Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally will not be political (& other Tea Party nonsense)

The BBQ Pit
1

At least, that’s what the AP is reporting. It seems that there’s some people who may take issue with Mr. Beck’s choice of place and time for his rally: the 47th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s “I Have A Dream” speech at the same Lincoln Memorial.

Mr. Beck then offers this further commentary:

bolding mine

What the fuck is he talking about? Reclaim the civil rights movement? From whom, and when did Glenn Beck have anything to do with it that he’s “reclaiming” it? Is he reclaiming it the same way that Strom Thurmond or David Duke would reclaim it? WTF?

To “prove” that this is not a political event, it seems that organizers have asked people to leave their classy signs at home “as they may deter from the peaceful message we are bringing to Washington.” Huh? What message is that, exactly? That Obama is a racist and that he and his supporters hate America?

Ignore the disconnect between saying Obama has “a deep-seated hatred for white people” and then immediately saying “I’m not saying he doesn’t like white people.” Yes, you did. Right there, where you said he had a “deep-seated hatred for white people”. That’s exactly the same as saying that he “doesn’t like white people”. But never mind Mr. Beck’s projecting his own prejudices and fears.

What does that say about the Tea Party movement and the people involved, that they have to be so controlled?

Which might have been a smarter move for the Tea Party types, but it’s not exactly what is happening.
Anyway, as I read that article, I’m struck by how completely disingenuous Beck comes across regarding his rally, and I suspect that at the end of it all, there will have been plenty of Tea Party idiots with their classy signs, that the rhetoric onstage will include plenty of political speech, i.e. “let’s get rid of these Democrats and get some real 'Mericans in office, take back our country, blah blah blah, etc., etc.” I don’t think for a second that this characterization of the purpose of the rally will prove to be anything other than a lie and a cover for the highly partisan, divisive activities and rhetoric that I believe will be led from the stage.

Does anyone here think that this rally will be as presented: a non-partisan, peaceful rally to celebrate American values?

Or is this all a pack of lies and the whole thing is a not-so-subtle way to tweak civil rights supporters (some 40 years after the fact) and the left in general by holding their rally on the same day and same place as MLK, Jr. did 47 years ago?

And as a longer, more far-reaching subject for debate: at what point will the provocations of the Tea Party finally combust, and who will be on the receiving end of the flame?

2

Not in the least

Most certainly.

Glenn Beck is a fucking scumbag. But as much as I detest him, he does have a right to be there. And the best thing the NAACP can do in this case is ignore him and book the place way in advance for the 50th anniversary of MLK’s speech. Otherwise they’re just drawing attention to him (and this is a guy who thrives on controversy) and giving his supporters another excuse to play the victim card (which they have done all too often recently with relish). And don’t think for a second that he won’t use this type of opposition as an opportunity to cast himself as a defender of the First Amendent and fighter of liberal “racism.”

3

Oh, it’ll be reasonably peaceful, of that I’m sure, and frankly, I expect it to be a pretty much a non-event. Non-partisan (or really, as the OP stated first, non-political), though? Of course not. How can rhetoric about ‘reclaming the civil rights movement’ be non-political?

This has been discussed in great detail in the press over the past few days. Either Mr. Beck is ignorant of American history, and utterly tone-deaf when it comes to the meaning and objectives of the civil rights movement, or he’s a self-aggrandizing douchebag tryiing to co-opt a significant date to draw attention to himself. Hey, actually, maybe he’s both.

4

He has a right to do this.

But doing it is tone-deaf and insensitive.

5

I’d say it’s probably more of the latter.

6

He’s probably trying to win back the far right. With his recent comments that gay marriage isn’t a big deal, groups like the AFA have described him as a defector in the “culture wars”. (along with Ann Coulter for speaking at a gay convention)

7

To the tea baggers - please, when you are in DC, don’t come stay in Alexandria. If you do (and I guess the hotels could do with the money) please don’t come drink in my bar like you did last time.

And if you do, please don’t act all surprised when you aren’t welcomed as returning heros. Or when you get told to shut the fuck up. It’s not that we don’t want people criticizing Obama or the Democrats, it’s that calling him a chimp or Muslim or worse doesn’t really count as rational criticism, and our pretty happy diverse community doesn’t appreciate racism and homophobia.

8

I’m sort of speechless. Glenn Beck, a fear mongerer has put the fear for America in me. This whole “restore honour” theme can only suggest that his political opponents have no honour. Like Obama who “is a deep seated racist”. If your opponent has no honour he becomes expendable.

This will come out as a major political event with lots of news coverage galvanizing all the quiet bigots and polarizing the country even more. It could lead to a political revolution, setting back all the progress made on civil rights, gay rights, etc.

I dare not say it, but the idea of Hitler comes to mind.

9

So where do you suggest that they go to drink after the rally? Anacostia?

10

:smiley:

Sounds like a good idea to me.

11

Typical right wing stuff - pushing an agenda by wrapping oneself in the warm, cozy “honoring the troops” flag. I must say, I give him double points for ingenuity by working the civil rights thing in there. “I’m honoring Dr. King!”

The comments of Benjamin Todd Jealous and Al Sharpton quoted in the article seem very carefully measured to me. I’m a little surprised by their restraint.

12

Agreed. Though I don’t see anyone saying(or even implying) he doesn’t have the right to do it, only that he’s being distasteful.

13

Has there ever been an instance – ever – where the invocation of “honor” in politics or a public forum was not a bad sign?

14

My reading is that the whole “non-political” thingy is first and foremost about the rules: if this is a political rally of the “Vote for Throckmorton!” variety, the rules and expenses are a lot different. As for signage, thats a pretty clever ploy for an idiot, he wants to avoid two embarrassments: one, that the signs may reveal the ugly racism that infects some of his fans. and two, the hand-lettered, ham-fisted and misspelled signs that reveal that the bearer of said sign is a knuckle-walking Ricky Retardo who enthusiastically supports Mr. Beck.

Thirteen of Mr Beck’s fifteen minutes are gone.

15

Obviously, when he talks of reclaiming the civil rights movement, he means taking it back from those uppity coloreds.

16

It’s my civil right to send people to the back of the bus.

17

I know Big Baby Beck’s ratings were sliding pretty badly a few months ago. How’re they doing now?

-Joe

18

Well, that’s what many of us were saying about the Ground Zero Mosque, right? I know that was my general take on the situation.

19

When did you start saying that, Moto? Been in the works for some time now, when did you first alert us to your concerns?

20

Sure, but the people saying the Ground Zero mosque is distasteful are wrong. That position is based on ignorance.

On the other hand, people who think it’s distasteful for Glenn Beck to co-opt the memory of Martin Luther King, especially in light of his somewhat antiquated views on race relations, are correct.