8/28/2010 1:33:55 PM

There was an opinion article on CNN yesterday about how Glenn Beck is altering history. I know it sounds crazy, and if I hadn't seen it myself, I wouldn't have thought it to be true, and nothing more than some left wing hack trying to stir the pot. I know Beck is a fucking moron, and I hate that douche bag. After reading this article:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/08/26/bunch.beck.history/index.html

I realized how true it is, and how much of a cancer Beck is on this country.

Let my describe what I mean. I always considered my grandfather (my mother's father) to be a pretty rational guy, and pretty smart. But it seems like the last 3 years, he's bitten more and more into the Fox News propaganda machine, and with Glenn Beck, it seems worse. I was visiting my grandparents this past summer to help them with some computer issues (nothing serious). Anyway, Glenn Beck had just finished up and we were going to go out to dinner, and he asks me "Have you ever seen this Glenn Beck guy, he's great." Two which I reply, "Yeah." He goes on and says "what's great about him, is he actually teaches you about history and what the founding father's believed in." I respectfully disagreed (I didn't want to get into some pissing contest with my grandfather) and said, "He may get some things right, but he also gets a lot of things wrong too." To which he asks me to name one thing he has gotten wrong on the spot. At this point, he is clearly offended, but I just state that Glenn has always presented our founding father's as God fearing Christians and that we are a Christian nation, which isn't right. While many, or even most, of our founding father's were certainly Christians, quite a few of them were not what I would consider strict Christians, or even Christians at all, but rather simply deists. After stating that, all my grandfather said was "I think you are wrong," without going into any other detail. I think my claim about the founding fathers all not being Christian kind of shocked him, not because I disagreed with him, but because he it may have been the first time someone actually casted doubt onto claims of Beck that he believed in.

If you read the article, you will notice that he's mainly stating that the people targeted and affecte by Beck are people with time, mainly retired people. My mother was also affected when she was looking for employment. She would watch Beck everyday and listen to Rush in the shower.

I don't mind if Beck wants to spout his propaganda, but the dangerous part about it is that people believe him. They never check to see if what he's saying is actually right. And he's just so good about taking a story and politicizing it in such a way that it can make his point.

For instance, last year (i believe), he showed a video of kids beating up and killing another kid on the street. A horrible incident, one that was truly sad and unfortunate. But he took that story, and spun it to attack atheists, by saying that the reason it happened was because atheists took God out of the classroom, and that these children didn't believe in God. He then went on to state that the number of atheists keeps growing, and that more and more violence is going to occur because of it, and that they promote horrible things like gay marriage, and that without bringing God back to the forefront of our society, our country is doomed. It was grade A fear mongering, the best I have seen in quite some time. It was filled with all the logical fallacies and emotional arguments you would expect. But the thing that bothered me about it wasn't that he believed it, but that other people believed it.

People who had they seen the video without the commentary, they would have thought that it was the product of being in a poor part of the city, where the parents are too busy to raise their children or the parents are simply absent from their children's lives. They were born into an unfortunate circumstance where their parents may not have even wanted them.

But Glenn took the story and twisted and turned it so that it's the ATHEIST's fault that this happened. But it logically doesn't make sense, as the only way to say that atheism brings this is that atheists are immoral people, but that means that he's saying that if you don't have God you are immoral. I think most of us know that's not true. There are plenty of people who claim to be Christian who are immoral, and plenty of people who are atheist who are moral.

I really wish Glenn would be stopped. I really do.

8/28/2010 1:48:01 PM

Peace Sells... but Who's Buying?

8/28/2010 1:53:26 PM

http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2010/08/a-suggestion-for-the-black-americans-who-dont-like-becks-rally.html

Quote :

"A lot of folks are accusing Glenn Beck of trying to “hijack” the legacy of Martin Luther King. (E.g. try this.) But they’re going for the tired old cards of calling him a racist, a divider, etc. Instead they should just say this: We understand that black Americans don’t “own” the legacy of Dr. King. This isn’t an issue of property rights. Of course Mr. Beck and his fans have every legal right to hold a rally in front of the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of the “I Have a Dream” speech. Nonetheless, we are asking that they hold their rally a few blocks away, and on a different date. There are 364 other days in the year; what’s wrong with them? Now look, we know full well that Mr. Beck and his supporters claim that they are trying to heal racial division. Intellectually, we black Americans know that just because we have been brutalized by angry white conservative males for as long as we can remember, that doesn’t mean that all angry white conservative males pose a threat to our physical safety. But this isn’t about logic or rationality. This is about sensitivity to our feelings. Surely Mr. Beck can understand why a majority of American blacks wouldn’t appreciate him holding a rally on the anniversary of Dr. King’s famous speech. If he goes ahead with his plans, he won’t promote racial unity. So we ask him to hold the rally in a different place, on a different date."

[Edited on August 28, 2010 at 2:04 PM. Reason : f]

8/28/2010 2:03:51 PM

^that suggestion is like Muslims being told not to build the mosque near ground zero.

fuck sensitivity and fuck anniversaries.

8/28/2010 2:15:41 PM

Whooosshh.

That was the sound of a point that flew right over your head. Shit was so close it gave you a buzz cut and you still didn't get it.

8/28/2010 2:17:37 PM

Well, he's not that far off. Glenn Beck can have his silly pointless faux-rage rally whenever and wherever the hell he wants (assuming he can get the permits).

It's the shameless attempt to co-opt MLK's legacy as something aligned with conservative values that is where the anger over this comes from. If Beck had just picked the date and not bothered to mention the MLK connections people probably wouldn't have given as much of a shit, but Beck has gone out of his way to draw the comparison.

So, since he started it (assuming that the site I'm stealing this from allows hotlinking, apologies if they don't)


http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/glenn%20beck%20martin%20luther%20king%20jr%20flowchart.jpg

8/28/2010 3:15:35 PM

Glenn Beck wants people to complain about his rally. He knows its a dumb idea, but he also knows it'll generate enough sound clips for him to play out of context to keep his dumb audience further convinced that white people are under attack.

The best things anyone can do is to just ignore Beck and his antics, kind of like what people should do about Westb**o baptist.

8/28/2010 5:15:03 PM

Quote :

""Something that is beyond man is happening," Beck told his supporters as the rally opened. "America today begins to turn back to God. For too long, this country has wandered in darkness." "

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/thousands-gather-dc-becks-restoring-honor-rally/story?id=11504433

This is why I become more and more discouraged about the future of this country. If you believe in upholding the constitution and limited government, you get lumped in with this dipshit. You can't advance libertarian ideals without being aligned with people that, somehow, think Christianity and politics should be combined. This guy is a populist of the worst kind, and I have no idea what can be done about it.

8/28/2010 5:30:51 PM

d357r0y3r and Glenn Beck, two peas in a pod.

8/28/2010 5:33:09 PM

Haha, you know it. This is a Christian nation, God damn it.

8/28/2010 5:34:44 PM

we're a culture of product and brand now

you've got to buy something even if you don't want to... might not even know you're doing it

i know i've got my favorite labels

8/28/2010 5:36:05 PM

How can this man claim to say we need to restore honor back to the country?!?!

Hasn't he realized that President Obama has done WAY MORE to restore honor to the country than he?!

My goodness, sometimes I get so riled up at all of this stuff that Beck says.

I'm glad Media Matters exists to counter the hate that he spews with all of this "God" and "Honor" talk.

Thank you, George Soros! You've made this country a better place! You are the one with the real honor.

8/28/2010 7:07:40 PM

its about honoring the troops "real men of honor"

8/28/2010 7:11:47 PM

Well, then, thank you.

8/28/2010 7:17:57 PM

^^^ Moderates don't take you seriously. You just replied to a criticism of Beck with some bullshit about Obama and other left wingers. You know, just because Beck is in the public conscience and aligns with many of your politics doesn't mean you have to accept him, right?

And you do realize a rejection of Beck isn't a rejection of conservatism, right?

8/28/2010 7:37:12 PM

The reason glenn beck is so successful and people like the guy on CNN that wrote the opinion article continually fail is because glenn beck backs up what he is talking about with specific events that happen in history instead of repeating wide generalizations all the time with no back up.

8/28/2010 8:35:34 PM

The reason glenn beck is so successful and people like the guy on CNN that wrote the opinion article continually fail is because glenn beck backs up what he is talking about with specific events that happen in history made up events or a single factual event followed by several made up events instead of repeating wide generalizations all the time with no back up.

8/28/2010 8:48:13 PM

^Lavim, you prove my point entirely. By you making a wholesale generalized statement with no specifics your argument is weak and people don't get anything from it

[Edited on August 28, 2010 at 9:35 PM. Reason : i can't spell...]

8/28/2010 9:35:30 PM

^ Are you speculating on why you think people think Beck is awesome, or are you saying why you think Beck is awesome?

8/28/2010 9:53:17 PM

BOLSHEVIKS! FRESCOES AT THE ROCKEFELLER CENTER! COMMUNIST IDEALS IN ART!

8/28/2010 9:53:36 PM

The purpose of government is to protect our rights. Rights granted by God. If they take God out of the equation then....who determines our rights?

8/28/2010 10:03:34 PM

^^^both.

I like Beck a lot. I disagree on some things and some of his tactics, but I love that he uses history. While he may "twist" it, I have yet to see any compelling arguments using historic events to disprove his main points.

I really think that people are fed up with people just blatantly making statements. The internet has made it so easy to present ideas lately. Example: someone can easily say Adrian Peterson is great at holding onto the ball and convince a bunch of people that he is in great at holding on to the ball when they don't know anything about him other than that he was labeled great and they believed it (of course this is not true)

So when Glenn Beck gets on a show and shows pictures, sound bites, and reads books it gives his message credibility so when his audience goes into the world and says Adrian Peterson sucks at hanging onto the ball they can reference all the games in which AP fumbled it away...IE Saints last year...and many others...instead of just disagreeing with the idiot that believed the person that said he was great at holding onto the ball...now he has evidence

So yes, there is bias, but I think its tough to not be biased on things you are passionate about. So my point is that if people want to discredit beck, please do it in a way that is similar to beck's style (IE Specifics)...because that is in fact why I believe so many people like him.

[Edited on August 28, 2010 at 10:11 PM. Reason : add an ^]

8/28/2010 10:10:42 PM

^ what do you perceive his "main points" to be?

[Edited on August 28, 2010 at 10:15 PM. Reason : ]

8/28/2010 10:15:16 PM

Faith hope and charity...of course...

I really think its simple with Beck.

1. Keep the government out of our lives as much as possible (IE lower taxes and less government services) because of the inefficiency of the gov.
2. Less government means more personal responsibility which gives people fulfillment and pride in their work because they are doing more of it.
3. People are able to make more money and follow the classic "american dream"
4. People that are successful see the rewards of being successful and become charitable
5. Our children see that personal responsibility and hard work leads to success and that charity is in fact a noble thing, not a forced thing.

That is what I understand Beck to be all about

8/28/2010 10:22:24 PM

All of this talk about charity makes me think you're actually a Muslim terrorist.. since one of the 5 pillars of Islam terrorism is supposedly charity. So, and I hope you can keep following where I'm going here, if you're a terrorist and you support Glenn Beck... WOW. I mean, I guess that means that Glenn Beck himself is a terrorist. WOW. It's not obvious until someone points it out. Glenn Beck is seriously a terrorist and he is trying to destroy America. WOW.

Seriously though... this is the guy you want leading your revolution? You have got to be a fucking moron. He's doing it to get rich and he's doing it by fooling all the dumbasses.

8/28/2010 11:22:36 PM

^^ so because you agree with those vague core principles, you don't care when beck grossly distorts reality, if it maintains those ideas?

I'm sure you must remember this Beck episode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YzrsNRvYmI&feature=related

Where he blatantly lies about what Obama was saying, and even gets his "proof" in the form of a video clip that is conveniently edited to remove the first half of the paragraph?

You do realize that blindly accepting sound "bites" of Beck are worse than the Internet? You are more skeptical of the Internet stuff, and you can just go research it, but you don't have any critical analysis of the "bites" that Beck feeds you?

I guess though that just because he has a portion of a video clip, he can't be lying, right? I guess you've already admitted that you don't really hold Beck to any rigorous standard, you believe him because you want to believe him. It's sad though that you are trying to convince other people to listen to someone who you admit tries to distort the truth.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090831102236AAEdDP5 here's the full context of that quote that Beck fooled you Lutz on Obama.

Beck lies to Lutz about Israeli coverage: http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/video-jon-stewart-points-out-glenn-beck-s-distortion-over-israeli-flotilla-raid

Beck deceives Lutz on Fox News funding: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/06/03/beck-alwaleed-911/

Glenn Beck asserts Obama surrounds himself with former Weather Underground people http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,598162,00.html
This is factually incorrect. It's easy to lookup, and Ayers at least worked for the conservative Annenberg foundation at one point.
Beck again deceives Lutz.

You pick practically any episode of the Glenn Beck show that you know of, and i'll show you how you've been hoodwinked by Beck.

[Edited on August 28, 2010 at 11:24 PM. Reason : ]

8/28/2010 11:24:03 PM

It is revisionist history to say this nation was founded on Christianity:

Treaty of Tripoli 1797:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries."
- James Madison 1803 letter objecting use of gov. land for churches

". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."
- John Adams

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
- Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813


"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law."
- Thomas Jefferson letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, 1814


"Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by the difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be depreciated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society."
- George Washington letter to Edward Newenham, 1792

8/29/2010 9:28:53 AM

Today's conservatives do seem to "cherry pick" from the founders. I'm still amazed sometimes at the wisdom and intellect of people like Jefferson, Madison, Washington, and Franklin. How shocking would it be to hear current politicians saying the kinds of things they did?

8/29/2010 12:10:00 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht8PmEjxUfg

This video is both hilarious and deeply unnerving. I count myself among the somewhat conservative, but these people are insane.

And the absolute worst part is 11:26-11:32. Pause it if you have to.

I facepalmed.

8/31/2010 7:26:02 PM

that is the biggest collection of fat, white trash, jort wearing rednecks i've ever seen

8/31/2010 8:53:09 PM

^^I seent it.

Oh Lord.

8/31/2010 10:25:03 PM

I have that same shirt

8/31/2010 10:54:25 PM

I heard that the folks over at MSNBC held a rally, too. Here's a photo:

9/1/2010 3:54:38 AM

Quote :

"I'm still amazed sometimes at the wisdom and intellect of people like Jefferson, Madison, Washington, and Franklin. How shocking would it be to hear current politicians saying the kinds of things they did?"

Considering that all of them but Franklin were slave owners (and Franklin, for all his abolitionist leanings, participated in the trade from time to time), I imagine we'd find it extremely shocking.

They were great guys, yeah, but we needn't put them on too tall a pedestal. Also, I notice that (as Libertarians are wont to do) you left out Hamilton, who was the only one of the founding fathers that I'm aware of who was not only anti-slavery but who supported equality of the races, period.

9/1/2010 4:13:28 AM

Tom Paine

9/1/2010 10:00:16 AM

^^^

I seem to remember that rally looking more like this:

9/1/2010 10:07:53 AM

Quote :

"I heard that the folks over at MSNBC held a rally, too. Here's a photo:"

You know how I can tell that Fox News isn't really a news company?

THEY'RE HOLDING FUCKING RALLIES!

9/1/2010 10:18:33 AM

fox news didnt hold the rally. Glenn Beck did.

Quote :

"I seem to remember that rally looking more like this:"

LOL. you are comparing a random event to the inauguration of this nation's first black president? good one!!



for all of his faults (and I am not a Glenn Beck "guy"), that rally and what it stood for is not one of them. I applaud him for it.

9/1/2010 10:33:18 AM

Who's Glenn Beck?

9/1/2010 11:01:57 AM

Quote :

"you are comparing a random event to the inauguration of this nation's first black president?"

No I'm just slinging irrelevant shit right back at hooksaw the way he slings it at everything else.

9/1/2010 11:11:51 AM

He's right though. You shouldn't compare the two events.

After all, people had a lot more time to make plans for attending Beck's Rally than they had to prepare after finding out Obama had won.

9/1/2010 11:22:20 AM

Quote :

"fox news didnt hold the rally. Glenn Beck did. "

I'm not the one who equivocated Glenn Beck w/ MSNBC.

9/1/2010 11:23:56 AM

Quote :

"Considering that all of them but Franklin were slave owners (and Franklin, for all his abolitionist leanings, participated in the trade from time to time), I imagine we'd find it extremely shocking. They were great guys, yeah, but we needn't put them on too tall a pedestal. Also, I notice that (as Libertarians are wont to do) you left out Hamilton, who was the only one of the founding fathers that I'm aware of who was not only anti-slavery but who supported equality of the races, period."

Yeah, because all these guys stood for was slavery. We know it's wrong now, but the things they were saying then were instrumental to the founding of the country.

Not sure about the others, but Jefferson was an opponent of slavery and the slave trade. He made it clear in writing and legislation that he was against it, and that it violated the natural order. He was in debt, and given that slaves were considered property at the time, there wasn't much he could do. Despite all of his flaws, he was a great thinker and his ideas should be considered more often now.

9/1/2010 11:28:51 AM

Washington also had moral hang ups about slavery. it did not stop him from having them, but he wrote frequently about the issue especially while in office.

9/1/2010 2:47:05 PM

Quote :

"No I'm just slinging irrelevant shit right back at hooksaw the way he slings it at everything else."

OopsPowSrprs

RAWR, RAWR!!!1 U mad?

I was just having a little fun.

Quote :

"As things get worse for the Democrats, I guess this is what we have to look forward to. Bitter and increasingly vicious partisans that can't deal with the fact that the Democrats are screwing up will become more and more paranoid."

hooksaw

message_topic.aspx?topic=574051&page=17

9/1/2010 3:13:41 PM

Couldn't have put this in the fox news thread?

9/2/2010 12:24:26 AM

Some of you who claim to be so concerned about astroturf and dumbass "protestors" should watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWlqiv-YL7c

9/24/2010 12:52:49 AM

^ who's claimed to be concerned about astroturf?

Do you realize what thread you're posting in?

That link is completely non-sequitur.

9/24/2010 1:15:33 AM

^ Wow. Let me walk you through it: The TEA Party was initially written off by many leftists here and elsewhere as "astroturf"--don't make me dig up the posts. But in reality, the movement was truly grassroots.

Now, in the video above, the group is clearly astroturf--bused in by the SEIU. With me now?

But that's not even the point. The point is that the "protesters" in question couldn't support any of the claims on their signs about hate and other smears.

BTW, you simply declaring something a "non-sequitur" because you don't immediately make the connection, doesn't make it so. Let's get that straight right now.

Would you mind simply addressing the content of the video instead of attempting to make some indirect attack on me? You do realize that it took place at a Glenn Beck rally, right?

9/24/2010 1:36:02 AM