What values does Glenn Beck want to return us to?

[Foxfyre]

I have the clip in which he said it. And he said it not at all hatefully. And I agreed with him 100%, but like Beck, I don't hate President Obama, don't speak of him hatefully, and disapprove of people who do. If you consider correct perceptions and honest criticism as 'hate' just because it is somebody you like, then everybody in the world is going to be a hate mongerer sooner or later.

And here is the so-called 'apology' IN CONTEXT in the Fox News Sunday segment in which it was said:

Wallace: "Do you regret having called [Obama] a racist and saying he had a deep seated hatred for white people?"

Beck: "Of course I do. I don't want to retract the, um ... I want to amend that I think it is much more of a theological question, that he is a guy who understands the world through liberation theology, which is oppressor-and-victim. 'Racist,' first of all, it shouldn't have been said. It was poorly said. I have a big fat mouth sometimes and I say things. That's just not the way people should behave. And it was not accurate. It is liberation theology that has shaped his world view."

Next?

 

[Vanquish]

That's your defense of your assertion that he's not a hatemonger? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

So you both admit Beck said it. And Beck at least admits that it was wrong....and squirms out of what he's clearly been smacked with...but admits that it wasn't what should have been said.

And this is the perfect example of how I could post a million citations of Beck's hatred...and we'd just be spinning our wheels with this debate (should we really call it that?)...because you dont want to be intellectually honest. Why would I go to the trouble?

Nothing is self-evident in modern political debate anymore apparently. It's what you can squirm and rationalize and spin something into meaning.

 

[yota5]

Looking at the crowd of the Glenn Beck rally it looked like the population of the US in 1776, white and Christian.
Those white Christians of 1776 had many good values but they did not understand or respect racial diversity. They basically stole the land from the Native Americans. They brought Aficans to America to be slaves.
Our founding Father's understood that was not right and put a structure together to allow us to be more accepting of diversity.

Glenn Beck wants to turn the back the clock and have a society for white Christians. In 1776 there were approximately 5,000,000 US citizens and they were almost all white and Christian. Today there are over 300,000,000 us citizens. The whites are predicted to be a minority by 2025. Our founding Fathers based our country on freedom of religion and many religions flourish in the USA.

Glenn Beck's values do not represent who the USA is today, they represent who the USA was in 1776; a white, Christian society.

Elmer, Glenn Beck promotes American values. Maybe you forgot what they are. You could probably get a different list from most Americans. For example Libro-socialists, wouldn't find anything in this list that they would agree with. I'm willing to bet that most real Americans would unamiously agree with the core values listed here. I've never heard Glenn Beck endorse anything that isn't on this list.
Freedom.

Equality.

Democracy.

Champion of the little guy.

Helper of the oppressed.

Defender against tyranny.

Capitalism.

Independence.

Strength.

Rightness and righteousness.

Manifest destiny.

God.

Freedom of religion.

Family.

Wealth.

Faith.

Nothing on this list agrees with the teachings within the communist manifesto. That is why even in these trying times America is still the greatest country on the face of the earth.

 

[Vanquish]

OMG. Break out the tin-foil hats.

Libro-socialists? Now you've found a term to miscategorize a whole section of people with a turn of phrase? NICE!

The above post amounts to: "We're the awesome guys who believe in awesome things. Our enemies don't. We're just that awesome."

 

[Foxfyre]

That's your defense of your assertion that he's not a hatemonger? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

So you both admit Beck said it. And Beck at least admits that it was wrong....and squirms out of what he's clearly been smacked with...but admits that it wasn't what should have been said.

And this is the perfect example of how I could post a million citations of Beck's hatred...and we'd just be spinning our wheels with this debate (should we really call it that?)...because you dont want to be intellectually honest. Why would I go to the trouble?

Nothing is self-evident in modern political debate anymore apparently. It's what you can squirm and rationalize and spin something into meaning.

Yep because I try really hard not to be a brainwashed numbnut or silly twat unless it is a silly thread. And if all you have is silly numbnut snipes and no rebuttal for my post, then we're done. Again, do have a good day.

 

[Vanquish]

You keep trying to put a point on the end of your posts as if you've gotten somewhere. It's cute.

Not accurate, but cute.

The point..for the 10000th time is that there is NO SOURCE that you would ever acknowledge as defeating you. Why would I want to continue beating my head against a wall when you're never going to admit it?

Besides, Time's already done it.

 

[Vanquish]

By the way:
Glenn Beck: Fox Host Channels American Fear, Anger - TIME

There's the time article. Shows he's a total fearmonger.

Let the crappy attacks on the source or the text begin.

 

[Foxfyre]

By the way:
Glenn Beck: Fox Host Channels American Fear, Anger - TIME

There's the time article. Shows he's a total fearmonger.

Let the crappy attacks on the source or the text begin.

You didn't say fearmonger, which is the opinion of the author.

You said hatemonger.

Or do you not know that there is a difference between these two things?

You equated the Time article with proof of hatemongering earlier. That was a mistake. So are you a hatemonger because you misstated something in error? Or is it only conservatives who aren't allowed an honest mistake or misstatement?

Speaking of hatemongering.

 

[Vanquish]

Ok. So you're ready to admit that he's a fearmonger?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Oh I've got more than enough to slam you...I'm saving us both a bit of time by predicting (correctly I might add based on your response) what you'd spew back.

Beck is a hate-monger of the first order. I guess you forgot about his apology for calling the Prez a racist. That's so in-your-face that even YOU can't deny it happened.

But that's fine. If you can't research and find something yourself...that just means that a) you suck a research and b) you're not intellectually honest.

Next?

In other words, you've got nothing.

 

[Foxfyre]

Ok. So you're ready to admit that he's a fearmonger?

Not at all. Not so long as he continues to advise us not to believe anything just because he says it but sends us to the same places that he used to form his opinions. Leftists hate him because they don't want to believe anything he says is true. But a lot of us like him because we've taken his advice to check out this stuff for ourselves. And whether we agree with his conclusions or not, we can see first hand that they were not created in a vacuum, or manufactured out of fear, or made up out of hate.

You apparently aren't willing to admit that you misstated what the Time article said though. Which by your definition makes you a hate mongerer. Even if you now acknowledge that you misstated what was in that article, by your definition you're a hate mongerer because you said it at all. Tsk tsk. Aren't you ashamed?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So he posts an opinion piece as "evidence".

Next indeed.

 

[Foxfyre]

So he posts an opinion piece as "evidence".

Next indeed.

One thing our friend here illustrates though is that some Leftists have no concept of what 'in context' means, and have very little evidence for the accusations they make about this person or that person. And the double standard is alive and well. They read the opinion of somebody who says what they want to hear and hold it up as 'evidence'. Oh well. Without them we would probably have a lot less to talk about on message boards.

Qualifier: I should add, just to be fair, that there are a few on the Right who are just as uninformed.

 

[Eric Cartman]

One thing our friend here illustrates though is that some Leftists have no concept of what 'in context' means, and have very little evidence for the accusations they make about this person or that person. And the double standard is alive and well. They read the opinion of somebody who says what they want to hear and hold it up as 'evidence'. ...

As I am sure you know Media Matters has 180 pages of outrageous or inaccurate Glenn Beck statements (yes I know they get some funding from Soros.) with links to the actual video and audio. You can also find some of his misinformation on many of the fact checking sites but I know none of that will satisfy you.

The truth is that is Glenn is a moderately intelligent person who knows his every word is being recorded so he is very careful (not to be confused with honest) about what he says.

Short list of some of his tactics:

1 He frequently states his 'enemies' intentions as fact when it is merely his opinion/guess (e.g. Obama wants the economy to fail) then he 'backs it up' with some obscure 'evidence' (quote/paper/link) that rarely shows a clear cause/effect.

2 He jumps to unsubstantiated conclusions and then one of his producers will shout out an even crazier assertion (straw man) in a mocking outraged left winger voice (e.g. Glenn Beck says Obama wants to kill off old people to save on health care expenses.)

3 He makes implications that are false/unproven by using sarcasm (e.g. Glenn states with thick sarcasm, "No, No... Obama would never do something to intentionally raise gas prices...no, of course not.")

4 He leaves out important facts that makes a neutral story seem quite damning (e.g. loans for foreign countries to drill oil were actually approved by Bush appointees or that it is normal for presidents to have 'czars' or that 'czars' is just a media term.)

He tries real hard not to outright lie (probably because he knows he is constantly watched) so he misleads people with lies of omission and half-truths. In other words he isn't intellectually honest.

I don't want to 'prove' anything but I would challenge any Beck fan to criticly listen to his show because I don't think you will be able to say that he is intellectually honest.

Here is a good site to help with an evaluation: 10 Signs of Intellectual Honesty |

 

[Foxfyre]

One thing our friend here illustrates though is that some Leftists have no concept of what 'in context' means, and have very little evidence for the accusations they make about this person or that person. And the double standard is alive and well. They read the opinion of somebody who says what they want to hear and hold it up as 'evidence'. ...

As I am sure you know Media Matters has 180 pages of outrageous or inaccurate Glenn Beck statements (yes I know they get some funding from Soros.) with links to the actual video and audio. You can also find some of his misinformation on many of the fact checking sites but I know none of that will satisfy you.

The truth is that is Glenn is a moderately intelligent person who knows his every word is being recorded so he is very careful (not to be confused with honest) about what he says.

Short list of some of his tactics:

1 He frequently states his 'enemies' intentions as fact when it is merely his opinion/guess (e.g. Obama wants the economy to fail) then he 'backs it up' with some obscure 'evidence' (quote/paper/link) that rarely shows a clear cause/effect.

2 He jumps to unsubstantiated conclusions and then one of his producers will shout out an even crazier assertion (straw man) in a mocking outraged left winger voice (e.g. Glenn Beck says Obama wants to kill off old people to save on health care expenses.)

3 He makes implications that are false/unproven by using sarcasm (e.g. Glenn states with thick sarcasm, "No, No... Obama would never do something to intentionally raise gas prices...no, of course not.")

4 He leaves out important facts that makes a neutral story seem quite damning (e.g. loans for foreign countries to drill oil were actually approved by Bush appointees or that it is normal for presidents to have 'czars' or that 'czars' is just a media term.)

He tries real hard not to outright lie (probably because he knows he is constantly watched) so he misleads people with lies of omission and half-truths. In other words he isn't intellectually honest.

I don't want to 'prove' anything but I would challenge any Beck fan to criticly listen to his show because I don't think you will be able to say that he is intellectually honest.

Here is a good site to help with an evaluation: 10 Signs of Intellectual Honesty |

Having been a member of the media for a number of years and a media watcher all my increasingly lengthy adult life, as well as a reporter charged with maintaining strict objectivity and sensitive to any discernable bias and then editor charged with making sure reporters maintained objectivity and were free of bias, I feel I am at least somewhat competent in evaluating objectivity versus obvious bias versus intentional dishonesty.

And I think you're not being objective in your evaluation of Glenn Beck.

He is absolutely biased on the side of Constitutional integrity as he believes the Founders saw it, and his entire perspective is grounded there. He will freely admit to that bias and it is obvious.

He is sometimes wrong on his facts, and when he becomes aware of that, he is reliable to correct his own errors.

In my opinion he is sometimes wrong in his conclusions, but he does not base his success on whether anybody agrees with him, nor is he obviously defensive when others disagree with him. But again, he cites almost every source that informs the conclusions he draws and encourages people to check them out himself. You don't get any more honest or any more objective than that.

There is no person alive that given fifteen hours on the radio every week, five hours of mostly monologue on television every week, numerous guest appearances in which his remarks will be mostly extemporaneous, plus prolific writings including several books on the best seller's list, only Jesus Christ himself would not ever say something he would like to take back, would never misstate a fact, or draw a conclusion that in retrospect would be stated differently.

Intellectual honesty recognizes that and allows people to be imperfect.

Fantatical ideology and hate mongerers do not.

I am informed by what Beck says. Not what others say about him.

 

[MaggieMae]

One thing our friend here illustrates though is that some Leftists have no concept of what 'in context' means, and have very little evidence for the accusations they make about this person or that person. And the double standard is alive and well. They read the opinion of somebody who says what they want to hear and hold it up as 'evidence'. ...

As I am sure you know Media Matters has 180 pages of outrageous or inaccurate Glenn Beck statements (yes I know they get some funding from Soros.) with links to the actual video and audio. You can also find some of his misinformation on many of the fact checking sites but I know none of that will satisfy you.

The truth is that is Glenn is a moderately intelligent person who knows his every word is being recorded so he is very careful (not to be confused with honest) about what he says.

Short list of some of his tactics:

1 He frequently states his 'enemies' intentions as fact when it is merely his opinion/guess (e.g. Obama wants the economy to fail) then he 'backs it up' with some obscure 'evidence' (quote/paper/link) that rarely shows a clear cause/effect.

2 He jumps to unsubstantiated conclusions and then one of his producers will shout out an even crazier assertion (straw man) in a mocking outraged left winger voice (e.g. Glenn Beck says Obama wants to kill off old people to save on health care expenses.)

3 He makes implications that are false/unproven by using sarcasm (e.g. Glenn states with thick sarcasm, "No, No... Obama would never do something to intentionally raise gas prices...no, of course not.")

4 He leaves out important facts that makes a neutral story seem quite damning (e.g. loans for foreign countries to drill oil were actually approved by Bush appointees or that it is normal for presidents to have 'czars' or that 'czars' is just a media term.)

He tries real hard not to outright lie (probably because he knows he is constantly watched) so he misleads people with lies of omission and half-truths. In other words he isn't intellectually honest.

I don't want to 'prove' anything but I would challenge any Beck fan to criticly listen to his show because I don't think you will be able to say that he is intellectually honest.

Here is a good site to help with an evaluation: 10 Signs of Intellectual Honesty |

You couldn't be more accurate in your assessment of Beck if you were playing his character on a mini-series. Bravo!

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Looking at the crowd of the Glenn Beck rally it looked like the population of the US in 1776, white and Christian.
Those white Christians of 1776 had many good values but they did not understand or respect racial diversity. They basically stole the land from the Native Americans. They brought Aficans to America to be slaves.
Our founding Father's understood that was not right and put a structure together to allow us to be more accepting of diversity.

Glenn Beck wants to turn the back the clock and have a society for white Christians. In 1776 there were approximately 5,000,000 US citizens and they were almost all white and Christian. Today there are over 300,000,000 us citizens. The whites are predicted to be a minority by 2025. Our founding Fathers based our country on freedom of religion and many religions flourish in the USA.

Glenn Beck's values do not represent who the USA is today, they represent who the USA was in 1776; a white, Christian society.

Not to put to fine a point on it, but Mr Beck has written half a dozen books, is on the radio on about 500 stations for 15 hour plus a week and on the TV about 10 hours a week with a highly rated show, He has been doing this for several years .

If you haven't figure out his message.
You aren't going to.

 

[yota5]

OMG. Break out the tin-foil hats.

Libro-socialists? Now you've found a term to miscategorize a whole section of people with a turn of phrase? NICE!

The above post amounts to: "We're the awesome guys who believe in awesome things. Our enemies don't. We're just that awesome."

Good evening Vanquish. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that you indeed wear a tin foil hat. I recognize that you're a centrist. That is a catch word that socialists use to disguise their true identity; along with progressive, liberal, and communist. You'll notice that democrats aren't included in that list. They're ticked of that you "centrists" have hijacked their party.

It is common knowledge that libro-socialists don't subscribe to the same core values that Americans do. Anti-Americans are against any thing that promotes patriotism. Do you remember what that word means?

Libro-socialist; accurately descriptive, and it has a nice ring to it. I'm pleased that you like it.

 

[Sherry]

It doesn't really matter what motives the left attempts to assign to Beck. It has baffled me that they don't realize that by getting their panties in such a bunch over him and his supporters, that it has given many conservatives an incredible drive and determination not to be marginalized. They have also succeeded in desensitizing people to being labeled as racists, hatemongers, fearmongers, etc. and just really examine their beliefs and then stand firmly by them. So it has been a great exercise for a segment of the population that previously didn't think they could have a voice in the debate. I hope it continues.

 

[MaggieMae]

I have the clip in which he said it. And he said it not at all hatefully. And I agreed with him 100%, but like Beck, I don't hate President Obama, don't speak of him hatefully, and disapprove of people who do. If you consider correct perceptions and honest criticism as 'hate' just because it is somebody you like, then everybody in the world is going to be a hate mongerer sooner or later.

And here is the so-called 'apology' IN CONTEXT in the Fox News Sunday segment in which it was said:

Wallace: "Do you regret having called [Obama] a racist and saying he had a deep seated hatred for white people?"

Beck: "Of course I do. I don't want to retract the, um ... I want to amend that I think it is much more of a theological question, that he is a guy who understands the world through liberation theology, which is oppressor-and-victim. 'Racist,' first of all, it shouldn't have been said. It was poorly said. I have a big fat mouth sometimes and I say things. That's just not the way people should behave. And it was not accurate. It is liberation theology that has shaped his world view."

Next?

Beck likes to salve his conscience by issuing apologies. He also apologized for making fun of Obama's daughter on his radio show:

In discussing how President Obama uses children to shield himself from criticism, I broke my own rule about leaving kids out of political debates. The children of public figures should be left on the sidelines. It was a stupid mistake and I apologize–and as a dad I should have known better.

But the damage is already done by the time he regurgitates some lame apology.