US Politics: Glenn Beck on Martin Luther King "A Radical Socialist Icon"

Glenn Beck stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial today, 47 years to the day after Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech at the March on Washington. He claimed to be reclaiming the "civil rights" that King pursued throughout his life. The organisers of the rally brought in King's niece to give an endorsement.

So what did Glenn Beck think in January of Martin Luther King? I've listened to this audio, of a conversation between Beck and his team on his radio programme, several times. I still can't quite --- even with the shrewdest editing --- make sense of what Beck is saying, as it verges on incoherence. However, what I think he is doing is trying to manipulate Martin Luther King into a poster boy for the "radicalised socialists" he believes are in charge of Washington.

But let's hold Beck to a simpler test: if he believes it is wrong to use the image of Martin Luther King to justify one's political agenda, what exactly was he doing in Washington DC today?

The audio begins with a statement by Julian Bond, a civil rights activist from the early 1960s to the present day:

*BOND: We don't remember the King who was the critic of capitalism is, who said...[to] Charles Fager when they were in jail together in Selma in 1965 that he thought a modified form of socialism would be the best system for the United States. We don't remember the Martin Luther King who talked ceaselessly about taking care of the masses and not just dealing with the people at the top of the ladder. So we've kind of anesthetized him. We've made him into a different kind of person than he actually was in life. And it may be that that's one reason he's so celebrated today because we celebrate a different kind of man than really existed. But he was a bit more radical. Not terribly, terribly radical but a bit more radical than we make him out to be today.*

US Video: Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” Speech (1963)
US Politics: The Daily Show on Martin Luther King (1963) and Glenn Beck (2010)

GLENN: Okay. Hold on just a second.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: This is and correct me if I'm wrong, America. Maybe I'm wrong. But I didn't think it was politically correct ever.

PAT: Oh, my, no.

GLENN: To say that Martin Luther King was a socialist. Ever. I believe this is the first time I've ever heard this from someone, you know, on the side of praising Dr. Martin Luther King. I've heard people say, oh, well, you know, he was a communist, he was a socialist.

PAT: FBI had files on him.

GLENN: Files on him! Okay, I've never heard this as praise for Martin Luther King.

PAT: No. Anybody who's ever said it has been beat down.

GLENN: Beat down. Beat down. Sarah, would you agree with that? Is that your recollection? Keith, is that your recollection? You've never heard anything like it?

SARAH: Absolutely.

GLENN: Right? Keith?

KEITH: Absolutely, yeah, this is a first.

GLENN: Got it. But listen to the words.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Listen to the words. We don't remember the King that was a critic of capitalism. That wanted a modified form of socialism, that thought it would be the best system for the United States, that talked ceaselessly about taking care of the masses and not just the people at the top of the ladder.

PAT: I have it again if you want to hear it in his words.

GLENN: Yeah, go ahead, yeah, yeah.

*BOND: We don't remember the King who was the critic of capitalism who said to Charles Fager when they were together in Selma in 1965 that he thought a modified form of socialism would be the best system for the United States. We don't remember the Martin Luther King who talked ceaselessly about taking care of the masses and not just dealing with the people at the top of the ladder. So we've kind of anesthetized to this.*

GLENN: Listen to this.

*BOND: We've made him into a different kind of person than he actually was in life. And it may be that that's one reason he is so celebrated today because we...*

GLENN: Stop. Stop! We celebrate a man that is different than the kind of man that really existed. And maybe that's why he's so celebrated. Do you hear this?

PAT: That's a total admission, that if Martin Luther King, if it got out that he was a socialist or a communist or what.

GLENN: He wouldn't be as celebrated.

PAT: He wouldn't be. Well, he wouldn't be.

GLENN: He wouldn't have been. Okay, so listen. So why in your wildest dreams would you do this? In your wildest dreams would the president or the chairman of the NAACP say that Martin Luther King was not terribly, terribly radical but more radical than we thought, basically a radical socialist? Why would you do that? A guy who we have combined George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. We've combined their birthdays, taken a holiday away from one of them and made it, you know, a double these two guys only deserve one day. Together, they can share it together, we'll call it President's Day. This is Martin Luther King day. Do you understand the icon that we have created? And then now to come out and say he was a radical socialist, this week, this week, this Martin Luther King holiday, why would you do that?

PAT: Hmmm.

GLENN: You are putting every chip up on the table....Why would you do that? Look what you're risking here. If radical socialism is discredited, you have then tainted the image of Martin Luther King. You have a holiday for a guy who, if America he just said, I think it's probably why we celebrate him the way we do now, because we're celebrating somebody who really didn't exist that way. He was different than that.

Now, they're either saying here, the left, that America is a radicalized, not terribly, terribly radicalized but a radicalized socialist nation and so we'll accept it now.

PAT: No.

GLENN: Or they're saying, well, that's just the way it is and I think this is probably more likely scenario that the president is under fire and we know that a radicalized socialist is a label that is going to be attached to this president and so we want to show you that a radicalized socialist is Martin Luther King and it's okay

PAT: He's got his own holiday. Right.

PAT: Perfectly fine.

GLENN: But if, if because now they are tying the fortunes of Barack Obama's policies to Martin Luther King. If radicalized socialism falls apart, what happens to the image of Martin Luther King? If America rejects that, will America be okay with a guy who I mean, the picture that is coming out of the White House to more and more people every day that these are radical socialists, some of them, Van Jones, a radical communist, that they believe in Chairman Mao. To quote Ron Bloom, power comes from the end of a gun. To quote Anita Dunn, my one of my favorite philosophers is Chairman Mao. If this is discredited, you've just put every chip you have on the table into the kitty....

Things are going to get extraordinarily difficult in America because I mean, I don't, I don't know what I don't know how to interpret this any other way. I don't know when it became politically okay to say that Martin Luther King was a radical socialist. You wouldn't even say that about President Obama. If I got on the air and said the guy is a radical socialist, which I do, they hammer me to death! Well, if it's okay that Martin Luther King was a radical socialist, why is it bad to say Barack Obama is a radical socialist? Am I reading this wrong?

PAT: I don't think so. I don't think so. We'll see.

GLENN: I'm waiting for another explanation. I...

PAT: We'll see what kind of fire, if any, Julian Bond comes under. I mean, if this is totally rejected

GLENN: No, no. Let's look for the kind of fire because this is, there are booby traps from the progressive left everywhere. I can't see the booby trap on this one, but maybe there is. There are booby traps everywhere. Let's see if I come under fire from the left for reporting Julian Bond and saying, okay, this is what he said, when did radicalized, not terribly, terribly radical, to quote Julian Bond but a radical socialist, when did that become acceptable in America? If we didn't celebrate, if he wouldn't have been as celebrated today had that news come out, when did it become okay and expect us to celebrate it today? Let's see how much fire I come under for asking that question. But look out, gang. These are the times that try men's souls. The left, look at the power arrayed with the unions and everybody else on the left. They are not going to let this one slide. They may pretend that they are being more moderate, but the uber left, if they are defending and using Martin Luther King as a radical socialist icon, they are not going to back away from socialism.

US Politics: Left-Wing Radio and the Rhetoric of Hate (Haddigan)

US Politics correspondent Lee Haddigan writes for EA:

Liberalism, as a political philosophy, has a proud tradition in the United States. Beginning with reform efforts to alleviate the hardships of industrial workers at the turn of the 20th  century, progressive politicians and activists have attempted to pursue policies over the last century that make the "American Dream" a realistic goal for all Americans. But, at the same time as advancing the notions of tolerance and equality in the United States, liberals have also shown a remarkable intolerance for dissent from their conservative opponents. A 19-page report recently issued by the conservative Media Research Center, The Real Radio Hatemongers: Left-Wing Radio Hosts’ Track Record of Vile and Vicious Rhetoric, provides the latest evidence that some liberals are as susceptible to making personal malicious attacks as their conservative adversaries.

US Politics: Glenn Beck on Martin Luther King “A Radical Socialist Icon”
US Politics: Can Obama and the Democrats Retain Control of Congress? (Haddigan)

Shortly after radio became a nationwide medium of communication in the 1920s, liberals began to attack conservatives for using it to spread a reactionary message of fear and "hate". They have tried to curb right-wing radio hosts, from the controversial "Radio Priest" Father Coughlin in the 1930s to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity today,  through federal regulations. 

The most important of these regulations was the "Fairness Doctrine". This required that every radio station, for a renewal of its licence by the Federal Communications Commission, had to include programming time for the discussion of controversial political issues, with a presentation of both sides of the topic.

Introduced by the liberal administration of President Truman in 1949, the Doctrine was revoked in 1985 by a FCC controlled by Reagan appointees, who argued it contravened the First Amendment right to free speech. In the interim, e President Kennedy and President Johnson had used the measure to blunt conservative criticisms over the airwaves of their policies. FCC enforcement eventually led to conservative Reverend Carl McIntire, in the 1970s, becoming the only radio broadcaster to lose his licence because of violations of the Doctrine. (McIntire attempted unsuccessfully to air Radio Free America from a "pirate" ship off the coast of New Jersey in 1973.)

Democrats have called for a reintroduction of the Fairness Doctrine. Former President Bill Clinton argued on a progressive radio show in 2009, "Well, you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or you ought to have more balance on the other side because essentially there has always been a lot of big money to support the right-wing talk shows."

Clinton articulated the longstanding fear of liberals that corporations, and tax-exempt foundations supported by corporations, were financing the Radical Right’s spurious attacks on progressive policies. His argument also drew on the disparity between liberal and conservative representation on national talk radio stations, with the right wing possessing a significant advantage in audience numbers. But, at the heart of liberal complaints against conservative radio hosts, from the thirties to today, is the contention that they foment discord in America with their "Toxic Talk: How the Radical Right Has Poisoned America’s Airwaves", the title of a new book by Bill Press.

Deep in the liberal psyche is the contention that the Radical Right, the so called fright-peddlers and hatemongers of the early 1960s, created the climate for the assassination of President Kennedy and Robert Kennedy. The MRC report includes the contentious assertion of Mike Malloy (The Mike Malloy Show, August 26, 2009) on his sadness at the death of Ted Kennedy: “I remember feeling that way in 1963 and again in 1968, when his two brothers were murdered by the right-wing in this country.”

Liberals fear that the same fate awaits President Obama, a tragedy that Ed Schultz suggests some right-wing radio hosts would welcome: “Sometimes I think they want Obama to get shot. I do. I really think that there are conservative broadcasters in this country who would love to see Obama taken out.”

And, apparently, conservative talk radio does not confine itself to encouraging the murder of Presidents. Other bizarre claims made by Malloy include: Limbaugh and Beck want to see repeats of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing; Bill O’Reilly inspires the killing of doctors who provide abortions; and a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington was killed because of the “poison” pumped out over the airwaves by conservative broadcasters. On a show last September, Malloy declared, "Glenn Beck rails against census workers, and inspires his people to go out and kill one for sport.” And not only did Beck galvanize the murderer, he welcomed the atrocity: “I will guarantee you that O’Reilly and Beck and the rest of these monsters on the neo-fascist right love this stuff. It gives them something else to talk about. It’s sport.”

Liberal radio hosts do not limit themselves to alleging that right-wing figures whip up hate. They also engage in personal attacks on conservatives, some of which contain material that, if aired by Glenn Beck, would lead to his instant dismissal by Fox News. Malloy in October 2008 argued that Michele Bachmann, a Republican Congresswoman from Minnesota, is a “hatemonger” who “would have gladly rounded up the Jews in Germany and shipped them off to death camps. She’s the type of person who would have had no problem sending typhoid-smeared blankets to Native American families awaiting deportation to reservations.” Molloy concluded, “This is an evil bitch from hell. I mean, just an absolute evil woman.”

But even that invective pales compared to Montel Williams almost a year ago when he urged Bachmann, “So, Michele, slit your wrist! Go ahead!  I mean, you know, why not? I mean, if you want to – or, you know, do us all a better thing. Move that knife up about two feet. I mean, start right at the collarbone.”

As the most prominent of conservative radio broadcasters, Rush Limbaugh receives most of the vitriol aired by some liberal radio hosts. Malloy has hoped “that Rush Limbaugh will choke to death on his own throat fat”. A parody song for the Randi Rhodes Show in May included the verse, “He’s a fat conservative butthead/Sick Republican sleazeball/Fearmongering scumbag/Egotistical asswipe/Mean-spirited, hog-wallowing, fat conservative putz/With the face of ahorse’s ass/Mega dildos, Rush!” Hardly the way to build a bridge to tolerance and respect for the differing political philosophies in the United States.

Of course, Rush Limbaugh has no interest in helping foster a spirit of bi-partisanship. The liberal media watchdog group, Media Matters for America, features a link to the "Limbaugh Watch". The site also contains extensive scrutiny (and easily accessed archives) of the misinformation presented in media appearances by Glenn Beck and other conservative broadcasters.

On the other side, the conservative Media Research Centre was founded five years ago to counter what it claimed was a liberal media bias on network news shows. Though not as easily searchable as Media Matters, the MRC website offers extensive evidence for the conservative lament that the media is controlled by liberals, a complaint that dates back to the years of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal.

As befits the importance of a free media to a healthy democracy, both these sites illustrate by contrast that political debate can be vigorous in the United States. Since the days of Roosevelt’s "fireside chats", however, liberals have been successful in portraying themselves as the responsible and principled political persuasion, opposed by a hatemongering and rabid right wing. Conservatives, understandably, resent their marginalization as the purveyors of extremism and react in a less than civil manner.

The truth is that, for all the instances of red-baiting in America (which continues today with the claims Obama is a socialist), there are similar occurrences of brown-baiting --- comparing conservatives to fascists --- by liberals. In fact, a credible argument can be made that McCarthyism was the result of an enraged conservative minority retaliating against attempts by liberals during World War II to smear all right-wing isolationists as fascist traitors. Until liberals realise that they are part of the reason for the current incivility in political discussion, there appears little likelihood that the nature and tone of debate will change in the United States.

The Latest from Iran (28 August): Music, Sanctions, and Science

2020 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch (Cosmetics Edition). Minister of Intelligence Heydar Moslehi, who has been putting himself on front pages all week with tales of danger and how Iran's services are triumphing, does it again today by accusing the Swedish cosmetics firm Oriflame of trying to harm Iran's security: "Oriflame intended to fight the (Iranian) system. There are no economic reasons behind the company. We realised through the evidence that the arrogants (Western powers) and intelligence agencies sought to create security problems for the country through this company."

Oriflamme's chief financial officer Gabriel Bennet responded, "We are a cosmetics company, we are selling direct. We are of course not involved in any political activities in the country (Iran). It is very very difficult to comment on [the accusations]."

On 22 August, Iranian authorities closed Oriflamme's Tehran office and arrested five employees, reportedly on charges that the company was running a pyramid scheme.

NEW Iran: Obama Rejects a Public “Red Line” on Nuclear Capability (Porter)
NEW Iran Music Special: The Kanye West No-War Rap
NEW Iran: Conservatives v. Ahmadinejad (Jedinia)
NEW Iran Special: The Supreme Leader and One Voice on Nuclear Talks with US?
The Latest from Iran (27 August): One Voice in Iran?

1625 GMT: The American Detainees (cont.). There is chatter, amidst the statement of Minister of Intelligence Heydar Moslehi that the case of Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal "is nearing its end", that the US hikers could be released before the end of Ramadan.

There have been a number of moments over the last 13 months when there were indications that freedom was imminent, and each time hopes have been dashed. So the attitude might be "believe it when we see it".

The lesson could be --- as with many other cases and seen this week in the campaigns for Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani (see 1415 GMT) and Shiva Nazar Ahari --- that pressure not be relaxed for justice and resolution of the situation.

1500 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Ten days after he was summoned back to prison, journalist/filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad has finally been allowed to see his family.

Reformist politician Mostafa Tajzadeh, who also returned to detention and shares a cell with Nourizad, has written an open letter to the Tehran Prosecutor General. In the message, he talks about seeing his wife after 11 days incommunicado.

1435 GMT: The American Detainees. Minister of Intelligence Heydar Moslehi has said the case of three detained American nationals --- Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal --- is near closure: "The investigations in the case of the three (Americans) is nearing its end and the verdict to be announced soon."

The trio were arrested in July 2009 when they allegedly crossed an unmarked border into Iran while hiking in Iraq's Kurdistan region.

1420 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. HRANA reports that the four-year prison sentence for human rights activist Mahboumeh Karami has been confirmed.

1415 GMT: Political Prisoner (Ashtiani) Watch. The Iranian judiciary has released a statement on the case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, sentenced to death for adultery.

The judiciary, implicitly recognising the international presssure for clemency and/or freedom for Ashtiani, said that the rights of all citizens were defended; however, the charges of adultery and complicity in her husband's murder had been proven against the 43-year-old woman.

1120 GMT: Diplomatic Service. Iranian official Mohammad Reza Sheibani Rauf has defended the President's appointment of four special representatives, including Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, for areas of foreign policy. He claimed this was "not uncommon" and cited the example of the US.

Rauf also noted that the President's office had appointed a Special Representative on Caspian Affairs in the past.

1100 GMT: The Battle Within. Leading conservative Morteza Nabavi has criticised the President for his failure to attend meetings of the Expediency Council, saying this was a "legal claim" as well as a political issue.

Nabavi noted the possible conflict between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the head of the Expediency Council, Hashemi Rafsanjani, but said both should reject "inflexible positions" and show an example of "political maturity" in reaching resolutions.

0900 GMT: Uranium Watch. Peyke Iran, drawing from Asr-e Iran, claims that Moscow is unsure about Tehran's proposal for a joint consortium to produce fuel for the Bushehr nuclear plant.

0850 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Dr. Shiravi, Professor of Mechanical Engineering and former Dean of Shahid Chamran University in Dezfoul, has been arrested.

0615 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Muhammad Sahimi, writing in Tehran Bureau, has a lengthy profile of Shiva Nazar Ahari, the activist detained since July 2009 and facing death on the charge of "mohareb" (war against God).

0610 GMT: Economy Watch. Street Journalist, relaying an item we saw in Peyke Iran, quotes Ali Deghan Kia, a member of the Higher Islamic Council Association Board, who says there has been a 40% increase in unemployment in manufacturing and "more than 90 percent of productive units transferred to the private sector are at risk of bankruptcy”.

Deghan Kia blamed "uncontrollable importation and smuggling of Chinese goods [as] the number one cause for unemployment....Every billion dollars of smuggled good entering the country is responsible for unemployment of 25,000 workers in Iran.”

0600 GMT: Academic Corner. Science follows up on the firing of Professor Yousef Sobouti, the astrophysicist and founder-director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences who was Chancellor of Zanjan University. It claims that Sobouti's replacement, Rasoul Khodabakhsh, is a "nuclear scientist known to have links with the pro-government Basij militia".

Science that the Government has also replaced the leaders of at least 17 other academic and scientific institutions over the past month, including the chancellors of Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, the University of Golestan in north Iran, and Arak University.

0545 GMT: We open Saturday with a music special, as Kanye West and Jay-Z put out a rap against war with Iran.

Meanwhile, the Swiss energy group EGL spins another message, saying that 18 billion Euro ($23 billion) gas contract with the National Iranian Gas Export Company is not affected by American sanctions: “We are not violating any regulations, and follow rules; we feel we are not really deserving to come on the sanctions list.”

“Using of the revenues by Iran from the EGL deal to finance terrorism and its allies Hamas and Hizbullah. That is speculation. We do not pay money for supporting terrorism. I cannot really comment on such a speculation,” spokeswoman Lilly Frei said.

Last week EGL put out a somewhat different rationale: “As we noted in the past when this deal was first announced, oil and gas deals with Iran send the wrong message when Iran continues to defy UN Security Council resolutions. We have raised our concerns with the Swiss government about this arrangement on multiple occasions."

However, Frei is now saying, “We have a contract with the company, not with Ahmadinejad." Asked about other connections, Frei said EGL did “not know if the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is affiliated with National Iranian Gas Export Company".

US Video: Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" Speech (1963)

Martin Luther King on the steps of the Lincoln Material, speaking to the March on Washington, 28 August 1963

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk[/youtube]

US Politics: The Daily Show on Martin Luther King (1963) and Glenn Beck (2010)

US Politics: The Daily Show on Martin Luther King (1963) and Glenn Beck (2010)

Apparently a few people are gathering in Washington DC, in front of the Lincoln Memorial, to hear radio and TV talk-show host Glenn Beck reclaim "civil rights" for America on the same spot --- or rather, in Beck's words, "two flights [of steps] down --- from where Martin Luther King delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech on the same day in 1963:

Watch US-based video or UK-based video.....