CNN hire Glenn Beck renamed nukes "climate-control devices," suggested bombing of Venezuela
In an attempt to devise a "politically correct name" for bunker-buster nuclear weapons to make their use more accepted, Glenn Beck proposed "climate-control device" and "butterfly bomb" before settling on the name "anti-cancer bombs" because "you treat cancer with radiation." Beck also suggested the name "bomb de tropical" as "something for the tanning index," adding, "We could use that one in Venezuela."
On the April 10 edition of his nationally syndicated radio program, Glenn Beck suggested that "we just need to come up with some sort of politically correct name" for bunker-buster nuclear weapons to make their use more accepted. Beck proposed they be renamed "climate-control devices," then suggested the name "bomb de tropical" as "something for the tanning index," adding, "We could use that one in Venezuela." Beck was commenting on investigative journalist Seymour M. Hersh's article in the April 17 edition of The New Yorker, which reported that the Bush administration has "intensified planning for a possible major air attack" on Iran, and may be considering "the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon ... against underground nuclear sites."
Beck also proposed the term "butterfly bomb" before eventually settling on "anti-cancer bombs" because "you treat cancer with radiation." CNN Headline News hired Beck in January for a new prime-time program scheduled to begin May 8.
From the April 10 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Why do we have these weapons? Why have we developed these weapons if we're afraid to use them? And I got news for you: I'm afraid to use them because I know exactly what would happen. Everybody would come out of the woodwork saying how horrible we are and we're despicable human beings and now we're using nuclear weapons. I think we need to change the name of the weapon. I think we just need to come up with some sort of politically correct name. Something, I don't know -- this isn't it, but like a butterfly bomb. Aw, look, it's like a little butterfly. We could paint it all psychedelic colors; everybody in San Francisco would be like, "Aw, ain't that like a little butterfly?" Vaporization. I think we'd have a better chance of dropping it. Can you imagine, [Sen.] John Kerry [D-MA] standing up: "It's completely irresponsible to drop the butterfly bomb." Yeah, because it sounds too nice.
You know, how about -- because it would make the ground temperature very, very hot, how about something like a climate-control device? Maybe we rename these nukes the climate-control device? Of course, that makes you think of global warming, and then it would tie in, and then it probably wouldn't -- something for the tanning index. Bomb de tropical. What do you think of that? Bomb de tropical. That kind of sounds nice. We could use that one in Venezuela. You know, the problem is I am so pro-science. Everybody says conservatives are anti-science. We're not. I'm pro-science. We've developed this bomb, why wouldn't we use it? It's the pro-science bomb.
No, wait a minute. Hang on just a second. You treat cancer with radiation. I say we call these things anti-cancer bombs. We're just -- what? We're just dropping anti-cancer bombs. There might have been a cancer victim some place in the -- you know, the bowels of that nuclear power plant over there. I don't -- we had -- we wanted to make sure we got that anti-cancer vaccine right to them. We're just dropping anti-cancer bombs. Who's against -- who's for cancer? Who's against treatment of cancer? That's all we're doing -- it's an anti-cancer bomb.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Beck is pathetic.
If not for those like you, who turn sarcasm into FACT ... we might believe that nobody could possibly THINK this way. Thanks again. - tex / Thursday April 6, 2006 11:26:57 PM EST
Sarcasm people. Beck has said some odd stuff before, but this was not serious.
Well... it's obvious you like Beck, because you defend him EVERY time. Prob working for the guy.
Bottom line is, this guy's just lame. What passes for 'sarcasm' and humor or even social commentary in the rightwing circle is pretty weak.
Yes, I do like Beck. I just don't judge him favorably on EVERYTHING he says the way some around here judge him unfavorably on everything. I judge him on the topic at hand.
Want to see me disagree with Beck? Put up some stuff he says about Catholics. Put up some of the stuff he says about less important issues (which is what he mostly talks about). I don't drink Beck's Kool-Aid, but on this issue, to think he was being serious shows a great fault in being able to look at things without bias, IMO.
When you say something sarcastically, there needs to be some irony. How is this sarcastic? That is probably the least satisfying way you could have defended such idiotic utterances.
If I were defending Beck I would have said it was an off-the-cuff remark that demonstrates many people's frustration with the current political climate between the US and Hugo Chavez and it should not be taken seriously. In fact, I think Beck should clarify himself that it was indeed a silly off-the-cuff remark.
I am glad that MMFA is highlighting this kind of stupid remark. If you don't show how stupid this whole line of thinking is, eventually people begin to think it is okay. "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" as Voltaire used to say.
The whole piece was ironic, in a way. Does radiation cure cancer? Yes! Do nuclear weapons change climate? Yes! The fact is he came up with names that actually fit and describe what happens (except perhaps the Butterfly Bomb thing)! You doubt the truth behind these names?
There was indeed irony there. I just read the summary at first and skipped to the comments too hastily. Sorry.
This is sarcasm, just not very good sarcasm.
In small, controlled doses at the hands of a skilled medical professional.
Radioactive fallout from a nuclear blast or a disaster like Chernobyl is a COMPLETELY different story.
The effects of Chernobyl in Belarus are especially disturbing. Take a look at this little tidbit I found at the Chernobyl Children's Project:
Belarussian doctors identify the following effects from the Chernobyl disaster on the health of their people:
* 100% increase in the incidence of cancer and leukaemia * 250% increase in congenital birth deformities * 1,000% increase in suicide in the contaminated zones * 2,400% increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer
So what is Beck's joke? Just tell me what the hell is so funny about calling a nuclear on a foreign country a cure for cancer?
I meant, sorry
Thanks for the plug, and I stand by the proposal that it's far better to have folks like Beck tell us what they're thinking, what they think is "funny", than to keep it bottled up.
In this instance, Beck is just extending the primarily Rightwing tactic of RENAMING something in order to frame the issue more to their liking.
Thus, "Pro-Choice" becomes "Pro-Abortion", "invading without provocation" becomes "Pre-emptive War", "late term abortion" becomes "Partial Birth Abortion", "illegal warrantless domestic surveillance" becomes "terrorist surveillance", and so on. There are dozens of examples, but it's all part of FRAMING.
If Beck is being sarcastic, his target is unintentional. He has allowed us to glimpse the process by which things the rightwing opposes are identified by "more acceptable" terms, terms which have the intention to deceive.
The Pentagon no doubt will rename "Bunker Buster Nuclear Bomb" something like "Underground Contained Fission Device for PEACE". Anything to avoid the NUKE label, and to allow its use without public concern excited by an ACCURATE discription.
Yes, but both sides do it too. I think it's all a bunch of baloney. Yes people try and change the language to suit their cause... it's gonna happen. But I don't really care what you call things. It may tick off some right-wingers, but not this guy. Call things like you will. No skin off my tooth.
but Beck is still a despicable human being himself. I'm one of those people who find humor in pretty much anything, including death - depending on the circumstances, but bombing Venezuela with a nuke and calling it a 'climate control device' isn't particularly humorous. Try saying that to a survivor of Hiroshima - I somehow don't think they'd find it that funny. Beck just says whatever he says to be controversial and elicit a reaction - that's not the scary part - the scary part are all the idiots that listen to him and go "YEAH!! - RIGHT ON BECK - LET'S NUKE 'EM". And, apparently, with his current approval rating, that amounts to an incredibly idiotic 36% of our population.
Simply because you call it sarcasm, does not make it okay.
The freedom of speech only extends so far until it could reasonably cause violence. If someone did bomb Venezuala, some crazy guy in the boonies who built some sort of crazy guy in the boonies bomb, Beck could be sued.
Just because you call it sarcasm doesn't mean it's funny, doesn't mean it should be said.
And it doesn't mean it was sarcasm.
That famous right wing wit. Why can't they joke without calling for murder and genocide? I think to be a right-winger you have to have your sense of humor arrested at age 12.
I have long considered sarcasm to be a tool of weak minds. Deftly wielded, it can persuade, but Beck is a hack. Encouraging him is akin to encouraging Ashley Simpson to sing some more.
I stand by my original assertion. Humor-wise, he's pathetic.
And he doesn't serve America. What he said will be repeated and employed against America. Anti-American sentiment will expand.
Colbert, Stewart, the precious Olbermann... all use sarcasm. Almost any humourist uses sarcasm. It isn't a show of a weak mind.
You don't have to find him, or this specific bit, funny at all. It's a matter of preference. But to try and make this into a serious piece is quite a stretch.
CONMAN loves Beck.
Please cite examples where Stewert or Olberman talk about using nukes on someone sarcastically. Please point out examples where either of those men spew racist or jingoistic bile and call it humor?
Colbert is doing satire, satire of the rightwing bobblehead O'Rielly. You might say he is making fun of your favorite brand of humor.
Actually, Colbert is one of my favorite humourists. I'm not a stick in the mud. I can laugh at myself a lot harder than you can laugh at me. Stewart used to be one of my favorites, but Colbert is the New Hot Goodness.
Humor is humor. I don't really care who you make fun of, just make it funny. That's my philosophy. Sorry to spoil your theory about me, though.
Colbert is funny, did you catch is act in "Strangers With Candy"? So how about some examples of offensive hateful humor from Stewert and Olbermann?
Sorry, I didn't know I was required to find examples for something I never said happened.
You claim that Stewart and Olbermann use sarcaism in a defense of the kind of "humor" that Beck employs. You are equating the two, very different brands of "humor". I'm asking you to do more than make a broad generalization. I'm asking for specific examples of the formers' humor that you believe is on a par with Beck's special form of humor.
No, I was simply saying that just about every humourist uses sarcasm. They may use it in very different ways, and for different means, but the fact they use it does not change. I am sorry if I misspoke somewhere to lead you to anything other than that.
I listen to O'Reilly on occasion and I love Colbert, despite the fact that he is making fun of him.
LOOK OUT JON STEWART!!
You're on the right track.
The success of sarcasm ultimately depends on the actual point of view of the speaker, his INTENT.
If the speaker's intent is mean spirited, or to SHOCK, it's not funny.
Try to imagine five minutes of a Richard Pryor routine delivered by David Duke. The words would be the same, but the INTENT would make the former hilarious while the latter would be hateful.
Bottom line, does Beck APPROVE of the use of nukes and bombs and destruction? Yes, he does. So his faux jocular approach to the issue is underscored by the the fact that he is an ADVOCATE, who is attempting to blunt the horror of what he desires to DO.
Pryor's bits about black life come from a love, a recognition of hardship, and a belief that laughing at troubles is the best way to get along in society.
Beck's bit here comes from a warmongering view that bombs are GOOD, and should be used at every opportunity, while at the same time taking a slap at "politically correct" people who might feel that violence should be a LAST RESORT, rather than a gleeful and jovial lark.
Nick Adams, author of "Making Friends with Black People", sums up the problem Beck has very nicely:
Adams: "To me the biggest questions you have to ask are 1. Is it funny? 2. What's the intent? The first one is obvious, but the second question needs some explanation. If your intent is to be mean-spirited or to make a point, you're setting yourself up for failure. One of the disturbing trends in standup right now is the white comic who isn't afraid to be 'un-PC.' So you get a lot of white people doing racial sh*t that isn't funny and seems like the only intent is to shock the audience. Lenny Bruce did not die so some Waspy motherfu**er from the valley can use the word 'beaner' on stage. Every jackass white comic in the world thinks that they're Sarah Silverman now."
And Beck proudly flies the "UN-PC" banner. It doesn't make him funny; quite the opposite.
I should post an accreditation to the above:
[link to mrzine.monthlyreview.org]
So is your point that all comics have to fit in their own little box based on race and cannot stray from it? White people can't make "Black jokes" and vice versa? No one is allowed to try and shock? Only White people can make fun of White people, only Mexicans can make fun of Mexicans, Asians can only make fun of Asians, etc.?
You may not find Beck funny, and the intent is important. But how are you to determine people's intent on every issue. Beck said he that he's afraid to use these weapons. I am just not sure I have gotten your point yet.
"Beck said he that he's afraid to use these weapons." --conman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Although Beck says he is afraid to use these weapons, if you read further it is clear he is really only afraid of the inevitable backlash. He then tries to come up with politically correct names for the weapons to curb the backlash and make the weapons easier to use:
"And I got news for you: I'm afraid to use them because I know exactly what would happen. Everybody would come out of the woodwork saying how horrible we are and we're despicable human beings and now we're using nuclear weapons. I think we need to change the name of the weapon." --Beck
Yes, you are correct.
"So is your point that all comics have to fit in their own little box based on race and cannot stray from it?" --conman
---------------------------------------------------------
It is actually much worse than that. That box is really just based on context of which race is a part. And yes, we are all bound to context in the real world. It sucks I know, but I would like to hear your kumbayah suggestion how we all can get past it?
Comedy and entertainment is not the real world. Unless you count The Real World. ;-) People should be free from everyday restrictions when entertaining (within reason, obviously). Think South Park. Think any of that would fly in the real world? It's not kumbayah, but who likes that song anyway?
South Park is very funny, although it is a bit over-the-top for me much of the time. They get away with their schtick because their characters are multiethnic/multicultural and no one is given a pass on the teasing. Much of the time the person who is saying the objectionable joke is really making fun of themself as well.
Also, since it is a cartoon, much of the real world is masked behind the context of entirely made-up characters.
The rules of context always apply. No matter how much they be damned by both sides. I think we would all like a society where each individual is independently evaluated with an absolute clean slate. It just won't ever happen. Sadly, it is much easier (and therefore too practical) for us to label people first and interpret what they say in accordance to that label.
Maybe if Beck wants to avoid the context behind his remarks, he should invent fictional characters like Matt and Trey have.
Open_Mind says: "They get away with their schtick because their characters are multiethnic/multicultural and no one is given a pass on the teasing. Much of the time the person who is saying the objectionable joke is really making fun of themself as well."
Considering that the creators of South Park are two white males, it's not really acurrate to say that the person (Jew, Muslim, Black) or character making the joke is really making fun of themself.
Also, since it is a cartoon, much of the real world is masked behind the context of entirely made-up characters. --Open_Mind from above.
If you read my post further, I explain that Matt and Trey mask their own context through the use of characters. This is quite common in imaginary worlds. Authors frequently change the context of their own views by using characters with different ones than their own.
Context can never be avoided, but it can be manipulated to effect by creative people.
GEOGRAPHY can make a difference, too.
If Beck was delivering his "humor" from the belly of one of those bunkers, the context would be entirely different from sitting in a comfy studio thousands of miles from being "involved".
Kinda reminds me of Bush's WAR experience springing from his cushy placement in the TANG. He's not really presidential, but he DID stay in a Holiday Inn Express...
In this sort of satire you look at which has the power and which is powerless. If a Venesualan comic joked about invading the US it would be funny because its ludicrous. If Beck jokes about dropping nukes on Venesuela its NOT funny because we have the power to do so and its intimidating. When blacks make fun of their standing of powerlessness it can be funny as per the late amazingly great Richard Pryor. If a CEO makes jokes about powerless blacks its not so funny becuase when the powerful make fun of the weak its just mean. There are very few perks in powerlessness and weakness, satire which traditionally has been one of them is one of the few. THAT is how you can discern intent and its also one reason among many that BECK ISNT FUNNY. I think he is mentally unbalanced and needs professional help....immediatly
I can't oblige you here. Beck is reckless. And Beck lacks talent.
"Butterfly bomb" and his San Fran reference are based upon stereotypes that were hoary in 1974. As humor, it doesn't work because it isn't hip.
And "climate control device" also doesn't work because it unintentionally references our climate conundrum: if there were such a device, it would absorb heat, not release it.
Plus, the whole notion of renaming something is deeply creepy. It's Orwellian.
You have a fine mind, Con Man. Don't waste it on Beck.
Hugs and kisses,
Holly
I have to agree with you con man. I used to listen to Beck when he was in Atlanta. I thought he was very funny. As a matter of fact, I didn't take very much that he said seriously. He made fun of the right as well as the left. My favorite was when he did a bit on the Axis of evil. I wish I could remember more of it.
I think that when he says outrageous things it is for shock value, like Stern and the like.
Colbert and Stewart are on Comedy Central. Beck is on serious radio. Very big difference.
and anyways he isn't joking. He really thinks the US should use nuclear weapons. Classic compassionate moral conservatism for ya
Whether or not you view his comments as facetious, depends on whether or not the person saying them has a similar political bent.
So you think liberals actually think that Beck wants to rename them "pro-science bombs", etc.? I think anyone who doesn't see this as a joke is stretching too far to try and see something wrong in anything Beck says.
Again I messed up with the italics tagging. I should really work on that. Sorry.
I think part of it is false outrage and it's BOTH sides that do it so I'm not picking on liberals, conservatives do it too.
When some says lets "hang" or lets "shoot" the George Bush, I know they don't mean it literally and when conservatives act like its literal, it pisses me off. Of course they are people who do want to use nuclear weapons and there are people who do want to shoot Bush- both are crazy.
Which means its funny but in a way he really means it. The difference is Franken uses this kind of humor about lying and other various forms of chicanery. Beck is using it to talke about killing tens of thousands. We can all laugh at human foibles. Whatever their political agenda. I love South Park and they are harder on liberals than conservatives. Trying this kind of humor with the subject mass slaughter and it is obscene. Heard any good jokes about the holocaust lately? Neither have I
Hey, don't joke about the Holocaust. It just so happens that my grandfather died at Auschwitz. Yeah, he got drunk and fell off the guard tower.
That's a joke for those of you in the media. I got nothing.
One ticket down, please.
Yet it STILL makes my point. It is a joke about a NAZI, one WITH the power not the powerless Jews or other INMATES at Auschwitz. THAT is a huge difference
What this country needs is a revolution, french style- you know, let's drag all the republicans into the town sqaure and chop their heads off in front of cheering crowds!!!! Gee isn't that funny! I'm sure no one thinks I'm serious here, I'm just being sarcastic. And isn't that hilarious. If you don't find that funny, you're just too PC. Just another conservative with no sense of humor.
If I anyone took that serious that would make them an idiot.
Perhaps if that had actually been funny or clever, maybe if you had thrown something in about Cheney being drawn and quartered, and Rumsfeld being pressed like in Salem. Now that might have actually been funny. But I have a sense of humor. I like to laugh at the right too. The whole Cheney shooting thing was very funny.
I'm not one of those uptight kind of conservatives. Hate to burst your bubble-wand.
i wasn't trying to be funny, I was trying to say something that couldn't be taken seriously but that could be offensive to conservatives. Much like the crap that comes out of Beck's orifice. I was hampered by not wanting to draw the attention of the authorities, Beck and his ilk don't have that problem.
I said it wasn't funny.
what I mean is that mean nasty comments shouldn't be defended or passed off as humor.
But if they are funny, why shouldn't they be considered humour? For example, when Carlos Mencia makes very racist, possibly hateful jokes about White people or the mentally handicapped, they shouldn't be considered humour even if they are hilarious?
Dark humour is a long-standing tradition. Look at Monty Python for a easy example. In Holy Grail they make fun of people dying from The Plague and being tortured as witches. Is this not humor? Different people find different things funny.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't you say earlier that what he said wasn't funny?
... sort of. I didn't say he was funny or not. I said that this monologue was sarcasm that some may find funny and some may not. But to say he was being serious about the nomenclature is absurd. It is humor, though. Whether or not it suits your taste in comedy is up to you.
You're comparing Beck's loose cannon antics to those of 6 brilliant men, all of them very skilled in the use and misuse of the English language. The Pythons excelled at finding humor in the plague, death, stupidity, the government, the handicapped, etc. I don't ever remember it being mean spirited.
Beck is a mean spirited ranter. More like one of those you see on the street corner spewing forth an opinion on every topic, the difference being that Beck's audience isn't imaginary.
Can Nuclear War be funny? Hell yes, look at Dr. Strangelove. Listen to Randy Newman's "Political Science". But Beck's attempt at sarcasm or irony or what ever his supporters call it, is just downright stupid and hateful. He is playing to his audience, just like Howard Stern and others, none of them can be considered great thinkers. That's the problem today, we don't have enough thinkers, but we have plenty of reactors.
A large portion of their humor was also self-critical, i.e., poking fun at British society and institutions and, especially in the movies, at human society generally. That "nothing is sacred" attitude is probably what allows audiences to accept the Python's humor, regardless of the target.
By comparison, probably few would find funny Dick Cheney making fun of illegal immigrant workers.
We need more to become energy independent. Glen the Rock Beck dropped like one on this attempt at humor, although humor a lot of the time is in the ear/eye of the observer.
Those who downplay Beck's advocacy for the use of nuclear weapons are in reality boosters of his insane idea. But they do have enough brain cells somewhere to realize that they're not exactly in the mainstream, and that some of their more reasonable fellow citizens would call it lunacy. They're right. And so when confronted with Beck's own words in a public forum, such as the quotes above, the knee-jerk reaction is to say Becky was just being funny. Deep down inside though, they're not just laughing- they wholeheartedly, seriously agree with him.
Dave, just an FYI, the reason I downplay Beck's advocacy for the use of nuclear weapons and consider it to be his attempt at dark humor is because he's a freaking talk show host! He doesn't have any power to put any of this nonsense in motion.
on the day Iran has an "anti-cancer bomb". That will be the test of is this sarcasm or is it someone who thinks we can scare people by gross displays of power.
What if Limbaugh used drugs after screaming that every drug user, no matter how much or how it happened, should be in jail? Wouldn't it be great to see that happen... wouldn't he have to apologize for -- something, anything?
What if Beck developed cancer? Do you think he would understand radiation a little better, and maybe not insult the thousands who are going through radiation treatment?
What if he volunteered to fight, and witnessed a nuke and its consequences? Would this dolt change his mind?
I would be more cencerned his boss doesn't put some brakes on his mouth. The leaders in Venezuela may not understand this " humor " and actually take him seriously, specially in light of recent revelations that the White House is considering nuclear devices being considered to terminate Iran's nuclear ambitions.
I used, inadvertently, the word "consider" twice in a sentence. Sorry, mrs Thom ( my english teacher )
I dont know one person that does.
Why would CNN hire such a hatemonger?
Well, I listen on occasion, so there's one person you "know".
For the second question, it's probably obvious. Money. Conservatism sells. Why else would right-wing radio, books, etc. do so well. There's a lot of money to be had. What can I say? The almighty dollar wins again.
because talking about using tactical nuclear weapons on a democratic nation is a BLAST!
I find Beck to be utterly brilliant. This is not to say that the collection of neurons barely contained by a cryo-field that compose his brain are brilliant, but Beck, himself, as a living canvas, is brilliant, like how a sunset is brilliant, or a reindeer trying to fly but just plummetting to its death after watching the same, old Christmas re-runs.
Why is it that every time some little pimple on the bum-bum of the US pops up, like Saddy H. or Monstrous Robo-Chavez, that we all have to remember the lessons of WWII and pretend that they are Hitler and rip their infrastructure a new one -- but the lesson learned from dropping the bomb has somehow not endured? The real lesson? Not just the Hitler=Bad axiom (we figured that one out... "Hitler bad"! I got an A on that essay from the teacher who taught my Advanced Hitler was Very Bad class).
Colbert: "60 years later Americans still yearn to kick Hitler's ass" And drop a few archaic nuclear devices, too, just to celebrate the 75th anniversary of taking down a villain so perfect that Disney had to race back to the drawing boards to revise their rogues gallery. If reality wasn't stranger than fiction than Hitler would never have existed and American's would just keep to their traditional bombing grounds -- Latin America, like God intended.
There is a slight possibility that Beck was merely making fun of the ways that politically correct habits have transcended an organic linguistic development and created many terms that, in turn, evolve into more complex terms, and so forth, and THIS process, if he was satirizng it, is perfectly apt for humourizationals by anyone on any side of the Political Left-Right Dichotomy.
I believe that Beck does seem to support nuclear bombs used as casually as common, over-the-counter, napalm, but a part of me refuses to believe that any American would commit the worst crime in American history, next to using taxpayer money to pay-off Russia and Canada to back off a bit in
Apparently someone misses being on Keith Olbermann's "Worst Persons in the World" list.
Personally, I liked "Tactical Behavior Modification". Get a grip people, it was just joking around. Quit trying to psycho-analyzing.
Oops! Sorry, I meant "analyze", not "analyzing". Apologies
I will make you a deal. YOU dont tell me what to do and I wont demand you stop drinking the koolaid that has clearly killed off most if not all your brain cells
It's a shame...
Based on your lifelong personal experience. Made obvious by your posting history at this site
Beck, Clear Channel who carries Beck, and CNN if they hire Beck
If you don't have anything better to do than worry about what Glenn Beck is saying ... then you don't have a life.
This is America ... have you heard of "free speech"?
Your not going to stop Beck, his radio show is now #5 in the country. #5 out of over 2000 talk radio shows.... not bad.
And now he has a program that will be in CNN, and you liberals can't stop him .. and why would you want to? This is America ... "free speech".
If you are trolling MMFA worrying about what we are say about Beck...
Should be "saying"
Than come to a site and complain that you dont like what it and posters here say. If you dont like this site feel free to go elsewhere. Coming here and snivelling about what it says shows YOU have no life.
Oh I understand very well what free speech is apparantly YOU do not. The way it works is Beck gets to say any stupendously moronic thing he wants. Then WE get to say what we think about it. IF someone told you that free speech means rightwing bloviating screechmonkeys like Beck get to say outrageous and insanely stupid things and for some reason the first amendment protects HIM but DOESNT extend to US telling him what WE think about his ongoing moronity they LIED TO YOU. Then again what am I thinking this as IF you EVER thought of ANYTHING. This is another screechmonkey talking point you recorded from this or that rightwing bloviater and chose this time to regurgitate it. Having NO ability whatsoever to do the cognitive functioning required to discern if it makes ANY sense at ALL.
I believe the intelligence agency's job title for people like Beck, Hannity, Krauthammer, Colter and many more is "Misinformation Specialist." It is a rather low paying job for wannabe spies, but these people get such a kick out of the anti-American propaganda they spew that they would probably do it for free.
are no doubt thrilled to hear "cnn hire" beck advocate dropping a nuclear bomb on them. the kind of arrogant macho stupidity that gives us a bad name.
If anybody heard this show, you would KNOW that his tounge was firmly planted in his cheek. Doesn't anybody on this website have a sense of humor??? It may not be your sense of humor and it doesn't make it wrong if it isn't yours.
I guess I've found a new hobby, calling out idiots that take themselves way to serious, like MediaMatters.org.
"The last time everyone had the same sense of what was right, it was Germany in the Thirties and it didn't turn out that funny." (Dennis Miller)
and what convinced me? the dennis miller quote.
Over 2500 of our brave American troops have lost their lives in order to allow Iraq a "democracy".
Iran? It's a democracy, with an elected leader.
Beck wants to nuke Iran, a democracy. Bush plans it as we speak.
This is meant as a lesson to Iraq; Just because you have elections and a Democracy, don't think we won't drop the big one on you. We love Democracy, but not all that much. In fact, it's not about democracy AT ALL. It's about ... our whim of the moment.
Americans believed WMDs, and now they're being asked to swallow "democracy" as the driving force rationalization for WAR. We Americans RESPECT democracies, you see. (AS IF)
"Kill me now so I don't have to listen to that idiot Glenn Beck" bombs.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Whatever comes out of that man's mouth is nonsense. He is a fool who wears specialized Moron underpants. That, I think explains everything we need to know about Mr. Beck.