Third Strike and he's out: The Meteoric Rise and Fall of Ben Carson?

Less than one month ago, Dr. Ben Carson's stock with conservatives shot into the stratosphere after a thirty minute speech at the Washington Prayer Breakfast. Never before had someone so eloquently and politely embarrassed Barack Obama while sharing the same room. I remember pumping my fist a few times while watching that speech. Conservatives began to entertain the idea that Carson would be presidential material in 2016.

Now, er not so much. In fact, the degree to which Carson seems to have diluted and convoluted his message is more than just a little vexing. It's as if he doesn't want conservative support.

My antennae first went up with Carson back on February 17th during his appearance on ABC This Week, just ten days after his speech. Take note beginning at the 1:45 mark, when Carson says we need to 'tone down the rhetoric' and 'discuss things in a reasonable and rational way'. He then advocates for both sides coming together rather than 'one side or the other side winning'.

Exhibit A (strike 1):



Does this mean Carson believes Capitalists can compromise with Marxists? Because of how well Carson did at the prayer breakfast, he seemed to receive a bit of a pass there but conservatives are a little hypersensitive whenever the 'both sides need to come together' rhetoric starts. Such thinking includes a premise that says both sides are equally to blame. That is a false premise indeed. Anecdotally, just look at how Obama ran his presidential campaign compared to how Romney ran his. Obama's campaign lied about Romney being a murderer and a felon while Romney's campaign wouldn't tell the truth about Obama - that he's a socialist.

Here is Exhibit B (strike 2).

It occurred on the Andrea Tantaros show. During the interview, the topic of CPAC came up. Specifically, the group's decision to exclude New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and GOProud - the largest conservative homosexual group - from speaking at the event was discussed. After talking about the cultural underpinnings of our society, Carson bemoaned the exclusion of Christie and GOProud. Take note at the 3:00 mark. This is where Carson alienates social conservatives while championing fiscal conservatism.

Then, at about the 4:47 mark, Carson utters words that conservatives are simply loathe to hear:

"You need to make the tent as big as you possibly can."

Ah, the hypocrisy of the big tenters... They always seem to bemoan the alienation of groups that are socially liberal but never seem to care about alienating social conservatives.



In Exhibit C (big fat strike 3), we find Carson with a fork stuck in him.

During an interview with Glenn Beck, the talk show host asks Carson about the second amendment and whether people like Beck should be allowed to own a semi-automatic weapon. Carson's answer is so ridiculous, you just have to see it for yourself.



h/t Hot Air

Videos: Gingrich calls himself a 'Wilsonian,' Glenn Beck Filets Him

When Glenn Beck said he would consider voting for Ron Paul as a third party candidate if Newt Gingrich wins the Republican nomination, I must admit, my reaction involved wondering if Beck had finally lost it. The conclusion one is left to draw is that Beck sees no difference between Gingrich and Obama because an Obama victory would be the result of Ron Paul running as a third party candidate.

This video double dose from The Blaze may actually cause you to re-think Beck's position, as well as yours - if you're supporting Gingrich.

First up, some undated video (probably within last ten years) of Gingrich calling himself a 'Realpolitik Wilsonian' (think Democrat progressive Woodrow Wilson).



Video of Newt Gingrich championing himself as a Wilsonian could be a political torpedo to his campaign. Here is Beck analyzing the reality of what Gingrich said in the above video.

It's really tough to argue with him on this:



Something tells me that Newt may need to get very, very specific about his past comments and beliefs. Either he's a progressive in sheep's clothing OR he's had a road to Damascus experience.

Regardless of who your candidate is, Beck is bringing up very legitimate points about Gingrich that need to be probed further.

Video: Beck Threatening to Support Ron Paul, Breitbart Grills him

Look, Newt Gingrich has a double-checkered past when it comes to big government positions and statements. He's also the front-runner in the Republican nomination process. There is a disturbing narrative coming out of the mouths of Ron Pauliens at this point and it has a 'cut off your nose to spite your face' ring to it.

Apparently, Glenn Beck is adopting it. Pauliens, in general, believe there is no difference between Barack Obama and Newt Gingrich.

That's absurd.

Another aspect to Beck's take has to do with support for Israel. Beck touts himself as one of Israel's most staunchest supporters; it has become a central issue for him. All one has to do is juxtapose Newt's statement that the Palestinians are 'an invented people' with Paul's response to that and it becomes quite apparent that Newt supports Israel more than does Paul.

Perhaps worse than that is the fact that a vote for Paul is a vote for Obama and if Beck is going to take the position that Obama supports Israel as much as Gingrich does, he's delivered a severe self-inflicted wound.

Via MediaIte:



In response to Beck's appearance on Andrew Napolitano's television show, Andrew Breitbart went after Beck very hard for this position.

Also via MediaIte:



Here is Beck's appearance with Judge Andrew Napolitano that Breitbart referred to:

Video Bombshell: Herman Cain Doubles Down on Islam

This all goes back to March, when a Huffington Post reporter asked Herman Cain if the presidential candidate would be comfortable appointing a Muslim in his cabinet. Cain said no and found himself in the middle of a controversy. He later appeared on Glenn Beck's radio show and walked his comments back a little bit, though not entirely. My guess is this most recent appearance on Beck's television show was an attempt to un-do the walk back; he likely heard from some angry supporters who didn't like what he did on Beck's radio show, though that's just a guess.

Via Daily Caller:

Ruh Roh: Herman Cain Backtracking on his Islamic Comments

Not sure how to digest this one. In March, a Huffington Post reporter confronted Herman Cain about the likelihood of Cain appointing a Muslim as a Judge or Cabinet member if elected president. Cain's response - which is the kind of response that has helped his stock rise with conservatives who understand the Islamic threat - was pointed and relatively clear. He explained why he would be uncomfortable with making such appointments and he focused on Sharia Law.

Here is that exchange:



Yesterday, Cain appeared on Glenn Beck's radio show and backtracked a bit. Intentional or not, Beck made it more difficult for Cain not to backtrack by feeding into the paradigm that allows Muslims to be portrayed as victims of racism. That paradigm puts conservatives on defense, it's ill-advised, and it's not relevant or correct. The issue is NOT the violation of Muslim rights. Jews are far more victimized. The issue is Sharia Law. Cain and Beck attempt to separate the two and it simply cannot be done. When the conversation is allowed to morph from a critique of Islamic Law to violations of Muslims' civil rights based on religion, it's a no-win. That's not the issue; the issue is Islamic Law.

Show me a Muslim who does NOT support Sharia Law and I'll show you either a bad Muslim or a non-Muslim. I think Cain hurt himself a bit here. He did leave enough wiggle room in his answer back in March but his answer to Beck seemed to rely on that wiggle room instead of further condemning Sharia Law as 100% antithetical to Constitutional Law. Again, compare the First Amendment with Article VI.

Fast forward to the 10:00 mark.



h/t The Blaze

Glenn Beck's Source Attribution Problem

First, an article was posted at the Daily Caller website on April 18th that cited claims by multiple bloggers that Glenn Beck habitually uses videos and materials without giving credit to his sources. One of the people quoted in the article is Andrew Breitbart, who actually admitted that Beck doesn't seem to cite the lesser known sources much. It also goes on to say that Beck has a heavy reliance on material from other sources. That's true but Beck's strength is taking those sources and connecting dots with them.

Via the Daily Caller:

Publisher Andrew Breitbart has seen a number of his stories surface on various Beck media properties over the past few years. While he describes himself as “grateful for the many times he has credited me and my sites,” Breitbart says that “sometimes he also uses other peoples’ work without crediting them, making it appear as though it were his own. But especially since adopting ‘The Truth Has No Agenda’ slogan – and trying to deliberately re-position himself as the pious conscience and judge of many of those he took content from – he has exposed himself to his new motto’s unforgiving standard.”

By any standard, Beck seems unusually reliant on the work of others, and unusually reluctant to credit it. In an interview with TheDC, Roger L. Simon, CEO of Pajamas Media, suggested that Beck has committed the journalistic equivalent of a notorious crime. “It is not a question of just doing it right the majority of the time. It is a question of doing it right always,” Simon said. “Doris Kearns Goodwin is forever a fraud in my estimation because she has been caught plagiarizing once. If you rob a bank once, you still robbed a bank.”

A remarkably large number of conservative writers say they feel robbed. During the March 18 airing of his television program, for example, Beck ran a portion of video created by a Chicago-based blogger who calls himself Rebel Pundit. The blogger, who does not publicly reveal his name, says he was initially pleased to see Beck running his video, which featured left-wing protesters demanding amnesty for illegal immigrants. He was soon shocked, however, to see that Beck’s staff had obscured the watermark logo of his website, RebelPundit.com, from the tape.

Beck responded to this article by mocking the charges (video below). I don't think that was a good way to go about it; these are the people in the trenches who are leading the movement he claims to champion. The people who are wanting to be cited are those that do a lot of hard work and if Beck's staff took a video from a blogger known as Rebel Pundit and scrubbed the guy's website from the video, that's just wrong. If you have a one hour show with 5 hours of material, it can sometimes get dicey. It's hard to cite all of your sources and doing so at every turn can take away from the quality of the broadcast but that reality doesn't apply to scrubbing a website from videos. Such things appear on the screen and do not detract from the broadcast if left alone. It actually takes more work to scrub the logo than to leave it alone.

Here is Beck's response to the piece in the Daily Caller. Note he references the article as appearing on the USA Today blog, which likely picked up the DC article and ran it. Beck comes off looking small here for mocking those who just want credit for their work. In this segment, he's clearly attempting to smear those with a grievance by painting their charges as ridiculous. Note too that he very quickly says his staff didn't 'scrub' any videos. If they scrubbed a website logo from videos submitted by bloggers, Beck may have lied about that. Perhaps that's why he spent such little time talking about that charge.

Via Verum Serum:

Video: Joe Scarborough Channels Neville Chamberlain

I've been critical of Glenn Beck on many occasions but since the rise of protests in Egypt, he has been reporting the truth far more than anyone else with a significant audience. The truth is that the Muslim Brotherhood poses a grave threat to western civilization; leftwing groups will work alongside alleged Democratic uprisings in the arab world. The arab Muslim world has proven time and again that it will use leftwing agents to acquire power. Google, a far left organization, helped Wael Ghonim spearhead the revolution in Egypt, which has now all but fallen into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Meanwhile, Joe Scarborough over at MSNBC, once again demonstrates that he is unable to process ugly facts. Lines are being drawn again. Not so long ago, it was a line that divided conservatives and liberals. It is now a line that divides those willing to accept a dire reality and those who are not. Unfortunately, there is a significant bloc of supposed conservatives that has chosen the latter camp.

Scarborough is officially one of them.

Via The Blaze:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As early as 1933, Winston Churchill warned of the German threat. After Neville Chamberlain implemented a strategy of appeasement often borne of denial, he was disgraced and Churchill was installed as Prime Minister by King George VI on May 10, 1940 after Chamberlain's resignation. Like Chamberlain, Scarborough either doesn't understand or refuses to admit the stated goals of the Muslim Brotherhood, which ironically allied with Hitler in WWII.

That British moment that will forever live in infamy.

Ex-Muslim Brotherhood Activist: Glenn Beck is Right

Walid Shoebat knows the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood; he used to be one of them. He also once belonged to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and committed acts of terror before he converted the Christianity in 1993. In the wake of Glenn Beck's claims that the Brotherhood wants to see a global Islamic Caliphate emerge, he has received criticism from some unlikely - and uninformed - colleagues on the right.

Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard said the following about Beck's claims:

When Glenn Beck rants about the caliphate taking over the Middle East from Morocco to the Philippines, and lists (invents?) the connections between caliphate-promoters and the American left, he brings to mind no one so much as Robert Welch and the John Birch Society. He’s marginalizing himself, just as his predecessors did back in the early 1960s.

As smarmy as that excerpt from Kristol was, he later revealed how truly ignorant he is just two paragraphs later.

We needn’t remind our readers that the most famous of the 9/11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta, was an Egyptian, as is al Qaeda’s number two, Ayman al Zawahiri. The idea that democracy produces radical Islam is false: Whether in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian territories, or Egypt, it is the dictatorships that have promoted and abetted Islamic radicalism. (Hamas, lest we forget, established its tyranny in Gaza through nondemocratic means.) Nor is it in any way “realist” to suggest that backing Mubarak during this crisis would promote “stability.” To the contrary: The situation is growing more unstable because of Mubarak’s unwillingness to abdicate. Helping him cling to power now would only pour fuel on the revolutionary fire, and push the Egyptian people in a more anti-American direction.

First of all, the fact that al-Qaeda is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood is blatantly lost on Kristol is astounding but his implication that Atta was driven by America's support of Hosni Mubarak is off the charts ridiculous. Kristol has actually joined the hate-America crowd by insinuating that our support for Mubarak helped to create al Qaeda. For some reason, Kristol is either incapable or unwilling to face reality but it didn't stop with him.

National Review's Rich Lowry chimed in and joined hands with Kristol by saying the latter's 'shot' at Glenn Beck was 'well deserved.'

If Shoebat - someone who was once active inside the Muslim Brotherhood and speaks Arabic - is saying Beck is right, Kristol and Lowry better start re-thinking their established paradigms.

More Here.

Video: Chris Matthews Mocks Beck for Telling the Truth

The last time I saw Chris Matthews so sardonic was when he was visibly incredulous at the notion of doing a segment on the birthers. This video montage starts out with Matthews and Eugene Robinson playing a few clips of Glenn Beck saying that the socialist left and the Islamists are allies because both have a common enemy in Israel. Whether or not hatred for Israel makes them allies is of little consequence in this clip. Matthews and his guest are more interested in painting Beck as a kook for saying it than in looking at the actual facts. The closer you get to the truth with the left, the more they try to paint you as a nut.

The way Matthews reacts almost makes me want to give the birthers a second look. Anyway, the short exchange between Matthews and Robinson is followed by a montage of other clips which more than prove Beck's point.

Via The Blaze:

Video: Frances Fox Piven Answers Glenn Beck

This is further evidence that Glenn Beck is onto something - when the people he warns about are captured in their own words, saying anti-American things. In this case, it's Frances Fox Piven, who along with her husband in 1966, authored a paper that encouraged people to take down governments by flooding welfare rolls. The consequence would be the opportunity to implement new, socialist governments. To learn more about that paper, click HERE.

Recently, Piven has been captured in a series of audio and video recordings in which she advocates the same thing on a much grander scale, including calls for violent protests. It apparently got to the point that she felt she had to publicly defend herself. What better venue for her to do so than MSNBC.

Here is 4 minutes of lies followed by almost 30 seconds at the end when Piven goes speechless in mid-sentence. It's possible she was about to say something incriminating and didn't know how to spin it. In any case, it was very bizarre. That moment starts at the 4:08 mark.

Via The Blaze:

GEORGE SOROS: FOX & GLENN BECK COULD CAUSE A DICTATORSHIP

If there is one thing the left is good at, it's lying. If there's another, it's the use of projection - a psychological term that describes the act of ascribing to others traits, characteristics, or behaviors that the accuser actually possesses or engages in. This week, George Soros masterfully did just that when he said that Fox News, Glenn Beck, and the Tea Party are taking the United States down a road that will lead to a 'dictatorial democracy.'

Via Forbes:

Billionaire investor and philanthropist George Soros warned tonight in New York that the combination of Fox News, Glenn Beck, The Tea Party, and the ability of Americans to fantasize unrealistically about their political system might lead “this open society to be on the verge of some dictatorial democracy.”

Soros mentioned George Orwell’s novel, “1984″ as a possible precedent for the kind of fantasies being promulgated in our culture today. Orwell’s “1984″ satirized the Communist system of absolute control over society and politics that prevailed in the Soviet Union until 1990.

Soros was speaking extemporaneously in conversation with CNN newsman Fareed Zakaria at a International Crisis Center dinner that honored him at the Pierre Hotel.

Former President Bill Clinton, Lord Christopher Patten, Chancellor of Oxford University, hedge fund multibillionaire Paul Tudor Jones, all spoke eloquently about Soros contribution to global order.

Did you catch that part about Bill Clinton applauding Soros for his work toward global order? Aside from the fact that someone like that was actually elected president to two terms, doesn't it blow Soros' argument about Fox, Beck, and the Tea Party out of the water? Didn't Clinton give Soros kudos for being an advocate for the kind of state control that George Orwell warned about? Isn't that the same system that Soros referenced when demonizing his opponents? Conversely, those opponents reject the notion completely.

Considering that George Soros is the one who wants this reality more than anyone, what does it say about him that he accuses his opponents of wanting it?

It's called self-loathing, George.

h/t Weasel Zippers

Further into the Forbes piece written by Robert Lenzner, the author actually piled on to the attack by Soros on Glenn Beck specifically. Lenzner wrote:

Soros also characterized Fox newscaster Glenn Beck, who has been falsely vilifying Soros publicly, as a throwback to the wild and crazy radical elements that never before were given such a public pedestal to foment their hate.

Beck has been trying to stir up public hatred of Soros, suggesting that the investment genius and significant philanthropist was maliciously trying to take over the U.S. for his own purposes.

I had to read that twice myself to make sure he wasn't identifying those charges as having been levied by Soros. Nope, Lenzner made those accusations all by himself.

Beck responded to the Forbes piece on his television show:



h/t The Blaze

BECK AT HIS BEST: EXPOSING GEORGE SOROS

I don't always agree with Glenn Beck and think he's gotten away from his strength on occasion. That strength is peeling back the veneer of the left. Van Jones, Anita Dunn, etc. The latest series on George Soros is right in Beck's wheelhouse and he's hitting home run after home run.

As proof of that, take note of the times Beck makes reference to a threat he received from one of Soros' people - Beck explained that threat during part 1 of the series (second video below). Here is Beck explaining Soros' five-step plan to destroy America.



Here is Beck explaining how the "threat" from Soros was delivered. He explained this at the end of Part 1 in the series.



Click HERE to watch the entire Part 1 installment.

h/t Breitbart

WILL GLENN BECK TALK ABOUT FOUNDING FATHERS ON ISLAM

There is no one in the media who touts America's founding fathers more than Glenn Beck. Posters of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and Samuel Adams seem to follow him everywhere he goes. That leads me to wonder if he will ever dig in to what our founders thought of Islam. To this point, the subject of America's Islamic enemies is rarely broached by Beck. While he admirably fights the Big Government abuses, he rarely broaches the subject.

One of the times he did, albeit briefly, was on March 8, 2010. During this segment of his television show, he seemed to imply that Dutch MP Geert Wilders - a vehement critic of Islam - is a fascist. Though Beck doesn't overtly say that, the implication seems very clear.



Fast forward to September 10, 2010. Courtesy of an excellent article by Laura Rubenfeld at Pajamas Media, we learn quite a bit about what the founding fathers thought of Islam at the time:

Correspondence from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson on July 16, 1814, reveals John Adams’ true feelings about Islam: Adams states that Mohammed is “a military fanatic” who “denies that laws were made for him; he arrogates everything to himself by force of arms.”

John Adams did indeed own a Quran — the copy he owned contained the following in the preface:

This book is a long conference of God, the angels, and Mahomet, which that false prophet very grossly invented; sometimes he introduceth God, who speaketh to him, and teacheth him his law, then an angel, among the prophets, and frequently maketh God to speak in the plural. … Thou wilt wonder that such absurdities have infected the best part of the world, and wilt avouch, that the knowledge of what is contained in this book, will render that law contemptible …

How about Ben Franklin?

In a March 23, 1790, letter to the editor of the Federal Gazette [7], Ben Franklin wrote:

Nor can the Plundering of Infidels be in that sacred Book [the Quran] forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the World, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of Right as fast as they conquer it.

John Adams' son may have perhaps the most incendiary writings about Islam.

Read it all

TWO VIDEOS, TWO SIGNIFICANT GAFFES

In much the same way Jimmy Carter should thank Obama for seizing the mantle as worst American president ever, Obama should thank Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick and TIME Magazine editor Richard Stengel for besting his 'Joe the Plumber' moment about spreading the wealth around being 'good for everybody.' First up, Deval. WTKK radio in Boston aired a Q & A segment in which Patrick was asked for his thoughts about Glenn Beck's rally on the anniversary on MLK's 'I have a dream speech' on 8/28.

The quote? "It's a free country. I wish it weren't."

Via Hot Air



Now, move on over to Stengel who, on Morning Joe, was discussing the Israeli / Palestinian 'Peace' talks. When the topic of the Israeli wall came up, Stengel delivers this gem: "The sad truth" is that "the wall actually worked". Hmmm, so it's a bad thing that innocent Israeli civilians weren't blown to bits?

CLICK HERE for video.

h/t to RCP

VIDEO CONTRAST: BECK RALLY VS. OBAMA INAUGURATION

Wanna hint? No contest. First up, video from after Glenn Beck's 8/28 rally at the Lincoln Memorial. Take note of the condition of the mall. No one seen picking up trash, perhaps because the people who attended exercised personal responsibility for their own while respecting the venue? Contrast that with the video - at bottom - of the aftermath of the 2009 Obama inauguration. To be fair, the first video was shot near the WWII Memorial, which is not where most of the attendees were but there's still an obvious difference.

Not that it would matter all that much but it would kind of be the proverbial cherry on top if the clean-up crew at the inauguration were compensated with taxpayer dollars.

Via HapBlog:



Now compare....

GLENN BECK SERIES ON WEATHER UNDERGROUND - WHERE IS GRATHWOHL?

On balance, when it comes to television, Glenn Beck is doing far more than anyone else to expose the radical agenda of the left. No one else is willing to dig as deep as he does. O'Reilly still has the culture warriors and games with cards on popsicle sticks; Hannity is better but how much is Bob Beckel really adding to the discussion with his repeated appearances? Besides, Beckel appears more interested in looking at himself on the off-screen monitor than in actually contributing anything substantive. Greta has gotten better in the last year but Beck has separated himself from all of them.

Beck is on-target about 90%-95% of the time. This week, we're witnessing part of that 5%-10% I'm afraid, relative to his three part series on the Weather Underground. The foundation for his series, designed to shine a light on the plans of the radicals in and around the White House is the Weather Underground's manifesto, right here:

Weather[1]

The problem with this series so far - only two of the three parts have aired as of this writing - is that the one man Beck should have with him on the set but hasn't even been mentioned is the only man to successfully infiltrate the Weather Underground for the FBI, Larry Grathwohl. That said, I have it on good authority that Grathwohl has not been contacted to this point and it is highly unlikely that he will appear.

Beck's decision not to incorporate a live appearance by Grathwohl into this series is made all the more curious by the fact that we know Beck is well aware of Grathwohl; he aired the shocking two minute clip of him from 1982 back on June 10th of this year. Here is a video portion of that segment:



A subsequent appearance by Grathwohl never came, though I know he would be willing to make that appearance.

The intent of this series is obviously to take viewers inside the motives of Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Jeff Jones, and Mark Rudd. What did they have planned? What were they like when they were being themselves? What things did they say before they had been "made clean", as Beck likes to say, so they would appear upstanding? With the manifesto in his hands, Beck has a window into that world but Grathwohl was INSIDE that world; no one else shares his experience. Why on earth would Beck not have him on the set LIVE as an integral part of this series?

There are, no doubt, aspects of that manifesto that Beck either might get wrong or not explain completely enough. Grathwohl can do that too.

As a last bone of contention for me, Beck held up a copy of the Weather Underground's book, "Prairie Fire" for the audience to see and no one can sell books better than Glenn Beck. I'm sure he sold quite a few of them by displaying it and discussing it for his audience. Bill Ayers is quite the wealthy terrorist these days and I'm sure he loved the plug. On the other hand, Grathwohl has a book too - though you'd never know it. Beck never mentioned it.

Grathwohl is the hero and Ayers is the villain. Why wouldn't Beck hold up Grathwohl's book for the audience to see? Why wouldn't he place him in a chair on the set for the audience to see and hear?

Here is the full two minute clip of Grathwohl in 1982.

VIDEO: GLENN BECK'S DEFENSE OF SHIRLEY SHERROD

I must say, this is one of those moments when Glenn Beck shines. On July 19th, a two and a half minute video clip of then Georgia Director of Rural Development, Shirley Sherrod, surfaced on the internet. In it, she is speaking at an NAACP Awards Banquet last March and relays a story about how she didn't help a white farmer as much as she could have because of his skin color. Within hours of the video going viral, Sherrod was forced to resign her position within the USDA.

It appeared to many - myself included - that this was an open and shut case of racism. But was it? Sherrod went on CNN and explained how she was relating a twenty year old story that helped open her eyes and see things differently. Bolstering her claim was the fact that the wife of the farmer she is seen discussing in the speech publicly supports her for having helped them.

Interestingly, the NAACP, which originally supported the decision to force Sherrod out, issued a statement in the wake of these new revelations saying they were "snookered" by Andrew Breitbart and Fox News. Rather than accepting responsibility or admitting a mistake was made, the NAACP blames others for jumping to conclusions itself. It's just simply too difficult for leftwing bodies to admit making mistakes or being wrong.

A very interesting dynamic may be at work here. A black woman is rejected by a black organization and publicly shamed but the two people who most come to her defense are Glenn Beck - the left's most despised personality on Fox - and the white farmer's wife.

One last thing before watching this video segment with Beck. Regardless of Sherrod's innocence or guilt, based on its own standards set forth in the NAACP resolution, calling the Tea Party movement racist, the NAACP should have to answer for the crowd's apparent audible support of Sherrod's tale of discrimination before they knew it was a tale of enlightenment.



h/t to Hot Air

VIDEOS: BLACK PANTHER LEADER VS. GLENN BECK

New Black Panther Party (NBPP) leader Malik Zulu Shabazz apparently doesn't think much of the first amendment. There's a shocker, right? On August 28th, Glenn Beck will be at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. on the anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. This Shabazz - not to be confused with NBPP's Philadelphia "cracker" hater, King Samir Shabazz - doesn't think Beck should be allowed to hold his rally.

It would also appear that Shabazz is exhorting his fellow Black Panthers to show up to look for trouble. Via MediaIte, here is an interview with Malik about the upcoming event. He thinks Beck is a "neo racist" and a "sneaky little devil". Shabazz suspects a conspiracy at Fox to keep him off the air. We'll see about that soon enough.

Just out of curiosity, who do you think Obama's pulling for in this one?



Here is another video of Malik, this time on Russian TV. It's a longer interview but worth the watch. He also refers to Beck's event at the end.

Via Breitbart

FINALLY! SOMEONE UNCOVERS LARRY GRATHWOHL

As I was traveling on I20 late Thursday night, I caught the audio of this episode of Glenn Beck on Sirius. As I heard him refer to Larry Grathwohl and then play the two minute video clip from 1982 of the only man to successfully infiltrate the Weather Underground, a Bruce Willis line from 'Die Hard' came to mind:

"WELCOME TO THE PARTY, PAL!"

Don't get me wrong. I'm thrilled that Glenn Beck discovered this video of Grathwohol. However, it was making the rounds on the internet before the 2008 elections. In fact, a link to the video was presented to Bill O'Reilly's producers. Though O'Reilly proceeded to interview Grathwohl in October of 2008, he never once asked Grathwohl about the shocking claims he made on the 1982 video. Instead, it was the usual questions about Bill Ayers being an unrepentant terrorist.

I have one question for Bill O'Reilly. Why didn't you uncover then what Beck is uncovering now? The photo of Grathwohl that Beck uses at the beginning of this clip is a still shot of Grathwohl's appearance on O'Reilly before the 2008 election. It was quite uneventful not because Grathwohl had nothing to offer but because O'Reilly avoided an extremely important story.

Better late than never, I guess...

GEERT WILDERS STANDING ALONE IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL

Sorry for two consecutive posts involving Glenn Beck but it couldn't be helped. To Beck's credit, he has been very outspoken in support of Israel defending itself against the flotilla of thugs that attempted to break Israel's blockade. A prominent politician in Europe - Geert Wilders - has been alone in his support of Israel within the political leadership of the Netherlands. This is significant because Glenn Beck implied back in March that Wilders might be put in power by fascists.

As I wrote at the time, Beck - for all the good he does - was very unfair to Wilders. Dutch News is now reporting that Wilders is not only an outspoken supporter of Israel's handling of the flotilla but that he's alone in doing so:

MPs from across the political spectrum, even those traditionally supportive of Israel, have said they were shocked by Israel's actions.

'Everything points to the fact that it is not right what Israel has done,' the Volkskrant reports VVD MP Atzo Nicolai as saying. Unless Israel comes up with a convincing story, an international inquiry will be unavoidable, he said.

However, PVV MP Geert Wilders said it is 'cheap' to attack Israel. 'I am certainly not going to make a cheap attack on Israel by howling in the woods with the rest of the wolves,' he told tv show Nova.

Israel was fully justified in entering the ships to see if they were also carrying weapons, he said.

The foreign affairs minister went so far as to say he wants the Israeli ambassador to appear in The Hague to answer questions.

Again, Beck does far more good than anyone else in television these days but when he's wrong, he should be corrected. Given his position on Israel lately, it is time for him to stand with Geert Wilders. To refresh your memory, here is Beck talking about Wilders back in March.