Skip to comments.Michael Medved - Flushing Out Fear Mongers from Their Fever Swamps (FR Mentioned)
Posted on 01/09/2007 8:27:45 AM PST by jmc813
Im greatly encouraged by the lengthy, indignant responses by prominent scare-mongers Joe Farah and Jerome Corsi to my on-air and on-blog denunciation (Shame on Demagogues for Exploiting North American Union!, 12/28) of their self-promoting paranoia regarding an alleged conspiracy to merge the US, Canada and Mexico. The defensive tone of their commentary suggests that these two have been appropriately embarrassed: Farah, in particular, dramatically deescalated his rhetoric.
While previous commentary on WorldNetDaily prominently and regularly featured the noun plot in defining this non-issue, his answer to my purposefully harsh attack omits that key word entirely and uses language in a vastly more responsible and rational style. If I can push an influential (and often insightful) journalist like Farah back toward reasoned debate and the mainstream, then Ive already succeeded in my chief goal: to prevent conservatives from following self-interested Pied Pipers off a cliff into conspiracist cuckoo land.
Im particularly gratified at the way that Farah worded his Daily Poll on this issue. He posed the question: What do you make of the talk about the North American Union? and offered only two alternatives (out of nine) that agreed with the lunatic alarmists on the subject. Those two choices declared: The evidence keeps mounting. When will people stop being in denial? and Plans for a union are an absolute reality, and anyone who cant see concerted attacks on U.S. sovereignty is blind. Please note that in declaring the evidence keeps mounting, this response never specifies what, exactly this evidence is supposed to prove. Similarly, the statement that plans for a union are an absolute reality never suggests who it is who is making those plans. If the plans (not plots this time) for a North American Union are coming from forces on the left as marginal as the fringies on the right who worry about such shcemes, then there is, indeed, no reason for fear.
Amazingly enough, Farah himself supports this reassuring perspective in his muddled attempt to defend his previous hysteria. He identifies one Robert Pastor as the man at the very center of the plans for a North American Union. Pastor is a loony leftist, slightly unhinged professor at American University who was an enthusiastic supporter (and informal advisor) to John Kerrys Presidential juggernaut--- and who bears no connection whatever to the Bush administration, or the dreaded Security and Prosperity Partnership. If an addled academic with zero power in the government and no clout whatever with the current administration is the man at the very center of the plans for a North American Union do those plans really sound so menacing and dire and imminent?
Moreover, even Professor Pastor (in an interview with NAU demagogue-in-chief Jerome Corsi, as quoted by Farah) specifically denies any desire for a North American Union. Each of the proposals I have laid out represent (sic) more than just small steps, Pastor proclaimed. But it doesnt represent a leap to a North American Union or even to some confederation of any kind. I dont think either is plausible, necessary or even helpful to contemplate at this stage. (Italics added)
I know that paranoids and conspiracy connoisseurs will seize on the last three words at this stage and scream, Aha! The dreaded Pastorthe evil academic whos the architect of the whole diabolical scheme is suggesting at some later stage it WILL be plausible, necessary, or even helpful to contemplate a North American Union!
But please, friends, consider this: if even the lefty professor who is considered the most dangerous plotter and visionary on the prospect of US-Mexican-Canadian merger explicitly denies any interest whatever in even contemplating that scheme at this stage, does it really make any senseany sense at all to frighten the public into believing that there is a current, powerful mass movement on behalf of such plans?
Thats the essence of my impassioned concern with the demagoguery on this subject: by focusing concern on a non-existent threat, people like Farah and Corsi take attention away from the very real dangers posed by the liberal ideologues who have taken over both houses of Congress.
There are open, undeniable, widely supported plans from the Democratic leadership to cripple the country in our war against Islamo-Nazis, to undermine our security agencies in the name of constitutional rights, to raise taxes, to punish productivity, to grow government, to undermine the traditional family, to nationalize health care, to force us all out of our cars (and onto useless mass transit) and to push through precisely the sort of immigration policies that most conservatives will absolutely hate. These plans demand a united Republican Party and a re-energized conservative movement that isnt distracted and paralyzed by non-existent threats concerning non-existent plans to terminate the independent survival of the United States. (PREMEDIATED MERGER: How Leaders are Stealthily Transforming USA into North American Union reads one typical and current Farah headline.)
This is a fateful moment for the conservative moment that Barry Goldwater launched and that Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich and, yes, George W. Bush led to some significant triumphs. For the first time since Clinton first came to power 14 years ago, we are definitely in opposition --- coming out of our thumpin in the 2006 elections, all the momentum and energy in Washington has currently shifted to the Democratic side. The next few months will help to determine whether Republicans and conservatives will fight the good fight over issues that matter or dissipate all chance of a return to power through in-fighting, defeatism and self-marginalization. Given the stakes involved with some of the current battles in Washington and around the world, how can any grownup, responsible activist justify focusing on black-helicopter-style threats like the border-dissolving, sovereignty-ending North American Union - which no elected leaders of administration officials have ever endorsed?
Where, in the past, have conservatives succeeded in building majorities by concentrating on secret plans and high level plots by their fellow Republicans?
And this brings me to the unfortunate Jerome Corsi, who felt the need in his response to my scorn to bring up some long-ago misunderstanding between us in which he believed I had charged him with anti-Semitism. As I communicated to Corsi in a telephone conversation, I did not recall making that charge on the air and I still dont believe I ever attacked him in that manner. If I had even hinted at Jew-hatred on Corsis part I was willing to apologize, I said.
But now that hes brought up the long-dead matter once again, I went to the trouble of looking up some of his controversial (and profoundly embarrassing) internet postings from FreeRepublic.com that were publicized in 2004. One of them (03/04/2004) attacked John F**ing Commie Kerry as follows: After he married TerRAHsa, didnt John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? (sic). He also has paternal grandparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry?
Given the fact that neither Kerry nor his wife (either wife, for that matter) ever practiced any form of Judaism (or Judi-asm, which might be a form of Judi worship), and given the fact that Theresa Heinz Kerry has never had any connection whatever to the Jewish people or the Jewish religion, and given the fact that Kerry himself has been a well-advertised, professing Catholic all his life, doesnt Corsis snide little comment about Kerrys reverting to the faith from which his paternal grandparents converted, give off unmistakable, fetid whiffs of anti-Semitic obsession?
In the same series of comments he also wrote of the beloved and revered Pope John Paul II: Boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isnt reported by the liberal press (03/03/2003) and We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but thats probably about it. (12/16/2002).
And now this same angry, venomous, irresponsible figure wants to be taken seriously when he warns of the looming, desperate danger of North American Union. He insists that he is utterly disinterested and selfless in promoting this grand conspiracy theory--- but then the final line of his posting gives the lie to this preposterous pose. That line announces about Mr. Corsi: He will soon author a book on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the prospect of the forthcoming North American Union.
I have no desire whatever to help him promote his latest book which is why I wont invite him as a guest to debate these issues on my radio show. If he wants to call in (with other members of the public) to make whatever points he chooses to make, hes welcome to do so on the one national talk show that identifies itself as Your Daily Dose of Debate and well move him to the front of the caller line. The phone number, Mr. Corsi (toll free, by the way) is 1-800-955-1776.
And concerning his challenge to me to debate him publicly and formally over his poisonous obsession over phantom dangers, Ive never in my life turned away from a rhetorical challenge, and Im not about to do so now. If Corsi wants a debate (over a non-issue that I dont believe is even worthy of serious discussion) Im willing to join him if he arranges an appropriate venue and I can participate without incurring debilitating travel or personal expense.
If this sort of confrontation can flush out fringe-figures like Jerome Corsi from the dank, turgid conspiracist fever-swamps he chooses to inhabit, it may perform an important hygienic purpose in returning the conservative movement to the robust health it needs for the serious battles that lie ahead.
Everytime someone mentions Free Republic, they always have such nice things to say...
Medved, is a big amnesty supporter. It doesn't surprise me that this would draw his wrath.
Ping to Round 3 of Corsi vs. Medved
That's because plans to push America into "galaxy-ism" are still on the drawing-board.
Our southern boarder is being torn down regardless of what he says.
If only he could help here at cuckoo land, Free Republic.
It came in on little cat's paws........and is here for good. Or more likely, for bad.
Is he actually a member? I tried Googling it up, but the latest Medved/Corsi controversy is jamming up the search results.
I'm with Jerry Corsi on this drive to strip the USA of it's sovereignty and plunge us into a union with narco-s**thole Mexico. Medved is pathetically trying to tar Jerry Corsi here as an anti Semite. I'm down on Jewish liberals same as J Corsi is, so what!(I'm Jewish)
If Medved has any balls (he doesn't) he'll invite Corsi on his show to duke it out. PLEASE TAKE HEED that Michael Medved is pretty much for open borders/amnesty so putting down Corsi's work is part of a piece
Thanks for posting. Interesting exchanges between Medved and Corsi.
Invite Jerry Corsi on your show. Let's see what you got!
Yes, and George W. Bush denies that his Temporary Guest Worker Program is really just amnesty for Mexican illegal aliens.
But, just as we know that the TGWP is amnesty, we also know that the SPP is working toward a NAU.