Skip to main content

The conundrum at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave: to respond to Glenn Beck or not?

From a political perspective, the proper response to Glenn Beck in the past few weeks would have been to stand by Van Jones and Yosi Sergant.

[I realize both had become political liabilities, but not even one-tenth the extent a political liability that being seen to cave into a talk show host creates.]

Now that Beck is going after Valerie Jarrett, the proper political response would be (a) for the White House to ignore him and support Jarrett, while (b) sending out some heavy-hitting political surrogates to take him on.

Having White House officials directly challenging Beck on an official White House website does not debunk Beck, it elevates him.

Hell, at this point he appears to be getting more of Barack Obama's attention than General McChrystal in Afghanistan.

At the same time it diminishes the power of the Presidency.

Why? Because it says, in effect, This man has developed such a following that his lies now require the official attention of the government in lieu of real things we should be doing.

Since trust in government, from both ends of the political spectrum, is running pretty damn low, that gives Beck's followers the idea that he is striking a nerve, and--ironically--tells President Obama's supporters exactly the same thing.

The problem for the Obama administration is that what would have been the right move for a campaign--responding quickly--is the wrong move for a sitting president.

Glenn Beck is a sick-freak-fad that can only become a phenomenon with staying power if his enemies treat him like one.

Comments

Delaware Watch said…
I read somewhere that Beck is a registered Libertarian. Do you know anything about it?
Anonymous said…
"This man has developed such a following that his lies now require the official attention of the government in lieu of real things we should be doing."

So, have you debunked any of these "lies"? If they're not lies, your impotent mini diatribe is a waste of time. Wait! You're a Libertarian (just like Beck?), so you're no stranger to political impotence.
Hube said…
I don't watch Beck nor listen to him; however, from what I've read, I can see nothing about him lying at least in regards to Van Jones. All he did was play clips of Jones' own words.

How is that lying -- or even the slightest bit disingenuous?
Mike W. said…
Having White House officials directly challenging Beck on an official White House website does not debunk Beck, it elevates him.

And that of course is exactly what Beck wants.
Anonymous said…
"And that of course is exactly what Beck wants."

Is anyone other than me surprised that Prof. Newton hasn't figured this out all by himself? He is certainly not that obtuse. I think he's gaming as a part of some perverted, masturbatory fantasy.
George Phillies said…
The people who appear on his program lend some of their credibility to Beck's claims of legitimacy.

A list could be generated.

Popular posts from this blog

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba