why the left hates glen beck

[geauxtohell]

Playboy had the most astute article on Beck I've seen. Of course, I can't link it here.

Anyways, it basically said not to dismiss him, because he speaks to people and there is a reason he does so.

 

[MrDiverse]

All that needs saying about the whore Glenn Beck.

Alas I am not allowed to post a URL, everyone will have to do their own search for "Glenn Beck EXPOSED - Crying On Cue Using Vicks under His Eyes", it's on Youtube but many other links will come up as well using Google.

Apparently he's been doing this for sometime as he talks about it's effects no longer working, that would take repeated usage.

 

[California Girl]

All that needs saying about the whore Glenn Beck.

Alas I am not allowed to post a URL, everyone will have to do their own search for "Glenn Beck EXPOSED - Crying On Cue Using Vicks under His Eyes", it's on Youtube but many other links will come up as well using Google.

Apparently he's been doing this for sometime as he talks about it's effects no longer working, that would take repeated usage.

Ohhhhh nooooooo! Glen's a phoney!



Alternatively, you might want to not post shit that's already been discussed.

 

[MrDiverse]

Alternatively, you might want to not post shit that's already been discussed.

True, but I just got here and there's a lot to get up to speed with, not to mention learning how to navigate this board.

 

[California Girl]

Alternatively, you might want to not post shit that's already been discussed.

True, but I just got here and there's a lot to get up to speed with, not to mention learning how to navigate this board.

True but it might be good to check out the topic before you post. You run the risk of posting stuff that's already been discussed and it tends to piss people off when you do that - trust me!! Lots of us fall into that trap as a newbie.

 

[Claudette]

Well Jake. Thats your opinion and your certainly entitled to it. I think my analytical abilities are just fine thanks and my hearing as well. What about yours?? You obviously listen to Beck and totally disagree with eveyrthing he says. I guess you have trouble seeing any side of an issue that isn't left. Doesn't say much for your analytical skills or your hearing doncha know???

 

[geauxtohell]

Alternatively, you might want to not post shit that's already been discussed.

True, but I just got here and there's a lot to get up to speed with, not to mention learning how to navigate this board.

True but it might be good to check out the topic before you post. You run the risk of posting stuff that's already been discussed and it tends to piss people off when you do that - trust me!! Lots of us fall into that trap as a newbie.

Oh please.

I know for a fact that I don't make a habit of reading long threads before posting. If you read all 500 posts on every thread before you pipe off, kudos to you.

Most don't.

 

[Foxfyre]

From time to time have watched Glen Beck on Fox News, and he is boring to me as a spokesman. He is not a scholar with political thought for the left or with the right. All he is and always will be is to notice the current political standings and make comments. The weird his comments and the weirder they are, people will spend time to refute his comments. With Glen Beck, it is best not to feed the troll.

Again, it would be helpful to the discussion for you to pull an example or two of something 'wierd' or 'unscholarly' that you think Beck said and post it to discuss. Otherwise, calling him a troll sounds little different from those who just dutifully spout the talking points given them in an effort to shut Beck up. In my analysis, he is so scholarly in his presentations and so thorough in his research that he appeals mostly to those who already pretty well know their stuff and are looking for solid facts and evidence. He enjoys eviable ratings from that demographic.

Is he everybody's cup of tea? No. Does he get it right every time? No. Does he draw wrong conclusions? Of course. He is human and fallible as we all are. But unscholarly? I don't think you can find much evidence to back that up. Nor can you make a case that he is partisan as he has been a bane to both parties when they are dishonest, irresponsible, or foolishly screw things up. So, many Democrats hate him and many Republicans do not look to him for comfort or education. But many of us on the right who put our money on principles and values rather than party loyalty do appreciate the research and information that he brings to the debates.

He might not be your cup of tea and he might be boring to you. But if you are going to hang him, try to hang him for something he actually committed.

 

[California Girl]

Alternatively, you might want to not post shit that's already been discussed.

True, but I just got here and there's a lot to get up to speed with, not to mention learning how to navigate this board.

True but it might be good to check out the topic before you post. You run the risk of posting stuff that's already been discussed and it tends to piss people off when you do that - trust me!! Lots of us fall into that trap as a newbie.

Oh please.

I know for a fact that I don't make a habit of reading long threads before posting. If you read all 500 posts on every thread before you pipe off, kudos to you.

Most don't.

Depends on the subject, but generally, yea, if I'm gonna post for the first time in a thread, I generally read through it to find out what's already been said.

 

[geauxtohell]

True but it might be good to check out the topic before you post. You run the risk of posting stuff that's already been discussed and it tends to piss people off when you do that - trust me!! Lots of us fall into that trap as a newbie.

Oh please.

I know for a fact that I don't make a habit of reading long threads before posting. If you read all 500 posts on every thread before you pipe off, kudos to you.

Most don't.

Depends on the subject, but generally, yea, if I'm gonna post for the first time in a thread, I generally read through it to find out what's already been said.

Well, you are certainly a superior poster. I'd be willing to bet that past 100 posts or so, 99% of this board doesn't read every post.

That's why when someone reposts something that's already been addressed, it's just ignored.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well Jake. Thats your opinion and your certainly entitled to it. I think my analytical abilities are just fine thanks and my hearing as well. What about yours?? You obviously listen to Beck and totally disagree with eveyrthing he says. I guess you have trouble seeing any side of an issue that isn't left. Doesn't say much for your analytical skills or your hearing doncha know???

Claudette, keep drinking the Beckian koolaide and all will look fine to you. I do remember I was quite impressed when Beck immediately condemned the American crimes at the Abu Ghraib prison when they became public. He was the only far right commentator to do so right out of the gate. Because he has gone off the tracks since then does not mean that I am a leftist. You are quite the mistress of the non sequitur.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well Jake. Thats your opinion and your certainly entitled to it. I think my analytical abilities are just fine thanks and my hearing as well. What about yours?? You obviously listen to Beck and totally disagree with eveyrthing he says. I guess you have trouble seeing any side of an issue that isn't left. Doesn't say much for your analytical skills or your hearing doncha know???

Claudette, keep drinking the Beckian koolaide and all will look fine to you. I do remember I was quite impressed when Beck immediately condemned the American crimes at the Abu Ghraib prison when they became public. He was the only far right commentator to do so right out of the gate. Because he has gone off the tracks since then does not mean that I am a leftist. You are quite the mistress of the non sequitur.

Hmm interesting. Perhaps you could name a far right commentator who commended or came out in favor of the issue at Abu Ghraib.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Can't find any other far right wing commentators who immediately condemned Abu Ghraib like Glenn did, huh?

Those "informed" folks who agree with Beck on most things believe generally in the principles associated with the John Birch Society and mouthpiece, Cleon Skousen. Glenn is a demagogue who is selling advertising space by appealing to the base fears of a small, fearful base of ignorant Americans.

 

[JW Frogen]

Like all reformed alcoholics Beck is a ring master.

Whipping the sober into the hoops of ideological ferver.

Conservatives, I tell you now, best to go with unreformed alcoholics, like Churchill.

 

[Foxfyre]

Like all reformed alcoholics Beck is a ring master.

Whipping the sober into the hoops of ideological ferver.

Conservatives, I tell you now, best to go with unreformed alcoholics, like Churchill.

I probably know more about reformed alcoholics than you do; for instance that there are recovering alcoholics, but those who are recovering do not confuse that with 'reformed'. I would be interested to know how you arrived at your conclusion about what alcoholics are ring master of.

And I would be interested what you would define as 'ideological ferver' and what that might consist of as Beck expresses it. Could you accommodate us with your thoughts about that please?

So far nobody else I've asked about that has come up with an answer.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Foxfyre, you have not answered the previous questions to you adequately at all. No one has any need to let you shift the conversation until you do answer sufficiently. JW Frogen has given you wonderful advice. Take it.

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfyre, you have not answered the previous questions to you adequately at all. No one has any need to let you shift the conversation until you do answer sufficiently. JW Frogen has given you wonderful advice. Take it.

I have not shifted the conversation in the least. I am participating in a discussion and actually have allowed the likes of you and Mr. Frogen determine what direction it takes.

Mr. Frogen made a statement that I do not believe he can support, and therefore I choose not to take his advice in that matter.

As I cannot think of a single commentator anywhere of any ideology who approved of the controversial activity at Abu Ghraib, I cannot answer your question with anything other than that observation. You will have to give me a standard and some criteria by which we can measure degree to decide whether the others were as 'forceful' as Glenn Beck to your satisfaction, and you will have to give me comments from all on that subject in order to make that evaluation as I don't listen to all the others or Beck himself all that often. Actually I didn't know there was a Glenn Beck at the time of Abu Ghraib.

Otherwise, I think my answer was about as good as anybody could competently give.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Foxfyre, as long as you keep deceiving, your comments here are irrelevant here. I realize that you can't think, but that seems not to stop you from posting.

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfyre, as long as you keep deceiving, your comments here are irrelevant here. I realize that you can't think, but that seems not to stop you from posting.

Perhaps I cannot think, but I can recognize baiting, trolling, making inflammatory or unsupportable statements, posting ad hominem, and personal insults, and know the difference between that and supporting one's opinion and/or making an argument from a rational perspective.

But since you consider my comments irrelevent, I would encourage you to continue to not address the points made and to scroll right over them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Foxfyre, as long as you keep deceiving, your comments here are irrelevant here. I realize that you can't think, but that seems not to stop you from posting.

Perhaps I cannot think, but I can recognize baiting, trolling, making inflammatory or unsupportable statements, posting ad hominem, and personal insults, and know the difference between that and supporting one's opinion and/or making an argument from a rational perspective.

But since you consider my comments irrelevent, I would encourage you to continue to not address the points made and to scroll right over them.

You have trolled, you have baited, you have made insupportable statements, posted ad hom as well as personal insults, then you want to say that I did it. You have passed indeed the EIB Institute Certificate of Propagandic Subversion.

The point is that Glenn Beck jumped on Abu Ghraib. None of the other rightwing commentators did so. How can I find evidence that does not exist, the lack of existance itself proving my point.

You are guily intellectual bulemia.