October, 28 2010, 02:20pm EDT
Palin Reacts to David Brock
After Media Matters' CEO asks her to repudiate Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin says "I stand with you, Glenn"
WASHINGTON
Today, after Media Matters founder and CEO David Brock said that he would "call Sarah Palin" and "make a personal plea to her" to stand above partisanship and repudiate Glenn Beck's rhetoric, Palin responded on Beck's radio show, saying: "I stand with you, Glenn."
Brock released the following statement in response:
"On Tuesday, I asked Sarah Palin to use her influential voice to stop attempted incidents of domestic terrorism incited by right-wing extremists like Glenn Beck. By telling Beck, 'I stand with you,' Palin -- Fox News' star contributor -- now associates herself with acts of violence and the insane conspiracy theories and hate speech behind them.
Rather than seize the opportunity to act in the national interest and do her part to prevent a major tragedy like the Oklahoma City bombing, Palin called into Beck's show to call me 'pathetic.' While Palin and I don't agree on much, I honestly believed we shared the view that the incitement to violence by a powerful media outlet was a national crisis that transcends the partisan divide. Sadly, I was wrong."
People For the American Way president Michael B. Keegan, who joined Brock in asking Palin to repudiate Beck, said:
"For someone who was so quick to smear Obama for 'palling around with terrorists,' Sarah Palin doesn't seem to take threats of violence too seriously when they're generated by her own pals and allies. Even the last few days have seen disturbing thuggery in states around the country. This shouldn't be a partisan issue. Democrats, Republicans, independents and even tea party members should be able to agree that inciting listeners to violence isn't acceptable. It's profoundly disappointing that someone laying the groundwork to run for president doesn't agree with that."
BACKGROUND:
Journalist John Hamilton recently documented that the gunman who plotted the assassination of leaders at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU said he saw Fox News' Glenn Beck as "a schoolteacher" and that "it was the things [Beck] exposed that blew my mind." Indeed, the gunman, Byron Williams, was driven by belief in conspiracy theories that have been pushed by Beck. As Brock and Keeganwrote in their Huffington Post piece: "For hours every day on radio and television, Beck pits American against American, telling his audience that our country is under attack by a demonic Nazi-like regime seeking to destroy all that is great about America... while insisting it's up to his viewers to resist and revolt."
In response, the Tides Foundation, along with Media Matters and People For the American Way, has called for an advertiser boycott of Fox News.
After Brock's appearance on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, where he said he would "call Sarah Palin" and "make a personal plea to stop this insanity," Beck spoke with Palin on his radio show and asked if she would respond:
BECK: We have Sarah Palin coming on in just a few minutes, just to respond to the gauntlet thrown down by Media Matters on I think a cable access program last night. And it is an amazing thing because this is somebody taking care of you and having to protect you every step of the way.
Of course you can't, you're not smart enough to figure things out on your own. So George Soros, and Media Matters, and the Tides Foundation, and all of them are here to help you. Because you're a danger. You're a danger to the country. Bring Sarah up. Is Sarah on the phone? Hi, Sarah, how are you?
PALIN: Hey, good morning, Glenn. How are you?
BECK: Good, where are you?
PALIN: I am at my kitchen table in Wasilla.
BECK: I don't know how you travel. I mean, it's crazy the amount of travel that you do.
PALIN: How do I travel, yes. Airplanes.
BECK: Okay, I don't think you need-- Okay, really. All of a sudden, Bill Maher, talking down to me. Okay. Sarah, I want you to hear this. This is the head of Media Matters, and I just -- I want to give you the opportunity to distance yourself. Here it is. No, here it is.
[BEGIN AUDIO CLIP]
BROCK: Basically, Beck, Beck's a radical. He either can't or won't control himself, even after he loses a hundred advertisers, so you can't go there. Murdoch was asked at a shareholder's conference a couple weeks ago about Beck, shareholder concerns about Beck, he said he doesn't agree with everything that goes on the Fox News Channel, but he's standing with Beck. Ailes recruited Beck to do this. He's standing with Beck.
So that leaves you with sponsors. So People For [the American Way] has backed up a Tides Foundation call with Media Matters called Drop Fox to ask for advertisers to take responsibility for this rhetoric. I was recently told by a member of the Murdoch family that if you could effect the bottom line, you might get attention by the News Corp. board.
But the truth is, we can't wait for that, so Sarah Palin, right now, in our view, needs to step up. She needs to step up because she's a leader of the Republican Party, of the conservative movement, she's a Tea Party favorite. She is the one person in this country, right now, today, who in the national interest, just in the moment, to put partisanship aside, could pull this country back from the precipice of another Oklahoma City. And that's what a real leader does, that's what we're asking.
[END AUDIO CLIP]
BECK: Sarah? As the leader now, of the GOP, as a Tea Party favorite, as somebody that they don't always agree with, but they respect, as a real leader: It's time. It's time to make choice.
PALIN: Well these silly and ironic men. This is ironic, that they're the same folks that are insisting that, you know, that I should be ignored because I am the irrelevant hockey mom--
[CROSSTALK]
BECK: No, no, no, no, no, you are, as an American citizen, for the national interest, you are the only one that can do this.
GRAY: That can stop him.
BECK: That can stop me.
GRAY: You've got to stop him, Sarah.
PALIN: Okay, okay, so Glenn. From my kitchen table in Wasilla, here's the deal.
BECK: Yeah.
PALIN: Now, we know, Glenn, you're up against one of the richest and self-suggested most powerful men in the world--
BECK: Spooky dude.
PALIN: George Soros, right?
BECK: Spooky dude.
PALIN: Yeah. The extreme left-wing king is, with many, many minions, that's what he is.
BECK: Yes.
PALIN: So, you know, when I speak of your love of our Founding Fathers, and how you are helping to educate Americans about respecting our nation's history so that we don't lose what makes America exceptional, and the far, far left mouthpieces, they're twisting and perverting that message. No, what I do, I go back to what Abraham Lincoln said about standing with anybody who stands right. You stand with him when he stands right, you part with him when he goes wrong. I stand with you Glenn.
BECK: No, no, you've got to stop. You're the only one. You're like Obi-Wan Kenobi. Sarah Palin, you're our only hope.
PALIN: Yeah.
BECK: Did you ever think you'd see the day, Sarah, when Media Matters would be calling you the only hope for America? I mean, that's incredible. It's sad. We were deciding-- We were trying to decide if it was laughable or kind of sad, pathetic, kind of like that smelly kid in third grade that everyone looked around and looked at and went, "That's kind of sad."
PALIN: Yeah, it's a little bit of both, I think. I see more humor it in though, and it shows, though, how pathetic their argument is that they would be that desperate as to reach out to me to say, you know, that you need to stop Glenn Beck, you know, you need to stop what they perceive as incitement to violence. Glenn, you know I abhor violence. I know you do. Hating war, hating civil war, and praying for peace, and wanting peace and freedom for our kids in a civil society. That is the mission here, is explaining to Americans what the threats are to our peace and to our opportunities and to our freedoms in America.
BECK: Yeah.
PALIN: That is what I see you doing, and that is why I support what you are doing.
BECK: Sarah, I can't tell you how disappointed I am in you. I really - I thought you were going to take this moment to lead. I really did. But now, now Sarah -- and I want you to understand this -- now Media Matters is going to come out against you and they're not going to like you anymore. They like you so much, but now they're going to have to isolate you too. Oh boy.
PALIN: Yeah because here's the [inaudible] They were on my side.
BECK: They've been on your side. It's like the -- it's like that abortion doctor said on TV the other day. Women only have abortions because they care about motherhood. They're only destroying you or trying to destroy you because they love you so much.
PALIN: There we go with the Orwellian -- up is down, twisted around
BECK: Two plus two equals six.
PALIN: There you go and I'm the idiot. Yeah.
GRAY: Sarah, if you change your mind, we have David Brock's number over at Media Matters. He's waiting for phone call -
BECK: He doesn't have a lot to do.
From Brock's October 26 appearance on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell:
LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: Violence is an unfortunate theme in the history of our politics. And now, "Media Matters" is reporting that there`s a link between a man arrested for firing on police in California in July, who`s admitted to plotting the assassination of leaders at the American Civil Liberties Union and the rhetoric of Glenn Beck.
Now, the founder of "Media Matters," David Brock, along with Michael Keegan, president of People for the American Way, are calling on Sarah Palin, who`s been a huge supporter of Glenn Beck, to refudiate the FOX News host, to use one of Palin`s invented words.
Joining me now is David Brock, the founder of "Media Matters for America."
David, can you explain this connection between a contemplated assassination plot and Glenn Beck`s rhetoric?
DAVID BROCK, FOUNDER & CEO, MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: Sure, yes. I mean, the concerns that we raised in the op-ed that you cited today, one, Glenn Beck incited an attempted assassination plot against innocent employees of the Tides Foundation in San Francisco.
But that`s not all. There`s a history here as Ilyse said -- he has attempted to poison in effigy Nancy Pelosi on his set. That led to a death threat by a guy in San Francisco who threatened to burn her house down. That guy`s mother said he gets all his ideas from FOX News.
And let me give you a personal one. Dick Morris is on the air every night on FOX News raising money for his political activities. One of his consultants after "Media Matters" fact-checked one of their ads and found it false tweeted that our staff should be curb-stomped. OK?
So, there`s a whole pattern here what`s going on. And I think the question is what to do about it.
So, I think there -- this is how we get to Sarah Palin. Basically Beck, Beck`s erratic, he either won`t or can`t control himself even after he loses a hundred advertisers, so you can`t go there.
Murdoch was asked at a shareholder`s conference a couple of weeks ago about Beck, shareholder concerns about Beck -- he said he doesn`t agree with everything that goes on on the FOX News Channel, but he`s standing with Beck.
Ailes recruited Beck to do this. So, he`s standing with Beck.
That leaves you with sponsors. So, PFAW has backed up a Tides Foundation call with "Media Matters" called Drop FOX to ask for advertisers to take responsibility for this rhetoric.
I was recently told by a member of the Murdoch family that if you could affect the bottom line, you might get attention by the News Corp board. But the truth is, we can`t wait for that.
So, Sarah Palin, right now, in our view, needs to step up. She needs to step up because she`s a leader of the Republican Party, of the conservative movement. She`s a Tea Party favorite. She is the one person in this country right now, today, who in the national interest, just in the moment to put partisanship aside, could pull this country back from the precipice of another Oklahoma City. And that`s what a real leader does, that`s what we`re asking.
As you know, you know, Bill Buckley, back in the `60s, divorced the conservative movement from the John Birch Society, and called it idiocy and paranoia. So, there`s precedent for this.
And Sarah Palin is a leader. We`re now going to find out what kind of leader, what she`s made of, and whether she`s going to do it. And I`m telling you, we`re going to find out.
We published this piece this morning. We heard nothing today. I hope she`s watching the show tonight.
If we hear nothing in the morning, I am personally going to call Sarah Palin. I`m going to ask Michael Keegan of PFAW to join me on that call and we`re going to make a personal plea to her to stop this insanity. It has got to stop, as Ilyse just said.
O'DONNELL: David, what you just laid out sounds to me like an absolutely brilliant political strategy, political posture for Sarah Palin to adopt at this moment in this kind of atmosphere. She would get so much credit for a move like that without, I think, costing her anything from her right wing base.
BROCK: I think that`s right. Now, you know, she`s a FOX News contributor star. She`s perfectly positioned. She`s joined at the hip with Glenn Beck.
We know she`s done a few tweets, right, about resisting and reloading and all of that. But, you know -- now, words have consequences, as Peter King, a Republican, had the guts to say last week. So, she`s on notice. And she needs to do the right thing.
O'DONNELL: David Brock, I think you`ve offered her a brilliant strategy. It`s almost -- it`s something of a political intelligence test and we`ll find out in a couple of days --
BROCK: We`re going to find out.
O'DONNELL: -- just how far she is going forward if she`s going to be a candidate.
David Brock of "Media Matters" -- thank you very much for joining us tonight.
BROCK: Thanks very much for having me.
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
LATEST NEWS
Critics Blast 'Reckless and Impossible' Bid to Start Operating Mountain Valley Pipeline
"The time to build more dirty and dangerous pipelines is over," said one environmental campaigner.
Apr 23, 2024
Environmental defenders on Tuesday ripped the company behind the Mountain Valley Pipeline for asking the federal government—on Earth Day—for permission to start sending methane gas through the 303-mile conduit despite a worsening climate emergency caused largely by burning fossil fuels.
Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC sent a letter Monday to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Acting Secretary Debbie-Anne Reese seeking final permission to begin operation on the MVP next month, even while acknowledging that much of the Virginia portion of the pipeline route remains unfinished and developers have yet to fully comply with safety requirements.
"In a manner typical of its ongoing disrespect for the environment, Mountain Valley Pipeline marked Earth Day by asking FERC for authorization to place its dangerous, unnecessary pipeline into service in late May," said Jessica Sims, the Virginia field coordinator for Appalachian Voices.
"MVP brazenly asks for this authorization while simultaneously notifying FERC that the company has completed less than two-thirds of the project to final restoration and with the mere promise that it will notify the commission when it fully complies with the requirements of a consent decree it entered into with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration last fall," she continued.
"Requesting an in-service decision by May 23 leaves the company very little time to implement the safety measures required by its agreement with PHMSA," Sims added. "There is no rush, other than to satisfy MVP's capacity customers' contracts—a situation of the company's own making. We remain deeply concerned about the construction methods and the safety of communities along the route of MVP."
Russell Chisholm, co-director of the Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights (POWHR) Coalition—which called MVP's request "reckless and impossible"—said in a statement that "we are watching our worst nightmare unfold in real-time: The reckless MVP is barreling towards completion."
"During construction, MVP has contaminated our water sources, destroyed our streams, and split the earth beneath our homes. Now they want to run methane gas through their degraded pipes and shoddy work," Chisholm added. "The MVP is a glaring human rights violation that is indicative of the widespread failures of our government to act on the climate crisis in service of the fossil fuel industry."
POWHR and activists representing frontline communities affected by the pipeline are set to take part in a May 8 demonstration outside project financier Bank of America's headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Appalachian Voices noted that MVP's request comes days before pipeline developer Equitrans Midstream is set to release its 2024 first-quarter earnings information on April 30.
MVP is set to traverse much of Virginia and West Virginia, with the Southgate extension running into North Carolina. Outgoing U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and other pipeline proponents fought to include expedited construction of the project in the debt ceiling deal negotiated between President Joe Biden and congressional Republicans last year.
On Monday, climate and environmental defenders also petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, challenging FERC's approval of the MVP's planned Southgate extension, contending that the project is so different from original plans that the government's previous assent is now irrelevant.
"Federal, state, and local elected officials have spoken out against this unneeded proposal to ship more methane gas into North Carolina," said Sierra Club senior field organizer Caroline Hansley. "The time to build more dirty and dangerous pipelines is over. After MVP Southgate requested a time extension for a project that it no longer plans to construct, it should be sent back to the drawing board for this newly proposed project."
David Sligh, conservation director at Wild Virginia, said: "Approving the Southgate project is irresponsible. This project will pose the same kinds of threats of damage to the environment and the people along its path as we have seen caused by the Mountain Valley Pipeline during the last six years."
"FERC has again failed to protect the public interest, instead favoring a profit-making corporation," Sligh added.
Others renewed warnings about the dangers MVP poses to wildlife.
"The endangered bats, fish, mussels, and plants in this boondoggle's path of destruction deserve to be protected from killing and habitat destruction by a project that never received proper approvals in the first place," Center for Biological Diversity attorney Perrin de Jong said. "Our organization will continue fighting this terrible idea to the bitter end."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Seismic Win for Workers': FTC Bans Noncompete Clauses
Advocates praised the FTC "for taking a strong stance against this egregious use of corporate power, thereby empowering workers to switch jobs and launch new ventures, and unlocking billions of dollars in worker earnings."
Apr 23, 2024
U.S. workers' rights advocates and groups celebrated on Tuesday after the Federal Trade Commission voted 3-2 along party lines to approve a ban on most noncompete clauses, which Democratic FTC Chair Lina Khansaid "keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism."
"The FTC's final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market," Khan added, pointing to the commission's estimates that the policy could mean another $524 for the average worker, over 8,500 new startups, and 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year.
As Economic Policy Institute (EPI) president Heidi Shierholz explained, "Noncompete agreements are employment provisions that ban workers at one company from working for, or starting, a competing business within a certain period of time after leaving a job."
"These agreements are ubiquitous," she noted, applauding the ban. "EPI research finds that more than 1 out of every 4 private-sector workers—including low-wage workers—are required to enter noncompete agreements as a condition of employment."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has suggested it plans to file a lawsuit that, as The American Prospectdetailed, "could more broadly threaten the rulemaking authority the FTC cited when proposing to ban noncompetes."
Already, the tax services and software provider Ryan has filed a legal challenge in federal court in Texas, arguing that the FTC is unconstitutionally structured.
Still, the Democratic commissioners' vote was still heralded as a "seismic win for workers." Echoing Khan's critiques of such noncompetes, Public Citizen executive vice president Lisa Gilbert declared that such clauses "inflict devastating harms on tens of millions of workers across the economy."
"The pervasive use of noncompete clauses limits worker mobility, drives down wages, keeps Americans from pursuing entrepreneurial dreams and creating new businesses, causes more concentrated markets, and keeps workers stuck in unsafe or hostile workplaces," she said. "Noncompete clauses are both an unfair method of competition and aggressively harmful to regular people. The FTC was right to tackle this issue and to finalize this strong rule."
Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, praised the FTC for "listening to the comments of thousands of entrepreneurs and workers of all income levels across industries" and finalizing a rule that "is a clear-cut win."
Demand Progress' Emily Peterson-Cassin similarly commended the commission "for taking a strong stance against this egregious use of corporate power, thereby empowering workers to switch jobs and launch new ventures, and unlocking billions of dollars in worker earnings."
While such agreements are common across various industries, Teófilo Reyes, chief of staff at the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, said that "many restaurant workers have been stuck at their job, earning as low as $2.13 per hour, because of the noncompete clause that they agreed to have in their contract."
"They didn't know that it would affect their wages and livelihood," Reyes stressed. "Most workers cannot negotiate their way out of a noncompete clause because noncompetes are buried in the fine print of employment contracts. A full third of noncompete clauses are presented after a worker has accepted a job."
Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) executive director Mike Pierce pointed out that the FTC on Tuesday "recognized the harmful role debt plays in the workplace, including the growing use of training repayment agreement provisions, or TRAPs, and took action to outlaw TRAPs and all other employer-driven debt that serve the same functions as noncompete agreements."
Sandeep Vaheesan, legal director at Open Markets Institute, highlighted that the addition came after his group, SBPC, and others submitted comments on the "significant gap" in the commission's initial January 2023 proposal, and also welcomed that "the final rule prohibits both conventional noncompete clauses and newfangled versions like TRAPs."
Jonathan Harris, a Loyola Marymount University law professor and SBPC senior fellow, said that "by also banning functional noncompetes, the rule stays one step ahead of employers who use 'stay-or-pay' contracts as workarounds to existing restrictions on traditional noncompetes. The FTC has decided to try to avoid a game of whack-a-mole with employers and their creative attorneys, which worker advocates will applaud."
Among those applauding was Jean Ross, president of National Nurses United, who said that "the new FTC rule will limit the ability of employers to use debt to lock nurses into unsafe jobs and will protect their role as patient advocates."
Angela Huffman, president of Farm Action, also cheered the effort to stop corporations from holding employees "hostage," saying that "this rule is a critical step for protecting our nation's workers and making labor markets fairer and more competitive."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Discriminatory' North Carolina Law Criminalizing Felon Voting Struck Down
One plaintiffs' attorney said the ruling "makes our democracy better and ensures that North Carolina is not able to unjustly criminalize innocent individuals with felony convictions who are valued members of our society."
Apr 23, 2024
Democracy defenders on Tuesday hailed a ruling from a U.S. federal judge striking down a 19th-century North Carolina law criminalizing people who vote while on parole, probation, or post-release supervision due to a felony conviction.
In Monday's decision, U.S. District Judge Loretta C. Biggs—an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama—sided with the North Carolina A. Philip Randolph Institute and Action NC, who argued that the 1877 law discriminated against Black people.
"The challenged statute was enacted with discriminatory intent, has not been cleansed of its discriminatory taint, and continues to disproportionately impact Black voters," Biggs wrote in her 25-page ruling.
Therefore, according to the judge, the 1877 law violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.
"We are ecstatic that the court found in our favor and struck down this racially discriminatory law that has been arbitrarily enforced over time," Action NC executive director Pat McCoy said in a statement. "We will now be able to help more people become civically engaged without fear of prosecution for innocent mistakes. Democracy truly won today!"
Voting rights tracker Democracy Docket noted that Monday's ruling "does not have any bearing on North Carolina's strict felony disenfranchisement law, which denies the right to vote for those with felony convictions who remain on probation, parole, or a suspended sentence—often leaving individuals without voting rights for many years after release from incarceration."
However, Mitchell Brown, an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, said that "Judge Biggs' decision will help ensure that voters who mistakenly think they are eligible to cast a ballot will not be criminalized for simply trying to reengage in the political process and perform their civic duty."
"It also makes our democracy better and ensures that North Carolina is not able to unjustly criminalize innocent individuals with felony convictions who are valued members of our society, specifically Black voters who were the target of this law," Brown added.
North Carolina officials have not said whether they will appeal Biggs' ruling. The state Department of Justice said it was reviewing the decision.
According to Forward Justice—a nonpartisan law, policy, and strategy center dedicated to advancing racial, social, and economic justice in the U.S. South, "Although Black people constitute 21% of the voting-age population in North Carolina, they represent 42% of the people disenfranchised while on probation, parole, or post-release supervision."
The group notes that in 44 North Carolina counties, "the disenfranchisement rate for Black people is more than three times the rate of the white population."
"Judge Biggs' decision will help ensure that voters who mistakenly think they are eligible to cast a ballot will not be criminalized for simply trying to re-engage in the political process and perform their civic duty."
In what one civil rights leader called "the largest expansion of voting rights in this state since the 1965 Voting Rights Act," a three-judge state court panel voted 2-1 in 2021 to restore voting rights to approximately 55,000 formerly incarcerated felons. The decision made North Carolina the only Southern state to automatically restore former felons' voting rights.
Republican state legislators appealed that ruling to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which in 2022 granted their request for a stay—but only temporarily, as the court allowed a previous injunction against any felony disenfranchisement based on fees or fines to stand.
However, last April the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed the three-judge panel decision, stripping voting rights from thousands of North Carolinians previously convicted of felonies. Dissenting Justice Anita Earls opined that "the majority's decision in this case will one day be repudiated on two grounds."
"First, because it seeks to justify the denial of a basic human right to citizens and thereby perpetuates a vestige of slavery, and second, because the majority violates a basic tenant of appellate review by ignoring the facts as found by the trial court and substituting its own," she wrote.
As similar battles play out in other states, Democratic U.S. lawmakers led by Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont in December introduced legislation to end former felon disenfranchisement in federal elections and guarantee incarcerated people the right to vote.
Currently, only Maine, Vermont, and the District of Columbia allow all incarcerated people to vote behind bars.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular