Letters to the Editor
-
Musharraf's Pakistan is a model for Glenn Beck and other right-wing extremists.
It strikes me that this administration's laissez-faire attitude towards our constitution and basic human rights gives aid and comfort to the enemies of freedom, such as Pakistan's Musharraf.
Glenn Beck and his ilk do not support American principles. They oppose the rights of privacy, free speech, due process and dissent. They are intolerant and cruel towards "others".
Glenn Beck is an enemy of the American constitution. Whatever Beck thinks that he is given by birthright- born an American with white skin- does not allow him the authority with which he speaks. He is an ignorant, small-minded fool, who successfully taps into the fear and mistrust of foreigners in this country. He is blessed only by an electronic soapbox on which to stand. History will show him to be a cowardly villain. Those, like Ellison, who speak out against tyranny, in the tradition of Paine, Jefferson, Henry and Hale are the true heroes.
The radical right wing which is in control of this country favors a dictatorship. Their tactics are fueled by fear and nationalism and use the same rationale, "fighting Islamic extremism", as Bush's erstwhile ally Musharraf.
GG, don't let your irony be mistaken for your true opinion. We must shout from the rooftops: "Glenn Beck is a traitor to this country and Keith Ellison is a hero!"
-
Gary Owen
Gee Glenn,
I was enjoying his posts this morning. I know your "amen chorus" will now kick in and applaud your actions. Fair enough. Its your blog, etc.
I say be a good guy and let him back in.
-
Re: Owen's Limits
Glenn,
I'd like to respectfully request you not limit G.O.'s postings. I understand your reasons, but it is censorship, plain and simple. Don't let him bait you into a hypocritical position where you silence his dissent as our government increasingly tries to do with those who disagree with it.
If each of us readers practices some personal responsibility, we can prevent the discussion from being hijacked. He's only able to do so because we respond and let him. It's our responsibility; let us take care of it.
-
"The medium isn't the message."
Sysprog... I think we actually agree. I was only trying to make the point that Glenn's lawyerly arguments are the point, not where/how he makes them... i.e., he doesn't have to be in Iraq. Nor does he have to practice "journalism," which mostly disappoints these days.
But, I get your point, and will choose my words even more carefully in future.
-
@lister WH press boycott
I love lister's idea about a WH press conference boycott -- it would be great if that herd of cats could organize on behalf of the fourth estate. I'm pretty bright-eyed, but even so I'm not optimistic this could happen.
What I can imagine is individual WH reporters (Helen Thomas?) making a protest. For example, they could show up for the briefings wearing handcuffs and orange jumpsuits with Sami al-Haj printed on the pocket.
Glenn, you've pointed to the AP's efforts to correct this thing, but I haven't seen any front-page stories. If the Press can't check American fascism, then the People had better get it handled. Thanks for picking up the flag and encouraging me to pick up the phone.
-
Not here.
Don't let him bait you into a hypocritical position where you silence his dissent as our government increasingly tries to do with those who disagree with it.
-- cincinnatus
This is not a case of censorship. This is comment moderation and Glenn has every right to do so. Your first amendment rights cannot be abridged by the government. Salon, or any other blog, isn't required to let you speak on their dime. You can step outside and holler as loud as you like, anything you like. Not here.
And now we are all going to continue making this thread about...
Please knock it off. Please?
-
farragoNW
Glenn, you've pointed to the AP's efforts to correct this thing, but I haven't seen any front-page stories. If the Press can't check American fascism, then the People had better get it handled. Thanks for picking up the flag and encouraging me to pick up the phone.
This is one of the most striking aspects of the story - the press' utter passivity in the face of these attacks on press freedoms. Even a minimally functioning political press would protest things of this sort before they protest anything else. It's the sort of self-interested power struggle the Founders wanted.
Yet they have been largely silent about these matters. As the article to which I linked above demonstrates, AP has practically had to beg fellow media outlets to write about the imprisonment of its photographer - largely to no avail. Obviously, if the press won't defend its own freedoms, then the likelihood that they can be eroded is vastly higher.
-
Equally sorry, if I may
Bebop-o, for what it's worth, I agree with you; GO is not a bad person, a prick, etc.
To literally lose control of your own mental states is a terrible thing, especially when it's a new experience. War is one of the things that can do it to you. This I know not from my own experience, but from those of others; some who tell of it convincingly, like yourself and Garry Owen, and some who show it in acts that can't have any other cause. Still, there are other experiences which can put a person in that state, and other people who've been in that place even though they've never been anywhere near a war. This I do know from direct experience.
All of which isn't directly relevant to Glenn's current post, I realize, but indirectly I think it is. The demands being made of us by the right wing these days, the view of the world which they are trying to impose on us, and the abuse they heap on those who won't go along with the program will combine to put us in a terrible place if we let them; this before we even mention how many other Garry Owens their policies will create. This obviously concerns him as much -- probably more -- than it does those of us who are innocent of war, which is why I respect him.
On the other hand, abusing Glenn, or anyone else on the basis of a presumption that nobody knows the trouble you've seen is an illegitimate claim on our sympathies, and a practice very similar to the one which has been used to justify the abuse of dissenters from the warrior pretensions of the right as long as I've been alive. That it isn't a case of pretension when Garry does it is hardly an excuse, in my opinion.
It's proper to ask that we attack the message, not the messenger in his case, but when the messenger so clearly believes himself to be the embodiment of the message, it's difficult avoid doing so.
We all have our demons; this one is mine. I apologize if expressing it was inappropriate here, especially to you, bebop, if only because you seem to see the issue more clearly than any of the rest of us.