Posted by: maboulette | October 16, 2010



Looking east towards 6th Avenue along north (4...

Image via Wikipedia


Rupert Murdoch founder, chairman, and chief executive officer of News Corporation, which owns Fox News, gave a speech this week in New York to the Anti-Defamation League and during that stated:  “Today it seems that the most virulent strains” of anti-Semitism “come from the left.”
There was no recognition by Murdoch that his Fox News personalities have a past of promoting sources which are anti-Semitic and mainstreaming individuals who have relationships with anti-Semitic groups.
Last week, it was pointed out by Media Matters “over the past few months several anti-Semitic authors and theories have popped up in Glenn Beck’s TV and radio monologues, and Beck’s audience of millions is, unwittingly or not, being exposed to some of the most hateful rhetoric of the last century”.
According to the Anti-Defamation League, Beck historian and frequent Glenn Beck guest David Baron has spoken at affairs which were hosted by the Christian identify movement.  The Christian identify movement is an organization which “asserts that Jews are ‘the synagogue of Satan’, that Blacks and other people of color are subhuman; and that northern European whites and their American descendants are the ‘chosen people’ of scriptural prophesy.”
Its time that Fox News stop spreading the fear and hatred that is dividing our country at a time when we need to come together as Americans in order to focus on the many serious problems which are facing our country.


  1. “…and Beck’s audience of millions…” Whooa, that makes you stop and ask yourself…
    What is he doing right?
    How does he have such a large viewing audience?
    I don’t agree with him, so how is it that I am so out of step with MILLIONS of my fellow citizens?

    • What is he doing right? I have a idea Kyle – why don’t you watch him for about 2 weeks and then you tell me what is he doing right. By the way, perhaps I added his viewers for a weeks time – there are approximately 800,000 Tea Party members – if only half of them watch Beck everyday – well there you go – millions. Actually just for you I will do some research and get an exact figure.

    • That audience does include his listens for this 3 hour radio show.

      • How do know that? Different times; people work. I never got a call from you asking me.

    • ok – Friday was his worse ratings ever averaging just 1.776 million total viewers. His highest ratings average about double that. This is the TV show only. This radio show goes to millions by itself so I stand by my article of ‘audience of millions”.

  2. Mary Ann, I was not questioning the figure. My point was, if you strongly disagree with him, then you are also strongly disagreeing with millions of others who agree with him to some degree. That is, I am sure that not all viewers agree with all he says. On the other hand, I have never heard you say if you totally disagree with him, or if you disagree with a part of what he says/believes. If you totally disagree, then shouldn’t you ask yourself if you could not find something about his ‘message’ that you can agree with. Otherwise, you are ‘totally out of sync’ with litterly millions of others. It just seems that is not a good place to be in.

    • Here is my history with Beck – when he was on CNN I watched his show all the time – good guests, good debates and he is very funny. When he moved to Fox I continued to watch him when I could – since I have been unemployed, I have watched him daily – but he has changed. He has come up with what I consider wild conspiracy theories much like Alex Jones. So I started to investigate many of the statements that he has made – Beck always says, do you own investigation (so does Alex). I think they are saying that because it takes some work to investigate some of these conspiracy theories and they know that most people don’t have the time or the energy to do the research. But I did, and I found that most of what Beck has said is simply not true – not all of it but a lot. So this lead me to wonder why he has changed so radically since coming on Fox – and I have my own theory about that (other story for another time). What I have seen is the anger of the Tea Party members get more – almost violent, really ugly and a great majority of his audience is these Tea Party people.

      I am a believer that the speech of others that promotes any hatred or closing of doors to one nation coming together to solve problems is not going to help us solve our problems. What is the saying, “a house divided against itself will not stand”. He is teaching what I believe is a revisionist history of our founding and the believes of our Founding Fathers – one of his frequent guest is this David Barton fellow who teaches that our founding father meant for this country to be a Christian nation and did not mean for any separation between church and state – Barton almost teaches that we should be a theocracy. Barton as no creditability as a historian and has always been in the background of the Religious Right. I have problems with the Religious Right and have for years. Anyway – as time has gone by Beck has gotten more and more radical with these conspiracy theories and I have problems with that. That’s my story about Glenn Beck.

      • Tell me you are kidding. Beck a revisionist? Give me some examples. Beck a conspiracy theorist? How so? It is the progressives that have revised history…Jesus is a Palestinian. Have you ever seen the program where people review the information in the books? A lot of mis=stated information. People were angry before there was tea party and BTW, where is the violence in tea party that you are speaking of? How about the SEIU beating up people outside the town hall or biting off someone’s finger?? Do you know that separation of church and state is mentioned no where in the constitution? Jefferson wrote the letter to the Baptist’s mentioning the separation and if you bother to read the letter you will see that it has been misinterpreted since that time. 29 of the founders had seminary degrees. There was a church in the capitol; they prayed; most of them believed in divine providence. It’s ok not to like Beck, but don’t spout off without TRUE facts.

      • I never said Jesus was a Palestinian. I have no idea what you are talking about. As for Beck and True Facts – many of his facts are not true.

      • I am talking about your revisionist statement. There are books, in school now, that say Jesus was a Palestinian…that is a revision of history. It is being done all the time. History should be history, not conservative, republican, progressive, or democrat. Once again I ask you to be specific…what has Glenn said that is not true?

      • The United States was really founded to be a fundamentalist Christian nation. This is simply not true!

      • What difference does it make whether Bethlehem was in Palestinian or Israel during the year of Jesus birth? He was still born of Jewish lineage. I am not understanding why anyone would say that he was a Palestinian.

      • I think you are misquoting him. I don’t ever recall him saying that…that aside, the United States has always been defined as a Christian-Judeo nation until Obama tried to redefine it his inaugural address. That doesn’t mean everyone is a Christian or a Jew….MY interpretation would be that the nation, as whole, believes in God and prays. Most of the founders believed in God, although some were not what one would term religious. The term providence appears in the Declaration 4 times…that refers to God. How do know it isn’t true? We can differ and I have stated my opinion as well as some facts. What are your facts?

      • What you believe is very much what I believe – thanks!

  3. Barton has denied being aware of these questionable aspects involving certain groups he’s spoken in front of.

    Maybe Barton should do a little more background checking, and perhaps even Beck should do some better checking on Barton.

    However, this seems to be a vastly more relevant and ominous “connection”. This NOTa case of being unaware or uninvolved.

    • My problem is with Barton and Beck and the revisionist history they are teaching – not with the political parties that our country has. We as a nation have many political parties such as the Socialist Party etc and they in my opinion have very little effect on our political system – we are still basically a 2 party system. Also these parties are not the size of the parties in Europe and will never be that large in this country. Most countries in Europe have vastly different political systems in place and have many parties that actually take part in elections and governing – we don’t and I think this is just another fear tactic to scare people. Thanks for writing.

    • “Barton has denied being aware of the questionable aspects of certain groups” – How can Barton be unaware of the questionable aspects of Christian identity movement – give me a break here – it took me about oh, 30 seconds to learn about them. And I am suppose to believe that Barton has spoken to this group at affairs sponsored by the group and he didn’t know about them?? Well, if that is true, I would say that Barton is not a very smart man!! As for Beck checking the background of Barton – again I laugh at that – he has a staff and he so closely investigates everything else and I am to believe that he don’t know about Barton.

  4. Sure Mary Ann. Except for the fact that CPUSA’s policy/platform pages are practically indistinguishable from those of the Democrat party.

    That should scare people, and hopefully it will inform people.

    This of course is Glenn Beck’s central message. Stop going down the unsustainable collectivist road we were directed down by CPUSA types, and get back on the route intended by the founders and their (our) constitution.

    • Thanks for the links – but – I am a liberal Democrat and I will always be a liberal Democrat – sorry – don’t waste your time trying to get me to be other than what I am.

      • ya you go girl dont let pesky facts get in the way

      • What facts have I not provided?

    • By the way, can you name me one election in the US where the CPUSA has won? So they support the principals of the Democratic Party – so do I. Does that make me a communist?

      • Do you want the communist to win an election???If you agree with their platform…yes

      • I never said that – and I don’t agree with the communist platform. I am just a progressive Democrat – thats all – don’t make me out to be something I am not.

      • I’m not trying to convert you, and no I’m not calling you a communist. But from what you’ve said, logic dictates that IF the contest WAS between a CPUSA candidate and a “tea party” candidate, you’d choose the former.

      • Natalie – no I would not vote for the CPUSA candidate and this is just a hypothetical situation. And I never said I wouldn’t vote for a tea party candidate. I may be voting for some in this election. And this is a gotcha situation where any of my answers are wrong.

        By the way someone named Bob said that I don’t even respond to your comments – please tell him that he is wrong. Thanks!

    • So what you believe the the Communist are out to take over our country – what do you believe is going to happen?

  5. Mary Ann, you stated, “What I have seen is the anger of the Tea Party members get more – almost violent, really ugly….”

    I have attended a few of the Tea Party events and have not seen any violent / ugly “members” of the Tea Pary. I have observed “members” gathered with the intention to deliver a unified message to our elected officials: Listen to us or else you will be ‘unemployed’. Am I missing something? The events I attended were in Texas. You would think that if violence was a part of the movement, it certainly would appear in the redneck capitol of the world…LOL

    • I have seen this angry on Glenn Beck’s Tea Party website The

      • I have been to 3 tea parties and there has never been violence…anger yes, but most people in country are angry and most people don’t belong to the tea party. What is wrong with being angry. The dems are angry, the independents are angry, the republicans are angry…so what

      • Anger and passion is very different from violent and ugly. As I think I said before on another thread here, I was at Glenn’s big rally, made several appearances on CSPAN actually. These core fans of Beck’s were just about the polar opposite of violent or ugly. It was like that rare family reunion where everyone actually likes and looks out for everyone else. Are they concerned, passionate and even angry about the direction of the country? Sure. But couldn’t the exact same thing be said about the movement that got behind Barack Obama a couple years ago?

        And of course the vitriol on display at any number of popular leftish websites makes TheBlaze look absolutely Sunday-schoolish.

      • The anger and passion on the Blaze has gotten extremely intense lately – I use to think the Huffpost was bad but there are tame compared to what I have read on the Blaze. And why exactly did Beck start the Blaze – and look where the staff comes from?

  6. The facts are that the cpusa,progressives and the democrats claim that Beck is teaching revisionist history. The thing is it is revisionist because it is the real history of America and not the history that has been taught in schools over the last forty years. The history had already been revised and Beck is now attempting to restore it to the facts.

    • I am sorry but most historian will agree that it is not the real history. Example: Beck says that FDR was a terrible president – when Presidential historians always agree that he was one of, if not the best president. Barton who works with Beck on this got the textbooks in Texas to take out the significance of Jefferson in all of the history texts books. Jefferson wrote the major documents of our founding – how can he be insignificant? I submit that the “real history” that Beck teaches is not the real history.

      • Read new deal or raw deal. You are not even open to the truth. I don’t think Beck said he was a terrible president; that said, Beck doesn’t like him and has said many things about him that are true, which you may or may not like. He was certainly a progressive president. Some Historians think Obama is also one of the top 10 presidents….now that is a joke. Only 2 years in and he is destroying our country and doubled the deficit.

      • Barb – for every book you ask me to read, I can list others that agree with my perspective – most books are written with a hidden agenda so no one should believe everything they read in books.

      • FDR had his good and bad aspects. He was just the person we needed to be tough and unyielding in WWII. I even sympathize with his locking up Japanese, German and Italian Americans, to a point. But of course, this is so typically “progressive” in retrospect. Individual rights take second to the good of the nation state. Perhaps OK in isolation, but ……

        ……this guy took it upon himself to almost re-write the constitution to suit his domestic agenda, to the point of the attempted stacking the Supreme Court to that end. He had his own personal Bill of Rights he sought to incorporate into American life. This is the really bad aspect about him that tends to get glossed over in your average school classroom.

        Of course most historians and text book writers being liberals, this is understandable. Glenn Beck is just one of many attempting to restore a little balance in perspective. We should all be grateful for that, and look beyond boiled down notions of good or terrible.

      • Natalie – is this you talking or are you just spouting talking points from Beck – this is all stuff Beck as said. Have you researched all of this? Do you know this to be fact? “……this guy took it upon himself to almost re-write the constitution to suit his domestic agenda, to the point of the attempted stacking the Supreme Court to that end. He had his own personal Bill of Rights he sought to incorporate into American life. This is the really bad aspect about him that tends to get glossed over in your average school classroom.”

      • point of view point of view point of view point of view, people. POV were are you standing when you say it is revisionist? are you already in the progressive camp? Then Glenn would be trying to revise the HISTORY that you accept as told to you by those you learned your beliefs from.
        How bout Glenn? is he wrong when he goes back the founding documents and prove that much of what is being taught any were in America is now ¨tainted¨ by being out of context as originally written or mis quoted to change the meaning of what was said?

      • I can see why you might think FDR was a great president. He never saw a government program he didn’t like. his answer to everything was more government less personal responsibility as is yours. For most of the rest of us that disagree with that assessment, he was far from the best, probably the worst, or close to it. One look at a current HS textbook will prove without a doubt that our history is being rewritten. In my sons book, Mya Angelou is much more important to American history than the likes of Madison, Henry and Franklin. Go figure

      • First of all, where do you get the idea that I think FDR was a great president? You have to stop with sweeping generalization about all liberals being the same. Now, about FDR – if he was not doing something right – how did he manage to get elected for 3 terms as President? As for the more government that you say he believed in – FDR put people back to work – something that is not exactly being done by the government at our present time. You think our history is being rewritten – I agree but the people who are doing the rewriting are not the Democratic. Texas is where most textbooks are developed and published for sell around the country and the people that set on the Board which decided what is put into our textbooks is made up of individuals who are all conservatives. So that situation can not be put at the feet of the Democrats. By the way, Mya Angelou is a very important writer in our country but I don’t see her as a historical figure but more of a literary figure to be studied in English.

        Steve – you are listening far to much to Glenn Beck – I am sorry, you are spouting things that come right from his teachings – and he is wrong on many things. I have researched him and he is almost like a cult leader – you have to stop watching him and I can promise that you will start looking at things in a different matter.

  7. FDR’s second bill of rights:

    FDR court packing:

    This is pretty common knowledge. Not something I learned from Glenn Beck, but he has rightly highlighted it as the wrongheaded power grab that it was, and the point at which we went off the rails in many ways regarding the proper role of government as envisioned by the founders.

    Similar power grabs are happening today, and have been for far too long, to the point at which we’re flirting with economic disaster. That’s why people are concerned and angry.

    At least he liked the Boy Scouts. They were booed at the Democrat convention a decade back.

    • Thanks for the links – it refreshed by memory on what I was taught in school – only I knew it only as Economic Bill of Rights and I fundamental agree with almost all of it. The major premise behind FDR’s thoughts was that if businesses were allowed to thrive and people were put to work and able to make a “living wage” and were able to get a good education, all the others items would fall into place. Perhaps if FDR’s ideas were put into place over the decades since his death, we might not be in the situation that our country now finds itself in.

      Since Reagan’s election in 1980, our country has acquired several severely anti-democratic tendencies, including the increasingly obscene role of money in our elections, a corporate national news media with little sense of responsibility to the American citizenry, an obscenely widening wealth gap, and a great capacity for election fraud via electronic voting machines that count our votes in secret.

      There are arguments on both sides!

      • Yeah. That was kinda my point. There ARE arguments on both sides, except that one side seems to have gotten some unfair treatment. This evident by your apparent impression from back in school of FDR’s government growing actions as an unquestionable positive.

        The ultimate result is that we’re trillions and trillions behind in being able to cover all these things that have been promised to people, largely as a result of the mindset reorientation performed by FDR and others of like mind.

        It’s too bad Reagan wasn’t around back then in place of FDR. The nation would be much better off financially and emotionally, and in much closer step with the core intentions of the constitution regarding the proper role of government.

      • It seems you may have a SEVERE SOCIALIST BENT in you reasoning system!

    • Good posts

  8. Mary Ann, I dont believe our founding fathers intended this nation to be “a Christian nation” to the extent that non-Christians were not welcome. I do believe the founding fathers intended for this nation to chart its course based upon Christian values. There is a big difference between the promotion of Christian values and the promotion of salvation through Jesus Christ.

    • Agree!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: