About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

Glenn Beck says he reads a lot, but he omits key words in the retelling

February 09, 2010 9:34 pm ET by Jeremy Holden

On his Fox News show, Glenn Beck stated, "I read a lot." That may be, but if his interpretation of a recent New York Times editorial is any indication, his reading comprehension leaves a bit to be desired.

Launching an attack on progressive income tax rates, Beck claimed, "The New York Times is doing their best to cover the spending tracks left by President Obama." Beck explained:

BECK: The Times claims that the deficit is a result of cutting taxes on the wealthy. And they offer this stern warning to us little people: "The last thing that government should do is slash spending." Wow. I wish I wasn't such a little person and I could understand that. History tells us taxing the rich and slashing government spending are both progressive lies. But you have to know history. You know, a lot of people will say, "That Glenn Beck, he's just a big, dumb dummy." Well, maybe I am. You can disagree with me all you want. But I read a lot. I read a lot of in-depth history.

The article, Beck said, could win "the gold medal in mental gymnastics" since the Times "will bend, twist, and contort all of the facts into a pretty, little, grimy, little ball of blame-Bush."

The thing is, I also read that New York Times editorial. Even the parts Beck omitted to fit into a pretty little ball:

The deficit numbers -- a projected $1.3 trillion in fiscal 2011 alone -- are breathtaking. What is even more breathtaking is the Republicans' cynical refusal to acknowledge that the country would never have gotten into so deep a hole if President George W. Bush and the Republican-led Congress had not spent years slashing taxes -- mainly on the wealthy -- and spending with far too little restraint. Unfortunately, the problem does not stop there.

See, the Times did not claim that "the deficit is a result of cutting taxes on the wealthy," as Beck claimed. The editorial stated that a combination of cutting taxes largely on wealthy taxpayers and reckless spending under Republican economic stewardship facilitated the current fiscal situation.

Further, when Beck said he couldn't understand the Times' warning that "[t]he last thing government should do is slash spending," this likely was due to his omission of the comments immediately preceding those he quoted:

At a time of high unemployment and fragile growth, the last thing the government should do is to slash spending. That will only drive the economy into deeper trouble.

As it turns out, in reading, context matters.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mmfa.fan (February 09, 2010 11:26 pm ET)
      2  
      Beck can read?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 09, 2010 11:35 pm ET)
      3  
      I don't care how much this loony-toon reads...he obviously doesn't understand much of it. Glenn Beck is a poster child for poor education.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (February 09, 2010 11:51 pm ET)
          1
        He does read a lot though...

        Let's see...there's the el Fathead Newsletter. The Ku Klux Klan Kuarterly. The John Boner mystery novel, "Dingbats on the March."

        And the Ronald Reagan classic, "How to Destroy Liberalism, and America, in 3 Easy Tax Cuts."

        Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (February 10, 2010 12:10 am ET)
        1
      So, the rich got a 10% tax cut (39.6% to 35%), pay about 40% of the personal income taxes in the US, and the 2010 deficit is about 30% of the total budget. Not sure how this all computes, but I don't work for the CBO or a major accounting firm, but it sounds a lot like ENRON type accounting to me.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Guppies (February 10, 2010 1:30 am ET)
          1
        Aah, you have to take Glenda's higher level of economics. You liberals/progressives/socialists/communist/pinkos/gun haters/freedom take awayers just don't understand/ How many times do I have to draw the chalk broad (oops, excuse me, I thought I was getting my finger nails done) board for you dumb liberalls?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Guppies (February 10, 2010 1:05 am ET)
         
      "us little people" - wish I were such a "little people" as Glenda. Not only is there a difficulty in reading, but in math - I sure don't think someone earning millions can be considered "little people" - but who am I to judge - by Glenda's standards, with a JD, 6 plus income, I am a socialist. BUT - I can read!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MagCynic (February 10, 2010 7:44 am ET)
        5
      These posts about Beck are getting to be pretty nit picky. Almost as good as nit picky as the great economic mind Keith Olbermann telling us that "federal budget debt is a good thing in a recession." Or that "As a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, it`s about the same as it was in 1970, as it is right now, far less than it was throughout the Reagan administration."

      There's no such thing as federal budget debt and his percentages are wrong, but why nit pick?



      Report Abuse
      • Author by peace4all (February 10, 2010 8:04 am ET)
        2  
        care to provide some evidence that olbermann is wrong?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MagCynic (February 10, 2010 8:20 am ET)
            5
          Source

          It's from NewsBusters so you better check their source. You never know if these extremist right-wing sites are telling the truth or just being big, fat liars.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by New Frontier (February 10, 2010 8:08 am ET)
        3 1
        These posts about Beck are getting to be pretty nit picky
        Therefore I am commencing Operation Change-the-Subject-to-Olbermann.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by epkklk851 (February 10, 2010 8:50 am ET)
        2  
        "the great economic mind Keith Olbermann telling us that 'federal budget debt is a good thing in a recession.'"

        This is the wisdom of the great economic mind, John Maynard Keynes. It was called "Priming the Pump." It was part of the strategy used by FDR to get the country back to work. Some of it was called the NRA-The National Recover Act, and some of it was the CCC or the Civilian Conservation Corps. They did lots of work on the National Parks and such trivial, little projects as Hoover Dam. You know, nothing important. If you've never been to the dam, there is a beautiful dedication area and walkways that are the height of Art Deco, proudly executed by hard working men. The dam is beautiful as well as functional.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MagCynic (February 10, 2010 8:57 am ET)
            4
          Oh, so sorry. I didn't know the Hoover Dam finally proves John Keynes right and Adam Smith wrong. My mistake. And what did FDR have to do with the Hoover Dam other than temporarily rename it to Boulder Dam?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by epkklk851 (February 10, 2010 10:02 am ET)
            2  
            Coo aren't you being nit picky. The dam was originally called the Boulder Canyon Project, true FDR did rename or return the name back to Boulder Dam, but it was still a major government works project, even if it did get funded under Hoover. The problem with the charts in the Newsbuster's article is that they are not really sourced properly. They give you the name of the report, but fail to give the page numbers in a 368 page report. They don't give table names or column headings. It is sloppy research that is deliberately confusing. As to Keith's error, he does seem to be wrong about the numbers, but he is not wrong about the Keynesian principle. As to Adam Smith, Mr. Smith made all of his observations about a small group of pin makers in Scotland in the 1770's. I know your type likes to invoke him like some plaster saint, just like the vaunted "Founding Fathers" but quite often, you haven't read any of Mr. Smith's writings and really don't know what he said. George H.W. Bush was correct when he called Reaganomics "VooDoo Economics." He took the worst from Keynes and Freidman and sodomized the economy and we are still dealing with it. And if your boneheaded hero wants to invoke Cloward and Piven, he really should look to Uncle Ronnie and his boys, because they have done a bang-up job of trying to collapse social program spending. Thank God no one let them privatize Social Security like they wanted or that would be gone, too.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by MagCynic (February 10, 2010 10:20 am ET)
                4
              Just a few additional points...

              1. Approved by either Republicans or Democrats, the Boulder Canyon Project was clearly unconstitutional. Beautiful and useful it may have been, I can't find any of Congress' enumerated powers that give them the authority to build a project benefiting a specific locality such as those states along the Colorado River.

              2. How did Keynesian economics work for the Japanese?

              3. Social security is broke. While you can make the argument that it is technically constitutional, it simply doesn't work. It's just one giant pyramid scheme.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by epkklk851 (February 10, 2010 10:40 am ET)
                2  
                As to the constitutionality of the Hoover Dam, I would think the Elastic Clause would work. "Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper..."Article One, Section 8, Clause 18. Lots of government projects and rulings only affect a small geographic area. Roads and interstate commerce are covered by the Constitution, and they only affect small areas. Where are you getting this drivel, more of Becky's diarrhea? As to the Japanese and Keynes, I couldn't say. Their economy and history are quite different from Western economies. They lost a decade to a bubble economy and now they are in a deflationary spiral. They practiced corporate capitalism, it hasn't worked out too well for them. And Social Security has eliminated poverty for 90% of senior citizens. I think it is a success. I would like to see it maintained, but I do think some things need restructuring, however, the seniors will never allow theirs to be taken away in the short term, in order to keep it going for their grandchildren. They paid in after all, even if they will collect $4 more for every $1 they paid in.
                Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

About the Blog

Feed Icon
  • County Fair is a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web as well as original commentary, breaking news and rapid response updates to major media events from Media Matters senior fellows and other staff.