Archive for the ‘internet/free speech’ Category

Bob Herbert finds it outrageous that Beck’s restore honor march is on the same day as that other famous supporter of Republicans Martin Luther King’s was:

America is better than Glenn Beck. For all of his celebrity, Mr. Beck is an ignorant, divisive, pathetic figure. On the anniversary of the great 1963 March on Washington he will stand in the shadows of giants — Abraham Lincoln and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Who do you think is more representative of this nation?

Interestingly he finds Beck’s criticism of the president racist but his own critiques of the administration not. I wonder if he is working under the Bo Snerdley certification rules concerning Obama criticism?

Maybe he doesn’t know that Alveda King is speaking at Beck’s rally. And they are playing Lift every voice and sing there as I watch it live at noon, but then again he gets his news from the NYT, so how can he expect to be informed?

Question: What do Bob Herbert of the New York Times and a six year old child afraid of Monsters in her closet have in common?

What is the reliability myopic Bob Herbert afraid of that doesn’t exist? Why Tea party violence of course:

But I worry about the potential for violence that grows out of unrestrained, hostile bombast. We’ve seen it so often. A little more than two weeks after the 1963 March on Washington, the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham was bombed by the Ku Klux Klan and four young black girls were killed. And three months after the march, Jack Kennedy was assassinated.

Well yeah you know what happens when conservatives get angry, there was the Bill Sparkman murder, oops that was a staged suicide, they stab Muslim cab drivers, no wait that was a supporter of the park 51, or they firebomb democratic congressman’s offices, oh wait that was a liberal blogger who is suspected of that, well what about the death threats and shots fired at a party office this week? Sorry those were fired at a GOP office and the death threats were against Freedom Works a pro tea-party group. Ok so they aren’t all that violent but they do throw eggs at buses of people who oppose them, oh wait

Where is he getting these delusions? Why the Southern Law and Poverty Center of course and they do have a history of seeing growing threats:

How did this story line grow? Many of the claims that extremism is on the rise in America originate in research done by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based group that for nearly 40 years has tracked what it says is the growing threat of intolerance in the United States. These days, the SPLC is issuing new warnings of new threats. But today’s warnings sound an awful lot like those of the past.

In 1989, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of skinheads, saying, “Not since the height of Klan activity during the civil-rights era has there been a white supremacist group so obsessed with violence.”

In 1992, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of other white supremacist groups, which it claimed had grown by 27 percent from the year before.

In 1995, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of right-wing militias.

In 1998, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of Internet-based hate groups that, according to one press account, had “created the biggest surge in hate in America in years.”

In 1999, the SPLC warned that the growing threat of Web-based hate groups was growing even more, with a 60 percent increase from the year before.

In 2002, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of post-Sept. 11 hate groups, which it said had grown 12 percent between 2000 and 2001.

In 2004, the SPLC warned (again) of the growing threat of skinhead groups, whose numbers it said had doubled in the previous year.

In 2008, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of hate groups overall, whose number it said increased 48 percent since 2000.

And in 2010, just a few weeks ago, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of “patriot” groups, which it said increased by 244 percent in 2009.

In the world of the Southern Poverty Law Center, the threat is always growing. Ronald Reagan’s policies led to a growing threat. The first Gulf War led to a growing threat. The election of Bill Clinton led to a growing threat. The Internet led to a growing threat. Sept. 11 led to a growing threat. The war in Iraq led to a growing threat. Is it any wonder that Obama’s presidency has, in the SPLC’s estimation, led to a growing threat?

Well mathematically sooner or later there is bound to be an incident they can point to (lemon soaked paper napkin anyone?), perhaps he can write the column in advance like an obit and wait until something happens and then he can sub in the place and date.

memeorandum thread here.

I’ll never forget an event I covered where a crowd was padded by union members ordered there by their steward. I remember the man scanning the crowd to make sure the people he ordered to be there showed up.

I’m very curious how many of Sharpton’s attendees will be “ordered” and bussed to Washington. I also wonder how many are professional paid protesters after all it was a year ago this month that we had this moment:

This clinic is adjacent to Denver’s day laborer pickup street, Park Avenue. Being fluent in Spanish, El Marco asked these guys “¿hablan ingles?” “casi nada” was the reply from our amigo on the left. I asked him if he could tell me what the signs said. “¿Quien sabe?” (who knows?) was all he said to me, with a big grin. I’m kicking myself for not asking them how much they were getting paid to support the grassroots.

The base post is here

I can’t help but remember the Cuba scene from Godfather II

Like in Denver I suspect we will have a set of protesters who are paid to be there (Sharpton’s) vs those who are coming of their own accord (Beck’s). Make sure you take a look at the photos that are run. You won’t see as many wide shots of Sharpton’s crew, particularly not as compared to Becks. The media will present them as equal and opposite. One voice here one voice there. In all things visual you won’t be able to tell the relative sizes of the groups.

Last year’s unbelievably huge 9/12 crowd defied attempts to lowball it:

This year the plan will be to over-count Sharpton & co. I wonder which crowd will leave a cleaner area.

One caveat here, For many in the tea party movement two trips to Washington within two weeks is prohibitively expensive. Don’t be surprised that this march is smaller than the 9/12 one since many tea party groups are going to Washington on 9/12. And the reverse is of course true. In that sense Beck’s Restoring Honor rally is about the power of Beck.

Update:
The NYT reports on “parallel rallies” even though the Washington post reports live from the Sharpton event that he has drawn “hundreds

As town hall says:

There is no equivalence between these two rallies. That won’t stop the MSM from trying to portray them as ‘competing’ gatherings, though.

Guess which narrative the MSM will use?

memeorandum thread here.

…concerning the White House making their own mess on the Ground Zero Mosque issue (that I really am sick of writing about). The inability to see that the White House turned this into a national story by the president’s statement and then his attempted retreat and the attempt to play the “demagogue” card on the issue.

More amazing is the continued attempts to push the White House to try to use the Bushes to bail them out here. Why either of the Bushes would be compelled to do so is totally beyond me.

It is interesting to note I don’t hear them calling on the silent Bill Clinton to speak up on the issue. Why? Because Bill Clinton is much too smart to do so, particularity if there is the slightest chance his wife will be running in a 2012 primary against this president.

The team did have Irshad Manji on in the first hour and her interesting WSJ piece:

Consider Bob, who feels so offended by antimosque activists in his state of Tennessee that these feelings alone drive him to support more mosques—without prior thought to what, exactly, he’s supporting. “I found local citizens to be intolerant and un-American,” Bob tells me over email. “So as a gesture of tolerance and Americanism, I donated to the mosque building fund.”

Before pledging a penny, Bob should have asked the imam: “Where will the men’s side of this mosque be?” It’s a discreet way of discerning whether the project will replicate segregation, and thus whether the mosque will wind up bolstering the intolerant behavior that Bob can’t abide.

She however sees possibility for the Mosque provided some questions are answered:

Namely, accountability. If Park51 gets built, thanks to its provocative location the nation will scrutinize what takes place inside. Americans have the opportunity right now to be clear about the civic values expected from any Islam practiced at the site.

That means setting aside bombast and asking the imam questions born of the highest American ideals: individual dignity and pluralism of ideas.

• Will the swimming pool at Park51 be segregated between men and women at any time of the day or night?

• May women lead congregational prayers any day of the week?

• Will Jews and Christians, fellow People of the Book, be able to use the prayer sanctuary for their services just as Muslims share prayer space with Christians and Jews in the Pentagon? (Spare me the technocratic argument that the Pentagon is a governmental, not private, building. Park51 may be private in the legal sense but is a public symbol par excellence.)

• What will be taught about homosexuals? About agnostics? About atheists? About apostasy?

• Where does one sign up for advance tickets to Salman Rushdie’s lecture at Park51?

These questions aren’t gratuitous. I, for one, remain haunted by the 300 Muslims chanting “Death to Rushdie” on Sept. 10, 2001.

Note the date. The fact is radical Islam didn’t first arrive in the US on Sept 11, 2001, it was just the first day Americans realized it.

Will the MSM ask such questions? Will they dare? Will any show other than Morning Joe in the 6 a.m hour dare bring it up?

Even when playing advocate they still do a better job than the rest of the MSM.