Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Insane Neocon to Ron Reagan: Your Father Would Be Ashamed

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 9:46 AM on October 23, 2009.


Frank Gaffney missed the sanity train long ago.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get World in your
mailbox!

 

Right-wing pundit Frank Gaffney was on MSNBC's "Hardball" yesterday, debating U.S. policy in Afghanistan with Ron Reagan. It didn't go well, but the heated exchange was really only part of the problem. (thanks to reader W.B. for the tip)

After Reagan rejected the neocon approach to the conflict, Gaffney made things personal. "Your father would be ashamed of you," Gaffney told Reagan. The former president's son replied, "You better watch your mouth about that, Frank."

 

Now, Gaffney probably knows he crossed a line of decency; in fact that probably why he said what he said. Gaffney's a right-wing nutjob whose job it is to say ridiculous things.

And that's really what matters here. Gaffney's insane rhetoric isn't the problem; the fact that he was invited onto national television (again) to share his insane rhetoric is the problem.

Gaffney probably isn't a household name, but inside the media establishment, he's a pretty well known figure, as evidenced by his joint appearance with Dick Cheney on Wednesday night. And when offered a major media platform, Gaffney takes full advantage.

In April, for example, Gaffney appeared on MSNBC to argue that whenever President Obama uses the word "respect" in foreign policy, the word is "code for those who adhere to Sharia that we will submit to Sharia." He wasn't kidding.

In June, Gaffney wrote a column insisting that President Obama might really be a Muslim. In March, Gaffney argued that "evidence" exists connecting Saddam Hussein to 9/11, the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, and the Oklahoma City bombing. Last September, Gaffney argued that Sarah Palin has learned foreign policy through "osmosis," by living in Alaska. He's argued that U.S. forces really did find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but the media covered it up. He's used made-up quotes and recommended "hanging" Democratic officials critical of the Bush administration's Iraq policy. He even believes there's "evidence" to support the "Birthers," and once recommended a military strike on Al Jazeera headquarters.

So why is it, exactly, that MSNBC's "Hardball" invited Gaffney on to talk about foreign policy? What is it the viewing public can learn from listening to his unhinged perspective?

To be sure, Gaffney is certainly entitled to believe obvious lunacy, but that doesn't mean he deserves a microphone or the opportunity to convince a national television audience that his lunacy is legitimate.

Honestly, is there nothing conservatives can say that would force them from polite company? Just how nutty must far-right activists be before they're no longer invited to share their ridiculous ideas?

Digg!

Tagged as: neocons, afghanistan, reagan, insanity, gaffner

Steve Benen is "blogger in chief" of the popular Washington Monthly online blog, Political Animal. His background includes publishing The Carpetbagger Report, and writing for a variety of publications, including Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect, the Huffington Post, and The Guardian. He has also appeared on NPR's "Talk of the Nation," MSNBC's "Rachel Maddow Show," Air America Radio's "Sam Seder Show," and XM Radio's "POTUS '08."


Tea-Parties so Diverse, They Had to Use the Same Black Guy in 5 Different Scenes of Tea-Bagger Movie
Really, you know a black tea-bagger named Nate?
Post by Oliver Willis. November 20, 2009.
Krauthammer Commits Terrorist Act on the Opinion Pages of the Washington Post
Terrorists terrorize -- it's what they do.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 20, 2009.
Hmmm ... Why Do So Many Wingnuts Have Such an Obsessive Fear of Being Raped?
It's all they can talk about in the right-wing media.
Post by Staff. November 20, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
"What does that even mean, Frank?"
Posted by: pelican beak on Oct 23, 2009 10:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gaffney and Norquist would be a better pairing.
They don't like one another.
Ron Jr. is too nice a guy for this garbage.

I'd rather see Frank and Grover publicly insult each other.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But did President Reagan even personally know Frank Gaffney?
Posted by: Gideon Planish on Oct 23, 2009 10:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know anything much about Frank Gaffney, but did President Reagan even personally know this nutbagger...?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy in the Reagan Admin
Posted by: dingham on Oct 23, 2009 11:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, nuclear neo con. shivers up my spine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bear and Bull in Pit
Posted by: Orange on Oct 23, 2009 11:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having crazy, loud, abrasive, colorful fascist nutcases on TV shows like "Hardball" increases the shows' ratings. That's why such lunatics get air time.

It's a new blood sport, like dog fighting or bear baiting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nancy...
Posted by: lmwilker on Oct 23, 2009 11:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Should kick Gaffney's ass....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where's MY check, MSNBC?
Posted by: eddie torres on Oct 23, 2009 12:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as Gaffney is profiting off of policy speculation, I've got a few theories to sell too:

Dick Cheney's stay-behinds are feeding an exclusive network of insiders - like Gaffney's CSP - details about defense and intelligence strategy and using it to re-frame the Afghan revenue stream. For domestic US election purposes, this paves the way for the politics of demagoguery, which neatly dovetails with a future terrrist attack on US soil that re-energizes the GOP base behind a US military general as a presidential "candidate."

Now, how the hell can I get paid by MSNBC to proliferate these theories?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

touchdown
Posted by: gaston on Oct 23, 2009 1:48 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sick of hearing about these Republican nut jobs, including Cheney.

Who gives them all this air time?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: touchdown Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: touchdown Posted by: luzmejor
Why?
Posted by: ianfan on Oct 23, 2009 2:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...the fact that he was invited onto national television (again) to share his insane rhetoric is the problem."

Well, it's clear Matthews had the guy on to specifically grill him about honoring a felon and the guy he covered up for. And he did that. He also made him look pretty ridiculous I think, if I can attempt to gauge with any objectivity at how the encounter came off in general.


I understand Gaffney has no credibility, and the media has a terrible issue with not recognizing who is credible and who is not, and with accountibility for people who keep getting things plainly wrong, but in this case the guy was not there to give his opinion. He was there to get admonished for the ridiculous behavior these guys have of getting together in groups and giving each other pats on the back for being wrong. And I think it was pretty effective.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why are they let on?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford on Oct 23, 2009 6:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'll tell you why people like him are let back on over and over again...

Because the media stations themselves are owned by corporations.

And who runs those corporations?

Rich, white, conservative, capitalist christian men who like warmongering and profiteering more than they like helping others.

THAT'S the reason you never see true liberals on the air.
THAT'S the reason you always always ALWAYS have conservatives on.
THAT'S the reason this country's media is so biased.

There is no liberal bias in the media, until you go online and find independent media sources.

The entire corporate media is conservatively biased.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I watched this, and it deteriorated into a shouting match
Posted by: Ellie1 on Oct 24, 2009 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in which no one could be heard. If any network is going to present both sides, PLEASE allow to be heard rather than shouting over each other.

However I have no interest in anything this right wing shill has to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberal "Tolerance" Be Damned.
Posted by: Eric.Arthur.Blair on Oct 24, 2009 11:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every time I see this idiot on television, I keep wanting to see a bullet hole sprout in his forehead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All Repig nutbars
Posted by: bettyn on Oct 24, 2009 12:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
can do very well anymore is shout down anyone who disagrees with them! I find myself shouting "STFU" at these morons everytime they come on TV.

Why bother with these BOORS anyway? They all say the same thing anyway, like the stupid parrots they are!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How did the nutjob get back on Hardball?
Posted by: Longdream on Oct 24, 2009 6:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because effing Tweety booked him, that's how.

Give me a break.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HardnoseMP
Posted by: HardnoseMP on Oct 26, 2009 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am fed up with all these Ding-Dongs like Gaffney talking trash about about the OKC Bombing and Saddam Husseins involvement. The facts are that I identified Mcveigh on April 21,1995 from the composite drawing the ATF and FBI showed me that came from Elliotts Body Shop in JC, Ks. and providied evidence that led to his arrest. I also looked through my gun records and found where Nichols had bought guns from me and called the ATF and gave information that led to his arrest. I had positively identified both the OKC Bombers. I saw John Doe 2 in my store before the bombing, and was subpeonaed in Nichols trial with about 50 others who saw him, like all the other business around here, he looked more Spanish to me ,but was definetely not an Arab, that stuff was all made up by the reporters in Oklahoma City. Gaffney ,Your father is probably rolling over in his grave with all the crap you are putting out. You need to learn a little respect for your President.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]