Monday, October 18, 2010

Quote of the Day

"Imagine, for a moment, that you were us and, had it not been for a sharp eyed highway patrolman, a heavily armed man in full body armor would have made it to your office with the intent to kill you and your colleagues. His motive? Apparently, it was because the charitable, nonpartisan programs we run are deemed part of a conspiracy to undermine America and the capitalist system, which is hogwash.

...While we may agree to disagree about the role our citizens and our government should play in promoting social justice and the common good, there should be no disagreement about what constitutes integrity and professionalism and responsibility in discourse -- even when allowing for and encouraging contending diverse opinions intelligently argued. This is not a partisan issue. It's an American issue. No one, left, right or center, wants to see another Oklahoma City.

The next 'assassin' may succeed, and if so, there will be blood on many hands. The choice is yours."

-- Drummond Pike, CEO of the Tides Foundation, which was targeted by self-proclaimed "progressive hunter" and Glenn Beck superfan Byron Williams, taking the staggeringly bold step of personally appealing to the companies which advertise on Glenn Beck's show on Fox News to drop their sponsorship or risk having blood on their hands

I'll have something more to say on this later this evening, but I had to just get this out there.


Juan said...

I'm sorry (really), but it's absolutely naive to say, in the US (in Europe we operate under different freedom of speech standards), that "(...) there should be no disagreement about what constitutes integrity and professionalism and responsibility in discourse (...)".

I fear that Beck will grab this ball and run with it for at least one full week of whining.

Steven D Skelton said...

Fuck this guy.

Imagine for a second we had a political left capable of pointing the finger at who it belongs to be pointed at.

Why is it always someone else's fault other than the fucking criminal. It's always about racist cops, bad schools, the klan, blah blah fucking blah.

The bottom line is that the political left in America can't stand that people get to disagree. Fuck, they can't even tolerate a two bit carnival barker having his say.

Fuck this guy.

Here's a question for him...whose fault was it when this fuckhead robbed a bank prior to ever hearing Beck?? Oh, he doesn't mention that because there are no political points to be scored.

What an asshole. He's no better than Beck.

Chez said...

Bullshit, Steven.

I've been through this with you before so I'm not going to bother trying to make you understand what makes Beck's rhetoric different, more inflammatory and more absolutely fucking irresponsible than the average right or left-wing flamethrower. And you know something (and this is what I'll get into a little later)? Fox knows he's dangerous and over the line. Trust me on that.

B8ovin said...

I know Steven D. Skelton. He is involved with several groups that are involved in channeling money to terrorists. For the sake of the country someone should do something about Steven D. Skelton. I'm not saying violence but if Steven D. Skelton is not stopped there will be bloodshed....

I trust you see how irresponsible this total fabrication is, Mr. Skelton. To say I disagree with you and your political views is one thing. To tie you, via wholesale lies and spurious connections and to indirectly advocate violence while claiming I am not doing exactly what I am doing is something else. Mr. Beck may not have created a psychopath as you point out, but he is directly responsible for providing that psychopath an innocent target.

Chez said...

B8ovin, FTW.

kanye said...

I'll be amongst the first cheering on Drummond Pike as he goes after Beck's advertisers, but at the same time, I find it more than a bit repugnant when he admonishes us as to what "...contitutes integrity and professionalism and responsibility in discourse..." and then follows it up by waving the bloody shirt.

Anonymous said...

While I don't agree with Steven D Skelton in his depiction of liberals or I guess the political left, I have a real problem with anyone trying to limit the freedom of expression. Do I find people like the Phelps family repulsive? Yes, but it is their right to act like complete morons and serve as the image of homophobia in America. Same with Glenn Beck. Is he a scum bag...yeah. Does he honestly believe his because no higher functioning adult honestly could. He is simply manipulating his audience into making money. Now is it his fault that a grown man decided to do something dangerous and If Glenn hadn't set this tool off, something or someone else would have. Does anyone honestly believe this guy would be a model citizen if there wasn't a Glenn Beck program? We start with Glenn...who is next. Who decides what is considered responsible and irresponsible. Sure its easy in Glenn's case as he just says the most insane shit possible...but it is a slippery slope.

If you stop Glenn...he just goes to the internet. His audience wants to hear his shit and if he doesn't deliver it, there is an entire internet filled with even more insane shit like

CNNfan said...

A solution to this problem can be specified with a precise algorithm:


Ref said...

Anon 3:20, get off your high horse. Nobody is saying Glen Beck has to shut up. What they are saying is that he does have to take responsibility for what he says and that nobody else is required to provide Lil' Glen with a forum in which to spew his eliminationist fantasies.

Anonymous said... I said, if Beck gets pulled off the air, what exactly does that accomplish? He can spin it into his crazy dogma that everyone is out to get him and it will drive his fanatics wild. It won't change a damn thing. He will never take responsibility for what he says. Should Catcher in the Rye be banned because of that nutbag that shot John Lennon? What's his name said that it told him to kill. What about the White Album? That drove the Manson family to kill... What you or I see as perfectly fine could be the thing that drives others overboard. I can't watch violent films thanks to PTSD, so should I demand that all films and film that show blood and guts get banned less I have an episode and start flash backing? I mean, who is going to decide what is too inflammatory? We can't even get this fucking country to agree what "middle class" means, but you think that we can put limits on free speech that we all somehow agree is permissible.

There will always be a forum, thanks to the internet. Should Beck be on the TV and radio...I sure as shit wishes he wasn't. But I cannot support the view that he taken off the air cause he says crazy shit. At the end of the day, even for the nuts, its their fault for their own actions. That's all I am saying.

Ref said...

Anon, when did I say limit free speech? I've fought against the academic left's attempts to suppress what THEY want to call hate speech. I say the same to them as I do in this case. A young boob on a campus should say what he wants without fear of expulsion, but without protection from public disgrace and opprobrium. Glen is free to say whatever he wants to and his opponents are free to advocate for boycotts of his advertisers. This is the free market of ideas. You seem to want some guarantee that public figures not have to face any consequences for arrant asshattery.

Anonymous said...

Where the hell did I say I want public figures to be free of responsibility?!? You still haven't said what will be the positive result if Glenn Beck will get pulled. How is him getting pulled off of Fox News going to hurt him in the least? He has his radio gig and he could shit on a stack of papers and it will hit the Times Best Sellers list. All it will do is give his "I am being persecuted by the evil Socialists in the government" more credence to his inane audience. It will play exactly into his hands, further cementing his cult leader status to his audience.

Chez said...

Potential martyrdom can't be taken into account; the fact is that any responsible news outlet -- and once again, the key here is that Fox is nominally a news outlet -- has to distance itself from Beck. It can't legitimize him. I agree that if Fox were to throw him under the bus, his legion of dumb-fuck myrmidons would adhere to his nonsense even more strenuously, but you're still taking away his biggest bullhorn and making it known that he isn't a credible source of information. You can't put the genie back in the bottle, but you can throw the fucking bottle as far away from you as possible -- for your own good.

CNNfan said...

Is that what ©₪₪ did when it couldn't put the
Ģʅɐɳɳĩɐ back in the bottle, throw the ʩʤing bottle as far away as possible to Ƒ☼Ẋ?

Ref said...

Anon, I DO believe that depriving him of his bully pulpit at Fox will limit him pretty severely. His fans are not really the internet types, nor do many of them hang out regularly in bookstores. Okay, maybe that's condescending, but you get my drift.

On the other hand, the kind of boobs who follow Beck around will just find themselves another demagogue to follow around.