As we have covered before in this space, the far left does anything possible to avoid having a straight-up, honest debate over ideas. Much like the old Communists and Fascists on the streets of Weimar-era Berlin, they’d rather use muscle than ideas to get a victory.
As we’re all aware, one of the current targets is Glenn Beck. In particular, Free Press wants to make him out as a paranoid McCarthyite.
Supposedly he’s seeing socialists, Marxists, and communists everywhere. Even though Senator McCarthy was right, and Communists had infiltrated our government all the way up to Alger Hiss, we’re supposed to think badly of Red hunting. But let’s look at the people themselves at Free Press, leading special interest promoter of the Fairness Doctrine, ownership diversity rules, and of course Net Neturality. Are they as socialist as Beck thinks?
Let’s start with Free Press Staff shocked at the Socialist menace alleged by Beck. Any socialists hiding under the rocks there?
- Megan Tady has a track record of working for places like In These Times, which billed itself as “The Independent Socialist Newspaper”. Are we to believe she was the contrarian influence there, and not another good Socialist?
- Or how about Lindsy Embree? She was, I’m told, a volunteer for The Catholic Worker, an expressly anti-”capitalist” organization that counted as its ally the Industrial Workers of the World. Surely they’re not Communist, he asked sarcastically?
- Finally there’s Alex Kahn, whose CV includes the dynamite claim of a BA in “Social Thought and Political Economy” from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, a degree would have had taken him through a course list with entries like “Black Marxism” and “Marxian Economics.” Did he suffer though all that while disagreeing with the Marxist agenda he was studying? Not likely.
Perhaps these buffoons should have looked in the mirror to find the socialists Beck speaks of? Or maybe they could have talked to the top brass in the office:
- Robert McChesney, co-founder of Free Press, is on the board of Monthly Review, which says of itself that “From the first Monthly Review spoke for socialism and against U.S. imperialism, and is still doing so today.”
- Ben Scott, policy director for Free Press, who voluntarily worked as a staffer for Bernie Sanders, the self-described Independent Socialist in Congress.
- Of course Van Jones was a board member of Free Press; funny how Free Press fails to mention in their hagiographical video about him, that he has a tie with that group. And in 2008 he was quite open about his plans to use “green” economics as a first step towards ending all “capitalism.” He also compared himself with Rosa Parks, saying her first step against Jim Crow was just like his first step against capitalism.
So tell us, again, why we shoudln’t think socialists are all over Free Press, when Free Press sends a trio of Socialists to mock the claim, and has socialists all the way to the top?
Neil Stevens
Steve Maley
55555! Right on re the socialists and Marxists.
ColdWarrior (Diary) Wednesday, October 21st at 11:31PM EST (link)nt
In 2012, will YOU become a “voting member” of the Republican Party in your precinct?
Where it all started. Twitter @kaltkrieger
Unified Patriots.
Learn how to GOTV at The Concord Project and at Procinct and
Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist, caucuses with Harry Reid & Co.
bannedtroll Wednesday, October 21st at 11:56PM EST (link)I want someone to explain to me the ideological differences between Bernie Sanders and Obama that distinguish him as a democrat and not a socialist. I suspect the only difference is in name, where in Vermont calling yourself a socialist only broadens your electoral appeal but isn’t particuarly palatable on a national platform.
I’ve heard the case that Obama is a socialist, but I have yet to hear the case that he isn’t. We own banks and car companies now, don’t we? Doesn’t he want to handle our health care system, energy industry and the Internet?
I’m a banned Democrat who came here to promote the idea that Republicans are racists for disliking Barack Obama.
If it wasn't so infuriating
jlynnr (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 1:31AM EST (link)It would be a crack up the way these people project. Great piece. Highly recommended.
Ok so the recommend option isn't available
jlynnr (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 1:35AM EST (link)…just know that I would.
The Lame Socialist Pose by Free Press on YouTube
Jim Lakely Thursday, October 22nd at 4:11AM EST (link)After viewing the video, it would also help if those Free Press staffers did not look like such typical leftie weenies with their matching Lisa Loeb unisex “smarty pants” eyeglasses. Hell, even the “dude sipping coffee” they walk up to is a grey-hair with a freakin’ pony tail. Sheesh. Grow up, hippie.
And it’s hilarious that the video posits that “commies” or “socialists” (lefties in general) would eat donuts. Please. If the lefties had their way, the nanny state would outlaw them for the good of “society” under statist medicine. The video just emphasizes how the left sees anyone who disagrees with them as idiots — always a persuasive stance. (Though, I gotta give them the funny on the “Miley Cyrus doesn’t even Tweet anymore” joke, despite the insulting context).
And, to answer the question in the video: Yes. Glenn Beck knows what socialism is. And so do we. You are it.
But, overall, that video is the definition of lame.
That comment about donuts is really not fair!
autiger89 Thursday, October 22nd at 5:47AM EST (link)Of course donuts are fine, as long as they have no trans-fats, are low-sodium, contain no MSG, contain soy-protein, are vegan-friendly, are government-subsidized, are not made with child labor, are made with energy-efficient equipment, are prepared and sold by employees making a “living wage”, meet proper quality control standards, received adequate stimulus money, are made and sold by a company whose CEO doesn’t make too much money, are made and sold by a company who is a “responsible corporate citizen”, are made and sold by a company who properly limits its carbon emissions, are made and sold by a company that meets all OSHA regulations, are made and sold by a company that has paid proper licensing fees and taxes, are made and sold by a company that has donated enough to the DNC and/or President Obama…
…and on and on and on.
Do You Really Want an Honest Debate?
dropoutpolitican Thursday, October 22nd at 8:43AM EST (link)In this article, Nate, you claim you want an honest debate about ideas, and call the left Fascists and Communists:
“As we have covered before in this space, the far left does anything possible to avoid having a straight-up, honest debate over ideas. Much like the old Communists and Fascists on the streets of Weimar-era Berlin, they’d rather use muscle than ideas to get a victory.”
Then you go onto defend the fascism of McCarthy, prosecution of anyone who did not share his political ideology, by going, ‘well, he was right.’
“Supposedly he’s seeing socialists, Marxists, and communists everywhere. Even though Senator McCarthy was right, and Communists had infiltrated our government all the way up to Alger Hiss, we’re supposed to think badly of Red hunting. But let’s look at the people themselves at Free Press, leading special interest promoter of the Fairness Doctrine, ownership diversity rules, and of course Net Neturality. Are they as socialist as Beck thinks?”
Tying a handful of commentators who intentionally say incendiary things to garner viewership and followings, which is true there are enough on both sides for this, to a stake is quite a different game than tying anyone who is associated with a political ideology who would dare disagree with yours to a stake.
Posts like this show the smoke screen of your interest in having an honest debate about ideas, unless you consider an honest debate with people who agree with everything you say before you’ve said it. In which case, carry on.
dropoutpolitician, so where's your debate?
johnt Thursday, October 22nd at 11:45AM EST (link)Thanks much for reading back to us what we just read for ourselves, but I doubt that constitutes debate. Nor is debate to be found in your borderline hysterical remark about tying others to a stake, a rhetorical overkill and a pretty excited smear in itself.
The post is quite clear in it’s target, Mr Silver, who is vexed that a self proclaimed communist has been identified as a self proclaimed communist. Damn, the injustice of it all, how unfair to point out the obvious, the obvious that Glen Beck could discover easily but the Obama administration couldn’t. Or wouldn’t.
But you see, that’s the real story, the nature of those who The O associates with, a problem going well back to Chicago and and well into his administration, if you can call this dazed mess, this chaos, this corruption, an administration.
You whine plaintively about “honest debate”. So be it, but just what do you think has been going on concerning the health care issue, cap and trade, the explosive deficits,[dwarfing those "terrible" Bush deficits], just what has been debated if not issues?
And, you sensitive thing you, what has been the response of the left, most of the media, and most disgraceful of all, this band of incompetents in the WH? Did I forget Congressional leaders with their remarks about Nazi’s, their mindless name calling of free Americans demonstrating.
You better pause and consider some of the things that have occurred emanating from the administration in clumsy and dangerous attempts to denigrate and threaten debate. Upon consideration you may then let fly an equally indignant and self righteous e mail to The O, who I’m sure will take it to heart.
Examples available if your mind goes blank on the above suggestion.
“a man’s admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him”. Tocqueville
Straw Arguments
dropoutpolitican Thursday, October 22nd at 12:17PM EST (link)I made no claims in defense of the Obama Administration or in anyone’s behavior, I’m sure that’s the argument you want me to put forth but it is not, and never was, my argument.
And you clearly missed my point I’ll state it more succinctly, academic and intellectual debate does not start across ideological lines of who is a capitalist, communist, socialist, or what not. Honest debate does not involve ad hominem.
The author of this post puts forth the notion that the left does not want an honest debate and then proceeds to not have an honest debate and instead returns to classic ad hominem arguments that permeate both sides of our political spectrum.
Behavior like that is indefensible for anyone who truly wants an honest debate. And for you to defend such attacks with the school yard ‘but they started it’ or ‘they do it too’ is also indefensible.
Kid, 'ad hominem' has a specific meaning.
Moe Lane (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 12:29PM EST (link)“John Smith is wrong in his argument because he’s a Commie poopyhead” is an ad hominem argument. “John Smith is lying when he says that Bill, Jack, and Jill aren’t actually Commie poopyheads” is not.
Feel free to come back when you figure that out.
The Kim Kardashian of blogging.
Check out my blog at http://moelane.com/.
http://moelane.com/filthy-lucre-filthy-lucre/
http://twitter.com/moelane
My (combined) wish list.
I think you missed the point...
DONTREADONME (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 12:30PM EST (link)socialist, Maoist, communist, marxist, supporters have no place in a Government or argument that involves the U.S. Constitution. Because each one of those is anathema to these United States of America. How hard is it for you to figure that out. BTW, Mcarthyism was not facism (right too, Alger Hiss), and BTW it was HUAC not the Senate involved in bringing the communists in for questioning.
dropoutpolitician, I see others beat
johnt Thursday, October 22nd at 2:53PM EST (link)me to the punch.
First, as to academic and intellectual debate[ my, you have such high standards]. What has the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century been about if not ideology. Now, you clever thing you. just what would and does ideology encompass ??
I’ll keep it short & close with this; one may defend a proposition or person by the indirect approach, in this case your non-mention of the lamentable Mr Silver, or for that matter the disgrace in the WH, while attacking Stevens. Quite selective.
But then you totally ignore my comments about the debate on various issues that has taken place every day and initiated by the Right and moderates on various Obama proposals.
You also ignore that the office of the president should avoid wallowing in lies and slander about the opposition, and should hold a higher standard.
Do you have an argument about the facts that Stevens lists? If so, refute them..
Sorry dropout, you’re a fraud.
“a man’s admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him”. Tocqueville
Nice
Neil Stevens (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 12:58PM EST (link)I didn’t read past the first 10 or so words of your comment, but I’m doubly vindicated here:
a) You’re still smarting about my comments about Nate. That means I was effective.
b) You’re smarting about my hit on Free Press, the drivers of net neutrality, so much so that you want to change the subject.
RS contributing editor, technical administrator, and “a hardy variety of crabgrass.”
Read the RedState Posting Rules
Unlikely Voter: Poll Analysis, Election Projection.
“I rejoice that America has resisted.” – William Pitt, the Elder
Neil- It seems that dropoutpolitician has a big gripe with you
Scope (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 3:16PM EST (link)wasn’t he the same one that argued that there was no debating you on your Net Neutrality diary the other day. He keeps claiming that you “Neil Stevens” do not invite debate, unless one agrees to blindly go along with your opinion. He keeps whinning that no debate is allowed on your diaries, yet, has no debating points to offer.
That's about it
Neil Stevens (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 4:36PM EST (link)Fortunately I feed off of his tears.
RS contributing editor, technical administrator, and “a hardy variety of crabgrass.”
Read the RedState Posting Rules
Unlikely Voter: Poll Analysis, Election Projection.
“I rejoice that America has resisted.” – William Pitt, the Elder
Glenn Becks big problem is
anotherindyfilmguy (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 12:31PM EST (link)that he see’s the socialists and marxists etc that are actually there trying to take over/hurt this country while a lot of other people want to hide their heads in the sand and many others want lots of people to hide their heads in the sand (or at least not notice).
Santorum? Well, at least he’s not Romney…
http://www.zazzle.com/enemy_of_the_statist_tshirt-235977043035297478