It's a Matter of Honor - the 8/28 Rally at the Lincoln Memorial

[Montrovant]

I did not judge you in any way sir. I responded specifically to your stated on screen here judgment of Glenn Beck. If you can't handle somebody debating you on your own words, you might consider some other form of activity than message boarding.

I will concede one point. You did not comment on the others so I drew what could be an erroneous assumption that you judged Beck more harshly based on his on camera demeanor than you judge any other. At the time you had not said that you doubt the sincerity of ANY or a lot of them based on their on camera or on microphone theatrics or demeanor, so I had good reason to believe you singled out Beck for harsher judgment than others.

But now you say you don't trust any of them.

And now you have also said (to others) that you are basing your judgment on the messenger and not the message.

So what do we draw from that? Do you consider the message suspect based on your opinion of the sincerity of the messenger? Or do you embrace the message despite your contempt for the messenger?

I didn't say I doubted the sincerity of other political commentators because I hadn't said anything at all about them. There was no positive or negative comment about others, I merely spoke my opinion of Beck. Why you consider that 'good reason' to think anything about my opinions of those other commentators I'm not sure.

Do I consider the message suspect? Perhaps a bit more so than with someone who doesn't try so hard to seem like they are just some concerned citizen, I'll admit. I don't think it's just a choice between embracing the message and considering it suspect because I distrust Beck, however. It needn't be so limited. I disagree with Beck's conclusions often enough; I think he twists things into his 'the progressives are destroying the country' ethos far too often. I also do not share his faith, so a lot of comments about getting back to god or things of that nature will not appeal to me. However, I agree with him when he says that politicians, regardless of party, care little for helping the country. I'm sure there are other points I agree or disagree with, but I don't watch him often enough to recall specifics off the top of my head. If you really want to know my opinion about anything particular feel free to ask and I'll try to answer. To give you a general, overall opinion, I'd say I tend to disagree with Beck. Perhaps my feelings about his sincerity play a part in that, but not, I think, a major one; I simply have disagreed with things he's said when I've watched his show. I don't consider him evil or anything like that, I just consider him more of a career-driven entertainer than concerned citizen trying to bring the truth as he sees it to light.

I don't have the kind of personality that would lead me to go to the 8/28 rally; on the other hand, I wouldn't go to the counter-rally with Sharpton et al, either. If others want to, have at it. I hope I've been clear enough to satisfy your questions, and if not, let me know what was unclear and I'll try to do a better job explaining myself.

 

[Big Fitz]

He barely said a word when Boy King was ball washing for Wall Street time and time again. Heck, almost all of Obama's financial sector are Bush League holdovers. Don't kid yourself, partisan crazy person.

As you are new here and stupid, I'll explain it to you. Bush screwed up by keeping Bernanke who has screwed up by continuing Greenspan's loose credit. The TARP was a massive fuckup as well. I did not like much of W's second term and even less once the democrats took over and use the financial crisis which many of their members are behind to make a bad situation worse.

Under the Boy King P-BO the First and Last, he made things worse still. In one year, as compared to W's first year, he's increased the deficit 3 fold. But of course, you're too hyper partisan to notice.

Your 'priceless irony' is just worthless sanctimony.