called Barack Obama a racist, and he helped organize a protest against him. Others on Fox have likened him --
MURDOCH: Yeah.
SPEERS: -- to Stalin. Is that defensible?
MURDOCH: No, no, no, not Stalin, I don't think. I don't know who that -- not one of our people. On the racist thing, that caused a [unintelligible]. But he did make a very racist comment, about, you know, blacks and whites and so on, and which he said in his campaign he would be completely above. And, you know, that was something which perhaps shouldn't have been said about the president, but if you actually assess what he was talking about, he was right.
News Corp. spokesman Gary Ginsberg subsequently stated that Murdoch "does not at all, for a minute, think the president is a racist." Politico's Michael Calderone reported that Ginsberg said it's "not the case" that Murdoch shares Beck's view, "but did not comment further."
After questioned by Media Matters, Murdoch appeared to deny claiming that Obama made a "racist" comment. On November 19, 2009, Media Matters for America staff member Ben Fishel asked Murdoch if he "could be more clear about what racist comments the president allegedly made." Murdoch said: "I denied that absolutely. ... I don't believe he's a racist." Murdoch did not respond when further pressed to explain his remarks.
Ailes: Beck "did say one unfortunate thing, which he apologized for"
Ailes: Beck said "one unfortunate
thing," and "he apologized for" it. From the
January 31 edition of ABC's This Week:
AILES: I don't -- I think he speaks English. I don't know, but I mean, I don't misinterpret any of his words. He did say one unfortunate thing, which he apologized for, but that happens in live television. So I don't think it's -- I think if we start going around as the word police in this business, it will be ...
HUFFINGTON: It's not about the word police. It's about something deeper. It's about the fact that there is a tradition as the historian Richard Hofstetter said, in American politics, of the paranoid style. And the paranoid style is dangerous when there is real pain out there.
Beck apologized only for how "racist" accusation "was phrased," asserted that "it is a serious question that I think needs serious discussion." Ailes did not specify to which of Beck's assertions he was referring when he said on This Week that Beck "did say one unfortunate thing, which he apologized for, but that happens in live television." Assuming that Ailes is referring to Beck's claim that Obama is "a racist," the claim that Beck "apologized" for the remark is false. In fact, Beck asserted that "it is a serious question" and apologized only for "the way it was phrased," noting that "living in a soundbite world is really a nasty place to live." From the September 22, 2009, edition of @KatieCouric:
COURIC: You stand behind your assertion that in your view, President Obama is a racist?
BECK: I believe that Americans should ask themselves tough questions.
BECK [video clip]: This guy is, I believe, a racist.
COURIC: Are you sorry you said that at all?
BECK: I'm sorry the way it was phrased, because I think everybody has to -- living in a soundbite world -- really a nasty place to live. And it is a serious question that I think needs serious discussion.
Murdoch falsely claims none of his "people" have "likened" Obama to Stalin
Murdoch: "[N]ot one of our people" at Fox has "likened [Obama] to Stalin." During Murdoch's November 2009 interview with Australia's Sky News, which -- like Fox News -- Murdoch owns, David Speers stated, "Glenn Beck, who you mentioned, has called Barack Obama a racist, and he helped organize a protest against him. Others on Fox have likened him to Stalin. Is that defensible?" Murdoch responded, "No, no, not Stalin, I don't think. I don't know who that -- not one of our people."
In fact, Beck and other Fox News personalities have repeatedly compared Obama and his administration to Stalin. Beck and others employed by Fox News have indeed compared Obama's administration to Stalin. For instance, on the April 2, 2009, edition of his Fox News program, Beck aired video of Obama interspersed with historical footage that included images of Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Vladimir Lenin and asked, "Is this where we're headed?" As recently as January 28, Beck likened Obama's purported "enemies list" to those made by Stalin. Beck also frequently invokes Hitler and Nazi Germany while discussing the Obama administration.
2) Compare the political events that have transpired to these points.
3) Try to deny that what is being (and has been) installed does not map to the points from step 1.
4) Take a look at how these events came into play at previous points in history.
5) Do you prefer freedom or government control? (It's a fair question.)
In response to "Swift":
You have drunk the kool-aid offered by some real thugs.
-I loves kool-aid :D Although I was given none by anyone high up.
To do this hideously stupid thinking, you have to seriously say that FDR = fascism.
-Aye, that is what he is saying. Good to know you read it.
The president elected four times -- and it was legal then, though the Republicans made that illegal the first time they could -- beloved of the American people, who ended up rescuing American capitalism from the "economic royalists" who had brought on the Depression, and from worldwide fascism, was actually a fascist.
-This is a slight run-on sentence. However: Yes. He was elected 4 times. Impressive feat. But he threw out the door a century of tradition set by George Washington. He felt he was too good to submit to the standard 2 terms. Was he really beloved? George Bush won both his elections. He was hated. He rescued capitalism by destroying it through tons of regulations? Really now? Stock owners are economic royalists who brought on the depression? Try terrible luck, a sour economy world wide, and an unsustainable society. (See: The Dust Bowl)
When a supposition gives you a ludicrous result like that, you have a moral necessity of reexamining your premise, because it's not only flawed, it's a propaganda tool of a bunch of sinister...
-So many fancy words. I am not sure there is anything in this to respond to.
oh, what's the term FDR would have used? Economic royalists.
-Theres that fancy term of yours that I am not sure about. Economic royalists. Is that people who had huge success and then LOST IT ALL in the Depression?
And George Bush wasn't exactly..."elected" the first time. Not without the help of the Supreme Court and getting thousands of black voters off the list by falsely listing them as convicted felons.
Show me a single delusional rant. One. Show me the factual errors that he is spreading that are hateful and causing violence?
When will the left get the same treatment as the right? What if Beck said "I forgot that Obama was black for an hour?"
When will the leftward media take responsibility for whipping Hasan into a murderous frenzy at Fort Hood? YOU WONT, because it is not true. So stop the crap about conservatives whipping people into a violent rage.
If you don't have facts to back up your rhetoric, do the world a favor and be quiet.
Errrrmmmmmm, how many times did Bill O'Reilly call Dr. Tiller, "Tiller the Baby Killer" before some nutcase walked into his church and shot him to death? Seems that Bill O. nor Murdoch or Iles are not willing to take even partial responsibility for what his "freedom of speech" cost this doctor.
All I'm saying is that-rational clear thinking persons need to differentiate between hype and reality. Fox News ratings are hype. Cable News having overall dismal viewing audiences is reality.
Consider that Beck is only dealing with the surface of these events as they materilise on the physical plane. One who is educated in other methods of investigation (that will not be disclosed here) can certainly delve much deeper into these issues. Interestingly, many of these findings do not conflict with the offerings of Glenn Beck to the same degree as those who simply hold other points of view, based in instinct and desire.
The truth is bitter. Lest one possess the eyes of a child, one will never see/know truth.
But hey, run with that! Ignorant children playing dittobot rightwingers really do well debating facts! No, really!
Mark my words, Glenn Beck will be the downfall of Roger Ailes (if the clogged arteries don't get him first) Glenn Beck, and Fox News.
Going against the grain gets you ratings!!!! Fox has figured it out, when will everyone else?
Boy, that's something for fox's loyal followers to be proud of...
What, exactly, would Olberman/Maddow be inciting people to do? Think? Research? Listen? Please be specific.
You simply feel dirty because you are so wrong.
If these guys are going to go on TV and just flat out lie, you cannot just sit there and argue the truth without being extremely careful and precise. You have to prove that they are lying (which is not at all difficult)! Ailes and Murdoch should not be able to just say "I don't think that's right" and expect to get away with it. Hold their feet to the freaking fire using cold, hard facts! If you don't they change the subject or otherwise wiggle out of the trap.
Why not debate any of the FACTS that Glenn Beck offers? Stop attacking the man and attack his facts instead. But then again, that would require liberals to actually WATCH the show instead of reading the summaries of other liberals that haven't actually watched the show.
I can;t tell you how many times Beck has said "prove me wrong, I want to be wrong about this."
Stop defending Obama like he is your little baby that can do no wrong.
And, yet, he gets proven wrong by... you guessed it, MEDIA MATTERS! So what does Beck do about it? Ignores, obviously.
What post were you reading? Nothing was even remotely mentioned about Obama in this thread. Not all of us here love the guy... I, for one, disagree with a lot of his policies and decisions, but not as much as I did with Bush.
The point here is Beck's extremely dangerous and hateful rhetoric... Obama is not the issue, Beck and Fox News are. And, if Beck and Fox want a war against the Progressives, they will get a war and once the facts hit them in the head, they'll be exposed for their BS.
Simple. Because he has yet to offer any.
Actually it's just as likely that a liberal tea-BAGGED lunatic will try and kill her...
? did you worry about all the left-wing nutter tea-bagged lunatics that threatened and made hate toward GWB? I'm not even going to guess...
But you're right, O'Reilly didn't tell anyone to do anything violent, but he did put Tiller in the public eye, and help make him the focus of a movement with a history of violence against abortion doctors. Remember Dr. Tiller had already been shot once. But more to the point here. Why don't you examine for yourself the similiarities between O'Reilly's reasoning and the rationalization of the crime by Dr. Tiller's murderer.
For the record though, the amount of death threats against President Obama is triple of those received by GWB. Seems to me a pretty good indication of which side has the most potentially violent lunatics.
How do you know what the ratio of threats to bho vs gwb is??? Seems like that information isn't released to the public.... regardless it's no o'reillys fault... wacko are wackos right or left...
Okay, try following the links [and reading or watching them] below and then tell me you never heard them ... please.
Tiller the Baby Killer
Kidnap Reid and Pelosi
Please take a few minutes, seriously, to educate yourself somewhere OTHER than via FOX News.
In "kidnap reid and pelosi" I'm sure you're not so dumb you can't understand a joke. and the fact is that there was no threat... it was an IF I blah... blah... I'd do this or that... Must be the way the justice department sees it as a threat would have landed him in jail... hmmm...
I don't watch Fox News or any TV channel for that matter. No TV in over 20 years, wouldn't be able to see it if I had one....
Falsely calling Tiller a "killer" and saying anybody who doesn't stop him has "blood on their hands" is quite obviously a threat. I don't know how it could be construed as anything else - especially when you consider the ultra-violent history of the anti-abortion movement.
I do not think O'Reilly did anything illegal. However, there is such a thing, at least in my life, as moral culpability. And, to pretend as if he bears none after repeatedly calling the man a baby killer and announcing that anyone who does not stop him has blood on their hands is frightening.
The only difference are the targets...
In actuallity you are more of a problem then I...
I like the "low information punk" that's funny... your pathetic....
Your Biggest Fan,
Open_Mind
I would think that FOX News would, like many other organizations, expect its community to respect the rights and dignity of all its employees, and/or viewers, guests, personalities, etc. I would think that they would prohibit racial, ethnic and religious harassment of those same employees, and/or viewers, guests, personalities, etc.
Perhaps since Rupert is NOT an American, he feels that he can run his business outside of American regulations, laws, guidelines, etc. I say send his sorry a$$ back to Australia. I think the "birthers" should be more worried about him than about President O'Bama.
Was that a cut to Arianna and her accent? Seems out of place here and the derisive way he said it made me go Hmm.
A clip from the article:
<Griffin, not surprisingly, says he doesn't believe Olbermann's recent hiccups are part of any larger trend. "Keith has been our tentpole," he says. "I watch the show every night. It's a great show. It's as smart and clever and fun as any out there, and I'm pleased with where we are.">