Glenn Beck: Satan or Saint?

I think it’s safe to say that with the stellar exception of Charles Krauthammer, the Washington Post is a determined bastion of liberal propaganda. This past Sunday, the Sacramento Bee reprinted a hit piece by Post writer Dana Milbank, aimed at FOX News phenomenon Glenn Beck. The article, “Glenn Beck exalted by the masses” makes it clear that the far left believes him to be the antichrist – perhaps even more dangerous than Sarah Palin.

This particular offering is so egregious, it simply begs for a response. Amusing, isn’t it, that so-called “liberals” can’t stand opinion or philosophy that conflicts with their own? Nothing “liberal” about them. That’s why the term “progressive”, might be a better term instead. Rather than argue the merits of an issue and try to persuade, these folks go after the individual. Utilizing ridicule, isolation, outright attack, when all else fails, they resort personal destruction. That’s why progressives are so desperate to silence him. However, it’s no surprise to Beck, who often reviews these slam tactics during his show, reminding the audience that they originate in Sol Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” (a how-to manual for leftist agitators).

Dissecting the article, first few paragraphs are devoted to broad-brushed smears. By paragraph 4, Milbank gets down to specifics, insinuating evil connotations over Beck’s discussions. These range from the possibility of “death panels”, “FEMA concentration camps”, etc., to Hitler’s SA-type “civilian national security forces” – most of which are either implied or contained in actual health care reform language, or the latter – specifically called for (for whatever need anyone can imagine), by then-candidate Obama, himself.

Another jab - at Beck’s urging viewers to read “Mein Kamph” - misses, because Milbank flubs Beck's message in the warning: Not learning from the lessons of history condemns one to repeat them. I’d personally recommend the Alinsky book as well. It helps explain the disdainful, condescending attitudes displayed by Washington politicians toward their tea-partying constituents.

Further along, Milbank asks: “Is Glenn Beck America?” As much as this may pain him, I’d answer in this manner: America is Glenn Beck – not the "liberal/progressive" elite. Like it or not, there’s a good reason for Beck’s raging popularity: He brings a message of truth that resonates with America. He voices our anger over the lies; he voices our frustration with campaign promises not kept; he voices our concern over the currently misguided direction of the country we love. He represents us – the “tea baggers”, “town-hallers” and “Astroturfers” – you know, the folks progressives and many of our misguided representatives in Washington just love to hate.

This rabid hatred is underscored in various ways throughout the rest of the article, including a few bullet points that fall flat:

“Cultural Impact” - Of course! Glen Beck has given America a voice and a direction to challenge what they see as impending disaster in the White House. That’s a huge impact. Will Beck eclipse Oprah? Why not?
“Scalps” – What, if anything about Van Jones’ departure can be considered a scalping? Jones’ own questionable history did him in. Beck did nothing but bring it to light.
“Followers” – Becks’s revelations regarding the “shadow cabinet” of Obama “czars” should have been exposed by House and Senate leaders long before Beck turned on the spotlight. What took them so long to catch up?

Finally, Milbank’s screed ends with a failed twist of one of Beck’s own frequent lines: “I fear for this country.” Sadly, it backfires on Milbank, revealing him as just another petulant pecksniff, with a very dull political ax to grind…