People at Glenn Beck's Rally

[Gene Steinberg]

I always expect that, one day before too many people turn away from Beck (and his ratings now are much less than the first part of the year), he'll come out and say it was all entertainment, no harm done. Bye-bye and all that, as he retires with his tens of millions of dollars of earnings.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Another case of Beck being caught in a lie:


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SsBvEnaXtgo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SsBvEnaXtgo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[Sean Elifritz]

The way you guys fire off links and expect them to be taken seriously is pretty amusing. This isn't science. Politics is a subjective thing. That's why the country is split 50%/50% (Yeah, it's more like 95%, 5% here. But for reasons that allude me boards of this type are always populated with a disproportionate percentage of leftists). Anyone wanting to do so can find 100 or even 1,000,000 links backing up their political viewpoint. It proves absolutely 0.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Maybe the money he spent on that stupid blackboard could have been better invested in a dictionary and a decent history book.

---------- Post added at 12:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 PM ----------

Further: There is such a thing as fact and fiction. It's not just opinion. I have no problem with one being right wing, left wing, or the broad gray area between the two. But get your facts straight!

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Maybe the money he spent on that stupid blackboard could have been better invested in a dictionary and a decent history book.

---------- Post added at 12:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 PM ----------

Further: There is such a thing as fact and fiction. It's not just opinion. I have no problem with one being right wing, left wing, or the broad gray area between the two. But get your facts straight!

Gene has a point - this has nothing to do with opinion. Beck frequently gets his FACTS wrong.

 

[trainedobserver]

I always expect that, one day before too many people turn away from Beck (and his ratings now are much less than the first part of the year), he'll come out and say

I think you've nailed it. I suspect he is doing a Cobert-like performance without the benefit of the "wink and a nod" that Covert's persona provides. Beck is, anyway you look at it, his own running joke.

 

[stphrz]

The way you guys fire off links and expect them to be taken seriously is pretty amusing. This isn't science. Politics is a subjective thing. That's why the country is split 50%/50% (Yeah, it's more like 95%, 5% here. But for reasons that allude me boards of this type are always populated with a disproportionate percentage of leftists). Anyone wanting to do so can find 100 or even 1,000,000 links backing up their political viewpoint. It proves absolutely 0.

If you want us to take you seriously you better get busy and start some refuting with facts. Wimpering about how we're all a bunch of leftists (wrong on it's face) ain't gonna cut it.

It isn't about politics and subjectivity. It's about true or false, right or wrong, lies or truth. When Glenn Beck or anyone else says something that can be demonstrated by the facts of reality to be false then it is false.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Gene has a point - this has nothing to do with opinion. Beck frequently gets his FACTS wrong.

Lol, I wonder how often y'all even watch the show. I see it only about once every two weeks so I'm definitely no expert on it myself. The show is done everyday and yeah, he gets things wrong sometimes. In fact, he sometimes spends the first few minutes correcting mistakes he's made on previous episodes. But the corrections never get mentioned by the left, just the mistakes themselves. I've heard plenty of mistakes on the Paracast throughout the years but that doesn't cause me to decide the show is evil or some big conspiratorial disinformation machine. Nope, people are people and nobody is perfect. But when Glenn gets something wrong he does acknowledge it and corrects it publically once he discovers it was incorrect. Like I said, the show is on the air everyday. He's got a staff of fact checkers doing the bulk of the research for him and yes, sometimes they get a detail or two wrong. Then the left goes crazy about one of these inaccuracies, he looks into it, and if he finds they are correct he mentions it on the show. But again, the corrections never get mentioned by the leftist bloggers and journalists that brought up the mistake in the first place.

My own take on Beck is that I find some of his theories are a little over the top and even comical. I don't think progressives are nearly as organized as he sometimes makes out. Instead I tend to view them as juveniles at a candy store that just can't control themselves. If anything, the conspiracy theories he sometimes dreams up are too complimentary, makes the burning of money appear somehow cunning when in reality it's probably nothing more than plain ol' gluttony and irresponsibility. But I agree with the primary premise of his show, the American government spends entirely too much money and we're going to bankrupt ourselves if we don't grow up and exercise some self control.

---------- Post added at 04:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:56 PM ----------

If you want us to take you seriously you better get busy and start some refuting with facts. Wimpering about how we're all a bunch of leftists (wrong on it's face) ain't gonna cut it.

It isn't about politics and subjectivity. It's about true or false, right or wrong, lies or truth. When Glenn Beck or anyone else says something that can be demonstrated by the facts of reality to be false then it is false.

Lol, if you think I'm going to waste my time throwing up 15 paragraph long rebuttals to your beliefs like another guy in here was doing you're comically crazy. In my 20s I might have done so. At nearly 40 I know from experience that it's utterly pointless. If drowning in a sea of debt and your government making all of your decisions for you somehow equates to rapture in your mind then knock yourself out with it. But hey, the extent to which Beck is able to piss you guys off is reason enough for me to like him, ha ha.

 

[stphrz]

Lol, if you think I'm going to waste my time throwing up 15 paragraph long rebuttals to your beliefs like another guy in here was doing you're comically crazy. In my 20s I might have done so. At nearly 40 I know from experience that it's utterly pointless. If drowning in a sea of debt and your government making all of your decisions for you somehow equates to rapture in your mind then knock yourself out with it. But hey, the extent to which Beck is able to piss you guys off is reason enough for me to like him, ha ha.

The challenge wasn't beliefs, it was facts. Refute the facts. Ultimate beliefs regarding government debt or the extent of its authority are not the issue. Lots, and I mean lots, of people talk about those very things and make rational valid points without resorting to distorting history and reality.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

The challenge wasn't beliefs, it was facts. Refute the facts. Ultimate beliefs regarding government debt or the extent of it's authority are not the issue. Lots, and I mean lots of people talk about those very things and make rational valid points without resorting to distorting history and reality.

Surrrrrrrrrrrre. :

 

[stphrz]

Surrrrrrrrrrrre. :

Look at this awesome post. Just look at it.

Isn't it beautiful? Isn't it insightful? Doesn't it contain the sum total of the author's thinking on the matter?

I don't know about the rest of you but I am blown away.

Thank you so much Wickerman1972. Thank you.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Look at this awesome post. Just look at it.

Isn't it beautiful? Isn't it insightful? Doesn't it contain the sum total of the author's thinking on the matter?

I don't know about the rest of you but I am blown away.

Thank you so much Wickerman1972. Thank you.

Yep, you're right. I should have linked to something so someone else could make my argument for me.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Another article some people here will ignore:

The CA cop shooter and Glenn Beck: Heres what we know | Media Matters for America

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Another article some people here will ignore:

The CA cop shooter and Glenn Beck: Heres what we know | Media Matters for America

Stunningly significant, Gene. Now I'll provide the ONLY link that actually means anything:

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Bush administration passes unfunded tax cuts. Bush administration starts two unnecessary unfunded wars. Bush administration sends the economy into the toilet. This doesn't let Obama off the hook, necessarily, but you need to see where the problems grew worse after we had budget surpluses.

And none of that has anything to do with Glenn Beck's lies, except insofar as he lies about the causes of those deficits.

 

[stphrz]

Yep, you're right. I should have linked to something so someone else could make my argument for me.

If you coulda you woulda.

That is called evidence. You make a reasoned argument, then you back it up with evidence.

Oh wait, that's not what you do. That's not what you do at all

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Bush administration passes unfunded tax cuts. Bush administration starts two unnecessary unfunded wars. Bush administration sends the economy into the toilet. This doesn't let Obama off the hook, necessarily, but you need to see where the problems grew worse after we had budget surpluses.

And none of that has anything to do with Glenn Beck's lies, except insofar as he lies about the causes of those deficits.

Economy was OK for the first six or seven years of Bush's presidency, not great, but nothing like what it became later and remains today. And EVERYONE knows what caused the economic crash: Bad mortgage loans. Don't go looking at what political pundits say about it. See what the economists say. The subprime mortgage crisis is what killed the economy. It wasn't about tax cuts or wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. Interesting that you bring up the debt accumulated under Bush's watch. Yep, he spent too much, way too much. The yearly deficit was several hundred billion. But with Obama just 2 years into office it is now nearly 2 trillion per year! Bush was bad, Obama is much worse.

But all of that is neither here nor there. Regardless of who spent what in the past the issue is what is going to be done about it today. What I hear from Democrats is that they want to spend more, much more. In fact, that's always the democratic answer to everything, "Let's spend more money." In their minds spending bills are what being "progressive" is all about. If you're for cutting spending you're a dinosaur, part of the party of no. But spending even more money? Now that's progress! Republicans spend too much, I don't deny that. But at least the spending of federal money isn't at the very heart and soul of their platform. And it is relevant to Beck because the country's debt is the primary thing he talks about on his show.

 

[stphrz]

Economy was OK for the first six or seven years of Bush's presidency, not great, but nothing like what it became later and remains today. And EVERYONE knows what caused the economic crash: Bad mortgage loans. Don't go looking at what political pundits say about it. See what the economists say. The subprime mortgage crisis is what killed the economy. It has nothing to do with tax cuts or wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. Interesting that you bring up the debt accumulated under Bush's watch. Yep, he spent too much, way too much. The yearly deficit was several hundred billion. But with Obama just 2 years into office it is now nearly 2 trillion per year! Bush was bad, Obama is much worse.

But none of that is neither here nor there. Regardless of who spent what in the past the issue is what is going to be done about it today. What I hear from Democrats is that they want to spend more, much more. In fact, that's always the democratic answer to everything, "Let's spend more money." In fact, in their minds spending bills are what being "progressive" is all about. If you're for cutting spending you're a dinosaur, part of the party of no. But spending even more money? Now that's progress! Republicans spend too much, I don't deny that. But at least the spending of federal money isn't the primary aspect of their platform. And it is relevant to Beck because the country's debt is the primary thing he talks about on his show.

What bill are you talking about? Please don't tell me the CRA. The cause was the boom in house prices. They rose far too high to be affordable so a correction absolutely had to happen. This was due to financial shenanigans of the major banks. They whined for bailouts and both Bush and Obama gave it too them. Fact is, the banks were not properly regulated. They did stuff they should not have been allowed to do.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

What bill are you talking about? Please don't tell me the CRA. The cause was the boom in house prices. They rose far too high to be affordable so a correction absolutely had to happen. This was due to financial shenanigans of the major banks. They whined for bailouts and both Bush and Obama gave it too them. Fact is, the banks were not properly regulated. They did stuff they should not have been allowed to do.

I had already edited that part out because I realized I hadn't worded it exactly right. It wasn't that Democrats passed a bill, it's that they opposed a Fannie and Freddie reform bill in 2005. And well, that speaks volumes to me. Since links make ya' all tingly inside:

Hot Air t get AIG right

And here's a google search string if you don't like that article (I simply picked the first result):

Google

I'm sure you can probably find a few articles in there that will bend it in the other direction, will argue that Dems' opposition to the bill was somehow a good thing. Like I said earlier, when it comes to politics you can find any interpretation on the web that you want to. But at the end of the day the reality is McCain foresaw the crisis coming, tried to do something about it, and Dems said "Fuck you!" and let it happen. But that wasn't the last middle finger McCain would get for his troubles. In 2008 the public echoed, "Fuck you, John!" by voting down the guy that tried to stop an economic disaster from occurring and voted in the guy that was one of the top campaign contribution recipients from Fannie and Freddie. But then again, Obama was promising to spend a lot more money than McCain was and if there's one thing Americans know it's that torching cash is really, really fun!

 

[bmadccp]

Bias is not off limits. It just reveals the weakness in your arguments. Refute things point by point by point.

The op ed piece I linked was full of facts. Try to refute them. Go ahead.. I dare you. Refute the quotes Beck made about "taking back the civil rights movement" Refute the history lesson the author gave about who the people who really were the one who put themselves on the line. I double dare you.

Try to refute what? The facts about the civil rights movement? Or his OPINION on Becks stance that was taken out of context? Beck's stance that is supportive of the civil rights movement by the way. I have already refuted the voracity of the author...does he state facts about the originators of the movement? Sure. Does he have a fucking idea what Glenn Beck really thinks/feels? NO.

Yes, I can be wrong about things. I have been wrong about things. Many things. You wouldn't believe the opinions I held on some things. But someone showed me different and I altered those opinions.

Perfect, I'll hold my breath watching for this to happen in other areas of the forum.

And yes I really did know about Beck's admiration of Rand. This isn't the first forum debate I have engaged in about Glenn Beck. What I didn't know about was your opinons of Rand. When you stated them along with your incorrect assessment of Rands politics I saw a chance to inform you. Using ridicule may not be the best way to point something out, but sometimes for me it is irresistable. Ridicule when it is on point has validity. The fact that I'm a dick has no bearing. You really need to develop a thicker skin.

I wasn't necessarily commenting on Rand's politics in the rant, it was her atheism. But who cares, those were MY words not related to my views on Beck. Context.

Finally about your assessment of my motives. You are just wrong. Skeptical critical thinkers are the heretics on a paranomal message board. The fact is your sentiments are the popular ones, not mine. I know every post I make tends to drive me further into the wilderness, make me even more of an outcast. Explain how in hell I'm trying to bully myself into a position of dominance again?

What the fuck are you talking about? If there is something you don't understand, reread, or do some of that "research" you are always doing. I'm done with you.

In this thread however, people aren't being swayed by sentiment. They are armed with the facts. Since you have none you cry about how you are being picked on.

You mean armed with opinion masquerading as fact. Whatever



The fact you are an arrogant dick has a great deal to do with things..."catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"...you've heard it before I'm sure.

As for developing thicker skin, do you mean so I can just sit here and absorb your insults? I don't need thicker skin, MY self esteem is just fine thanks. I don't care what you say about me, I think that there are quite a few intelligent people here that can see through you.

And yet again you misunderstand simple words. It's not "crying" to appeal for civility.

But truthfully, I don't give a shit to discuss this or anything else with you any further. In terms of communication (and many other things probably) you and I are incompatible (to put it nicely). You attack and insult me in other threads, I will reciprocate (at least until Gene bans me). Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. This is my last appeal to your good nature for civility, for truce.

The last words are yours.

So here's my answer to the rest of you in this thread...

You win.

Here is my promised admission that I was wrong. Glenn Beck is a worthless, child molesting, communistic, liar. Add what you will, I'll sign off on it.

Gene,

If you want me to read the link, and I want to, you need to give me more time in the future. I've already wasted enough of my work day on the other guy and I can't keep doing this rapid fire back and forth shit. I've got work to do.

Truth told, I'll likely read the website you recommended, but I doubt I'll post anything in this thread (unless I'm attacked...again). If I find it compelling, I'll give you the credit you are due. But then I'm done debating anything remotely political. It's toxic and I have a life to lead. And I'm sick of the insunuation that I'm somehow mentally inferior to others here. I'm not. I don't need validation on that...

I do hope though that you commit to asking people on your forum to discontontinue personal attacks and insults (in general, not just with regard to me), it detracts from the professionalism of your show.