From our friends over at Media Matters for America, Erick Erickson at the 2010 CPAC Convention talking about right wing media infrastructure. He basically says out loud here what we already know, which is that Fox is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party. Apparently ClusterFox isn't good enough for Erickson since CNN has made him part of their "best political team on television".
Countdown's Worst Persons for Jan. 28, 2009 with winners being a whole host of right wingers for their response to the State of the Union address. Media Matters has the breakdown--The right-wing response to Obama's SOTU address: "jerk," "arrogant," cocky". Runners up Karl Rove for his appearance on Fox & Friends--Does Rove Think Reagan And Bush Were ‘Weak’ For Discussing The ‘Situation’ They Inherited? and Rudy Giuliani on the same show--Giuliani falsely claims Obama never said "war" in State of the Union.
(Dr. W.S. "Stuart" McBirnie - warnings against the all-malevolent "them")
Every time I hear about "Liberal Media", another batch of tapes fall off my shelves, always from some extreme right-wing group, or quasi-religious organization with an extreme agenda. Never fails. There are thousands of them. The airwaves have been jam-packed with them since the beginnings of broadcasting.
This particular tape comes by way of The Voice Of Americanism, a daily radio (and later TV) show hosted by William Stuart McBirnie, a wildly anti-Communist preacher who was heard on over 300 stations from the early 1960's to the 1980s.
On this broadcast, from the 1980s (no exact date) he plays host to a Gordon Browning who was Executive Assistant to California State Senator H.L. "Bill" Richardson. Not much is known about Browning (although I'm sure someone out there has a whole file someplace), but Richardson, who has since "retired" from the State Senate, is around and flying slightly under the radar.
The subject of the broadcast is how the left manipulate people through issues - this issue being Clean Air. Sound familiar?
McBirnie: “Smog is not only a product of automobiles, it is also the product of many things. Now, help us understand though, how the leftists and the Stateists, the people who want to control people, are stepping into this picture to use this problem?”
Have a listen and have at it. Should be lively.
Oh . . .and hit the button below and feel a whole lot better!
(With no place to go but implode)
I ran a C.W. Burpo broadcast the other night featuring one of his rants masquerading as a sermon. I also stumbled across an interview he conducted in 1969 with Congressman John H. Buchanan (R-Alabama), which is always a good reminder that there has never been a historic shortage of hysteria, fear, death, hate and mythical accusations coming from the unhinged sector of our society.
Even in 1969:
Burpo: “Isn’t it comforting to have Secretary Laird in the Defense Department office instead of Robert “Strange”, emphasis on Strange, McNamara? (laughter)
Buchanan: “Yes sir, I cannot tell you how much better I sleep at night since this is the case. I felt a little like . .. I may have said this before, but . .when they were discussing the war over in the Middle East, said that we ought to swap the Israelis four hundred F-111 aircraft for one one-eyed General (Moishe Dayan), and another got up and said ‘ yes, he’d agree to that and he’d also throw in Mister McNamara” (laughter)
Burpo: “That’s good . . “
What's interesting about this particular interview is how Burpo goads and manipulates a rather reluctant (at times) Buchanan into buying all his views, not that he probably didn't anyway. But judging by his record, John Buchanan hid out quite a bit, preferring not to make many waves. His 17 years in the House produced a scant few paragraphs on Wikipedia and not too much else. Burpo, on the other hand, had enough bluster for several people - but even that didn't prevent his almost total obscurity shortly after his death.
Such is the life expectancy of the shrill and devious.
(Seems to have a very long history)
The name C.W.Burpo rings no bells to speak of - other than the fact that he was a "radio minister" who was virulently anti-communist and died in 1982. One of the things I've noticed, in researching a lot of these "radio ministers" who preached a steady stream of right-wing extremist diatribe during their "messages to the children of God" is that not many of the recordings seem to exist. Certainly, the Library of Congress has a policy not to accept recordings of any of those broadcasts, with the possible exception of Father Coughlin, who was something of a pioneer of the form.
But C.W. Burpo hosted a daily program, heard over a large number of radio stations in middle and Southern America for a number of years, beginning in the late 1950's and going to the late 1960's. After the first few minutes of citing scripture and praying for God's guidance, he launched into a tirade over the perilous nature of our lives here in America.
As sampled by this 1965 broadcast dealing with the Civil Rights Movement.
C.W. Burpo: “I’m talking about real, red-blooded patriotic Americans, and I say there’s no doubt in the minds of those Americans that Nazism and Fascism are evil, and that we want no part of it. And yet with increasing intensity, we observe references in the press to Nazis and Fascist activities in our country. Now there’ve been no exposures of such activity, just references veiled insular references, as far as we’ve been able to learn there is no real Nazi or Fascist threat within America, but we have during the course of investigation learned something very revealing. And that is, that there is a Communist conspiracy against this nation, against the churches, against the homes, against the schools and against your very life. And as a major tactic of this conspiracy – well AS a major tactic of this conspiracy is to smear the opposition with a Nazi or Fascist label. But let’s look at the real trouble that we’re facing today. Communist infiltration into the Race Revolution is becoming evident as investigation exposes leaders and organizations. A partial list of organizations involved in the Civil Rights Movement, which reportedly has Communist or Communist fronters in its leadership are . . .now I have a copy of this so I’m going to give it and I want every station to hold steady because we’re not going to incriminate you.
(I.F. Stone and friend - even in 1958 the Liberal Media was a myth)
Our news media has gone through countless changes since this interview was conducted in 1958. It was before the days of "breaking news" 24 hour news cycles, Satellite feeds, cable and instant access. It was also the days before media conglomerates, info-tainment and reality TV.
But even in 1958 there were problems. Newspapers at the time were still the main source for getting news, with radio a close second. Most major city newspapers published twice a day. But even with that, a lot of stories just weren't covered. A lot of news items were downplayed and only given cursory mention, usually towards the back of a paper with one or two lines.
This program, part of the Open Mind series featured interviews with prominent newspaper figures of the time. Herbert Brucker, who was chairman of the Freedom of Information Committee of the American Society of Newspaper Editors. William J. Miller, chief Editorial writer for the New York Herald Tribune, and I.F. Stone, publisher of I.F. Stone's Weekly. . .
I.F. Stone: “I think the three things wrong with the American press, a very good press I think. Better than that of most countries, except perhaps England. They have a very good press. The three things wrong with it are these – first of all, as soon as you get away from the Eastern seaboard, there are very few papers in this country that run enough news matter to make possible a considered judgment on public affairs. The average city daily does not run enough news, that’s the first big criticism of it. Second thing is the newspapers, and to a greater degree radio and television are adjuncts of advertisers. Advertisers object to ideas that might disturb anybody. So there’s a tendency, not to spread wicked ideas or bad ideas, but no ideas. So as not to upset any possible customer. And the third thing is, that since it takes a lot of money to own a newspaper, except a small one like mine, most publishers are Republicans.”
So even in 1958 all was not rosy with the media. And the factors in that discontent seem to be the same, despite protests to the contrary.
Who better for Bill O'Reilly to get a "fair and balanced" opinion from following President Obama's speech to Congress than serial liar Karl Rove? Media Matters has the run down on this one.
Rove advances "glaring misstatements" and "distortions" in criticizing Obama speech:
Purporting to examine President Obama's health care speech, Karl Rove claimed that while discussing "the so-called lies and misstatements about his proposal," Obama "made a series of very glaring misstatements or distortions." In fact, it was Rove who was advancing falsehoods and distortions.
[.....]
Rove distorts "what people were concerned about" regarding "panels to kill off senior citizens".
[.....]
Contradicting CBO, Rove suggests "most companies" will "dump the coverage" under House bill.
[.....]
Rove distorts Obama statement to claim he is "not shooting straight" on deficit.
(H.L. Hunt - Richest Man in America . .and the furthest right - Booga-Booga!)
For people who think the wave of extreme right wing media is a new phenomenon, it's been with us forever. Going back to the 1930's with the likes of Father Coughlin, there have been a steady stream of pundits, alarmists, hate advocates and wingnuts ever since.
During the 1950's and 1960's one of the biggest practitioners of right wing alarmist radio and TV came in the person of H.L. Hunt.
Rings no bells? Probably not. H.L. Hunt maintained a very low profile in his funding of weekly radio and TV broadcasts that fed a steady stream of fear, hate and paranoia for many years. So low in fact, that funding for his programs came out of his advertising Agency.
It also didn't hurt that he was the richest man in America, with a vast fortune starting with oil. By all accounts, he was eccentric at best. Leading a somewhat monastic life (except for the mass of illegitimate children he was reported to have fathered), even to the point of carrying his own brown-bag lunch to work every day.
Something about extreme wealth fostering extreme strange. J. Paul Getty had his phone booth - H.L. Hunt had his brown bag lunch.
Question: "You run a pretty large network of communications that carry forward your own political ideas, starting way back with programs such as “Facts Forum” and “Answers For Americans” I believe was another. Why did you turn to radio and television with your great wealth to put across these ideas? What made you do that?"
Hunt: “Well that was a means of communication. Now . . .public opinion is a powerful factor and public opinion could save our nation if our nation is in danger. But the communication media is owned and controlled by 80 or 85% of the opposition to the constructive philosophy."
Hunt: "I think the line should be drawn between people that love liberty and are for the freedom system. And the society that has made America great. And the newspapers, radio, TV stations and networks are in the hands of, we shall say, the enemy of that system."
Hunt was a huge supporter and board member of the John Birch Society and was convinced Washington was a cesspool of communism. He pops up in all sorts of conspiracy theories. And even though he's been dead since 1974 and there has been ongoing legal battles regarding family members, the Hunt legacy is still shrouded in mystery.
And so it was quite unusual that in 1970, a documentary on Hunt would surface. The recordings I have give no trace as to who did it, who conducted the interviews (there is a lengthy one with Hunt) and how they gained such access.
One suspects, since this was done in 1970 and Nixon was President, a lot of former closeted extreme right wingers came out of the closet and made their presences known.
In any case, it's interesting listening and further evidence the roots of the extreme right wing are many and deep and go back a long way.
Make no mistake. Muslims created this atmosphere where hatred of the Jews is okay and must be "tolerated" as a legitimate point of view. The shooting today is just yet another manifestation emanating from that viewpoint--another manifestation of the welcome mat that Muslims rolled out for fellow anti-Semites of all stripes to no longer be afraid to come out of the closet.
- Wingnut blogger Debbie Schlussel.
Aren't you tired of listening to crazy, hateful people treated as normal and even credible every time you turn on your teevee news? Yeah, me too. Joan Walsh talked about this delicate subject on Hardball last night: Yes, people themselves are responsible when they pull out a gun and shoot people - but do we really need television talking heads whipping them up into a frenzy?
And why is it that the right wing is so eager to blame music and movies "from liberal Hollywood" when kids who do crazy, violent things, yet people who are indoctrinated with year after year of Fair and Balanced Wingnut Poison are somehow invulnerable to its effects? Don't think this ended with von Brunn's capture yesterday. There were far too many people sitting at home watching the news and cheering him on.
If there's a through-line between any of these acts of terrorism and the right-wing rhetoric that abets it, of course, it's the one linking Bill O'Reilly to Scott Roeder, the man who murdered Tiller. O'Reilly more than demonized Tiller; night after night he called him a baby killer, compared him to the Nazis, and suggested that he must be stopped. Roeder stopped him, all right. If I were O'Reilly I'd feel terrible for putting a private figure in my public sights night after night, simply for doing his lawful job. But O'Reilly has no conscience, so he's proud of it.
And there's clearly been an uptick in rhetoric suggesting that white men are having their rights abridged by the Obama administration, especially since his pick of Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. In a debate with Buchanan a couple of weeks ago, he told me that what was happening to white men was exactly what happened to black men — he didn't give me any examples of lynching — and that it was open season on white men. Wealthy Sen. Lindsay Graham suggested an average white guy like himself wouldn't get a fair shake from Sotomayor, and now even the new face of the GOP, Michael Steele, has said the same thing. If I were a marginal, unemployed, angry, racist white man right now, I'd be hearing a lot of mainstream conservative support for my point of view. Can that help create a climate for more violence? I don't know. I hope not, but I don't know.
