I do not watch him daily, nor do I seldom watch an entire show start to finish. I did sit through the entire hour of his TV show yesterday ( if it was not a new show - i suggest that says how often I do watch). For those of you who did also watch - I am curious about your thoughts on his perspective of “Social Justice” = “Marxism”, this apparent new love affair of our current administration and churches; the apparent efforts of our current administration to take over churches and create partnerships against Gobal Warming and Climate Change, John Kerry’s claim of large faith based support groups for a bill; his clip of Pelosi speaking to an apparent group of worshippers/clergy that they must talk about illegal immigration as the gospel; if the chruches desire help from the government in addressing illegal immigration. Has Beck lost his mind, has the administartion lost theirs’? Is Beck onto something and if so what could possibly be the repercussions if he is accurate. I see no-one as a talk show host as a “fence- sitter” they all have agendas - that I get, and selling ads is their primary focus - however substance does sustain over gobbleygook; just curious if you care to share your opinion of his perspective.
That’s a lot of questions. I’ll just briefly address two of them.
Certainly, the term “social justice” is often used as a euphemism for the redistribution of wealth, although I don’t think the term necessarily has to be used that way. That usage of the term bothers me for somewhat the same reasons it probably bothers Beck.
I don’t know of any conspiracy by the current administration to “take over churches.” Of course, the politicians in this administration, just like those in the Republican administration that preceded them, are happy to get support from the churches. Personally, I don’t think that religion provides a sound basis for political policy, but in that regard Democratic administrations are certainly no worse than Republican ones.
No discussion of Beck’s worldview is complete without Lewis Black’s dissertation on Beck’s “Nazi Tourette’s Syndrome.”
http://ccinsider.comedycentral.com/2010/05/13/lewis-black-glenn-beck-has-nazi-tourettes/
.
The nice thing with Beck, and he has and promotes what he believes in like the rest of them, is he provides the material and you can decide. Of course some don’t bother since they dislike him personally or his political views. Instead they choose to criticize without even bothering to listen or investigate.
He has a huge staff that does his his research so hes good for that if nothing else. it doesn’t mean you have to take it as gospel but you can watch, research yourself and then come to your own conclusions
-or you can research the same material in a format not hellbent on convincing you that anything and everything the President does mirrors Nazi Germany in action and intent.
Take John Stossel, for example. You know, that guy who gets zero attention for his cool-headed, rational, unemotional, nonhysterical consideration and analysis of the same sets of fact.
-or you can research the same material in a format not hellbent on convincing you that anything and everything the President does mirrors Nazi Germany in action and intent.
Take John Stossel, for example. You know, that guy who gets zero attention for his cool-headed, rational, unemotional, nonhysterical consideration and analysis of the same sets of fact.
Stossel has his own agendas as well. I wasnt saying you had do drink Becks Kool-Aid but he digs where others dont. His library of info on the scummy folks that are in power currently is beyond compare in the media, not that hesa journalist. Its funny if you actually catch his radio show or tv show and wait for about 4-6 months you’ll see the mainstream media MAYBE pick up on the fact that Joe Politician is a scumbag. He is very good at following paper trails and digging up info.
I know scumbag and politician usually go together 
On the Nazi thing have you really looked into what he is getting at? Hes not saying they are going to round up any particular group and take them off to te ovens or that they plan on invading Poland. Im not saying he isn’t over the top, he admits that and his staff harasses him about it, but there is a point to his rant.
Of course if we only watch the snippets then we really dont get the full story. His sarcasm, and its thick, could easily be edited (and it has been) in such a way as to distort what he is getting at.
Beck has outed many of the radicals in the Obama adminsitration.
He pursues stories that nobody else will cover.
He uses peoples own words to prove his points and exposes the interlocking connections between different factions on the left.
It is for this reason that progressives hate him and why those that believe in the Constitution and individual liberty find value in the product he provides.
I did sit through the entire hour of his TV show
Now that is quite an accomplishment.
Would you and Rodred say the same of Rachael Madow and Kieth Olberman?
Would you and Rodred say the same of Rachael Madow and Kieth Olberman?
In so far as they provide a product that helps progressives understand how conservatives et al are attacking socialism in America, sure they provide value to their respective audiences.
I watch them periodically in order to guage the tenor of the bad guys.
But from what I have seen, Glenn Beck doesn’t have to call someone a “smashed bag of meat” in order to get his point across–which is a subtle, but important distinction.
When he calls Van Jones a radical and a self proclaimed communist, is he not speaking the simple truth?
The guy waves swastikas around about every third day. “a bag of smashed meat” vs. “a nazi”…hmmmm hmmmm troublesome.
if you actually catch his radio show or tv show and wait for about 4-6 months you’ll see the mainstream media MAYBE pick up on the fact that Joe Politician is a scumbag. He is very good at following paper trails and digging up info.
He’s had his successes on that front, to be sure. But it only seems to urge him further into conspiracy theory madness.
On the Nazi thing have you really looked into what he is getting at? Hes not saying they are going to round up any particular group and take them off to te ovens or that they plan on invading Poland. Im not saying he isn’t over the top, he admits that and his staff harasses him about it, but there is a point to his rant.
Of course if we only watch the snippets then we really dont get the full story. His sarcasm, and its thick, could easily be edited (and it has been) in such a way as to distort what he is getting at.
I used to listen to him almost daily, back in the Bush era. He was a little nutty then, but it’s taken on a whole new flavor now. I don’t know if he changed his game intentionally, or if the conditions around him changed enough to push him further over the edge, but it’s not the same show he put on radio a few years back.
The Nazi references are gratuitous and strategic. The National Endowment for the Arts program equation is a case in point: he couldn’t link it to Goebbels’ propaganda machine fast enough, but if you look at what it was he was criticizing–“Unity Through Service”–it could be viewed just as easily as the US government’s propaganda campaign against the Nazi threat. But of course he doesn’t make that comparison, because it doesn’t fit his agenda. It would make him look positively pro-America, not like the racist (which he openly calls him) evil dictator he wants America to believe our President is.
So he has access to facts, maybe more so than the average talking head. It’s what he does with them that matters most, and what he’s doing with them is no great secret.
Beck dedicated three complete shows in a quest to determine if FEMA runs concentration camps full of U.S. citizens before he reluctantly concluded that, no, FEMA does not run death camps. Three shows. Of course Beck knows that FEMA doesn’t run death camps. But he identifies the cherished fears of his core audience, and milks those fears for all they’re worth. So he managed to get three shows out of it. He’s like the Larry Flynt of right-wing media. He identifies what triggers an audience, and blows it up in glorious detail, airbrushing along the way to meet expectation.
I have no problem with it in general. It’s just speech. But I worry about certain people who get sucked into watching/listening to this stuff basically 24/7. It’s addictive, just like porn can be. And it really affects some people, makes them angry, withdrawn, and paranoid.
Beck dedicated three complete shows in a quest to determine if FEMA runs concentration camps full of U.S. citizens before he reluctantly concluded that, no, FEMA does not run death camps.
But his staff did great research.
In so far as they provide a product that helps progressives understand how conservatives et al are attacking socialism in America, sure they provide value to their respective audiences.
I watch them periodically in order to guage the tenor of the bad guys.
But from what I have seen, Glenn Beck doesn’t have to call someone a “smashed bag of meat” in order to get his point across–which is a subtle, but important distinction.
When he calls Van Jones a radical and a self proclaimed communist, is he not speaking the simple truth?
IOW, Glenn Beck tells you what you want to hear. Madow and Olberman do not.
I used to listen to him almost daily, back in the Bush era. He was a little nutty then, but it’s taken on a whole new flavor now. I don’t know if he changed his game intentionally, or if the conditions around him changed enough to push him further over the edge, but it’s not the same show he put on radio a few years back.
It’s very, very obvious that Beck is just after ratings and money, so he is exploiting the suckers like chainpin and Rodred who prefer to be spoon-fed total nonsense, rather than gather information from numerous diverse sources and draw their own conclusion. Apparently, that type of media strategy is very successful for right-wing hate mongers like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. I don’t think Beck really belives most of the bullshit he spouts.
So he did the research and reported the truth?
As opposed to spastically repeating the (erroneous) party line, like BO and his minions are doing with the AZ immigration bill (which they can’t even bother to read).
.
I used to listen to him almost daily, back in the Bush era. He was a little nutty then, but it’s taken on a whole new flavor now. I don’t know if he changed his game intentionally, or if the conditions around him changed enough to push him further over the edge, but it’s not the same show he put on radio a few years back.
It’s very, very obvious that Beck is just after ratings and money, so he is exploiting the suckers like chainpin and Rodred who prefer to be spoon-fed total nonsense, rather than gather information from numerous diverse sources and draw their own conclusion. Apparently, that type of media strategy is very successful for right-wing hate mongers like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. I don’t think Beck really belives most of the bullshit he spouts.
Bring facts to the table. Prove his facts as reported wrong. Sorry you’ll struggle with that since he loves to let them use there own words. he might ad commentary but every single person he has goner after has had a quote/book/interview/video of them speaking their mind.
Im curious what your diverse sources are. I rarely catch Beck for more than a few minutes at a time anymore but I do follow CNN ABC CBS RUETERS AP FOX BC etc. I defend Beck because of haters like yourself who take bits and pieces from someone who hates him and don’t bother to listen to his facts, which are presented in the persons own words, but instead listen to his view and decide because you dont like how or what he says that it somehow negates the facts.
Do I agree with his take on things? Sometimes yes sometimes no but you cant argue with people hanging themselves with their own words. Van Jones is a great example. He never called him anything he didn’t call himself in books, interviews or lectures.
Obama a racist? Yep easy to argue when he promotes affirmative action and similar programs not just making the playing field equal but putting people in front of better qualified candidates because of their skin color. Racist policies to fight racism are racist. That’s very easy to argue.
Bring facts to the table. Prove his facts as reported wrong.
They can’t and won’t. Progressives don’t deal with facts.
Bring facts to the table. Prove his facts as reported wrong.
They can’t and won’t. Progressives don’t deal with facts.
Amen brother.