Comments on: Is that Darrell Hammond?

By: ASPECTRATIO

ASPECTRATIO — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:33:12 +0000

Ralph Kramden + two years of community college credits = Glenn Beck

By: Billy Beck

Billy Beck — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:29:43 +0000

“Because he’s talking crazy talk about shit that has been going on for 50-200+ years under various presidents of various parties.”

And yet: look at where we are.

By: Flukebucket

Flukebucket — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:09:51 +0000

Thanks guys. John Stossel and Glenn Beck. That gives me something to work with.

By: James D

James D — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:36:33 +0000

I did qualify that John Stossel is the best, but he’s barely on TV with any regularity.

By: solinox

solinox — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:50:21 +0000

I don’t know, I would think John Stossel is the most libertarian guy on TV, even though he gets less air time. Third? IS there a third?

By: Flukebucket

Flukebucket — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:03:58 +0000

he is the most libertarian guy on TV

Who is the second and who is the third most libertarian guy on TV? I am trying to learn.

By: Sheldon Richman

Sheldon Richman — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:00:08 +0000

Is a Gilbertian the same as a Savoyard? I hope so. Count me as one, Radley.

By: Janie

Janie — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 07:58:33 +0000

As funny as it is to see Beck sigh every two seconds, it’s hilarious to see him fake cry. The problem with men (e.g. the Menendez brothers and Beck) who fake cry, is that they study women to get the “look” right; the head thrown back, the biting of trembling, quivering lips. Only that’s not how women cry. But the fakers, not having a woman close at hand who will cry for them on cue, study the soap operas and that’s where the lip-biting and head thrown back poses come from. Real crying is not pretty, but soap stars try to make it look sexy, and you can see their mannerisms mimicked by the male fakers, which is WAY funny. One time Beck bit his trembling lip, caught his quivering voice several times before he could reassure someone not to worry, the calvary was finally here to help, too stupid to know that Calvary is where Christ was crucified. He actually made boo-hoo noises.

By: chris

chris — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 07:38:40 +0000

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/08/28/video-glenn-beck-oligarh-was-on-purpose-you-cant-spell-oligarch-without-czars-or-something/

By: James D

James D — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:30:07 +0000

I’m still hearing nothing but ad-hominems … no refuting of any facts.

By: Big Chief

Big Chief — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:23:45 +0000

That clip was one weird way to end my weekend. Good night, Glen, thanks for playing!

By: de stijl

de stijl — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 03:14:25 +0000

Matt,

At least he didn’t identify himself as a party clown*. I’d be supremely bummed. Now, if he would just become a mime we’d all be in a better place.

*If he was a party clown, he’d totally be a Binky The Clown type: “You didn’t see nothing old man. We’re just five happy party clowns, sitting down to a plate of beef. White, powdery beef.”

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:35:26 +0000

How can you take someone serious that has refereed to himself as a “rodeo clown” on other shows? He is in it for the money and the celebrity and doesn’t really care about the truth just the entertainment.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:32:19 +0000

“Beck did not “warn us” of FEMA death camps. HE DEBUNKED THEM. He went through the story to kill it. He interviewed the experts to prove that the death camps didn’t exist.”

Oh bullshit he didn’t debunk them until he was under intense pressure from a variety of outlets (blogs other shows etc). He stirred the crazy pot for many months on the subject beforehand. Hell in his next show he alluded to concentration camps again..

“Can’t you at least listen to the guy and debate him on the facts?”

Because he’s talking crazy talk about shit that has been going on for 50-200+ years under various presidents of various parties. Hell you haven’t even given one exact thing to refute just vague shit without specifically naming anyone other then OBama and only naming him because it’s “certain people in Obama’s administration”..

The Glenn Beck on fox news wouldn’t even agree with Glenn Beck from CNN it’s hilarious. The dude has no real principles other then filling his bank account and gaining celebrity.

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:15:58 +0000

OK. Beck is a useless nut. What about those questions though? Anyone else on TV asking who is writing the bills? Or why the rush? Or the czars? et, et.

No? Well, don’t watch! Better to just write Beck off as a nut.

By: InMD

InMD — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:00:34 +0000

At #32

The problem with it is that it doesn’t put things in context. People who aren’t well informed by more in depth reporting from other places accept what he is saying as though it is fact or at least a reasonable interpretation of fact. Now don’t get me wrong, there isn’t anything inherently wrong with that. He has the right to say whatever he wants to say and Fox News has the right to air whatever views they want on their channel. However, based on your own description of what he does you might as well put Glenn Beck in the same category as Jon Stewart. Like Glenn Beck, Jon Stewart will occasionally say something insightful. However, Jon Stewart is on comedy central, not a channel that claims its mission is to provide information. If, as you yourself say, the fundamental purpose of Beck’s show is to entertain then it is no better than getting information from Jon Stewart. Both of them engineer the show to get the results they want. In Stewart’s case it is to get a laugh, in Beck’s case it is to stoke outrage.

Once again. None of this is to say that what they do doesn’t have its place. But, in my view, anyone who allows it to shape their world view is being extremely naive.

At #33

No source of information is unbiased. Some are merely more intelligent than others and thus worth more consideration. This website has a bias. It is Radley Balko’s bias. Now I happen to agree with him on many things, particularly on the law enforcement issues, but this site definitely has a point of view. When that point of view, even if it counters your own, is well thought-out and sophisticated it is worth listening to. When it is a guy shouting about where the letters go in a word he can’t even spell it may not be. I believe someone else made a comment about the ranting derelict on the street occasionally being correct about something. It doesn’t mean he is worth listening to.

By: Stormy Dragon

Stormy Dragon — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 22:54:02 +0000

I wonder if Beck has notebooks filled with tiny writing. Seems to be the type of guy.

After the blackboard thing, I’m leaning more toward there being a room in his house that looks like John Nash’s office from A Beautiful Mind.

By: Jim Henley

Jim Henley — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 22:21:42 +0000

Well played, Radley. Well played.

By: James D

James D — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:54:54 +0000

InMD they have that … it’s called NPR; it puts you to sleep, it’s all liberally biased, and it’s paid for by our (stolen) tax money …. if that’s the alternative, no thanks.

By: solinox

solinox — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:21:35 +0000

“If Glenn Beck wanted to have a show where they calmly discussed the gives and takes of government policy and where lines should be drown when it comes to personal freedom he’d be off the air because no one would be watching.”

This is an interesting point. Beck makes no bones about being an entertainer first and foremost. And I think the wacky factor is probably a big part of his getting such big ratings since moving to Fox. Without it…you’re right, nobody would listen, would they? Good grief, if it weren’t for things like Moron Trivia I would never have started listening to his radio show in the first place! I love the silly stuff. And if that’s what gets the proletariat to listen…and maybe manages to make them think about a few things while they’re at it…what’s wrong with that? How would being 100% serious be any better for presenting a message, if that would mean nobody would listen?