READER COMMENTS ON
"VIDEO: Glenn Beck Adds Metaphorical 'Fuel' to His Own Imaginary Fire"
(24 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 2:08 pm PT...
Inciting others to commit heinous crimes, is that Beck's intentions?
this man needs to be interviewed by the Feds and told to TONE DOWN THIS BS before someone gets hurt or worse! He should be held responsible for his actions in a court of law.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 2:11 pm PT...
Sorry for the OT but I thought you might get a little joy from this exchange described at the Politico website. I hope this doesn't go against any copyright stuff but if it does go over to Politico and see the article about Rove and Jason Roe (Tom Feeney's former chief of staff).
"Roe walked over to the table, "I'm Jason Roe."
Rove: "Oh, the famous Jason Roe."
Roe: "I don't know that I'm famous, but I'm Tom Feeney's former chief of staff, and I'm offended by your comments on Fox about Tom. You guys wouldn't be in the White House without Tom. And you made these really degrading comments about him that offended a lot of people."
(Sidenote: Tom Feeney was the speaker of the Florida House of Representatives during the whole Bush/Gore 2000 recount.)
Rove: "Well, I have a file on the things Tom Feeney said about George Bush."
Roe: "That says more about you than me that you kept a file on Tom Feeney. This guy was so restrained in his desire to criticize the president — even against this staff's advice."
Rove: "I have a file."
Roe: "I'm right here. Tell me to my face what's in that file."
Rove: "I'll send you the file."
Roe: "Well, I hope the file is the beginning of the conversation and not the end. I would love to disabuse you of whatever you think of Tom Feeney's loyalty from this file."
Rove: "If you keep talking over me, this conversation's going to end right now."
Then a lady came over to fill up Rove's water glass, breaking up Roe and Rove, and Roe returned to the bar. Rumor has it Rove was waiting to have dinner with former RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman."
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 2:42 pm PT...
Can anybody else listen to the whole 6 minutes?
I can't, I hate that f*c%tard
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 6:27 pm PT...
Hmmm! Maybe Beck's just setting up his insanity defense when he gets charged with fomenting rebellion.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 6:40 pm PT...
Nunya - That's why I supplied you with the Jon Stewart bonus video. Much easier to take Enjoy!
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 8:03 pm PT...
While his choice of presentation isn't so enticing or tasteful, in all fairness, he makes some legitimate points.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 10:00 pm PT...
Cheryl Comment #2- you wouldn't be the famous, long-lost BradBlog commenter Cheryl, from Canada, would you?
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 10:51 pm PT...
I find Jon Stewart's propaganda to be infinitely more subtle and insidious than Beck's personally.
Just look at the way he practically bares his teeth in anger during this interview with Jehan Sadat. Her crime? I guess suggesting that Israel shares some blame in the troubles in the middle east. Watch how Stewart changes the subject to Arab leaders and their misdeeds when she brings up problems with Israeli leadership. Oh yes, there's definitely some anger there, perhaps she went off script? I really don't know why you can't see it Brad, you've already admitted that coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is biased in this country, why is it such a leap to see that people like Jon Stewart are just as dangerous (if not more so) as people like Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck is the friggin' mayor of crazy town, I doubt viewpoints like his will ever sway the majority. Stewart's brand of propaganda is even more dangerous tho because it's much more subtle and thus able to manipulate a much larger and more intelligent segment of the population.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 4/10/2009 @ 11:05 pm PT...
Oh, and the fact that Stewart so beautifully illustrates all the misdeeds of the Bush administration certainly gives him credibility, as does his takedown's of crossfire, that Jim Cramer douchebag, not to mention many many others...and he's funny when he does it too!
So surely, if Stewart doesn't think Israel's behavior is a matter worth considering...why should I?
I'll stop believing the Israeli influence in this country is too strong when I see people as talented as Jon Stewart either allowed, or willing to address that country's relationship with ours in an honest and open manner. Just pay attention to the way American media portrays jews vs. how the portray arabs people, you will start to notice some strange things. Resenting being manipulated isn't racism either so please don't even go there people.
Jon Stewart = Condescending asshole and liar of omission. Colbert too. Sorry.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 2:55 am PT...
This shows how nuts rightwingers are - how can they consider this a "news" channel? That's news? A guy pouring gas on someone? Crying? When will even the rightwingers start leaving FOX "news", realizing it's simply not a news channel? It's a circus, not a news channel.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 3:10 am PT...
I, myself think it is a metaphor (or pedaphor) for Glen to be wanting to give his little buddy another type of shower off camera.
They most likely carried on later at Becks place with a little teabag action.
Oh yeah, you know he is.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 5:58 am PT...
Jon Stewart --- an actually responsible steward of public largess
Bradley, Bradley, Bradley. What's in that cigarette, dude? I'm with you that Beck is way over the top, but even you know that Stewart is nothing more than an Obama mouthpiece. But maybe that's what you consider "responsible stewardship."
Off topic: can you bring us behind the scenes to the day you selected the cigarette smoking photo? What else was considered? How did this one win?
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 9:12 am PT...
Steve @ #7,
No, I've been lurking here for years and followed the Clint Curtis story from the beginning and appreciate Brad's work more than I can tell. I do remember a long time ago that a Cheryl posted on Brad's blog quite a bit. I remember her posts being pretty good.
Anyway, I thought he'd get a kick out of the statement about Tom Feeney being responsible for getting Bush into the white house.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 10:54 am PT...
Michelle L @ 6 said:
While his choice of presentation isn't so enticing or tasteful, in all fairness, he makes some legitimate points.
Okay, I'll bite. What do you see as his "legitimate points"?
(To Gos and Potfry - I'll try to circle back to speak to your comments if I have a bit more time later today.)
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 1:13 pm PT...
Timely teabag videos: one showing an assclown trying to be as funny as The Daily Show, and the next, being The Daily Show.
It is unfair to Glenn Beck to post these here for posterity. He may actually decide to light HIMSELF on fire if he sees these in the future. I would.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 6:49 pm PT...
I enjoyed some of the liberal dialogue while Bush was in office because he was such an ongoing disaster, and it's always good to keep an open mind.
Bush, like everyone else, had his own reality. We don't know all that he knew or all that he saw. There are many secrets at the top, and it's why some of us in the peanut gallery can be short-sighted, or make hasty, premature judgments.
Beck's reference to illegal aliens as a problem when 46 million Americans have no healthcare, and so many are losing or have lost homes and jobs is a common opinion shared vastly throughout the heartland. I can't think of a solution to the problem as there is presently a pretty bloody, ongoing border/drug war, and most of the American illegals are Mexican. And we have a tremendous problem with drugs coming through Mexican borders. It's a problem, without a doubt.
The "quadrillion" debt is a problem. But Beck didn't mention money is being handed out for $400,000 parties, and million dollar bonuses to companies run by crooks. But doesn't this same corporate crook mentality go on back to Tyco, Enron, BCCI, and the Keating Five? And were any of them thrown in prison and the key tossed into the Nile? Nope.
Beck said a lot, but there's a lot he didn't say. His job is to bash Obama, so fair minded viewers must read between the lines. It appears he's trying to find a conservative "libertarian" niche that will not so closely follow the Republican party.
(Can you really blame the guy?)
He spoke of Obama closing Gitmo, and who could disagree with that? The problem Beck didn't address is that Obama's gone soft with Bush, backing away from investigation of the torture allegations and is going limp with many of his "change" promises. He's also softened on the email issue. It's as if he got into office and someone injected him with Republican mentality serum.
Beck was upset that Obama was lax spending on national defense. If we could ever determine who our true enemies are, I might agree. The truth is the DoD has NEVER balanced its budget, and probably never will. In the meantime it has coin gambling machines on military bases to shake the pockets of poorly paid military sons and daughters, and maybe you can ask Vegas boy, Alexander Haig to explain why, and who's making the money from those machines! Maybe someone needs to whisper that in Beck's (and Obama's) ears.
Everyone with hope believed Obama would come in like the month of March, like a lion, and make changes, but as it is, he's just more of the same. Some of the more conservative ones have gone after Obama with a nasty, hate-filled vengeance, when it's best to give the man a chance.
Beck was upset with Obama's intentions on making peace with Cuba and with the Middle East, and I don't understand why it would bother him. If Cubans pay their people $9 per week, he should be glad his Conservative friends will have a place to send more jobs after Obama makes the connections (!)
Who would oppose peace, besides those who profit from war?
He made valid points, seeing things from his perspective it's respectful to have an open mind. The incredible debt was the largest, most valid point, but one he can't blame on the current President.
Beck sometimes shows poor timing. His touch with the grassroots heartbeat is not always in-sync.
There are, however, millions of people in this country who believe like Beck, that there is a boogeyman out there somewhere planning to drop a nuke. They believe in church, and it's the only social activity many people have. They believe in the things they were taught in school, history, through families, and within their communities. They're not unintelligent, but they have a love for their families, their country, homeland, culture, and tradition. They're the patriotic ones, proud of the military and all it does to protect the USA.
When it comes to liberal or conservative, if folks took a real close look, they'd probably see a little of each in themselves.
Beck had some legitimate arguments, made some valid points, informed his viewers of issues they otherwise might not have known about, and I respect his opinions. He's been set off balance since he went after Ron Paul.
(The fire stunt was a gimmick, and apparently for all the attention it roused–– it worked.)
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 11:01 pm PT...
Michelle L. comment #16: why did Glen Beck become "patriotic"...only after Bush left office? Pointing out things wrong with our government, as you say. Glen Beck is a false patriot. He may be correctly pointing out things that are wrong with the government...only because there's not a Republican president. That tells me he really doesn't give a crap about the correct things he's now pointing out. He's joining a mob that's angry at government, to steer the mob in the direction he wants it to go. Where were the "tea parties" for the 8 years of Bush? In these "tea parties", why aren't there any anti-war protesters or health care for all protesters? Because he has an agenda, they have an agenda. The agenda of the last 8 years. These "tea parties" would not exist if McCain won. These "tea parties" didn't exist during the 8 years of Bush. Yes, there were REAL protesters, anti-war protesters, health care for all protesters...but you won't find them in this limited agenda shill Republican/rightwing "tea party" mob. They are just the 15% of Bush's 15% approval rating.
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 11:03 pm PT...
Tea Party = GOP
There's lots of REAL protesters out there and lots of REAL protest groups and organizations, and they're getting no coverage because they're not linked to FOX "news".
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 11:05 pm PT...
FOX "news" claims they are "fair and balanced" and just want to give "coverage" to a protest group. This is the ONLY protest group they have EVER given coverage to! Wake up, please! It's a shill group!
So, that is a LIE, when FOX "news" says they just want to give "coverage" to the tea parties because it's "news". Or they would be covering other protests and protest groups for years! And they haven't been!
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 4/11/2009 @ 11:08 pm PT...
And covering a protest and promoting a protest are two completely different things. FOX "news" is promoting the tea baggers. I've never seen a news channel promote a protest...EVER!
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 4/12/2009 @ 10:43 am PT...
Yep, its Astroturfing alright = Fake Grass Roots
The Teabaggers don't even realize that they are being used by the corporate 1%ers to try and regain power in '10 before any meaningful good for the people legislation is passed.
That dreaded Socialism ya know :roll eyes:
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 4/12/2009 @ 2:09 pm PT...
Michelle L. @ 16:
"Beck's reference to illegal aliens as a problem when 46 million Americans have no healthcare, and so many are losing or have lost homes and jobs is a common opinion shared vastly throughout the heartland."
Whether it's a "common opinion" or not, has nothing to do with it being true. "Illegal aliens" aren't the reason there are 46 million Americans without healthcare, nor rising unemployment, etc. That's a strawman, red-herring argument. No matter how many have been trained by folks like Beck (thanks to our generous government largess that they enjoy off the tax-payers teet) to believe that nonsense.
For the record, due to years of misinformation and propaganda, the majority of Americans likely believe that Photo ID restrictions should be used at the polls, and that homosexuals should not be entitled to same rights as the rest of us. None of that, however, means their "common opinion" is either correct or legitimate.
"And we have a tremendous problem with drugs coming through Mexican borders. It's a problem, without a doubt."
One that we created. Decriminalize, legalize, legitimize and tax the industry and the "problem" goes away (oh, and likely saves our economy in the bargain, but that's just a little side benefit.)
The bulk of your criticisms of Bush and Obama (with the exception of claiming he's "he's just more of the same", which I believe is an absurd statement, if "the same" is Bush), is largely on target, but Beck did not, as you point out, note those things.
In regard to his "valid points", presumably concerning the debt, etc., sure, there's reason to be concerned about that (very), but as he didn't bother to mention who put us in this mess, he lacks credibility on those points, which keeps them, in my mind, from being "valid". If by "valid" you mean "opportunistic", then I might agree with you.
With all of that in mind, to say that "Beck had some legitimate arguments, made some valid points" and that the frightened masses he's taking advantage of by frightening even more (a reprehensible scare tactic) are "the patriotic ones", as if those who call out liars and opportunists and fear-mongers like Beck are NOT "the patriot ones" (I believe that we are), is something I'd reject wholeheartedly.
There are many legitimate issues and concerns, and yes, reasons to be critical of both Obama and the Democrats. Beck does not credibily touch any one of them with his fear-mongering, opportunistic, dangerous, phony populism.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 4/13/2009 @ 12:21 pm PT...
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 4/14/2009 @ 5:38 am PT...
When it's Beck making the noise, it's "fomenting rebellion"....when it's International ANSWER and Code Pink openly threatening to descecrate and vandalize our memorials in Washington D.C., it's "free speech".
When Linda Chavez was revealed to have some "problems" with domestic help during her nomination to George Bush' cabinet, you loons screamed about the "culture of corruption" and what a criminal Bush and all of his cabinet were. But when Barry-boy paraded a rogue's gallery of tax cheats before the nation as nominees to his cabinet, with one of them now actually IN CHARGE of the treasury, we heard nary a peep from you one-way virtue crusaders.
Do I smell hypocricy cooking here? OH NO, it couldn't be, not from you paragons of virtue, you giants of intellect who know how to run our lives so much better than we stupid, un-informed working schmucks out here in fly-over country do!! What WOULD we do without you? (besides keeping more of our own money that we EARNED, retaining our Constitutional rights....silly little things like that)
And once and for all, this IS NOT a democracy!! We live in a Constitutional Republic with a representative government! Do any of you spongy headed mutant commie-lib leftards even remotely understand the difference? A representative Republic is the one and only reason that your golden boy of "hope and change" is now the occupant of the White House......and he doesn't have the slightest clue what to do!
I'm sure they'll be enjoying their Ipods in London as the United States sinks further and further into the pit of irrelevance and fuzzy, warm socialism.
You wanted change? Oh, you are very definitely going to get your change! But I don't think it will be the "change" that you invested all of that "hope" in!
Good luck......and good night.