Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman writes about rightwing bloviaterss who use the airwaves to promote their paranoia, extremist ideas, and lies, which, in my opinion, contribute to inciting murderers like Tiller and Von Brunn.
Exhibit A for the mainstreaming of right-wing extremism is Fox News’s new star, Glenn Beck. Here we have a network where, like it or not, millions of Americans get their news — and it gives daily airtime to a commentator who, among other things, warned viewers that the Federal Emergency Management Agency might be building concentration camps as part of the Obama administration’s “totalitarian” agenda (although he eventually conceded that nothing of the kind was happening).
But let’s not neglect the print news media. In the Bush years, The Washington Times became an important media player because it was widely regarded as the Bush administration’s house organ. Earlier this week, the newspaper saw fit to run an opinion piece declaring that President Obama “not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself,” and that in any case he has “aligned himself” with the radical Muslim Brotherhood.
And then there’s Rush Limbaugh. His rants today aren’t very different from his rants in 1993. But he occupies a different position in the scheme of things. Remember, during the Bush years Mr. Limbaugh became very much a political insider. Indeed, according to a recent Gallup survey, 10 percent of Republicans now consider him the “main person who speaks for the Republican Party today,” putting him in a three-way tie with Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich. So when Mr. Limbaugh peddles conspiracy theories — suggesting, for example, that fears over swine flu were being hyped “to get people to respond to government orders” — that’s a case of the conservative media establishment joining hands with the lunatic fringe.
It’s not surprising, then, that politicians are doing the same thing. The R.N.C. says that “the Democratic Party is dedicated to restructuring American society along socialist ideals.” And when Jon Voight, the actor, told the audience at a Republican fund-raiser this week that the president is a “false prophet” and that “we and we alone are the right frame of mind to free this nation from this Obama oppression,” Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, thanked him, saying that he “really enjoyed” the remarks.
24 comments:
I hope this helps puts matters into perspective: In a paper called “Toxic to Democracy: Conspiracy Theories, Demonization & Scapegoating,” Chip Berlet states
“Dualism is an overarching theme or “metaframe” in which people see the world as divided into forces of good and evil. Scapegoating is a process by which a person or group of people are wrongfully stereotyped as sharing negative traits and are singled out for blame for causing societal problems, while the primary source of the problem is overlooked or absolved of blame. Demonization, a process through which people target individuals or groups as the embodiment of evil, facilitates scapegoating (…) Apolcalyticism, also a metaframe, involves the expectation that dramatic events are about to unfold during which a confrontation between good and evil will change the world forever and reveal hidden truths. Apocalyptic Aggression occurs when scapegoats are targeted as enemies of the “common good,” and this can lead to discrimination and acts of violence [3].
Cynical movement leaders then can hyperbolize false claims in a way that mobilizes overt forms of discrimination. People who believe conspiracist allegations sometimes act on those irrational beliefs , and this has concrete consequences in the real world. Angry allegations can quickly turn into aggression and violence targeting scapegoated groups (…) Even when conspiracist theories do not center on Jews, homosexuals, people of color, immigrants or other scapegoated groups, they still create an environment where racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, xenophobia, homophobia, and other forms of prejudice , bigotry, and oppression can flourish [p. 47].
You can find the full paper by clicking here. Highly recommended reading.
Here we go again, with the same old bullshit.
"And then there’s Rush Limbaugh. His rants today aren’t very different from his rants in 1993. But he occupies a different position in the scheme of things. Remember, during the Bush years Mr. Limbaugh became very much a political insider. Indeed, according to a recent Gallup survey, 10 percent of Republicans now consider him the “main person who speaks for the Republican Party today,” putting him in a three-way tie with Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich"
Holy crap when are you going to say ANYTHING that a democrat did or said?
Oh, I forgot, they are never in the wrong are they
Ted Kennedy, or Nancy whats her face of Schumcky Chucky Schummer, or even Charlie Rangel the Prince of Thieves from Harlem
To the person who wrote the above comment:
I didn't "say" what you quoted.
The title of the posst indicates who did say it.
Please, if you're going to comment here, use your reading comprehension skills.
Again, certain people in your group appear to have none.
As for writing about Kennedy and Pelosi, why don't you use your own blog to do so and cease and desist from telling me what I should write about on mine.
Thanks.
The Washington Times was never the Bush house "organ", any more than Rush Limbaugh is correct to call Reuters, CBS, etc "state owned media". It's a common error, and propaganda technique, to claim that a media organ that agrees with politician happens to be "owned" by them. Here, Krugman gets his facts wrong (no surprise) and is using sloppy thinking identical to Limbaugh's current lame "state-owned media" meme.
The Times, is, however, an organ of the Moonie criminal cult. It's nothing more than their newsletter. That's a point of fact, and the way the ownership works. Unfortunately, they have bamboozled too many conservatives into supporting and participating in it.
And from Wikipedia: "On June 23, 2004 the Washington Post reported:
At the March 23 ceremony in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.) wore white gloves and carried a pillow holding an ornate crown that was placed on Moon's head. The Korean-born businessman and religious leader then delivered a long speech saying he was "sent to Earth . . . to save the world's six billion people. . . . Emperors, kings and presidents . . . have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent."[1]"
Looks like Republicans aren't the only one who have bought into this cult.
"The Times, is, however, an organ of the Moonie criminal cult. It's nothing more than their newsletter."
I can't believe it. DMarks got something correct for a change.
See? Proof positive that if you bang on the keyboard long enough, one day you will get all the letters and words in the right order.
Krugman got it right.
The Washington Times (along with the WSJ editorial page and Fox News) could quite fairly be described as 'Bush/GOP house organs'.
It is very far off the mark suggesting 'identical sloppy thinking' between Limbaugh and Krugman. Far off indeed.
AS the Republican Party dives deeper and deeper into the hole of it's own digging, it believes it's only way out is to shout louder appeals to bigots, homophobes and idiots.
dmarks,
Please don't put Professor Krugman and the bigoted demagogue, Limbaugh, in the same sentence.
You may not agree with Krugman's liberal writings, but that doesn't make him in any way comparable to Limbaugh. That would be like comparing a polished diamond to a turd.
Krugman and Limbaugh are alike, however, with the erroneous "media agreeding with a President must be owned by them" logic. It's shoddy coming from both Rush and Paul.
If it is true that the Wash. Times, WSJ, and Fox are Bush "house organs", then it is true that CBS, CNN, etc are "government owned".
But.... neither silly claim is true.
dmarks typed:
The Washington Times was never the Bush house "organ", any more than Rush Limbaugh is correct to call Reuters, CBS, etc "state owned media". It's a common error, and propaganda technique, to claim that a media organ that agrees with politician happens to be "owned" by them. Here, Krugman gets his facts wrong (no surprise) and is using sloppy thinking identical to Limbaugh's current lame "state-owned media" meme."
You misread his column.
He does NOT claim that the Washinton Times was the Bush house "organ" or owned by the Bush Administration.
This is what he wrote"
"...it was widely regarded as the Bush administration’s house organ."
And he's certainly accurate on that. A lot of people believed the Washinton Times was a propaganda arm of the Bush White House. Krugman did NOT claim any truth on this, just what was perceived.
You got a bit ahead of yourself on that one.
Shaw: You are right.
dmarks: The Mooney Times let themselves be used as if it were a house organ of the Bush regime and the GOP in return for increased advertising and for the butt kissing Rev. Moon got from the GOP.
Again, selective indignation. You brought in Rush where he wasn't involved. you brought in all of the extemporaneous bits of useless information about Palin, but when I bring in Jeremiah Wright, invoking the same theoretical insight you are attempting to use you balk? please.
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_wright_0610jun10,0,7603283.story
Asked if he had spoken to the president, Wright said: "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ...
Alleged anti-semetic speeches? I think not.
You want to bring in Rush, I'll bring in the good ole Rev. Wright.
Triad typed:
"Again, selective indignation. You brought in Rush where he wasn't involved."
I'm not exactly sure what that statement is about. But if you go back and read the post you'll see that it is not I who is writing, but rather Paul Krugman. This post is about Prof. Krugman and his opinion about Rightwing extremists.
Triad typed: "...you brought in all of the extemporaneous bits of useless information about Palin...,"
I'm assuming you meant to post this in another comment thread, because I don't mention Palin in this post, and neither does Krugman.
Triad typed: "...but when I bring in Jeremiah Wright, invoking the same theoretical insight you are attempting to use you balk? please."
I don't know what you mean by "theoretical insight" or my balking.
Mr. Obama distanced himself long ago from Wright and condemned his crazy rantings.
Shaw said"Mr. Obama distanced himself long ago from Wright and condemned his crazy rantings."
And why is ALWAYS MR. OMAMA... but only "Bush"
I guess it's the Bush-bad Obama-good, dumb mentality!
Dear Triad,
You'd kick if I had a football.
Are you examining my blog and counting how many times I say Mr. Obama? Or just plain Bush?
You are a prime example of the angry, unhappy Right.
Shaw said:...Are you examining my blog and counting how many times I say Mr. Obama? Or just plain Bush?
I don't have to count, it's SO obvious.
Triad,
Get. A. Life.
To I Ain't Got No Blog,
Your comment has nothing to do with the topic.
All you do is come to my blog and attack what I say. When I defend myself, you accuse me of being a hater and other vile things.
You and bluepitbully are pathetic little cowards with nothing better to do with your lives than harangue a fellow blogger because she doesn't suffer fools gladly.
Bluepitbully has cribbed my comments and posts from other people's blogs as well as my own and posted them on his blog to establish himself as some sort of superhero of the blogsphere.
In fact, his pusillanimous behavior shows him to be the grossest of cowardly little snivlers who has to talk about a fellow blogger behind her back and get his fellow cankerots to enforce his puerile rants.
It illustrates perfectly why people like you and bluepitbully are a fading minority of unintelligible yahoos.
Begone!
Next time, I'll have to get the Orkin guy.
Jesus, shaw, they've really flipped out.
What power you must have. An ex-military guy blogging about you blogging and doing it behind your back?
Unbelievable.
"One of the things that schoolyard bullies do is to bring their victims to the point of irrational rage and use it to pose as victims when the shit hits the fan."
got that over at Swash Zone.
I checked out bluepitbull's blog and that fits him.
Paul Krugman should do a column on crazy rightie bloggers and their need to hound people they don't agree with.
what a bunch of nuts.
keep up the good work. do't let the bastids get you down.
Post a Comment