Another Far-Left "Beck and Tea-Bagger Bashing Book" Goes Down in Flames (Dana Milbank's)

The Coffee Shop
1

In an effort to get the old passions, juices, interest level – whatever you want to call it – going in this last week before what looks to be a Democratic electoral disaster of historic proportions (though some polls show some tightening, at least in certain Senate races), I present the case of the once “straight down the line” WaPo reporter Dana Milbank, who’s since moved into the commentariat, penning a regular piece for that august paper’s pages (Okay…so I’m also looking to throw some pogey bait out there to see who responds to it, LOL!). Seems his latest tome, Tears of a Clown: Glenn Beck and the Tea Bagging of America, looks to be going down in the kind of flames reminiscent of some sort of five-alarm blaze at an oil refinery along the Gulf Coast:

The Daily Caller reported, via Wizbang:

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank’s new book critical of Fox News host Glenn Beck isn’t exactly going out-of-stock, The Daily Caller has learned.Milbank’s “Tears of a Clown: Glenn Beck and the Tea Bagging of America” has sold fewer than 1,600 copies nationwide since it was released Oct. 5, according to a source with knowledge of the figures.

Milbank’s publicist, Todd Doughty, declined to confirm a figure. “Random House does not release sales figures as a corporate policy,” he said.

Doughty said 38,700 copies of Milbank’s book have been printed.

The summary of the book says Milbank “exposes as the guy who is single-handedly giving patriotism a bad name.”

“The wildly popular Fox News host with 3 million daily viewers perfectly captures the vitriol of our time and the fact-free state of our political culture,” the description on Amazon.com reads. “The secret to his success is his willingness to traffic in the fringe conspiracies and Internet hearsay that others wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole: death panels, government health insurance for dogs, FEMA concentration camps, an Obama security force like Hitler’s SS.”

By comparison, Beck released a novel this summer called The Overton Window that sold more than 132,000 copies in its first week.

2

I misread the numbers the first time and thought “well thats not too bad”.I read 16,000 sold out of 38,000 printed. Oops :slight_smile:

3

Whether a book sells is more an indication of the audience than of the quality or accuracy of the book. An excellent example is that perennial best-seller, the Bible.

4

Are you saying Milbanks’s tome is too weighty for the average person out there? That they don’t “get it?” I’m going to have to hang out at my local Borders today, to see how many people stop, pick it up and leaf through it and then put it back on the shelves :slight_smile:

5

Are you saying Milbanks’s tome is too weighty for the average person out there? That they don’t “get it?” I’m going to have to hang out at my local Borders today, to see how many people stop, pick it up and leaf through it and then put it back on the shelves :slight_smile:

“Okay…so I’m also looking to throw some pogey bait out there to see who responds to it, LOL!”

6

The same argument is made about Fox News being the #1 cable news network.

One thing I’d like to point out is that many of my “conservative” friends like to read/watch things that they already agree with and will continue to exhaust that communication line (TV or books) endlessly. On the other hand, many of my “liberal” friends like to sit around and actually talk about issues over dinner, a cup of coffee or even a round of drinks.

I hate generalizing, but from my point of view the conservative base will always have the #1 watched or bestseller because that demographic likes this kind of information fed to them. The liberals that I know seem to like to express their viewpoints and talk it out with others that like to do the same thing, instead of constantly reading/watching what others feel is a more valued opinion.

You don’t really think Sarah Palin’s book was a #1 best seller because it was well written and had ground breaking ideology, do you?

7

“Okay…so I’m also looking to throw some pogey bait out there to see who responds to it, LOL!”

LOL! Good one. I don’t know why that Milbank story caught my interest, other than that it does, in fact, make for some nice pogey bait here in the LR. I confess to not being able to sit through a Beck screed, but I also confess to being disappointed in Milbank and his obvious shift to the left, in his move to the commentary side of the house, for some reason. Now, anything I hear from him seems colored by his obvious prejudices, which I suppose were always there in the first place, though I didn’t really see them when I used to read his work. I find his pejorative about tea bagging, and his implication that Americans participating in those tea parties, are somehow to be associated with the practice, a bit off-putting, unfortunately.

8

The issue is that the folks who want to read conservative things can afford them…the other side I am sure will want some Federal grant or other public aid to get them the book for free.

9

One thing I’d like to point out is that many of my “conservative” friends like to read/watch things that they already agree with and will continue to exhaust that communication line (TV or books) endlessly. On the other hand, many of my “liberal” friends like to sit around and actually talk about issues over dinner, a cup of coffee or even a round of drinks.

I hate generalizing, but from my point of view the conservative base will always have the #1 watched or bestseller because that demographic likes this kind of information fed to them. The liberals that I know seem to like to express their viewpoints and talk it out with others that like to do the same thing, instead of constantly reading/watching what others feel is a more valued opinion.

You don’t really think Sarah Palin’s book was a #1 best seller because it was well written and had ground breaking ideology, do you?

I don’t think anything about much of anything, though I think you’ve made a couple of very broad generalizations vis a vis how thoughtful and capable small ‘l’ liberals here in America are versus their knuckle-dragging brethren on the right. You realize you’ve helped reinforce the suspicion that many on the left are disdainful of those not on the left who also might not hold the ‘worldly’ views that liberals here in America supposedly do, right?

Though I’m an independent-minded, proud Mexican-American veteran who voted Democrat/Barack Obama in 2008, I won’t be doing so this time around. I find the tone and tenor of the conversation, and the actions as well, coming from the Obama administration and the Democratic caucus in Congress to be a bit mean-spirited and ill-considered. I’m no fan of tea parties, either, but I don’t like the characterizations put forth by many on the left and in the media that my fellow Americans participating in those gatherings are Nazis or otherwise anything other than what the majority of them are: Americans of good will with a point of view and the willingness to demonstrate for that point of view (Beck may be a different story, and I won’t vote any ticket with Sarah Palin on it). I thought that’s what we celebrated in our country? Sadly, as has recently been demonstrated by the firing of Juan Williams over at NPR, it would seem that about 20 percent of the population (classic small ‘l’ liberals in America) come across as intolerant of any point of view that doesn’t comport exactly with what the group think is over on that side of the aisle. It’s turned many independents like me off this year, a point which is also going to be driven home in a big way on November 2nd, I’d say.

10

Simple – the far lefties already know this and won’t buy a book to confirm their beliefs, and the far righties don’t even read.

11

As good an explanation as any other one I’ve heard, so far :-).

12

I find the tone and tenor of the conversation, and the actions as well, coming from the Obama administration and the Democratic caucus in Congress to be a bit mean-spirited and ill-considered.

Please, the tone and tenor of your original post was all of that and more! Who the hell is Dana Millibanks? Why does his (her?) sale numbers have anything to do with the quality of whatever book he/she wrote? Is this actually even discussed anywhere except WonkoPundit.com? You insist on clinging on to your “independent” moniker, and yet only choose to wave the bloodiest of red meat issues from the far right (Juan Williams? Yawn…).

13

I was trying to start a “fight” in order to get a discussion going, which is a point that I made clear from the beginning with the “pogey bait” remark, and which klehner astutely called me on. Have a sense of humor about that, at least. The rest of the commentary on the thread after that been fairly consistent. And of course I’m waving a red flag. I also made that clear when I said that I wanted to get the juices flowing for the week ahead. I sense the same thing coming from the left this year, in terms of an electoral smackdown and its dislike of the coming “Dempocalypse,” that I saw from the right in 2008, in the last week of that election cycle. You seem a bit testy about that, and I believe you’re from California and nominally of the left, from the tone and tenor of your own posts. You should be feeling happy, though, because the polls seem to be indicating a Jerry Brown victory, if not one also for Barbara Boxer.

14

I don’t think that it matters so much who wins the Governorship (thinking of the Titanic, post-iceberg… ;), but I do think that Brown has done a good job of shedding the “Moonbeam” moniker over the pat decade. Fiorina could have run as a moderate (after the primary), but I don’t think the electorate would have supported her. Moderates can’t actually get enough votes to win in this polarized environment. A shame, really, because we need more folks in Congress willing to work on solutions for the whole country (IMHO).

15

Well, you’re absolutely right about the “moderate” issue, but I think we’re in for a time of increased polarization. Already, certain Republicans – in anticipation of a majority in the House and maybe the Senate – have said they’ll be in no mood for what they term compromise (probably because the word “bipartisanship” is like a poison pill at the moment) with the Obama administration. The funny thing is, I don’t think that even if the House and Senate were to both flip to the Republicans by wide margins, the Obama administration would be all that amenable to a move to the center or center-left (it’s perceived as being far-left, at present). Folks there are really giving the impression that they’re true believers and not all that convinced that they still can’t win out when it comes to pushing the rest of their agenda, this time through the regulatory process, because Congress will have been closed off to them, with Republicans in charge in at least the House.

16

You’re right, but polarization has been increasing for decades.

The funny thing is, I don’t think that even if the House and Senate were to both flip to the Republicans by wide margins, the Obama administration would be all that amenable to a move to the center or center-left (it’s perceived as being far-left, at present).

That will be THE discussion for the next 2 years, trying to blame the other side for the systemic gridlock. The most important thing will be to define “the center”, and then show how “the other side” is unwilling to move that way, or how the “center” isn’t really the “center”, but completely socialist/fascist/etc. I get a headache just thinking about the futility of it all. :wink: Clinton was much more “radical” from '93-'94, and then was able to triangulate and pass legislation because there were moderates on both sides of the aisle. Not sure they exist any more, the only thing left will be the blame…

17

meh, Obama is in the catbird seat. He played the politics wonderfully, taking advantage of big majorities early to push a lefty agenda. The cost of those efforts was less energy and clout to put toward the economy, and it has languished, but with pubs coming in to share the blame, they’ll almost HAVE to work with him for real economic improvement which will only redound well for O, and help him in 12. Dems were in similar straights vis-a-vis the Iraq war, with any subtle attempts to undermine the effort or not overtly support it, reflecting poorly only on them…so they generally helped make GWB look good, or at least strong.

18

bipartisanship (n.): when Democrats and Republicans reach agreement about exactly how to take away more of our freedom.

19

Well, I certainly can’t find anything to quibble over in the body of your observation, professor ;-).

20

I’m not sure how you can say Obama didn’t push a lot of economic legislation. I agree that these policies will probably be frozen for a while, and folks will decide if they worked or not in 2012 (with an infinite amount of persuasion from pundits). In the end Obama will be judged on those actions, just like GWB was judged for his conduct of the Iraq War.