My YouTube Podcasting Has Erupted

This is the first of the podcasts I’ve been cutting over the past few days.

It’s a lot of fun to switch gears as a broadcaster into new mediums.

Though it’s become clear to me that the fun part of doing the recordings is getting addictive versus the boring part of doing the editing.

These are going to get a bit … wild … in coming updates.

If you’re catching me here then consider linking up with me over on the YT as well.

Glenn Beck & The Right-Wing Media

(WATCH VIDEO: Crooks & Liars “Glenn Beck ‘You’re Going To Have To Shoot Them'”)

I see Glenn Beck as actually dangerous, and not just abrasive and dishonest like other right-wing media pundits.

I first became mildly aware of Beck when he was scathing the Bush White House, but back then he never ever called himself “conservative” and only called himself “libertarian.” Today he has fashioned himself a New Media Joe McCarthy and wants to teach the children of America a distorted and fictitious version of U.S. History.

What has actually risen to the level of public danger is centered on the TV show aspect of what he has done with his career. If anyone doesn’t already know he has mocked setting people on fire, shown a shaky rape video for no reason beyond fear mongering and to cap it all off he called a sitting president a racist on live TV.

Because television gives the illusion of credibility putting the character (I believe he is playing everyone, he said so in an interview around when he got all freaky) of Glenn Beck out there has sent horrible and extremely dangerous repercussions into the nation that can never be taken back.

Without pulling out a pack of URLs it’s quicker to just say that historically the U.S. has kind of “self-policed” this kind of extremism and incitement to violence disguised as free speech when it has happened before and always the figure that resembles Glenn Beck of today had a fall from grace. Usually getting fired. The best recent example is “Dr.” Laura getting the axe: she went into something from a KKK rally and that was the “the line.”

It sounds too simple, I know, but the most serious offender here is News Corp and Fox News.

Glenn Beck is only especially dangerous because his bosses won’t fire him no matter what “line” he crosses. If you minus Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Brothers from this situation then Beck would have been canned for being disrespectful to a sitting president or too libel for his “here’s some violence, but don’t do violence” message he delivers regularly. Since this heartless media empire keeps him alive the kind of normal “quality controls” are not coming into play.

In the wake of the Tucson shooting, another act of domestic terrorism that the mainstream media refuses to label as such, and the moving speech delivered by President Obama there is a strong need to assess ourselves in our words and also more deeply to our mind state. This cannot, however, negate the need for people to speak their opinions about the current state of the nation.

America is on a road of a long, slow decline into moral ambiguity and a complete lack of ethics, and Glenn Beck combined with Fox News and the tea party is the first step toward this destruction of all that is good and decent in America. I don’t say these things to get a rise out of anyone or to single out Glenn Beck, but rather only because I see these words as the simple truth.

If Beck and those similar to him would only stop the incitement to violence, racism and bigotry then I would never raise issue with them beyond to merely disagree. Since this next evolution of political dialogue looks more like McCarthyism and Nazism combined I simply refuse to call it anything else.

America The Hateful (Cyber-Harassment)

I called in to a radio show tonight to express my disgust for the current state of political debate in America today.

Alan Colmes of Fox News Talk has this late night / evening political talk show that has some of the lightest call screening in all of the talk medium, let alone that he is working under Fox. Many doubt it but he is a liberal, I would think of him as the kind of liberal who shops at only Wal-Mart. We might call him the “token liberal” of the opinion-media produced under the Fox mantle.

Here is my fan-script / transcript:

ERIC IN SANTA CRUZ: I want to talk about hate. I think there is a lot of hate out there, and I’m part of it on the left.

COLMES: You’re part of it?

ERIC IN SANTA CRUZ: Well, I’m part of it in that I get upset. I hear you doing it on the [phone] lines too. People will say something and you come back at them. And I just wanted to say that it’s wrong. No matter who does, whether it’s me or whatever, it’s wrong. We hate got to hating each other all the time. You can think whatever you want. I can even call someone a “racist,” or whatever, but you got to find a way to not hate people as individuals and just have your point of view.  It’s all over the internet, it’s going on the [Alan.com] chat room right now, it’s all over talk radio right now…. You start making it about people, and not about opinions; that’s when people get upset and we don’t know what to do. That’s when things get out of hand, people start talking about coming over to your house … You were right about the Tea Party, I think there’s racists — racism — in it, but …

COLMES: Well you don’t fight fire with fire, you fight fire with water.

ERIC IN SANTA CRUZ:

COLMES:

I misstated myself when I said “I can even call someone a racist.” I meant to say: “I can even call someone out on what I feel is racism without attacking person by focusing on the statement instead of the person.” (I also had a runny nose and forgot to blow it so I was making annoying snorting noises while on the air, to be fair here they put me on right away and I was shocked that I was on hold for perhaps less than five minutes. I thought I had a little more time than that…)

Also I could have been more clear that the times when he “hates” is rare, and I only mentioned it because it is the same kind of goading harassment and invective language that I see everywhere. Compared to everyone else on the radio-side of Fox he is a big huggable teddy bear with a pack of ravenous lions, but like anyone who deals with verbal harassment sometimes niceties fail and you end up sounding just like them. I am ten thousand times more guilty of this crime than he, but I’ve heard the sounding cry of the masses and it is hate that rules this tempest waging around us.

Forgetting to focus on the statement and not the speaker is the rule I have forgotten more than once now while online and have been rightly deleted / banned from websites as a result.

Hate begets hate. Violence begets violence.

I am ashamed, but only in my expression and not in my passion.

Cyber-harassment is wrong, and it’s currently the favorite past time of lazy teabaggers who have yet to call in death threats or destroy property of health care reform advocates.

MTV-AP Digital Abuse Study:

Objectives/Background
As part of its multi-year public affairs campaign to address the emerging issue of teen digital abuse,
MTV partnered with the AP on a study that provides an in depth look at the prevalence of digital abuse
among young people today. This research was designed to quantify how young people are affected by
and respond to issues like sexting, digital harassment and digital dating abuse.

Emailing Alan Colmes of Fox News

I doubt anyone cares but I spent a bit of time on this email and perhaps there are some interested in hear about all this:


“You’ve Lost a Customer, Not Like One Customer Ever Mattered”

Alan Colmes,

You’ve lost a customer, but not a friend or a fan of your witty radio banter.

I will not be renewing my Fox News Talk podcast subscription when it ends this year.

I have always believed that one votes with their money in a capitalistic society and I will not “vote” for your program any longer. I have to retract it like I was saying that I believe strongly in ethical journalism and would have resigned from Fox, were I you, in the ACORN racist-crusade. You make your own career decisions, but broadcasting inaccurate information was what I trying to avoid by subscribing to your show out of the Fox News Talk selections.

In 2008, with W. in the White House, you were absolutely right about Fox News in regards to the straight-news being honest and you served to clear up misconceptions spread on the internet or by commercialized news-media.

Things change, my friend. Just as the NY Post has made it their singular agenda to “destroy Barack Obama” this is also true for Fox News as evident in endless cases of failure to report facts.

If you, as a broadcaster, refuse to do any research and refuse to look at any objective data on the matter then you have no credibility on the issue. Period.

As an example: you said on the air that you never get vaccines but you never advocated against getting vaccines on the air. Do you understand? If you had done the latter I would also be unsubscribing in the future. All this political crap we all talk about is no different. You and everyone else can believe whatever the **** you want, but when you spread inaccurate information as “fact” you can bet you drive the intelligent / educated people out of the tent and you also drive the loudmouth assholes like me crazy as hell.

This mindless defense of Glenn Beck (he should have finished college if he was going to claim to a “historian“ on the air) and of Fox News as a network when the line was crossed many lines between individual bias and network bias then you are not standing up for the truth.

There was a time you were not making crap up and when you didn’t know one way or another you would say as such. Now you have several times lied on the air and the only reason I don’t call up tonight to grill you on it is because that would serve to feed the right-wingers that are trying to destroy what is left of your credibility.

By the way: the credibility scale is internet then radio then television then print. You have three and I have barely two. I should just pornography in between paragraphs and you have an existing audience, no matter what network you are under.

I like to save your credibility and enhance your lack of credibility but now that I have had it out with your producer and thought on it more than that childish angry-email I first sent: I would only like to inform you that it is an accurate statement that you have “lost a fan.”

The only real difference I can make, other than speaking out, is to not feed into the process any longer.

I like the show, and your internet-work.

I just demand honesty, outright with no exceptions. I refuse to tolerate corporate lies coming from you or anyone else.

I want to be clear: I am not pandering to get back on Liberaland. I used my knowledge of psychology to make an awful, mean-spirited joke on Joel’s expense and I was so out-of-line I myself think I should be banned. Any rational person would agree.

I just want you, as the author of this blog, to understand that I thought every-goes because you posted words like “f***” and allowed endless verbal assaults on other users through an obviously moderated site.

I was under the false impression it was like my blog with Net-Neutrality intact. A simple misconception on my part.

So I’ll be enjoying the show via podcast and surely call in sometime soon (statistics show I‘ll call in the next few months or years after listening for about three years at this point, every night) but I’m not going to keep paying when I’m done with this round.

It’s kind of funny because you are the “clean-up crew” on almost every single other issue I can think you that you bring up on the show.

But I’d just be the caller that would hound you about “Fox-this, Fox-that” that actually had the capability to go out get a degree in Media Studies.

Basically, I’m not f***ing around. I thought you weren’t either but I was wrong and it doesn’t change your value as a broadcaster but your value as a social activist.

When I create a network out of thin air like Fox did in ‘94, I’ll hire you. I’d bring you in as Senior Staffer even on the first day.

I get it by the way. I know you just don’t want to attack fellow broadcasters and people in the news-room. It’s just crossed that line, my friend. It’s fully inaccurate to make any case for credibility from Fox Broadcasting as a corporate entity, and if don’t I think the facts are working against you that’s fine. But it’s like the tea-baggers, if you just shove your head in the sand we have nothing else to talk about and I have to just talk over your shoulder.

I believe I’ve said it before: If you are a liberal and not so angry you can barely stand it right now, then you are just not really paying attention to politics.

My suggestion is to have a full segment, perhaps reoccurring, dedicated to previous-guest Joe Conason of Salon talking about matters pertaining to Glenn Beck and Barack Obama.

I have the feeling he would not start screaming in talking about the racism being spread by both your former partner on television and this “rodeo clown” Glenn Beck.

I’m talking about shaking hands with the devil and still trying to make a better case than that. Joe Conason has it wrapped up, you need to talk to him.

“Truth to power.”

It was very cool when I first that in a promo for your show was impressed by your ability to tackle radical right-wing extremism with tact and intelligence. But my real enemy are the corporations and those who promote lies, or dishonesty, in the guise of “journalism.”

The truth comes out, with or without you aboard.

You do your thing, great radio entertainment, and I’ll do mine.

I am not here to question your motives, only to state mine: I follow the guidance of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in that I feel I must speak out rather than remain silent about racism and bigotry.

Those evil idiots who tried to spread lies about you and your “Radio Graffiti” are an example of what qualifies as something I will continue to fight against. But just like you told them “learn your Radio History and call me back” it’s pretty much the same thing here except to you.

Learn your Modern-Media History studies a little better and then we’ll talk about me continuing to promote your product online, and buying it at future dates.

November 16th 2009

Repost: The Tragedy at Fort Hood

1109_fthoodbh

(Image: PBS.org)

The tragedy at Fort Hood had nothing to do with religion. No matter what some Muslim-hater says.

The tragedy at Fort Hood cannot be properly termed that this point an act of terrorism. No matter what some fear-monger says.

Jon Soltz, of VoteVets.org, appearing on Alan Colmes Radio agrees with me that saying such unfounded statements about this tragedy is completely disrespectful to the fallen.

Those equating this incident with terrorism are an insult to this nation.

The raw truth of this, is that this was a mass murder by a highly-unstable person.

My heart goes out to all those who lost loved ones in this senseless violence. The nation mourns your loss.

I find it unfortunate in the extreme that unethical broadcasters like Bill O’Reilly use this horrific mass murder on a U.S. Army base to spread the Politics of Fear in the nation.

This was a senseless killing of Americans by a deranged individual.

Media Hate-Profiteers may say otherwise, but care nothing for following the facts and care everything for spreading anti-Islamic sentiment while promoting baseless public fear.

At this stage, to call this anything but a mass murder of co-workers by a disturbed individual is purely motivated by a divisive political motive, and the attachment to the issue of the shooter’s religion or ethnicity is motivated purely by the motives of hatred for others based on creed or faith.

I find it a shame that we have a corrupt Media-giant promoting the Politics of Fear and the Politics of Hate under the guise of the credibility of a news group.

I find it a shame that some people have such unethical practices and then claim the title of “journalist,” as Bill O’Reilly does.

Repost: Loyal Opposition No More

1.republican-party
For many years I have felt that for all our disagreements between liberal and conservative individuals in the U.S., there was a shared position by both sides.
A loyal opposition to the opposition, if you will.
For the time being, as since the election of Democratic President Barack Obama, I believe the majority of the conservatives of America have thrown down this national system of civil loyalty in politics in place of a pure obstructionist agenda.
The Party of “No!” is not conservative, nor liberal, it is pure nihilism in place of understanding.
I have not heard any amount of logical rebuttal to an Obama Policy or policy proposal, except in very rare cases.
I find I cannot listen to the standard bearers of GOP right-wing radio these days. Like most people I have my “hang-ups.”
Dismissive attitudes, a complete lack of humility and screaming people down end up on my list.
Every time I have been listening to conservative talk radio, or GOP responses, since the election of Barack Obama I am disgusted by the complete lack of integrity and grace in politics. Every word a smear, every point a spin.
Reducing everything down to simply “look at who is doing the name-calling” is not the issue. Though it is important thing to avoid name-calling as much as possible.
Not sticking to the facts about our democratic representatives and our recent national historical facts is unpatriotic.
I wish it were not so, and no group can claim to innocent of some form of vitriol in these times. But if something I say amounts to “name-calling” then I’m afraid it must be so. But understand I don’t say such things in a state of glee as we see from others screaming rational people down.
I find it offensive that in a matter of weeks all our politics have reduced to childishness and fear-mongering about the government.
Instead of having an actual political dialogue they insist on presenting “vague-facts” along with connect-the-dots logic, which is simply dirty pool politics.