Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America

by John P. Avlon, Tina Brown (Foreword)

One year into the Obama administration there is a bad craziness snaking through America: the Wingnuts are on the attack. They are the unhinged activists, professional partisans and paranoid conspiracy theorists on both the far right and far left of the political spectrum, whose hate and hyper-partisanship since Obama's inauguration threatens to mock the promise upon which he was elected. In "Wingnuts", journalist John Avlon travels to the outer-reaches of American politics to explain how far-left and far-right extremists came to dominate the nation's political dialogue. From the revolutionary-inspired "Tea Party" protests to the healthcare town hall 'hijackings', principled policy opposition to government spending has taken a sharp right turn into Crazytown. Not to mention Sarah Palin's rants about administration 'death panels', attacks like Obama-as-Hitler/Communist/Antichrist and actual death threats against elected leaders. For those with a vested interest in stirring the crazypot - like the hyper-partisan talk-show radio and cable news hosts - all of this has been good for business: hate is a cheap and easy recruiting tool. But it can be murder on a democracy...

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Essays, Political Science, Ebooks, The United States Of America

284 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

John Phillips Avlon (born 1973) is the author of Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics and Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America. He was a columnist and associate editor for The New York Sun and worked as chief speechwriter for former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani. He was Director of Speechwriting and Deputy Policy Director for Giuliani's 2008 presidential campaign. He is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He is senior political columnist at TheDailyBeast.com.

Reviews

[Jennifer Jacobs · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very entertaining overview of far left and far right in America!
This book is by the Daily Beast and in the polarized American Politics,this balanced narrative is as good as it ever gets!
The book is a 250+ pages quick read on the most outrageous statements and transgressions of both liberals and conservatives in America!From the Bush hating Liberals,9/11 truthers to Obama hating,flag having gun humping bible thumping conservative hatriots this book covers all the craziness in the US politics!
The author is very unbiased and that's very impressive imo,he has written a very personal account as he has met most of the personalities mentioned in the book himself,attended racist,hate filled Tea Party rallies and interviewed them all for the book!
If you are a political junkie this book will be a pleasure for you :-)

[Malcolm Pellettier · Rating 2 out of 5]

Mr. Avlon needs a re-think. There is no moral equivalence bn the left and the right. sorry.
John Birchers have taken over the Republican party so they're aim is some Ayn Rand cum theo-fascist dystopia. The lefty equivalent would be 19th century anarchists taking over the dems. period.

Moreover, mr. Avlon singularly fails to take into account the MASSIVE astro-turf nature of right-side insanity. Take away the money and the infrastrucure and the tea party is just a bunch of lonely basement bombshelter hoarders, nothing more. "Libertarianism" as practiced by american billionaires, who just happened to inherit their money, is a provincial ideological vestige, that only has traction in the US. The rest of the world left it behind in 1848, and laughs at its precepts, probably cause the rest of the world has stronger Public institutions, like, say, public broadcasters. For eg, the US will be the last place on earth that accepts global warming en masse, because it's the only place on earth that lets climate deniers "debate" scientists on television. Just imagine debating the effects of tobacco with a cigarette lobbyist everytime a public health official comes on the tube?! The BBC outlawed climate deniers as a pollicy. it's about time. It's no secret why the Kochs take an interest in PBS.

[Helynne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I find the title word Wingnuts delightfully appropriate, although it is just another of many epithets such as dork or dingbat that so aptly describe many politicians, political commentators and pundits of our day. The book’s cover features photos of Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman, although author John Avlon refers to numerous other people of their sort who talk a lot—really a lot—without doing their homework, and stir up public fear and discontent without a care as to whether they are making any sense or doing serious harm. And they spout their rhetoric allegedly in the name of patriotism and Christian doctrines. “Beneath the heartfelt talk of God and Country there is a strangeness seeping in to our politics, not just incivility but outright hostility,” Avlon states. “It is a sign of the increasing influence of the extremes, embracing the slash-and-burn techniques of a talk radio entertainer instead of the coalition building skills of political leaders. But by enabling the extremes, Republicans may be sowing the seeds of their own destruction” (165). But Avlon is not singling out only Republicans as Wingnut demagogues. (He calls Olberman “the Limbaugh of the Left” [129]). He points out that the flakiness of the cover people as well as Rush Limbaugh and many others is an omnipresent, contagious, and very scary phenomenon. Avlon begins with a “Wingnut Glossary” that defines many of the bizarre obsessions and misconceptions bandied about by contemporary fanatics. Three of the weirdest are “9/11 Truthers” conspiracy theorists from both the far-left and the far-right who believe that the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 were an inside job, “Birthers,” who want to convince the rest of the country that President Obama should not be in office because he was really born in Kenya (despite legal documentation and witnesses that prove he was born in Hawaii in 1961), and the Obama Derangement Syndrome that makes some people call the president a Nazi and others label him a communist. Others insist he is a Muslim. (Wow). Of course, the Wingnut philosophy is not new. Avlon notes that the Teddy Roosevelt coined the term “lunatic fringe” to describe the Wingnuts of his day like the left-wing anarchist who assassinated his predecessor, William McKinley. He also reminds us of the militant anti-communism that surfaced in the era of Senator Joe McCarthy and the John Birch Society. But today the these disturbingly excessively phenomena are made worse by easy dissemination over radio, TV, and the Internet where Wingnuts engage in “apocalyptic fear-mongering” (232) “Rarely has anyone gone from obscurity to obsession American psyche faster than Sarah Palin” (144), says Avlon. He points out that Palin’s popularity is deep—some people absolutely adore her--but (mercifully) does not go wide. That is, there are not huge numbers of obsessive admirers . . . yet. This study is filled with many quotable tidbits that are disturbingly accurate. He notes that a lack of perspective is the tell-tale sign of the Wingnut. “The line between political fantasy and reality can blur for the unhinged “ (235). Avlon asserts that Glenn Beck (among other) uses fear as his motivating factor. “”(Beck) keeps people’s attention via fear, anger and resentment” (129). Beck and other use “fear of the other; fear wrapped up in the American flag; fear calling itself freedom “ (239). One of his concluding statements is that “the Founding Fathers warned about the dangers of faction—Wingnuts enflame it. The Founding Fathers were focused on uniting the nation. Wingnuts try to divide it” (239). This timely, balanced and perceptive essay definitely should be widely read and extensively quoted in our time and in generations to come.

[Melki · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the publishing glut of "novels" by Rush Ann O'Reilly Limbaugh-Beck, it's nice to occasionally hear something from the other side of the fence.
Avlon attempts to present a "fair and balanced" look at political blowhards and their followers by including Keith Olbermann and a look at the 9/11 conspiracy theories, but let's face it -- liberals just do not ride the crazy train as well as their right-wing counterparts. One group of people signs petitions and talks amongst themselves in hushed voices. The other group repeatedly threatens, "Be like us, or we'll kill you." Which group do you think makes for more interesting reading?
The author goes to great pains to investigate the nutjobs' claims, even venturing inside the lair of Orly Taitz, a leading figure in the "birther" movement and a woman who scares the hell out of me.
He checks out claims that Obama is a Nazi by contacting an active member of the American National Socialist Party - they don't use the "N" word much anymore. The answer is no, Obama is not a Nazi and he needn't bother submitting an application anytime soon.
The book is an entertaining read, going into deeper detail on things the mainstream media have only touched on, but in the end offers no real solutions on how to repair our Divided States of America.

[Tom Schulte · Rating 3 out of 5]

A lot of this book was about specific wingnut celebrities like Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, etc. These are colorful characters and the biographical details are interesting. (Glenn Beck, an unlikely Mormon?) However, for me I am real interested in the mechanics of the rightwing fringe ascendancy. There is a set of quotes that frames the discussion of increased partisan divisiveness and amped up crazy:

"I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president, and I hope he does a good job."
—John Wayne after the election of John F. Kennedy, 1960

"I hope he fails."
—Rush Limbaugh after the election of Barack Obama, 2008

"William Butler Yeats who so memorably captured the eternal predicament of oppositional politics:

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity."

"You cannot reason someone out of something he has not been reasoned into."
—Irish satirist Jonathan Swift

Published in 2010 at the start of Obama's first term, this does cover some of that evolution, such as the far-right move into cyberspace:

The technology gap could be seen in the GOP’s 2008 online outreach. Obama had 3.1 million Facebook supporters, compared to 600,000 for McCain. Obama had 113 million YouTube views compared to twenty-five million for McCain. And when it came to Meetup.com—a site famously used by Howard Dean supporters in 2004—McCain got outhustled not only by Obama but also Libertarian candidate Bob Barr. McCain ran a twentieth-century GOTV (Get Out the Vote) campaign in which phone calls and mailings to supporters were the key metric. The McCain campaign spent $18 million in postage and shipping costs, and $3 million on the Internet, according to opensecrets.org. By comparison, Obama spent $15 million in postage and shipping costs and $14 million on the Internet.

But after the election, grassroots conservatives woke up to social media and the Internet. They were energized by being in the opposition—supplementing their talk radio diet with Twitter, the social networking service that pushes text messages of 140 characters or less. Ironically, McCain—whose campaign hadn’t collected cell phone numbers for text messaging during the campaign—created his own Twitter account three days after the election and ten months later had a million followers. 55 By mid-2009 there were twice as many conservative congressmen on Twitter as Democrats, and Sarah Palin was using her Facebook page as her primary means of communicating with supporters. The Tea Parties and town hall protests were organized online, and with an assist from Fox News’ pre-game promotion, they started to feel like populist uprisings.

This conservative netroots revolution is an evolutionary leap—a higher degree of specialization—beyond the niche partisan network approach innovated by Roger Ailes at Fox News. Now what conservatives dismiss as “mainstream media”—because it does not reflect movement politics—can be completely bypassed. You can have news tailored to fit your beliefs and chat with like-minded activists.

I also have been increasingly become convinced that partisan districting and political primaries are at the core of what is wrong with American politics today. That area is touched on here, though I wish it went into greater depth:

...the rigged system of redistricting has helped push political power to the margins. The creation of safe seats has resulted in a 96 percent re-election rate,26 effectively ending competitive general elections. That makes the only real contest a partisan primary—and if only 10 percent of the electorate turns out, 5.1 percent makes a majority. It’s a paradise for activists, empowering ideological warriors who do not have to worry about winning voters in the center of the political spectrum. Instead, they can focus on playing to the base.

Well, George Washington warned us:

...in his Farewell Address, George Washington made it clear that he perceived no greater threat to the American experiment than a partisan demagogue who “agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another.”

This pre-Trump work feels more hopeful than we now have a "right" to be:

There’s also a secret hiding in plain sight: The far right is far more loud than powerful. The few big-tent Republicans who are left are among the party’s most powerful vote getters, even as they are attacked as politically impotent.

[Monica · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading the book nine years later, a lot of things are more diluted and seemingly harmless, in retrospect. Scary how many crazy people have such a voice, though.
I liked the Jonathan Swift (attributed) quote: "You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into. "

[Rob · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first edition of this book was published in 2010, then updated in 2014. At the last update, Donald Trump wasn't even on the radar of most political observers. He is mentioned just once in this edition, as a prominent spokesman for the Birther movement. But Trump is all over is this book in spririt and, if it proves anything, it proves that Trump is more of a symptom of what ails the American political scene than the leader of any new "movement."

Avlon, a writer and editor for The Daily Beast, focuses on modern manifestations of political extremism, but he goes back all the way to the nation's founding to show that, if nothing else, the extremism we see today is hardly new (for a more complete examination of this idea, see Charlie Pierce's Idiot America). The subtitle of this book, though, is "Extremism In The Age of Obama," and it is the right-wing response to the 44th president that Avlon gives most of his attention to, including:
•the rise of the Tea Party, now virtually unrecognizable from its origins early in the decade.
•how conservatives who once sneered at "Bush Derangement Syndrome" practiced "Obama Derangement Syndrome" with no apparent sense of irony once the Oval Office changed Parties
•the idea that whites are now an oppressed minority, to the point that in recent surveys a majority of Republicans believe that reverse racism is a bigger problem than the old-fashioned kind
•the political fractionalization of the press

Only four years later, some this book seems a little dated. References to Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck might strike an "Oh, whatever happened to them?" chord with anyone except the minority of Americans who still pay attention to them. But much of it still rings true. As sure as Bush Derangement Syndrome became Obama Derangement Syndrome, the latter became Trump Derangement Syndrome. All that changed is who was becoming deranged and who was doing the sneering. The Obama as Hitler comparisons have become Trump as the harbinger of American facism. The only difference is ... well, you get the idea.

Persons of a conservative bent might find this book a little one-sided, but it's worth keeping in mind it was originally written during the Obama Administration about extremist reactions to that president. If written today, would Avlon write more about the left's responses to President Trump? Many on the left would argue that the Trump regime itself is an extremist reaction to Obama. But are people who say that just a left-wing species of wingnut? As Avlon writes:

"Partisans on each side think they are the true patriots. They all find a way to conveionce themselves they are the inheritors and defenders of the American Revolution. And in an implicit acknowledgment of Americans' allergy to extremism, each side tries to paint its opponents as the real extremists. In this sense, at least, we are not all that far apart."

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obama’s a Nazi! Buy Gold! Who is ‘The Worst Person in the World?’

What has happened to the news media? It has become polarized in search of ratings, is what happened; at least according to John Avlon in his new book (and the first book from The Daily Beast) ‘Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America.’

Led by the radical voices of the far right wing (the ‘fright wing’ as Avlon calls them) this largely insane polarizing of the extreme left and right is driven by two factors according to the book – the electoral rejection of the right in November of 2008 as well as the declining ratings of talk radio and its reliance on a largely older, white demographic audience. In a world where die-hard partisans are perhaps the only reliable audience (P1s), talk radio (with an incubation assist from websites like WorldNetDaily, Redstate and others) has purposely rearranged itself into a forum for self-segregated narrowcasting. The more shocking, the better – at least for ratings.

The vocabulary of the extremists, both in the media and extremist politics, includes frequent references to Marxism, socialism, death panels, Obamacare, the birthers, the truthers and of course, the bedeviled Nazism. It seems the more radical the verbiage, the more popular the pontificator becomes, (Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, etc.) at least with the base.

Avion explains both in a historical (TR, FDR, JFK) and current day context (town hall meetings, Tea Party, etc.) how these factions began and evolved but concludes with a formula for the settling of these conditions through the emergence of a more vocal populist (i.e. centrist) movement. We’ll see.

[Blog on Books · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obama’s a Nazi! Buy Gold! Who is ‘The Worst Person in the World?’

What has happened to the news media? It has become polarized in search of ratings, is what happened; at least according to John Avlon in his new book (and the first book from The Daily Beast) ‘Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America.’

Led by the radical voices of the far right wing (the ‘fright wing’ as Avlon calls them) this largely insane polarizing of the extreme left and right is driven by two factors according to the book – the electoral rejection of the right in November of 2008 as well as the declining ratings of talk radio and its reliance on a largely older, white demographic audience. In a world where die-hard partisans are perhaps the only reliable audience (P1s), talk radio (with an incubation assist from websites like WorldNetDaily, Redstate and others) has purposely rearranged itself into a forum for self-segregated narrowcasting. The more shocking, the better – at least for ratings.

The vocabulary of the extremists, both in the media and extremist politics, includes frequent references to Marxism, socialism, death panels, Obamacare, the birthers, the truthers and of course, the bedeviled Nazism. It seems the more radical the verbiage, the more popular the pontificator becomes, (Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, etc.) at least with the base.

Avion explains both in a historical (TR, FDR, JFK) and current day context (town hall meetings, Tea Party, etc.) how these factions began and evolved but concludes with a formula for the settling of these conditions through the emergence of a more vocal populist (i.e. centrist) movement. We’ll see.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent primer on the current Wingnut crazies. John Avlon is an excellent voice of reason in the current internet media. He touches base on everything from the conspiracists of the Birthers and Truthers, to the media noise-makers like Keith Olbermann and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, passing sufficient critical judgement when and where it is needed. As well as revealing the simply ridiculousness of some of the claims. I love his level headed, and personal reporter's experience, with the Tea Party protests and the health-care town hall protests.

One of the great things about this book is Avlon's extensive sources page, most of them from websites and links to the media pages so you can read his resources for yourself and judge yourself. Everything is sufficiently footnoted and left for you to easily decide for youself. I can see myself using this book to find support for my political arguments or to shoot down other people's preposterous claims.

If anything, the only criticism I had was that I wish the author could have gone MORE in depth, but he does recommend a few books at the end about extremism in politics for his readers to check out if that want more. So kudos, to Beast Books on this first installment. I look forward to other excellent political books.

[Cedric Hendrix · Rating 4 out of 5]

American politics has gone bat@$#% crazy. Loudmouths from the far left and the far right are the only people being heard, and their voices are driving the electoral process. John Avlon puts a few names and movements to the ideals that our dividing our country, and offers sanity in the suggestion that extremism from either side will do the country no good. It would do extremists good to read "Wingnuts," but the real benefit may be to those who consider themselves center-right or -left, and feel themselves heading out to the far end of their political spectrum. We can still save ourselves from the insanity. John Avlon would be an ideal speaker for the movement.

[Page · Rating 1 out of 5]

The writer starts from his point of view as THE ONE point of view which enlightened people should have. To be fair, he went after both left and right, and far right, and middle right. I found his whole premise composed of strawmen and lack of complete facts. Sure a dude out of thousands says something ignorant about Obama. When talking about "violence" at tea rallies he failed to mentioned the anti-tea party were responsible.

Just watch Fox News,CNN and MSNBC and see wingnuts in action.

[Marsha · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book - It's an expose of the political fringes and a rallying cry for radical centrists. Reminded me of how the wingnuts have been using the same scare tactics and manipulations for a very long time.

[Michael Laflamme · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fresh air at last!

Finally, an author who truly understands the nature of the wings of U. S. opinion. A balanced, well-reasoned, analysis. Deep enough for a close rereading.

[Connie Glasgow]

So glad to be done - now I know why politics are not my favorite. YUCK!

['becca · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I don't personally think it helpful to derrogatorily label those one disagrees with, even if they are on both side's political extremes, I do appreciate this author's call to independence from the extremes-a coming together to move forward instead of standing across the ever-widening divide and passionately throwing stones.

I am one who has felt pushed into being a conservative-leaning independent, by the extremes of the Republican Party to which I previously belonged. The author of this book is, I believe, a more liberal-leaning independent, and he pokes fun (with his sense of humor) of people and ideas I can relate to. But he does speak a lot of sense, and I agree with his call to action.

I think it is possible to have high ideals, and not compromise them; and still be able to meet in the middle with those I don't agree with in order to move our country forward. John Adams, working to even get our country started, is my favorite example of this.

I understand better now why I was verbally attacked by close family and good neighbors when I insisted on "voting my conscience" in the last election, instead of voting "with the party." I understand better now how President Trump was elected, and much else politically that I've seen going on around me. And I feel even less of a desire to join or rejoin either of the major political parties.

[Ra Fe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating book in light of the polarization of politics that exists today. If one is a moderate/centrist, it is relatively easy to get caught up in how freaky and "wingnutty" the ends of the political spectrum are and what people actually believe (Qanon, 3%ers, antifa, etc) when in fact the book does a great service in illuminating the fact that these fringes have existed since the beginning of our countries history. That doesn't downplay how wackadoodle these fringes are, but it does allow perspective to come into play. It was a good read and it will be interesting to now view the ends of the spectrum with a slightly different lens as we march forward through this election cycle and future ones.

[Ari Damoulakis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wish he could have been given a crystal ball and then been asked to write this. Wonder how he’d change it? At the time, I suppose most people would not have really taken much or the characters in this book too seriously? But we mustn’t forget, this author is also media and I blame even the normal media for the Trump phenomenon to make money for themselves.
Very good descriptions of scenes and behaviour of people.
Another problem though, he tries talking about Bush Derrangement Syndrome and left-wing extremism.
Someone should remind him that literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians died.
It isn’t always just about mostly local life and politics in America.

[Joel · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's some superlative reviews on here. I have to say the author was somewhat prescient seeing how I'm reading this nearly 12 years after he published it. I liked his written cadence and the research he did. One reviewer noted he focused on right wing extremism more than left wing and I would tend to agree with that. That's not to say what he reported isn't harrowing...and a call for all of us to be vigilant.

[Budd Margolis · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is useful to understand how the crazy Political climate in America has continually developed in a negative and destructive manner. If the events across 3 decades are of interest then this book is useful. The few solutions seem unattainable but ignorance is no excuse as we seek a cure. And we should be ashamed for not even trying.

[Cheryl · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book needs updated to encapsulate the wingnuts and conspiracy theorists we've confronted since the 2016 election cycle.

While this books chronicles craziness in the U.S. for last several decades, it failed to perceive a future if the progression of hate and distrust continues... Bringing us to a 6 January 2021 effort to violently overthrow the results of a fair election.

[Jenifer · Rating 2 out of 5]

Relevant now as very recent history, but still applicable, of course. I'm not the best at politics, so I had hoped that this would be written in such a way as to really capture my attention. I don't know if that's even possible for a political book. I did a fair amount of skimming.

[Mark Nicholson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well done!

[Karl Ingersoll · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great Book

I am a Canadian who lived ten years in the states during a much better time. I enjoyed this book immensely.

[Michael T. · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very informative work, a quick read, with lots of good information, and with one big fat flaw in it's thesis -- I'll call it an "equivalency" problem. To paraphrase said thesis, most Americans are somewhere in the middle of the "political spectrum", and yet a disproportionate amount of modern day media coverage has been hijacked by extremists on both the political right AND the political left. Good so far, right? Well, right. But where's the left? Don't get me wrong. Believe me, I've seen my share of left Wingnuts -- they are true-believing, full market socialists (Che posters on their walls, natch) & believe that Dick Cheney remote control flew the airplanes into the twin towers and the Pentagon (actually a cruise missile there) himself, personally, on 9-11. They (the left Wingnuts) exist. No doubt about it. So where's their 24 hour news network? (And please, for God's sake, don't tell me MSNBC -- owned by multi-billion dollar corporation GE, which recently hired a handful of moderately left-of-center pundits in order to cash in on the untapped market of folks who don't fit into the Tea Party/ Fox News mind-set.) Name a powerful media leftist. Michael Moore, right? How did I guess? Probably he can, in terms of physical bulk, counterbalance Rush Limbaugh. In terms of influence? Probably not. Maybe you've got Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon. All right, well get ready -- Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Laura Schlessinger, Bill O'Reilly . . . I could go into the minor leagues with someone like Michael Medved, and a whole "minor leagues" system of wannabe big-time bloviators. But I think you get the idea. And has Tim Robbins ever said the offensive equivalent of a Michael Savage (actually Weiner, but that's a whole other rant) telling a gay man to "get AIDS & die"? Where is anything Susan Sarandon has EVER said to compare with Anne Coulter's post 9-11 statement in regards to Muslims worldwide, that we ought to "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."? John Avlon (author of Wingnuts) points out a single instance in which MSNBC pundit Keith Olbermann called George W. Bush a "Fascist". (And, when considered rationally, policies such as torture, the invasion of sovereign nations which have not attacked you first, and the kidnapping of suspects off of the streets worldwide, with their delivery to "black" sites in order to subject them to said "enhanced" interrogation techniques -- this could reasonably be called at least "Fascistic", yes? I will leave it for others to decide how many "Fascistic" acts, policies, etc. one can initiate before one can reasonably be referred to as a "Fascist.") Almost every one of right wing pundits I have named above have repeatedly -- REPEATEDLY! -- referred to my President, Barack Obama, as a "Socialist", a "Communist", or (and this would be comic if they weren't deadly serious about it) a "Fascist." And, of course, a "crypto-Muslim terrorist sympathizer". And they have done so with the megaphone of some VERY powerful and ubiquitous cable and radio networks. Where is the Rupert Murcoch of the left? Don't waste your time looking. There isn't one. And while, to a limited degree, Avlon's point is well taken -- the extremes, right and left, are the tail; we in the middle are the dog -- to pretend that the far right has not had much, MUCH more influence in the last 20 years or so is to also ignore a genuine and VERY present danger. The "middle" is not a static place. It has been moved to the right, VERY deliberately, in recent years. So is Avlon's book a recommended read? Sure. But with the following caveat -- the equivalency which he pretends exists for the sake of his thesis, does NOT. 40 years ago, egged on by some overheated left wing rhetoric, a group calling itself the "Weather Underground" set off several bombs, some of which even killed some innocent people. 15 years ago an individual named Timothy McVeigh, egged on by some very overheated right wing rhetoric, set off a bomb, killing 186 people in a single morning.

[Matthew Willis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not too bad. Honestly it was very informing. a couple things tho. He shares the information without an opinion like a real journalist. His actual opionon comes out in the last chapter quoting someone else's opinion. "The alternative domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism." - George Washington

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A CRITICISM OF THE "EXTREMES" (MOSTLY ON THE RIGHT) IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE

John Avlon is a columnist for The Daily Beast, and also author of 'Independent Nation: How Centrism Can Change American Politics.' He notes in the first chapter of this 2010 book, "I am not a Democrat. I am not a Republican. I'm an American. I believe the far left and far right are equally insane. But in the opening years of the Obama administration, the Wingnuts on the right have been screaming the loudest." (Pg. 3)

He later adds, "We are caught in a pendulum swing of hyper-partisanship. The extremes echo and incite each other, confirming their side's worst stereotypes..." (Pg. 19) He argues that redistricting "has helped push political power to the margins," even as it resulted in 96% reelection rates, since it effectively ended competitive general elections. (Pg. 157)

Observing the criticisms of the president's health care proposals at town hall meetings, he suggests, "The roots of the town hall protests were the same as the Tea Parties---anger at the growth of government and the unprecedented spending. The fact the president had called for the health-care legislation to pass before the August recess felt to many citizens like liberal arrogance and overreach." (Pg. 30) He also notes the objections of liberals to Obama's "realpolitik agenda---a surge for Afghanistan, a cautious exit from Guantanamo, pragmatism on health care..." (Pg. 188)

He concludes the book on the note, "Washington was the original independent... George Washington warned us about the Wingnuts. We would be wise to take his advice." (Pg. 244)

Although obviously coming more from the Left, Avlon spares neither side completely in his analysis; this book (despite having been written in a mere three months in-between his wedding and honeymoon; pg. 245) will be of interest to anyone who deplores the growing "extremism" on both sides of the political aisle.

[Bunny · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is scarier than anything Stephen King, Dean Koontz, and Richard Matheson combined could come up with.

I'm downright horrified. When I started this, I worried that, during the Bush administration, I became a bit of a Wingnut. I shuddered to think I was anything like the people (both liberal and conservative) showcased in these pages.

I'm 98.5% certain I was NEVER this bad.

I believe in freedom of speech. I believe people should express their political beliefs often and loudly. But I don't believe you should be abusive, and I don't believe you should attack people without having strong facts to back you up. So I'm pretty sure I'm not a Wingnut. Pretty sure. ::shifty::

This is a very well written book. Political books tend to confuse me quiet a bit, as I'm slow on the uptake when it comes to hardcore politics. This spoke in a way that kept me from going, "Hunh?" over and over again.

I'm liberal. Maybe if I was conservative, I wouldn't care for this book. And I wish there was a review from a GR conservative, so I could see their opinion on it. This book doesn't strike me as being too one-sided, but what do I know? I think Sarah Palin is a moose-killing dumbass.

[Maria · Rating 4 out of 5]

Have you ever watched political commentary and thought, those people are crazy? Or these people are way to angry and loud? Our nation has a history of hysteria in politics, from the Know-Nothings down to the present... the sad news is that they are louder and better paid than ever. And dare I say it, more crazy too.

Why I started this book: Eye catching title and it was a short audio.

Why I finished it: Written in 2010, some of the references are already dated but I enjoyed Avlon's insight into both sides of the crazy spectrum. He pointed out that the party out of power amps up the crazy talk, so his present selections of craziness lean towards the right. That doesn't mean that the left has driven the crazy train or served the kool-aid too. The internet and niche news markets have accelerated the rush to the extremes in a time when we need to build political cooperation and to trust the news networks.

This would be an awesome book group selection because the conversations and discussion would be epic. And we need to have them as a country. Plus I enjoyed the shout out to Jon Stewart as one of the most trusted news sources because of the polarization of the networks.

[John Defrog: global citizen, local gadfly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is John Avlon’s chronicle of the rise of fearmongering extremist political rhetoric on both sides of the political aisle in recent times (that is, up to 2010, when the book was published) – which means that anyone who’s not a centrist is going to find something here to offend them. It also means that what you make of it is probably going to depend where yr own political views lie. The book is generally intended as a wake-up call to centrists to stand up to extremist politicians and pundits on both sides before they become the mainstream. It’s more anecdotal than comprehensive or analytical, but it does cover a lot of bases – cable TV news, talk radio, hyperpartisan online echo-chambers, birthers, 9/11 truthers, right-wing militias, Tea Party rallies, Godwin’s Law, etc. Some readers might feel the comparisons of certain groups to others are a little unfair. And Avlon may be guilty at times of somewhat overstating his case, or at least overstating the danger. Then again, when you look at the state of media and politics today, it’s pretty clear the situation is worse now than it was when this book came out six years ago. Wingnuts may be somewhat superficial, but it’s a good primer for a larger and deeper conversation.