Saturday, February 27, 2010

Glenn Beck is No Friend of Liberty

Below is an open letter I sent to a conservative leader. Several months ago he made a gushing endorsement of Glenn Beck, announcing that he was a Beck "convert." After several exchanges of emails in which I continued to point out that he should back off his endorsement, lest less sophisticated people be deceived and misled, he never gave any kind of a public retraction.


In the meantime, just the kinds of dangers I warned about arose with Glenn Beck. Meanwhile, Beck is on point to derail, deceive and deflect the growing populist, anti-establishment tea party sentiment and lead them back into the waiting arms of the GOP. If the Bush-Cheney years taught us anything, the establishment GOP is no friend of liberty or the US Constitution. Here is my letter:

Dear XXXXXXX:

For some reason you continue to soft-peddle the clear and present danger Glenn Beck poses to the liberty movement. His intentional hatchet-job on Debra Medina confirms who he is working for, and it is NOT liberty-lovers. The longer you go without publicly recognizing the threat he represents, the harder it will be to counteract it.

I've sent you a number of emails with specifics, but apparently none have been persuasive.

"Beck Has Gone Too Far! - Trashes Medina as a Nazi"    http://dailypaul.com/node/125837
Watch the video. The first part is good stuff. He explains at a 6th grade level some things most people don't understand, so they think he's a credible inside source. A champion. Then in the new segment that starts at about 8:50 he moves in for the kill.

Watch what he does to Debra Medina -- and anyone who thinks there are legitimate questions about Obama's lack of birth and education credentials or about 9-11. Though these are legitimate questions held by a large portion of the citizenry, the views of some of her supporters have nothing to do with the Texas governor's race. You and I know that, and Glenn Beck certainly knows that. He surprise attack on Medina is purposeful and appears to have had the intended effect of slowing down her startling rise in the polls in the last few months.

Here's follow up, building on the Beck attack:
From Wednesday's Oklahoman:
http://newsok.com/a-texas-dark-horse-with-a-shovel/article/3441706?custom_click=headlines_widget
Here is Texas radio host,Mark Davis, Clear Channel (major NeoCon ownership and donors) also wielding Beck's hatchet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTqb5FXn9eA
I don't have time to see how many others have jumped on the bandwagon, but I'm sure the Texas media is peppered with it.

Still not convinced? Well, here he has just slimed you and anyone else who might be a "conspiracy theorist" who is "on the internet." See he deceptive Beck is on the danger of Executive Orders:
http://www.infowars.com/glenn-beck-on-executive-orders-lies-ignorance-or-deception/

You see, Beck is primarily a debunker of the idea of "conspiracies" in general. Any he does expose only bolster his credibility in those he debunks.

Beck also debunked the idea of FEMA concentration camps even existing. He knows better than that, and so do you. Beck also supports a national sales tax.

And now he give credence to "global warming"! After it has been shown to be a fraud at the international level, he now recants!!
http://www.prisonplanet.com/anointed-leader-of-conservative-movement-glenn-beck-now-believes-in-global-warming.html

And he failed to retract his statement in response supporting global warming:
http://www.infowars.com/becks-failure-to-retract-global-warming-advocacy-provokes-online-firestorm/

I have no doubt that if the establishment thinks that the result of the Governor's race in Oklahoma is possibly going to Brodgon, and if they think it important enough that it not, Beck will do the same thing to Brodgon as he has to Medina. In many ways Brogdon is to Oklahoma what Medina is to Texas -- the shining hope of a straight-talking Constitutionalist to use state government to protect people from the overreach of the federal government. And both face stiff opposition from establishment fake-conservative Republicans misleading unsophisticated voters.

It appears that Sarah Palin is being used in cooperative fashion.

Many besides me are sounding the alarm about Beck and Palin:
http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/2211.html

Palin is a run-of-the-mill Neocon:
http://www.infowars.com/tea-party-sarah-is-a-neocon/

And here she is trying to sheepdog the Tea Partiers into the GOP.
http://www.infowars.com/palin-tells-tea-party-to-merge-with-republican-borg-hive/

And let's not forget that Beck is a NeoCon, not a Constitutionalist:
http://www.infowars.com/glenn-beck-for-dummies/

Ruppert Murdoch, Beck and Palin's employer, owns FAUX News. FAUX, after apparently hyping the recent CPAC meetings, then downplayed the significant margin by which Paul bested both Palin and another Murdoch employee, Huckabee, in the straw polls for President. Should there be ANY question whatsoever that Beck will NOT do anything that might cost him his lucrative spotlight and paychecks from paymaster and New-Worlder Murdoch? By the same token, do we have any reason to believe that this slick actor is unaware that he is acting as a bell cow to lead those with conservative instincts back into the GOP corral, ready for the next round of abuse by NWO/NeoCon Republican leadership?

Your use of the term "Pied Piper" for Beck is also accurate. The Pied Piper of legend deceived the children of the village and led them off to their deaths.

I'm not denying that Beck is saying many good things and even waking some people up about SOME things. The problem is that while he is building is source credibility, he at the same time is using it to smear real Constitutionalists, promote fake ones, debunk the idea of "conspiracy theories," and attempt to short-circuit, mislead and deceive the growing populist/Constitutional movement in this country. Rat poison is effective because 99% of the ingredients are tasty to the rats. It's the important 1% that is fatal. When it comes to politics, it takes a much smaller amount of truth to deceive a dumbed-down, unsophisticated population. And once that group has an idea fixed in their minds, it is very difficult to dislodge it. I see it all the time.

For instance, I understand that half of Americans still believe Saddam had WMD's that threatened the US and was involved in 911. Both ideas were debunked as deliberate lies long ago. Yet they still believe the initial lies. How many people have heard your strong endorsement of Beck and told their friends, but might not see your retraction, if it ever comes. I believe you should be using your position of influence and leadership to help people understand how  Glenn Beck can be used to deceive the people and further the very things that are leading America to destruction. Instead, you proudly announce that your are a "Beck convert"!!

I just heard several friends recently speak with great faith in Glenn Beck. These people don't have the background or experience to sift the falsehoods from the truths he may say. I also got another Mary Fallin mailing touting Beck's appearance in Tulsa next month, announcing that Palin will now be with him. Can some kind of Beck and/or Palin endorsement be far behind? At the very least Fallin is attempting to ride on their coattails.

I fear the damage has already been done. When the watchmen sound an uncertain trumpet, who will warn the people?

Because this issue is so important, I'm opening up this dialogue to a number of liberty leaders in Oklahoma. This discussion is too crucial to confine to just you and me. If I'm wrong about Beck, then show me. We already have plenty of evidence that he's no friend of liberty and the Constitution. If I'm right, then start taking steps to minimize the problem when Beck and/or Palin come meddling in Oklahoma to deceive our citizens.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I would hold that if everyone simply turned off Mr. Beck, that the only ones left watching him would be the bubble-heads. I haven't watched Teevee for over a decade now. There is nothing I need on that idiot box.

Elijah said...

Here is a reply to a recipient of my open letter who thought I was hurting the liberty movement by being "divisive." What do you think?
----------------------------
Thank you for your response.

The open letter was sent to XXXXXX after numerous private attempts to persuade him to back off of his public "conversion" (his word) as a Glenn Beck fan. There is a scriptural procedure for addressing someone in private before taking it before the group. That is what I have done. It was never my desire for it to reach this state, but XXXXXX has steadfastly stood by his man, despite the evidence. He even did so in response to this same open letter.

Beck is a "NeoCon" by any definition of that term. It it is "divisive" to unmask a deceiver, then so be it. There is no benefit in being deceived unanimously. Beck is a clear and present danger to the liberty movement. If those of us in the movement with the discernment to see deceivers do not warn the rest, then who shall do it?

It is most unfortunate that XXXXXX has participated in the Beck deception. He, more than most, has the background to see how the mainstream media manipulates public opinion. For some reason he has a blind spot toward Beck. Most people are not intellectually sophisticated enough to separate the truth from the lies that Beck perpetuates. They instead rely on those who they think are, whether it is Beck, Limbaugh or even XXXXXX.

Those in leadership have a great responsibility to be scrupulous with the truth and to be prudent about real dangers to the flock. If the leaders are regarded as omniscient and free from criticism, then you have turned them into cult leaders.

Yes, the enemy would like to create divisiveness to decrease our effectiveness. They would also like to create unity to fall in lockstep behind media creations like Beck and Palin. What they don't want is a movement that has many independent heads moving in a similar direction with unity of purpose, not under the spell of any individual leader. A leaderless movement is hard to corral or decapitate.

Because XXXXXX has such a large reach with his mailing list, it is incumbent upon him to use the greatest care with his endorsements. Usually I find that he does that. In this case, I don't believe he has.

What conclusions do YOU draw based on the evidence I have presented in the open letter?

Sincerely,