Glenn Beck was once informative and edgy. No longer. These days the Fox News Talker is mostly tedious, windy, preachy and plain spaced-out. “Spooky Dude”is a sobriquet Beck uses to describe his latest personal nemesis, George Soros, about whom he intones for hours on end, aided by the usual indecipherable charts. Beck is one spooked-out dude.
Beck is too boring and marshals too few facts to persuade me of anything he says these days. However, no matter the number of fatuities Beck disgorges in one session, one thing is clear: he is not an anti-Semite. Beck is no hater; he’s a nice guy. He has just become so fat-headed that he believes his own hype. A muddle-headed man who has deluded himself about being a philosopher king will ad lib himself into trouble.
Our man from La Mancha is aping Bill O’Reilly. BO’s show revolves around BO and his encounters. The mental midgets of The View will pick a fight with BO, and BO will devote the week to discussing the implications for the nation of his squabble with some bitches. Their body language he’ll dissect (“analyze” is his term for wanking on-air with junk science), his body odor his expert will break down; he’ll invite guests on to praise him and damn the dames, and vise versa, on and on.
But even BO picks up on more news items, these days, than does Beck, whose hour is bereft of any information. Beck, once a humble man, has adopted Bill O’Reilly’s braggadocio broadcasting. (Warning, Glen: that’s un-Godly!)
So now the Jewish, liberal establishment is having a go at Beck for rambling incoherent about Soros.
This is what happens when one let’s the ego take over, as Glen has done. It all began when Glen discovered that Soros had donated money to combat the Beck tidal wave. Thereon-in Beck was like a man possessed; high on his own importance for drawing Soros’ attentions. The dybbuk did not pay dividends.
On November 12, Simon Greer, president and CEO of Jewish Funds for Justice, went on Countown [sic] with Keith Olbermann to discuss Glenn Beck evoking anti-Semitic sterotypes [sic] to attack a prominent Jewish philanthropist and Holocuast [sic] survivor. In his three-day “Puppet Master” series, Mr. Beck accused Geroge [sic] Soros of “helping send the Jews to the death camps” when he was 13 years old. There has been an overwhelming response condemning Mr. Beck’s grotesque falsehoods from Abe Foxman calling it “horrific” to Elan Steinberg calling it “monstrous.”
If you’re interested (I’m not) read more about the developments on this badly spelt website.
EGO TV has taken a predictable tumble. I don’t agree with a word he says, but Simon Greer seems a sincere, refined man. This is more than one can say of Countdown Keith, into whose trap Talker Beck stepped.
This is not even a case of the pot calling the kettle black. It’s plain insane. Barack Obama is the president of a country that is, with full presidential imprimatur, devaluing its coin and all private savings in order to conceal the ever-accreting public debt. China’s monetary policy, which is its business, is geared toward production; toward growing its economy out of any foreseeable economic straits.
Brainy boy is so stupid as to demandthat China strive for a “balance” (of what? Debt and credit?)
“The president, speaking at a news conference in Seoul, suggested China bears much of the blame for global trade imbalances, The New York Times reported. He abandoned his usual cautious language on the subject and said China and other countries should not assume ‘their path to prosperity is paved simply with exports to the United States.'”
Wow, BHO is unaware that China produces for the world. But then Americans do think America is the world. In that, BHO is very American, and not so much of an alien.
Recall that Lazy Boy issued the same dire warning to Germany’s Ms. Merkel:
“U.S. President Barack Obama [has called] for Germans to aid the global recovery by spending more and relying less on exports.”It is not only Germany that Obama wishes to knee-cap economically, but Canada, Japan and China too. Given that big-spending Americans exist at the sufferance of the frugal, productive Chinese, I don’t quite know how this would work.
“Ms. Merkel countered that Germany’s growth and employment are rising—and therefore the world’s fourth-largest economy has no reason to rethink its dependence on its powerhouse industrial sector and large trade surplus.”
UPDATE I: WSJ: “We don’t like to see U.S. Treasury Secretaries so completely shot down by the rest of the world, except when they are so clearly misguided.” An understandable sentiment, except that from where I’m perched, I can’t recall when last an American president went abroad on a worthwhile mission.
Rather than leading the world from a position of strength, Mr. Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner came to Seoul blaming the rest of the world for U.S. economic weakness. America’s problem, in their view, is the export and exchange rate policies of the Germans, Chinese or Brazilians. And the U.S. solution is to have the Fed print enough money to devalue the dollar so America can grow by stealing demand from the rest of the world. …
But why should anyone heed this U.S. refrain? The Germans are growing rapidly after having rejected Mr. Geithner’s advice in 2009 to join the U.S. stimulus spending blowout. China is also growing smartly having rejected counsel from three U.S. Administrations to abandon its currency discipline. The U.K. and even France are pursuing more fiscal restraint. Only the Obama Administration is determined to keep both the fiscal and monetary spigots wide open, while blaming everyone else for the poor domestic results. …Meanwhile, China and other Asian economies see first-hand that rather than spurring more U.S. growth (on which Asian exporters still depend), U.S. monetary ease has flooded the developing world economies with dollars they’re not able to absorb; produced exchange-rate turmoil to the detriment of the region’s traders; and sent the world’s dollar-denominated commodity prices climbing.
No one is giving voice to the following thought—and whenever I mention this point, posters on this blog equivocate—but truly, the austere economic policies leaders are pursuing in Europe and the UK bespeak of some love of country and sense of duty. These Obama, and Bush before, is without. The terrible two have done things that, ultimately, hurt their countrymen horribly; they’ve trashed the country and its coin via war, welfare and debt.
UPDATE II (Nov. 13): What do busybody conservatives have against China for producing in response to demand? Why is the centrally planned, state counterfeiting of money even remotely comparable to the production of made-in-china junk in response to the demands for made-in-china junk? Mad at the Chinese for their exports? Why do you buy them?
American Sinophobes should remember that “China has undergone considerable economic restructuring and market reforms, the consequence of which is a 300 million strong Chinese middle class. Poverty levels have receded from “53 percent in 1981 to 8 percent in 2001. Only about a third of the economy is now directly state-controlled. As of 2005, 70 percent of China’s GDP was in the private sector.” The Chinese financial system is duly being liberalized—banking is diversifying and stock markets are developing. Protections for private property rights are being strengthened as well.”
“China is changing. It is ‘out of the red’ in more ways than one. The US is changing too: It’s in the red and getting redder.”
“When the large African-American woman—in the employ of the American taxpayer to torment the same subjects at the Miami International Airport—summoned me with a crooked finger for a pat down, I thought of the film ‘Midnight Express.’ And in particular, the scene where Billy Hayes’ far-from-delightful Turkish jailer schemes to enjoy some time alone with the young American. My tormentor wore the same sadistic, atavistic expression. Her giant digits were soon upon my chest and between my legs. …
… The attractiveness variable is, however, a statistical outlier; a red herring that should not form the focus of an uprising at the airports. To counter the salacious, if spurious, sexual angle, the TSA could easily produce accurate evidence of the equal number of attacks perpetrated on feeble, little old men and their wives. It would appear that this cross-section of the population is as likely to be targeted by TSA terrorists as is the attractive, distaff demographic.
“I’ve watched dozens of documented attacks, or accounts thereof, on YouTube. If the footage is at all representative, attractiveness is not the salient feature of the victims. The sex-appeal tack will, invariably, invite evidentiary exculpation: ‘See, I attacked grandpa, too; I’m all about the random.’ You don’t want the TSA’s hounds to be fair in their pursuit of the American people; you want them to cease and desist it. And you want individual culprits and their higher-ups publicly exposed and punished.”
If the countless YouTube clips I’ve cringed through are in any way typical occurrences – then what we have here are affirmatively appointed federal recruits, loosed upon meek, mild-mannered, mainstream Americans. What is salient about the assailed is that they are, from what I’ve observed, members of the pilloried and pliant majority.
This onslaught is a quest for submission, not sex. …”
I know some of you are waiting for the publication of Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa. It’s turning out to be quite the ordeal. At least one publisher is still considering my controversial manuscript. If this fails, fear not; someone clever and courageous will see to it that the true story of the New South Africa (“Rambo Nation”) is told. (And that a good book, if a little different, is published.)
So far, two magnificent men (as writers, thinkers, and human beings) have already returned Praise For The Cannibal. Thank you. You know who you are. What touched me so was the speed with which both gentlemen returned their blurbs. They seemed to sense the urgency of my mission (and I like to think that the thing was a page-turner). How refreshing to encounter towering talents who do not inhabit the solipsistic universe in which most American “writers” (and publishers) are mired.
UPDATE I (Nov. 12): In reply to “becky willard’s” dismay at my mentioning the race of the large woman who “touched me inappropriately.” Oh, but this fact is very germane to the column and to the topic. I would have added that in the “the countless YouTube clips I’ve cringed through” for this column, the victims were all “members of the pilloried and pliant majority.” My dear, that’s code for you know who… But I can’t say, because, well, we don’t speak of reverse racial hatred, now do we?!
Please correct me, “Y’all.” Send me documentation and YouTube footage of Brothers, Sisters and robe-clad Muslims being frisked and tormented. Please. I wish to be proven wrong.
UPDATE II: NATURAL RIGHTS; NOT SECTIONAL PRIVILEGES. Here is what the agents of the TSA, now “lobbying hard for law-enforcement power,” do when travelers express dissent (Via Salon.com.:
… “DISRUPTIVE PASSENGER!!! DISRUPTIVE PASSENGER!!! HEY I GOT A DISRUPTIVE PASSENGER OVER HERE!!! DISRUUUUUUUUUPTIVVVVVE PAAAAAAAASSSSSEEEEEENGEEERRR!!!”
A supervisor ambled over and I explained my case. “Put it in writing and send it to Washington,” was his advice. I got the impression that he more or less agreed with me, but as a front-line worker at the airport he had little say in actual policy or how to enforce it. That’s fair enough, though it did not excuse his colleague’s rudeness and hair-trigger temper.
Imagine that woman with actual law-enforcement power. Or a weapon.
Reportedly TSA is lobbying hard for law-enforcement power, and that it could happen is something worth worrying about. Speak out, or speak up, and you’ll be arrested. Protest the TSA’s rules, or demand an explanation as to why a guard is taking your belongings or possibly violating your rights, and you’ll be locked up.
The problem with this pilot’s account is that the man seems to believe that, “Essential liberty” is the preserve of “a pilot,” because of his position in the flying world hierarchy. Salon would probably agree.
The same cloistered, sectional concerns vis-a-vis natural liberties typify one 2,000-strong, flight attendant’s union, which has been fielding tons of complaints from its members. mauled and violated passengers to not fit the bill.
Liberty doesn’t have an exclusionary clause attached, unless you think, in error, that the state is the source of your freedoms.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
I am not an attorney, but my common sense tells me that the TSA was asking Mr. Roberts to undergo an unreasonable search without probable cause. If the government can’t tell you, “Here’s why we suspect you, and here’s what we expect to find when we search,” then as I read the Constitution, the search is unconstitutional.
UPDATE IV: Here go those “sectional interests” again (see Update II in this post): Noelle Nikpour is a Republican consultant and strategist who talks frequently and tediously on Sean Hannity’s Great American Panel. This evening she suggested that people like herself and her co-panelists—you know, important people who fly a lot—should be able to acquire a permit that’ll exempt them from being screened afresh as they scurry to their important appearances.
What an exquisite understanding of rights this Republican exhibits. All in all, the Republicans like the police state.
UPDATE V (Nov. 13): Writes my mother-in-law:
“Dear Ilana, have now read this week’s article in full and can sympathize with people going through Security in USA. We have had some of this ourselves going from Airport to Airport in US – each stop we were singled out for ‘Special Treatment’; found the ‘Special Treatment Forces’ obnoxious (administered by, mostly, what you call ‘minorities’), sporting the look of ‘we got the power’ on their faces – no smile, no polite exchange – no nothing. We were herded like sheep and treated as such – in fact sheep might well have fared better.
Found the Security, Immigration etc., in Holland for example – thorough but very polite. USA is paranoid and to my mind have taken it way too far. There must be other ways to ensure safety on Aircraft without making the Public feel like criminals. It’s disgusting treatment and quite unnecessary.
It is however quite necessary in this day and age for Airlines to ensure safe flying – we all want a safe flight wherever we go but there are ways and ways. The Public in general have no objection to security searches for baggage or their person, but it’s the manner in which it is done that is so disgusting.”
[SNIP]
UPDATE VI: This image says it all. The work of Dean Shaddock, via Derek.
UPDATE VII (Nov. 14): Yet more arguments for rights based on occupational privileges. Via the WaPo:
“The Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 53,000 employees with 38 U.S. and Canadian airlines, said it is working with federal agencies to create an exception for pilots who have been subjected, they said, ‘to a long line of ever-increasing security measures that have frustrated and burdened.'”
Peter Rez, a professor of physics at Arizona State University, disagrees. Rez has independently calculated the radiation doses of backscatter scanners using the images produced by the machines.
“I came to the conclusion that although low, the dose was higher than they said,” he said.
Based on his analysis, Rez estimates each scan produces radiation equivalent to 10 to 20 minutes of flight.
In April, four science and medical faculty members at the University of California, San Francisco, sent a letter to the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy expressing concerns about potentially serious health risks related to the X-ray scanners.
In the letter they claimed there could be risks to various population segments, including children, senior citizens and women susceptible to breast cancer. The group also called for a clear screening policy for pregnant women once possible risks to the fetus are known. The group wants a review of existing data and recommendations for additional study by an independent panel of scientific experts.
“‘There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations,’ a group of scientists from the University of California at San Francisco informed the White House.”
In the past decade, terrorists on airplanes have killed just about 3,000 people — all on one day. Even if the Christmas Day bomber had succeeded, the number would be under 3,500.
Those are horrible deaths. But in that same period, more than 150,000 people have been murdered in the United States. We haven’t put the entire U.S. on lockdown — or even murder capitals like Detroit, New Orleans and Baltimore.
While reducing the murder rate to zero is very desirable, we also understand that the costs, in terms of liberty and resources, are too great. But when it comes to air travel, 9/11 seems to have stripped away our ability to put things in perspective.
UPDATE VIII: “If you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested.”
“When the large African-American woman—in the employ of the American taxpayer to torment the same subjects at the Miami International Airport—summoned me with a crooked finger for a pat down, I thought of the film ‘Midnight Express.’ And in particular, the scene where Billy Hayes’ far-from-delightful Turkish jailer schemes to enjoy some time alone with the young American. My tormentor wore the same sadistic, atavistic expression. Her giant digits were soon upon my chest and between my legs. …
… The attractiveness variable is, however, a statistical outlier; a red herring that should not form the focus of an uprising at the airports. To counter the salacious, if spurious, sexual angle, the TSA could easily produce accurate evidence of the equal number of attacks perpetrated on feeble, little old men and their wives. It would appear that this cross-section of the population is as likely to be targeted by TSA terrorists as is the attractive, distaff demographic.
“I’ve watched dozens of documented attacks, or accounts thereof, on YouTube. If the footage is at all representative, attractiveness is not the salient feature of the victims. The sex-appeal tack will, invariably, invite evidentiary exculpation: ‘See, I attacked grandpa, too; I’m all about the random.’ You don’t want the TSA’s hounds to be fair in their pursuit of the American people; you want them to cease and desist it. And you want individual culprits and their higher-ups publicly exposed and punished.”
If the countless YouTube clips I’ve cringed through are in any way typical occurrences – then what we have here are affirmatively appointed federal recruits, loosed upon meek, mild-mannered, mainstream Americans. What is salient about the assailed is that they are, from what I’ve observed, members of the pilloried and pliant majority.
This onslaught is a quest for submission, not sex. …”
I know some of you are waiting for the publication of Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa. It’s turning out to be quite the ordeal. At least one publisher is still considering my controversial manuscript. If this fails, fear not; someone clever and courageous will see to it that the true story of the New South Africa (“Rambo Nation”) is told. (And that a good book, if a little different, is published.)
So far, two magnificent men (as writers, thinkers, and human beings) have already returned Praise For The Cannibal. Thank you. You know who you are. What touched me so was the speed with which both gentlemen returned their blurbs. They seemed to sense the urgency of my mission (and I like to think that the thing was a page-turner). How refreshing to encounter towering talents who do not inhabit the solipsistic universe in which most American “writers” (and publishers) are mired.
UPDATE I (Nov. 12): In reply to “becky willard’s” dismay at my mentioning the race of the large woman who “touched me inappropriately.” Oh, but this fact is very germane to the column and to the topic. I would have added that in the “the countless YouTube clips I’ve cringed through” for this column, the victims were all “members of the pilloried and pliant majority.” My dear, that’s code for you know who… But I can’t say, because, well, we don’t speak of reverse racial hatred, now do we?!
Please correct me, “Y’all.” Send me documentation and YouTube footage of Brothers, Sisters and robe-clad Muslims being frisked and tormented. Please. I wish to be proven wrong.
UPDATE II: NATURAL RIGHTS; NOT SECTIONAL PRIVILEGES. Here is what the agents of the TSA, now “lobbying hard for law-enforcement power,” do when travelers express dissent (Via Salon.com.:
… “DISRUPTIVE PASSENGER!!! DISRUPTIVE PASSENGER!!! HEY I GOT A DISRUPTIVE PASSENGER OVER HERE!!! DISRUUUUUUUUUPTIVVVVVE PAAAAAAAASSSSSEEEEEENGEEERRR!!!”
A supervisor ambled over and I explained my case. “Put it in writing and send it to Washington,” was his advice. I got the impression that he more or less agreed with me, but as a front-line worker at the airport he had little say in actual policy or how to enforce it. That’s fair enough, though it did not excuse his colleague’s rudeness and hair-trigger temper.
Imagine that woman with actual law-enforcement power. Or a weapon.
Reportedly TSA is lobbying hard for law-enforcement power, and that it could happen is something worth worrying about. Speak out, or speak up, and you’ll be arrested. Protest the TSA’s rules, or demand an explanation as to why a guard is taking your belongings or possibly violating your rights, and you’ll be locked up.
The problem with this pilot’s account is that the man seems to believe that, “Essential liberty” is the preserve of “a pilot,” because of his position in the flying world hierarchy. Salon would probably agree.
The same cloistered, sectional concerns vis-a-vis natural liberties typify one 2,000-strong, flight attendant’s union, which has been fielding tons of complaints from its members. mauled and violated passengers to not fit the bill.
Liberty doesn’t have an exclusionary clause attached, unless you think, in error, that the state is the source of your freedoms.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
I am not an attorney, but my common sense tells me that the TSA was asking Mr. Roberts to undergo an unreasonable search without probable cause. If the government can’t tell you, “Here’s why we suspect you, and here’s what we expect to find when we search,” then as I read the Constitution, the search is unconstitutional.
UPDATE IV: Here go those “sectional interests” again (see Update II in this post): Noelle Nikpour is a Republican consultant and strategist who talks frequently and tediously on Sean Hannity’s Great American Panel. This evening she suggested that people like herself and her co-panelists—you know, important people who fly a lot—should be able to acquire a permit that’ll exempt them from being screened afresh as they scurry to their important appearances.
What an exquisite understanding of rights this Republican exhibits. All in all, the Republicans like the police state.
UPDATE V (Nov. 13): Writes my mother-in-law:
“Dear Ilana, have now read this week’s article in full and can sympathize with people going through Security in USA. We have had some of this ourselves going from Airport to Airport in US – each stop we were singled out for ‘Special Treatment’; found the ‘Special Treatment Forces’ obnoxious (administered by, mostly, what you call ‘minorities’), sporting the look of ‘we got the power’ on their faces – no smile, no polite exchange – no nothing. We were herded like sheep and treated as such – in fact sheep might well have fared better.
Found the Security, Immigration etc., in Holland for example – thorough but very polite. USA is paranoid and to my mind have taken it way too far. There must be other ways to ensure safety on Aircraft without making the Public feel like criminals. It’s disgusting treatment and quite unnecessary.
It is however quite necessary in this day and age for Airlines to ensure safe flying – we all want a safe flight wherever we go but there are ways and ways. The Public in general have no objection to security searches for baggage or their person, but it’s the manner in which it is done that is so disgusting.”
[SNIP]
UPDATE VI: This image says it all. The work of Dean Shaddock, via Derek.
UPDATE VII (Nov. 14): Yet more arguments for rights based on occupational privileges. Via the WaPo:
“The Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 53,000 employees with 38 U.S. and Canadian airlines, said it is working with federal agencies to create an exception for pilots who have been subjected, they said, ‘to a long line of ever-increasing security measures that have frustrated and burdened.'”
Peter Rez, a professor of physics at Arizona State University, disagrees. Rez has independently calculated the radiation doses of backscatter scanners using the images produced by the machines.
“I came to the conclusion that although low, the dose was higher than they said,” he said.
Based on his analysis, Rez estimates each scan produces radiation equivalent to 10 to 20 minutes of flight.
In April, four science and medical faculty members at the University of California, San Francisco, sent a letter to the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy expressing concerns about potentially serious health risks related to the X-ray scanners.
In the letter they claimed there could be risks to various population segments, including children, senior citizens and women susceptible to breast cancer. The group also called for a clear screening policy for pregnant women once possible risks to the fetus are known. The group wants a review of existing data and recommendations for additional study by an independent panel of scientific experts.
“‘There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations,’ a group of scientists from the University of California at San Francisco informed the White House.”
In the past decade, terrorists on airplanes have killed just about 3,000 people — all on one day. Even if the Christmas Day bomber had succeeded, the number would be under 3,500.
Those are horrible deaths. But in that same period, more than 150,000 people have been murdered in the United States. We haven’t put the entire U.S. on lockdown — or even murder capitals like Detroit, New Orleans and Baltimore.
While reducing the murder rate to zero is very desirable, we also understand that the costs, in terms of liberty and resources, are too great. But when it comes to air travel, 9/11 seems to have stripped away our ability to put things in perspective.
UPDATE VIII: “If you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested.”
