Shameful wars, words, wars of words, wars because of words

February 22, 2009 · Posted in Economy, media · 1 Comment 

Gobsmacked. Astonished, even. How can people who claim to be educated not understand a simple concept: What you say carries weight? It matters.

Words can be used to inspire, uplift, discourage, denigrate. They affect markets and moods. Not saying or responding is as powerful as shaking your fist at someone, but ultimately it takes words to create culture wars, wars between nations, wars between people, misunderstandings and missed connections. (This isn’t news to anyone. I just felt the need to say it. Again.)

This week brought a stunning array of some of the most irresponsible use of words I’ve seen in a very long time.

Let’s begin with Rick Santelli over at CNBC. I have long held the opinion that CNBC wields far too much power with regard to how it reports financial news and how that news is received. Watch this week’s Frontline on the financial crisis. CNBC’s participation in the way it happened and the way it was shaped for the viewing public is striking. I don’t think anyone can come away from that report without understanding that part of what ails financial markets can be laid at the feet of CNBC. They are an out of control freight train with no competition to stop them. They need some. Desperately.

Which brings me to Santelli’s rant last Wednesday. Before President Obama had even outlined his plan for people facing foreclosure, Santelli, and other CNBC “hosts” were talking it down. Keep in mind, these are the same people who talked UP the bailout for banks and Wall Street back in October, assuring the public that only a Federal bailout of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and IDG would save us all from ruin.

Here is Santelli in all of his glory:

Do we all feel righteous now, after watching that? Wanna go get some tea and toss it in Boston Harbor? Here are some reasons why you shouldn’t, courtesy of Twitter friend roadkillrefugee. (Hint: Santelli forgot a few key facts and protocols…)

  1. Santelli/CNBC never mentions that GE was recipient of $139 B from taxpayers to bailout out its own incompetent management.
  2. Santelli/CNBC not outraged GE’s CEO was offered bonus after horrible stewardship of GE. Yes, he declined, but can’t decline w/o an offer…
  3. What was GE’s Board/Comp Comm thinking when it decided to give Immelt a bonus with taxpayer dollars?
  4. CNBC is following FNC (Fox News) model of adopting an ideological editorial identity. To compete with FBC, it’s feigning Joe Stock Trader populism
  5. CNBC uncritically enables the poor governance practices, deregulation and corruption that have fed Wall Street insiders
  6. Right now, CNBC is not reporting on Wall Street, it’s cheerleading for Wall Street

In case it didn’t quite sink in, I’m going to repeat it. CNBC’s parent company, GE, was the beneficiary of $139 BILLION in the first bailout, and Rick Santelli has the NERVE — the GALL — to complain about a total foreclosure package of $75 Billion, putting the dog whistle for the reactionaries with the term “moral hazard“.

And finally, this: Santelli was proclaiming the health and soundness of the economy right alongside John McCain last September.

Words in September and February, carelessly used, amplified by the studio hosts and magnified. They do harm.

While there’s no question that we’re in a crisis right now, the most immediate crisis is one of trust and confidence. Period. So when the most powerful voices dog whistle the right-wing reactionaries with loaded words like “moral hazard” and oblique references to communism, what they say matters to people poised to receive those messages.

Like Rush Limbaugh. And Alan Keyes.

Ordinarily I wouldn’t quote them, much less mention them. But what they are doing is so dangerous, so utterly immoral, that I can’t let it pass.

Since President Obama’s inauguration, Limbaugh has repeatedly expressed the hope that his presidency will fail, a repugnant and unpatriotic hope that would mean we all will fail. But last week, he put this call out: “They” must be STOPPED. And this, in the context of telling a listener that understanding a Democrat is like trying to understand a murderer or rapist.

And that pushes the Republicans one step closer to the slime bucket, poised at the edge so Alan Keyes can push them the rest of the way in. Alan Keyes’ commentary was so incredibly loaded with vitriol and hate it was nearly impossible to sit through the whole thing. But be aware: what Keyes said on Friday hovers dangerously close to shouting “Fire” in a crowded theater.

In the span of about five minutes, Keyes says our President is an “abomination”, that “we have to stop him” or the US will cease to exist. He dredges up the old canard (proven false over and over and over) that President Obama was not born in the US, and suggests that the military not obey his commands because he is not a legitimate President.

Even though Keyes is a nutjob, he’s not alone. What’s most chilling about his words is the violence they contain. Keyes and Limbaugh are spouting a to-do list, using their public figure status as a bully pulpit to put out a call within the sound of their voice to do, feel, and act violently. They offer the reassurance that there is some sort of entitlement to this, because they are being violated by the nasty Democrats in power.

It’s pure bullshit. Any rational thinker knows that. But the problem is, they have a wide-ranging amplifier, and in the case of CNBC, that amplifier is partially funded by taxpayer bailout funds. They are using their voices and their words to summon the troops to violence.

This is a disturbing trend. It is one thing to have legitimate political and policy disagreements, and entirely another to lie to people with the sole intention of fomenting unrest and violence.

God help us all if they succeed. That would be an abomination.

We teach our children to use their words, and to use them wisely. Yet, these men are proving that some people don’t listen to their mothers. Or learn the most basic lessons of fruitful and adequate discourse. They should learn. Or have their amplifiers turned off.

I didn’t mention the New York Post cartoon…but it all falls into what I view as a concerted effort to push racism, hate and violence into the public dialogue.

(Thanks again, @roadkillrefugee, for the inspiration. Visit his blog)

Also, if you needed any evidence that whackos will behave violently when spurred by hate speech, read this.

Sphere: Related Content

Clinton Flip-Flops on Assassination Analogies

May 23, 2008 · Posted in Election 2008 · Comments Off 

Back in January, before the New Hampshire Primary, Senator Clinton was introduced at a campaign event with the following words:

“Some people compare one of the other candidates to John F. Kennedy. But he was assassinated. And Lyndon Baines Johnson was the one who actually” passed the civil rights legislation.

When the press pushed back on that comment, a campaign spokesman said:

“We were not aware that this person was going to make those comments and disapprove of them completely. They were totally inappropriate.”

I guess she was against assassination analogies before she decided to incorporate them into her campaign rhetoric.

Is there nothing that she can’t rationalize?

Sphere: Related Content