History profs: Beck's documentary smearing progressives is a "complete lie"

[VanceMack]

Yes. It was on the same day as an Obama speech so I flipped through most major networks to see what they were covering. Why? Did I watch it from minute 1. to minute X? No. However I did see Beck trying to tie progressives like myself to Mao, Stalin and Che truther style.

So while YOU PERSONALLY dont associate yourself to those individuals, do you deny that Che has become a pop icon on college campuses? That Stalin and Mao are promoted as cntral figures in the struggle against capitalism at all of the anti-war or 'workers' rallies for the last 9 years? (we live in a wonderful time where pictures and websites immortalize such occurences).

Ive known a LOT of 'progressives' who EXIST to vent their hatred about Jews and Israel. I would never suggest that ALL progressives do...but for someone to deny that it is a common theme is simply not connected to reality.

I do not know you...and all I can do is respect you and take you at your word...and if you say that connection for you is unfair then I will believe you. But for myself...having spent time on several college campuses in undergrad, masters, and doctoral studies, Ive seen enough of it to know first hand that there is at least SOME fair correlation.

 

[WarrenB]

I am sorry to find the topic deteriorated to a series personal attacks, smearing, ridicule, and ad hominems. I confess to a weakness in this realm.

I remain convinced that Beck is a champion for the libertarian and conservative cause. I have found no evidence that Beck is deliberately deceiving to fool his listeners. At times he is dramatic and may exaggerate in making a point but his views are based on truths and facts. Beck is one of my heroes. With more Becks, we have a chance to save America from the liberals and progressives. Beck is very talented and adroit at exposing the clumsy manipulations of the current administration, all of whom are trying to run the economy, none of whom have ever even managed a hot dog stand.

It’s easy to fix problems with someone else’s money. Besides, money does not fix problems that money created. It takes talent and courage to get to the root and eliminate the cause. The cause is not always politically correct.

LONG LIVE BECK!.

The many rolls of pages of silly exchanges have discouraged me. I was looking for intelligent conservation. Au revoir, goodbye, adieu, arrivederci, and farewell.

May the Good Lord Bless and Keep You!:2wave:

 

[misterman]

I am sorry to find the topic deteriorated to a series personal attacks, smearing, ridicule, and ad hominems. I confess to a weakness in this realm.

I remain convinced that Beck is a champion for the libertarian and conservative cause. I have found no evidence that Beck is deliberately deceiving to fool his listeners. At times he is dramatic and may exaggerate in making a point but his views are based on truths and facts. Beck is one of my heroes. With more Becks, we have a chance to save America from the liberals and progressives. Beck is very talented and adroit at exposing the clumsy manipulations of the current administration, all of whom are trying to run the economy, none of whom have ever even managed a hot dog stand.

It’s easy to fix problems with someone else’s money. Besides, money does not fix problems that money created. It takes talent and courage to get to the root and eliminate the cause. The cause is not always politically correct.

LONG LIVE BECK!.

The many rolls of pages of silly exchanges have discouraged me. I was looking for intelligent conservation. Au revoir, goodbye, adieu, arrivederci, and farewell.

May the Good Lord Bless and Keep You!:2wave:

Thanks for bringing the conversation back to reality and integrity.

That's more than I can say for Beck.

 

[Boo Radley]

I have to say the evidence is pretty clear. From him saying the health care system needs to be fixed to one audience to saying it doesn't to another, to his crying to his hyperbole, it is hard to willingly suspend disbelief to the level of not seeing his deceit.

 

[misterman]

I have to say the evidence is pretty clear. From him saying the health care system needs to be fixed to one audience to saying it doesn't to another, to his crying to his hyperbole, it is hard to willingly suspend disbelief to the level of not seeing his deceit.

Yeah, I like how he said our health care system was great, and then ended up in the hospital and bitched about how horrible it was. That was cute.

 

[Grim17]

I have to say the evidence is pretty clear. From him saying the health care system needs to be fixed to one audience to saying it doesn't to another, to his crying to his hyperbole, it is hard to willingly suspend disbelief to the level of not seeing his deceit.

Since you're obviously not a fan of Mr. Beck, I suspect you don't watch his show. That being the case, your opinion that Mr. Beck presents his show using a high level of deceit, must be an opinion you adopted based on second hand information and/or from far left websites like Media Matters.

Speaking as someone who does watch his show, takes the time to research many of the things he presents, and investigates all the major allegations leveled against him by his detractors, I can tell you with a very high level of confidence that the man is not deceiving anyone.

In fact... I think it's safe to say, that you sir, are the one who is being deceived. The only question that remains, is whether you're a victim of this deception, or a willing participant?

.

 

[misterman]

Since you're obviously not a fan of Mr. Beck, I suspect you don't watch his show. That being the case, your opinion that Mr. Beck presents his show using a high level of deceit, must be an opinion you adopted based on second hand information and/or from far left websites like Media Matters.

Speaking as someone who does watch his show, takes the time to research many of the things he presents, and investigates all the major allegations leveled against him by his detractors, I can tell you with a very high level of confidence that the man is not deceiving anyone.

In fact... I think it's safe to say, that you sir, are the one who is being deceived. The only question that remains, is whether you're a victim of this deception, or a willing participant?

.

You must be kidding.

My favorite Beck moment is when he breathed in and out, claiming that carbon dioxide can't possibly be harmful as a greenhouse gas because we breath it.

But that's not really deception, more like abject stupidity. I guess a better way of describing Glenn Beck is not that he's deceiving anyone - it's that he actually believes all the goofy crap he says.

 

[Boo Radley]

Since you're obviously not a fan of Mr. Beck, I suspect you don't watch his show. That being the case, your opinion that Mr. Beck presents his show using a high level of deceit, must be an opinion you adopted based on second hand information and/or from far left websites like Media Matters.

Speaking as someone who does watch his show, takes the time to research many of the things he presents, and investigates all the major allegations leveled against him by his detractors, I can tell you with a very high level of confidence that the man is not deceiving anyone.

In fact... I think it's safe to say, that you sir, are the one who is being deceived. The only question that remains, is whether you're a victim of this deception, or a willing participant?

.

I've seen his show and have been shocked that anyone, no matter how uninformed, would ever take him seriously. And I have seen the things I spoke to. The crying bite was just too over the top. It labeled him disingenuous.

Now, as you are clearly unable to see the silliness, I'm not sure you should ever speak to anyone's view until you get your vision clear.

 

[Hatuey]

So while YOU PERSONALLY dont associate yourself to those individuals, do you deny that Che has become a pop icon on college campuses?

College Campuses are not the left. The majority of "the left" would made up by the 60-70 million voters who go out and vote Democrats each year.

That Stalin and Mao are promoted as cntral figures in the struggle against capitalism at all of the anti-war or 'workers' rallies for the last 9 years?

No. Stalin and Mao are promoted as totalitarian figures running totalitarian governments.

(we live in a wonderful time where pictures and websites immortalize such occurences).

Sure?

Ive known a LOT of 'progressives' who EXIST to vent their hatred about Jews and Israel. I would never suggest that ALL progressives do...but for someone to deny that it is a common theme is simply not connected to reality.

That is great. What does that have to do with what I said? Mao and Stalin were totalitarian. Che to a lesser extent. Matter of fact he left Cuba when he started seeing the path Fidel Castro was taking. But as long as we're on the topic of Jews and Israel, who was it that killed 6 million Jews from 1939 to 1945? Wasn't it the right wing Nazi government? I guess since it is okay, to create false connections between "right" and "right" it would be perfectly honest for me to say that if we allow the right wing in this country to take charge than we are likely to see another Holocaust?

I do not know you...and all I can do is respect you and take you at your word...and if you say that connection for you is unfair then I will believe you. But for myself...having spent time on several college campuses in undergrad, masters, and doctoral studies, Ive seen enough of it to know first hand that there is at least SOME fair correlation.

Not really. I've never met a single leftist who advocates sending people to gulags or subtle ethnic cleansing like Mao and Stalin did. I've never met a single leftist who supports sending the opposition to re-educations camps and creating a totalitarian government in America.

If you want to say that the left in America is like the left in say Russia because both believed in universal healthcare. That is true. However that is not the comparison drawn by Beck. The comparison he drew is much more sinister. One where if I state that I support universal health care and call myself a progressive, than I am somehow in the same train of ideology that supported millions of people being murdered and imprissoned. That is academic dishonesty.

What Beck fails to realize is that totalitarians are not something "the left" has any monopoly over what so ever. Right wing leaders such as Peron, Pinochet, Salazar & Franco(and these are just off the top of my head) were also totalitarians. Am I to compare you to them simply because you share faint political connections to them? No, because that would be dishonest.

Just because A and B share a percentage of C it does not mean that A and B are the same.

I guess my problem with the way presented his show was that he more or less said:

We have people in America who call themselves leftists and people in Russia, Cuba & China who called themselves leftists. Obviously because they share some of the same ideas, like universal health care, they are in complete agreement.

In reality however this is not true. Right wings and leftist governments all over the world have supported universal health care. It simply makes sense to have a population which is healthy. It is not an idea any ideology has a monopoly over even though the left has advocated it more often than the right.

Healthcare? Oh no! if Mao supported that and leftists in America also support it, then re-education camps are next!

But as somebody who has engaged in doctoral studies you know that this is simply does not follow. Because I support a lightly regulated market and less government when it comes to private matters. I also support gay rights. Something which very few(I'll say "few" even though it more like "none") totalitarian leftist governments supported it. As a matter of fact, "Progressives" in Cuba and Russia even banned homosexuality. In all honesty, what could I possibly have in common with these people when we disagree on some very key issues regarding human freedom and economics? No. I truly believe Beck was dishonest in his comparison.

 

[Sir Loin]

Thanks for bringing the conversation back to reality and integrity.

That's more than I can say for Beck.

It is certaibnly more than can be said for yourself. Unless you count posting refutation of your own claims and running and hiding from the same as a personal strength. By the way, since it escaped you, he was speaking primarily about you. Man you don't miss a clue do you? You only managed to miss out on just what your own clue actually said. And of course the chance to man up and admit the obvious. But keep strutting and preening, it is really obfuscating your boo boo as you argue about Beck obfusciating boo boos.

 

[Hatuey]

It is certaibnly more than can be said for yourself. Unless you count posting refutation of your own claims and running and hiding from the same as a personal strength. By the way, since it escaped you, he was speaking primarily about you. Man you don't miss a clue do you? You only managed to miss out on just what your own clue actually said. And of course the chance to man up and admit the obvious. But keep strutting and preening, it is really obfuscating your boo boo as you argue about Beck obfusciating boo boos.

HEY! I'm debating the topic here!

 

[Sir Loin]

HEY! I'm debating the topic here!

And your are doing a find job of it too! Pardon my dust, I'm doing some exterminating. As if often the case, a little light thrown on the subject induces a mad frenzy of flight!

 

[VanceMack]

College Campuses are not the left. The majority of "the left" would made up by the 60-70 million voters who go out and vote Democrats each year.



No. Stalin and Mao are promoted as totalitarian figures running totalitarian governments.



Sure?



That is great. What does that have to do with what I said? Mao and Stalin were totalitarian. Che to a lesser extent. Matter of fact he left Cuba when he started seeing the path Fidel Castro was taking. But as long as we're on the topic of Jews and Israel, who was it that killed 6 million Jews from 1939 to 1945? Wasn't it the right wing Nazi government? I guess since it is okay, to create false connections between "right" and "right" it would be perfectly honest for me to say that if we allow the right wing in this country to take charge than we are likely to see another Holocaust?



Not really. I've never met a single leftist who advocates sending people to gulags or subtle ethnic cleansing like Mao and Stalin did. I've never met a single leftist who supports sending the opposition to re-educations camps and creating a totalitarian government in America.

If you want to say that the left in America is like the left in say Russia because both believed in universal healthcare. That is true. However that is not the comparison drawn by Beck. The comparison he drew is much more sinister. One where if I state that I support universal health care and call myself a progressive, than I am somehow in the same train of ideology that supported millions of people being murdered and imprissoned. That is academic dishonesty.

What Beck fails to realize is that totalitarians are not something "the left" has any monopoly over what so ever. Right wing leaders such as Peron, Pinochet, Salazar & Franco(and these are just off the top of my head) were also totalitarians. Am I to compare you to them simply because you share faint political connections to them? No, because that would be dishonest.

Just because A and B share a percentage of C it does not mean that A and B are the same.

I guess my problem with the way presented his show was that he more or less said:

We have people in America who call themselves leftists and people in Russia, Cuba & China who called themselves leftists. Obviously because they share some of the same ideas, like universal health care, they are in complete agreement.

In reality however this is not true. Right wings and leftist governments all over the world have supported universal health care. It simply makes sense to have a population which is healthy. It is not an idea any ideology has a monopoly over even though the left has advocated it more often than the right.

Healthcare? Oh no! if Mao supported that and leftists in America also support it, then re-education camps are next!

But as somebody who has engaged in doctoral studies you know that this is simply does not follow. Because I support a lightly regulated market and less government when it comes to private matters. I also support gay rights. Something which very few(I'll say "few" even though it more like "none") totalitarian leftist governments supported it. As a matter of fact, "Progressives" in Cuba and Russia even banned homosexuality. In all honesty, what could I possibly have in common with these people when we disagree on some very key issues regarding human freedom and economics? No. I truly believe Beck was dishonest in his comparison.

I'll admit to bias...MOST of my experience with people that are 'progressive' are in the university or social services setting. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE with your statement that MOST progressives...like MOST liberals, and oh yeah MOST conservatives are night and day removed from parties and party ideology and really spend more of their life worried about providing for their families than political entities.

I think that maybe the point to be taken should be this...learn about who you are following as a pop icon. I cant tell you the number of kids in college that actually did not believe those very real truths about Che. Even the assclowns wearing the "Viva Che" T-shirts. And we wont even start on the 'educators'.

And I kinda think that was the point of the special If I understand everyone here. A broadcast which BTW I did not watch...which is why I asked you if you did. Because I dont watch or listen to Beck...or Limbaugh...or Olberman...and only manage to catch Jon Stewarts monologue on Hulu.com over coffee in the morning.

 

[Grim17]

Now, as you are clearly unable to see the silliness, I'm not sure you should ever speak to anyone's view until you get your vision clear.

I not only see it, I value it. It's what separates him from all the other political pundits out there, and makes his show not only informative and educational, but entertaining to watch.

That so called "silliness" more often than not, ends up becoming the focal point of the arguments used by his detractors, when they realize they can't refute the actual information he presents, as your post has clearly demonstrated.

Far to often, the criticism heard from the left isn't centered around the actual information, but rather how he chose to present it. They often choose to ignore the facts he provides, and instead focus on the words he uses to communicate those facts to his audience, by either distorting them, or taking them out of context.

Here's an example I posted this morning that back up my words:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-media/65429-glenn-beck-exposes-dishonesty-far-left-attacks.html

.

 

[Boo Radley]

I not only see it, I value it. It's what separates him from all the other political pundits out there, and makes his show not only informative and educational, but entertaining to watch.

That so called "silliness" more often than not, ends up becoming the focal point of the arguments used by his detractors, when they realize they can't refute the actual information he presents, as your post has clearly demonstrated.

Far to often, the criticism heard from the left isn't centered around the actual information, but rather how he chose to present it. They often choose to ignore the facts he provides, and instead focus on the words he uses to communicate those facts to his audience, by either distorting them, or taking them out of context.

Here's an example I posted this morning that back up my words:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-media/65429-glenn-beck-exposes-dishonesty-far-left-attacks.html

.

Well, it's not informative as he's mostly inaccurate. And such inaccuracy can't be educational.

As for your clip? Thanks for supporting my view.

 

[Sir Loin]

Well, it's not informative as he's mostly inaccurate. And such inaccuracy can't be educational.

As for your clip? Thanks for supporting my view.

From what I've seen in this thread and at DP in general, the inaccuracies are coming from Beck's detractors and your glib comments above are a pretty typical example of how "silly" things do get when the "inaccurate" gets outed.

As for the clip, you either did not watch it or are just dissembling. I actually watched Beck's show for the first time last night so I caught the segment that Grim linked to. It is an airtight exposure of the level of dishonesty and deceitful "journalism" that Huffington did in fact engage in and Beck has her caught dead to rights. And this is only one small part of the show, he exposed several attacks about what he supposedly said to what he actually did say. It was a pretty telling demonstration of dishonesty and bias from a supposed source of the same. But if you insist on pretending otherwise, your arguments are not worth the HTML that comprises them.

 

[USA_1]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Ebo4UhloU"]YouTube- GlennBeckisaCryBaby.com - Extended *English subtitles added*[/ame]

 

[Sir Loin]

YouTube- GlennBeckisaCryBaby.com - Extended *English subtitles added*

As nobody is arguing the guy does not cry often (far too often for my taste) I wonder, is that what you call an intelligent reply or just plain old trolling? Talk about a dumb post. Did the local Middle School just let out?

 

[USA_1]

As nobody is arguing the guy does not cry often (far too often for my taste) I wonder, is that what you call an intelligent reply or just plain old trolling? Talk about a dumb post. Did the local Middle School just let out?

No, It's a reality check. I am just amazed that anyone can take him seriously. He reminds me of Jimmy Swaggert.
Don't get so defensive, man. You can worship him if you want.

 

[Sir Loin]

No, It's a reality check. I am just amazed that anyone can take him seriously. He reminds me of Jimmy Swaggert.
Don't get so defensive, man. You can worship him if you want.

A "reality check" that has nothing to do with the topic or what is being discussed in this thread? One need not get defensive to recognize just how dumb your idea of a contribution was. Naturally I'm the one getting defensive and telling you that you can "worship" him if you want. Chuckle.

Dumb.

 

[USA_1]

A "reality check" that has nothing to do with the topic or what is being discussed in this thread? One need not get defensive to recognize just how dumb your idea of a contribution was. Naturally I'm the one getting defensive and telling you that you can "worship" him if you want. Chuckle.

Dumb.

The topic is about Beck's credibility, isn't it?:rofl:rofl

 

[Sir Loin]

The topic is about Beck's credibility, isn't it?:rofl:rofl

Posting a video of Beck crying is supposed to be a reality check and somehow addresses "credibility"? Yeah :rofl:rofl indeed. I'll give ya this much, you ain't afraid to make it and keep it dumb. Real dumb.

 

[Hatuey]

I'll admit to bias...MOST of my experience with people that are 'progressive' are in the university or social services setting. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE with your statement that MOST progressives...like MOST liberals, and oh yeah MOST conservatives are night and day removed from parties and party ideology and really spend more of their life worried about providing for their families than political entities.

I think that maybe the point to be taken should be this...learn about who you are following as a pop icon. I cant tell you the number of kids in college that actually did not believe those very real truths about Che. Even the assclowns wearing the "Viva Che" T-shirts. And we wont even start on the 'educators'.

And I kinda think that was the point of the special If I understand everyone here. A broadcast which BTW I did not watch...which is why I asked you if you did. Because I dont watch or listen to Beck...or Limbaugh...or Olberman...and only manage to catch Jon Stewarts monologue on Hulu.com over coffee in the morning.

I absolutely agree with your statement. I didn't go to college but, I think most people in college who "follow" the ideas of Che and Mao are people who simply see the "good" things they did. And they did indeed do some very good things.

Cuba's independence is something which for the time was a huge accomplishment on many different grounds. Not just politically but also socially. For the first time in the world, you had a Latin American government which viewed race as irrelevant to a person's place in society. If you compare this to say Bolivia or Peru who up until the last 2 decades were incredibly racially divided, it is huge. Latin America's racial history is one which has some horror stories where the locals are treated as second class citizens and people were divided by color castes.

You also had a government which took the overall education of it's populace very seriously and had an alphabetization campaign that made 99% of the country literate in a 2 year span. Those are regardless of the ideology, HUGE, accomplishments historically for any country in Latin America. However there were also huge crimes committed by the Cuban government. They murdered thousands of dissenters and tortured many more. Nobody I know on the left "denies" these facts. Matter of fact a large percentage of people on the left don't even know that.

But then again, many on the right do not know that Reagan was essential in supporting right wing governments and militias in South America which committed just as many murders and made thousands disappear. Videla's dirty war alone made thousands disappear in a period of 7 years that spanned Democrat and Republican presidencies. Latin America has been the dictatorial experiment of the U.S. for nearly a century. We've supported left wing AND right wing governments who regardless of ideology have engaged in horrible massacres and made millions disappear. I'm not blaming America as we've just been looking for our own best interests. But if you really sit down and think about who has a monopoly on authoritarian dictatorships you find that they exist on both wings.

I thank you for at least trying to understand my point and not barking like some other right wing members on this board would do at the thought of being compared to some horrible men on this planet when their opponents are trying to make a logical point.

 

[Hatuey]

The topic is about Beck's credibility, isn't it?:rofl:rofl

Maybe you should try to debate what Beck actually said instead of what he's done in the past? It would be a great start. Not to mention that if you did some research on totalitarian governments and politics, you might actually learn some really amazing things? I'm not trying to cramp your style or anything - but there are people on this board who would actually like to discuss what Beck said instead of how many times he has cried.

 

[Grim17]

Well, it's not informative as he's mostly inaccurate. And such inaccuracy can't be educational.

As for your clip? Thanks for supporting my view.

I must confess, that I made a mistake. I was wrong and I admit it.

I made the mistake of believing that although you didn't agree with me politically, you were still a person of integrity that would continue to engage in honest dialog.

Based on your response, It's clear that I made a significant error in judgment. There's no way around it... I was wrong, and I admit it.

.