Zeb Bell, Tea Bags & Talk

By now you've heard about the tax day tea parties going on all around the country.  If not, besides living in a cave burning buffalo dung [btw, excellent aromatherapy properties, I hear], you've probably been wondering why some of those around you are saying "teabagging" and snickering while others are furiously collecting tea bags and preparing for the big day.  In that case, click those links and get caught up 'cause the big day is fast approaching.

Whether you fall into the two-thirds of Americans who approve of the president's job performance and are among those snickering, or the third who don't and whatever fraction of those who really don't—enough to stage mini-rebellions involving various incarnations of teabagging (apparently there is a proper etiquette for these things)—and are among those furiously preparing your tea bags for deployment, it should be an interesting day.

In preparation for the day, Fox News is teabagging central; they've gotcha covered... from all angles one would suppose.  And in the Magic Valley, Zeb Bell has gotcha covered for all your teabagging needs as well; he's been talking up the tax day tea party on "Zeb at the Ranch" and on his Zeb's Rebs blog.

In fact, last Thursday he had a chilling exchange with a caller about what he'd like to do on tea party day and folks, this is the Zeb Bell that should scare you.  Yes, as usual, he also talked a lot about things like raising money for Meals On Wheels and he did a segment promoting a veterans group motorcycle ride, which makes what he said Thursday and all the other hateful and bigoted things he has said before even worse.

"How could this upstanding, honorable member of the community say or do anything wrong," his listeners might think.  "Why, he's talking about Meals on Wheels and Speaking Up for Morality.  If Zeb says it, it must be true and right," they might suppose and, actually, I've heard and read similar themes from supporters, both on the air and on his blog.

How long, then, before someone acts out on statements like this one he made Thursday?  Listen to the short exchange here and follow along with the transcript below:

UNIDENTIFIED CALLER:  Uh, I'm right with you Zeb.  Hey, and I'll be out there on the bridge, uh, on tax day.
ZEB BELL:  You know it's too bad we can't find somebody from the Obama administration to go swimming.
[laughter from both]
CALLER:  Yeah!
ZEB:  Have a good...
CALLER:  Throw them, throw them in as the tea bag, right?
[amid laughter]
ZEB:  Well, we could put the tea bag around their neck, only have it weighted with...
CALLER:  There we go.
ZEB:  Have it weighted with about 150 pound weight.
CALLER:  There we go.
ZEB:  Have a good day.  Appreciate you...
CALLER:  Sounds good to me.  Thank you Zeb.
ZEB:  ...thank you very much.  Thank you.  How far can you swim?!  [malicious laughter]  Not very.  Okay... calls welcome 436-2244, 1-866-927-4587.  Tea bag, heck.  Throw a doggone dumbbell around their neck.  Swim to shore!  Oh gee, what's the matter; what are all those bubbles about?

Even though he sounded pretty serious, maybe Zeb wouldn't actually drown someone he didn't like in the Snake River.  What message does it send, though?  That violence is an acceptable solution to a problem?  When guys like Richard Poplawski and James Adkisson go on killing sprees, their heads filled with nutty ideas about America in decline, doomed by whatever "ism" of the day and having to stand up and take their country back, don't talkers like Zeb have some "Moral Responsibility" for giving their fears and nutty fringe ideas a mainstream voice?

But perhaps the second-most frustrating thing heard on "Zeb at the Ranch" last week came from James Wright, the managing editor of the Times-News, who spent an hour talking with Zeb last Wednesday and said this, among other things:

Anyone who stands up and takes a stand and doesn't waffle out from under it if someone disagrees with them is going to get heat.  If somebody on the left wants to call that hate speech or whatever, they can.  I mean, it's just speech.  Unless they're shootin' at ya pal, it's not that bad.  It's just talk.

The Times-News is the lone newspaper serving a hundred-mile-radius area that includes the broadcast range for Zeb Bell's program.  Its editor not only dismissed the consequences of hate speech, he essentially endorsed Zeb's view that he's under attack from liberals who don't like his "moral values."

Nothing could be further from the truth and either Wright has no idea what's being broadcast daily on "Zeb at the Ranch" or he doesn't care.  He should.  It's his community.  I hear some members of it are gathering on a bridge Wednesday to "take their country back" and some are saying they'd like to throw people in the river.  I'd think he'd be just a little concerned about that.

Comments

[Coward of the Keyboard]

Much of the teapartying is being headed up by the host who follows Zeb, Steve Mitton.

You can check out the sites at these links:
http://greatidahoteaparty.blogspot.com/
www.stevesradio.com

[thepoliticalgame]

I find it quite funny that Mitton's petition boldly states that all men are created equal, noting the oft said regardless of race, religion, etc. line. Hmm...but please no Hispanics, African-Americans, Muslims, or any other non-Christian. They state one thing and mean another.

[Coward of the Keyboard]

And did you notice the gun icon at the opening?

[Wordsmith]

Go over and read Orcinus today - Dave Neiwert's following.

There was something else, but I forgot. I'm at work. Oh! The constitution party - I checked the national under Idaho (other way around) the chairman for Idaho is a black guy, Paul Venable!? Over in Parma or somewhere.

Gotta go.

Good job - MG.

[MountainGoat]

Thanks for the info and links on Steve Mitton's role in promoting the tea party. I haven't looked at Mitton's website in a while and missed it in all my searching for Idaho's tea party connections last night. Shoulda connected it though...

And yes, couldn't miss the gun... Really, what's all this nonsense about progressives wanting to take away everybody's guns? I happen to be one that enjoys firing a weapon every now and then (and quite well I might add) but I think it's ridiculous that anyone would want or need something like a 50 cal. handy. I mean, you could use the same arguments to insist that everyone should be entitled to own their own tank.

As we've seen with recent events, in the wrong hands (even of normally law-abiding citizens), guns can be very dangerous and there ought to be measures for minimizing the chances of that happening, especially to the most vulnerable among us.

That doesn't mean living in constant fear that someone is coming to take away your guns and anyone who would suggest such a thing is just trying to frighten you (or make money off you). Let's be rational and reasonable about it, not act like paranoid weirdos being chased by black helicopters and stockpiling ammo. Okay, off my gun soapbox.

Thanks for the heads up on the sites, Wordsmith. There's also another Neiwert piece (same theme but shorter) mentioned at The Political Game today in her rundown of Monday craziness.
http://politicalgame.blogspot.com/2009/04/mondays-must-reads.html

Your fine militia post ties in nicely to this post too:
http://leftistmoon.wordpress.com/2009/04/12/being-molded-into-militias/

[MountainGoat]

Ridenbaugh Press has an interesting bit on the tea party from a Northwest view, including info and links that point out that this "grassroots movement" is, gasp, nothing of the sort.

http://www.ridenbaugh.com/index.php/2009/04/12/tea-parties-then-and-now/

[thepoliticalgame]

I think guns are absolutely worthless and I don't understand why anyone would just want one to fire on occasion, but I've read the Constitution, something I don't think many of the black helicopter crowd have or they wouldn't be so damn scared about somebody taking away their guns.

[Callisto]

I'm confused by the James Wright quote. Why did he single out "the left" when he said "If somebody on the left wants to call that hate speech or whatever, they can." And what kind of language does he think "the left calls" hate speech?

Aw, heck. I'm disappointed in Mr. Wright. I've been impressed with some of the reporting and editorials published by the Times-News. Perhaps he knows exactly what Zeb's rep is, and was just doing a little pandering.

[MountainGoat]

yeah, that "left" bit was especially irritating because it isn't like hate speech is a partisan issue. he also said in the interview that it wasn't the paper that called zeb a racist, it was the democrats; that the paper was simply reporting what the democrats were saying, which i found extremely frustrating.

there were times in the interview where he did stand his ground with zeb but usually when he was defending the editorial board, his reporters and the paper in general. he also told zeb he was wrong about the media being liberally biased. i've got a clip of some of the audio that i may post at some point.

and yeah, tpg, i knew you'd disagree with me on guns, but at least we agree on the idiocy of the black helicopter crowd and their paranoia. ;-)

[James G. Wright, Editor, the Times-News]

Callisto: You're confused by the quote because it is presented here without context. It was a response to a question from Bell, who asked why "the liberal left" dismisses everything he says as hate speech. I told him he was making himself out to be the victim (playing to the crowd for sympathy) and that I take heat from the left AND the right because the Times-News is an independent newspaper that takes strong stands on issues.

The reference to Democrats calling Bell a racist was simply an effort to set Bell straight. He asked what prompted the Times-News to call him a racist. I pointed out that the paper had not done so - we simply covered it when others did last June. Bell sometimes fails to differentiate between the editorial voice of the newspaper and comments made by others reported in news articles.

[James G. Wright, Editor, the Times-News]

Here is the article in question.

Alleged radio remark irks Democrats
Bell says accusations are baseless, harmful
By Cassidy Friedman
Staff writer
A local family-owned radio network has lost advertising since Monday when a morning show personality on its AM station was charged by state Democrats with racially slurring Barack Obama.

Zeb Bell, 60, a conservative talk show host who has leased air time on Rupert-based KBAR AM for eight years, denies he made any racial remarks targeted at the presumptive Democratic nominee. But he admits his guest and friend Frosty Wooldridge did.

Thomas Garcia, an Obama supporter, circulated an e-mail alleging that Bell called Obama the "black Negroid Barack Hussein Obama" on his Monday morning show. More than a dozen irate Magic Valley residents, who had read the e-mail but had not heard the show, complained to Bell, he said. Three long-time advertisers have threatened to cancel their spots unless the station removes Bell from the air, station owner Kim Lee, of Lee Family Broadcasting, said.

Lee Family Broadcasting is not affiliated with Lee Enterprises, the parent company of the Times-News and South Idaho Press.

Bell said the accusations against him are baseless and harmful.

"This is killing me," Bell said. "I am getting hate mail from people who don't even know me or listen to me."

In the first hour of Bell's Wednesday morning show he vowed to maintain his political attack on Obama, however, he told the station's owner he would apologize on air for statements made by his guest, most likely at 10 a.m., Tuesday when Bob Powers, an active member of the Democratic Central Committee in Twin Falls County, will appear on Bell's show.

After hearing parts of the Monday show, Powers said Wooldridge called Obama's mother "trailer trash" with a fixation on black men. Wooldridge also said Obama was raised a Muslim for 10 years and was indoctrinated in Islam - a statement "which has been proven false," Powers said.

"Zeb agreed with him," said Powers, who calls himself a longtime friend of Bell's. "He went along with what Frosty was saying."

Even if Bell did make the statement attributed to him, there are few options for the Democratic Party to challenge him, said Chuck Oxley, the party's state director of communications. With Bell leasing from the radio station and the words falling short of violating Federal Communications Commission rules, Oxley encouraged advertisers to pull sponsorships of the family's radio network.

"It sounds like if it's not something he said exactly, it's something close to what he said," Oxley said. "We certainly get the gist of what he's trying to say."

Both Bell and Lee say there is no audio recording of the show, which Bell admits included unchecked racist statements by his guest. Lee said there usually is a broadcast recording, but a technical difficulty forced them to halt recordings.

"I am a great believer that people ought to be able to express even outrageous opinions," Idaho Democratic Party Chairman Keith Roark said Tuesday. "But those slurs have no place in public discourse."

Roark and Oxley both said they had not directly heard the statement.

Bell said he is accustomed to facing accusations that he advocates racist views, in particular because of his tough rhetoric on illegal immigration. But this is the first time he's been openly accused of using a racial slur, he said.

The negative publicity revealed to Bell the existence of an online campaign against him that pre-dates this incident.

A Web site, with a domain name registered to Rudy Castro of Heyburn, appears as a vehicle for counter-attacks against Bell. The Web page contains statements attributed to Bell, personal and aggressive comments about him and a photo of a person wearing Ku Klux Klan garb at a 1994 rally in Jerome, which the Web site says, "we believe" is Bell.

Bell said it is not.

After consulting with Bell this week, Minidoka County Sheriff Kevin Halverson called the Web site "inflammatory" and a "smear campaign," but he has not opened an investigation.

Castro has previously been outspoken against the Republican Party in letters to editor of the Times-News. Halverson said he does not know what history the men share.

Castro did not return phone calls to his home and work Wednesday.

Since throngs of e-mails and phone calls attacking Bell started this week, the station owner told him he has been losing sponsors, Bell said. Bell said he believes the Web site is the second prong of an attempt to sabotage him by the same liberals.

Bell said he has used the word "Negro" - he borrows the term from the United Negro College Fund - but never "Negroid." He said he referred to Obama's color only when mentioning that he is "the first black nominee for president in this country." And he said including "Hussein" - Barack Obama's middle name - is equal to inserting anyone's middle name in a reference.

"It's not a race issue," Bell said. "The liberals feel they got their toes stepped on. It has nothing to do with his color. I don't like the man."

Oxley said whether Bell is preaching racism or hatred, it's the wrong message.

"We think those advertisers should know that he has made this clearly racist statement and should think about pulling their advertisement," Oxley said. "It sounds to me like the best way to deal with these folks is to ignore them. I don't think that people like this who spew this sort of hatred get much audience aside from people who are also filled with hate."

Cassidy Friedman can be reached at 208-735-3241 or cfriedman@magicvalley.com.

[Coward of the Keyboard]

By the way, there are many of us who heard that broadcast in question, and there IS NO DOUBT about the content. I was shocked and disgusted, as I still am.

[Coward of the Keyboard]

As for teabagging, check this video out from Lee Camp:

[Coward of the Keyboard]

Here's the URL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asWI3rlE14U

[thepoliticalgame]

The Times-News is an independent paper...Ha! Since when? The last time I remember the paper being even remotely middle-of-the-road was the late 80s, early 90s when I actually started reading it. Independent. Funny.

[MountainGoat]

James, even with the added context (the audio of which I'll be happy to post at some point) your comment to Bell reinforced his world view that he's under attack from people who don't like his moral stands on issues which is simply not the case. Context adds a little color but doesn't diminish that fact.

When asked why the paper called him a racist, you did set Bell straight about it being Democrats that called him racist. Absolutely... the paper *never* said he was a racist, which has been a frustrating point since the issue first surfaced last June. In the article you cite (and for future reference, a link to the article is sufficient) Bell himself admits that what Frosty (his guest) said was racist. Bell admits to using "Negro" which *is* an offensive term... that's not "alleged" that's a fact. The fact that you highlighted that the "allegations" were being made by Democrats turned it into a partisan issue. One of the most outspoken voices against Bell's hatred and racism has been Gary Eller (who writes the "In the Middle" blog for your paper) a Republican. Racism is not a Democratic or Republican, conservative or liberal issue but the paper sure fed into Bell's deluded view that it is.

[Wordsmith]

{"It's not a race issue," Bell said. "The liberals feel they got their toes stepped on. It has nothing to do with his color. I don't like the man."}

Ohhhh - trust me.....it has EVERYTHING to do "with his color."

[James Wright]

Please do post the audio. I beg to differ with your interpretation - which goes way beyond anything I actually said.

In any event, my intent was to respond to Bell's question by pointing out that he cries crocodile tears in trying to claim moral high ground as a victim when in fact he's a combatant who should expect to take as well as give. I checked with some co-workers who listened to the show and they heard it the way I intended.

Saying the T-N made the uproar over Bell's remarks a partisan issue is revisionist history. Chuck Oxley, the state Democratic Party spokesman, was out front in calling on advertisers to pull their ads from Bell's show - in press releases on state party letterhead. It's disingenuous to ignore this.

If you want to write a guest commentary taking the T-N to task for failing to call Bell a racist in an editorial, we'd run it. Or if you would like to meet with our editorial board to make your case that we should do so in an editorial, I'd be happy to arrange it. My number is 208-735-3255.

[Michael Blankenship]

Paul Krugman's essay - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13krugman.html - also points out the fallacies of this non-movement.

[Callisto]

TPG, you used the terms “independent” and “middle-of-the-road” to describe the Times News. I’m not sure what you mean by independent, and I know I’m wading into dangerous waters because you’re locally grown whereas I’m a relative newcomer, but the publisher and editor of the Times-News from 1990 to 2004 was Stephen Hartgen, the District 23 representative who recently ignited the Idaho blogosphere with his proposal to eliminate anonymous online commentary and bloggers.

According to a December 2008 interview published in the Boise Weekly (http://tinyurl.com/cs7dn2) “Hartgen said in his days at the Times-News, the paper was more conservative on education, oriented to accountability and merit pay.” And based on comments made by numerous bloggers who admitted having worked as reporters at the Times-News when Mr. Hartgen was its editor (including Kevin Richert of the Statesman), it’s hard to imagine that the editorial stance of the paper was anything other than socially and fiscally conservative.

I stand by my original comment regarding the reporting and editorial commentary of the Times-News. It’s been one of the few papers in the state to challenge the march toward privatization of public education in Idaho by investigating and reporting on the financial and social costs of the charter school movement. Its reporting on water resources and agricultural issues unique to the Magic Valley is excellent, and its editorial criticism of state politics is refreshingly straight-forward (read today’s editorial on frivolous legislation at http://tinyurl.com/da8b83).

I appreciate the fact that Mr. Wright joined the conversation here. I trust that MG found something to be concerned about in the conversation between Zeb and Mr. Wright, but I also understand Mr. Wright’s concerns that his comments were taken out of context.

[MountainGoat]

James, I appreciate your coming here and trying to clarify what you meant, and we can argue over whether or not more context would have provided clarification, but I can think of *no* context in which it would have been okay to say that "hate speech is *just* speech." Minimizing the consequences of hate speech just reinforced Zeb's view.

It is completely protected speech--I wouldn't have it any other way--but hate speech is dangerous. It's the first step on the scale (Alport's) measuring the level of prejudice in a community. It infects that community with an acceptance and tolerance of bigotry and other, even physical, acts of hatred. Zeb Bell doesn't understand how damaging it is, his supporters don't understand how damaging it is and if the guy running the only newspaper in the valley doesn't understand how damaging it is, your community (the community I grew up in) is in more trouble than I ever realized.

No one has suggested that Democrats weren't the ones "out in front" on the issue of Bell's remarks in June. In fact good on *someone* for doing so. My point was simply that your paper could have done more than just report that Democrats were making "allegations." For instance, do you know that Bell's guest that day, Frosty Wooldridge, has written articles for the website of David Duke? And that there is other evidence of the bigoted views held by Frosty who is a weekly guest on the show and who Zeb calls "his dear, dear friend?" Bell even complained in the segment with you that no one had contacted him to get his views on race. The paper could have put more focus on the issue of racism and bigotry that permeates that entire community.

[MountainGoat]

Also Callisto, in TPG's defense (not that she isn't quite capable of doing so herself) during my time in the area, my folks took both the SIP and the Times-News and while I can't think of any specific examples from the time to cite, I remember the Times-News as being pretty middle-of-the-road, much more than the SIP. In fact my mother often considered canceling the T-N because she considered it "too liberal," except that it covered national news in more depth at the time.

[Callisto]

MG, my comment to TPG was not meant as an attack, so please don't think there's a need for either of you to mount a defense.

I'm just sharing what I've read about the Times-News and its editor during the time period mentioned, and it seems unlikely to me that the paper could have been less conservative in its editorial views than it is now, which was all I intended to convey. The perception that the T-N was liberal-leaning when Mr. Hartgen was its editor is valid, it's just surprising to me based on what I've read elsewhere.

[James G. Wright]

MG: You said "I can think of *no* context in which it would have been okay to say that "hate speech is *just* speech." Minimizing the consequences of hate speech just reinforced Zeb's view."

Perhaps I wasn't making myself clear that day, or you are chosing to warp my words to fit your needs. I NEVER said "hate speech" is just speech. I was talking about Bell's wanting to portray himself as the victim of you big bad liberals who say mean things about him. My point remains this: As long as you're not shooting at him, your criticisms of him are just talk and he is no victim.

Please: post the audio, if you have it. And I'm still waiting for your call.

[MountainGoat]

James,
I've built a pretty solid reputation around here as a blogger who is credible and fair, even among journalists in this area. For you to suggest that I would *intentionally* misconstrue your words that day is insulting. For you to also, knowing that I'm blogging anonymously, "offer" to meet with your editorial board or to discuss by phone the paper's failure to adequately cover issues of racism in the Magic Valley is also insulting. Does it really take an independent weekly (Boise Weekly) to do the reporting that your paper should have been doing for years?

You know what I find hilarious, though? That what you're accusing me of doing is exactly what I've heard others who find themselves in the spotlight accuse journalists of doing--taking quotes out of context, misconstruing intent. I've even heard some say that about your paper. The fact remains that you said what you said:

"If somebody on the left wants to call that hate speech or whatever, they can. I mean, it's just speech."

And you've been able to state your case for what you intended by that.