After slamming Apollo Alliance, Van Jones, Beck suggests "our freedom" is at stake

Because his failed show received a bailout from the stimulus package?

Does that somehow negate the other facts? As far as I'm concerned, I don't care about his arrest, I care about his policy. Am I crazy or is everyone freaking out about the little things and not seeing a larger picture here? Why are we wasting our time arguing about Van Jones' arrest history and insulting GB instead of asking things like how are we going to pay for all these new positions and programs? And while we're at it, why doesn't anyone know the budgets for all these new Presidentially appointed positions? In case you weren't paying attention, we're BROKE. Where is all this new funding supposed to come from, or does anyone care that our grandkids are going to be paying for all this and we don't even fully understand what THIS is?

The term... ironically... is faux liberal.

I'm a moderate, church going Christian. What I see on Beck is so far from what my Bible tells me about how I'm to live my life, it's amazing that you would say what you said in your post. He lies, he is a racist, he MAKES THINGS UP because he lacks the intelligence or education to actually research what he says, and he's LAUGHING at you.

BTW, some of the most devoted Christians I know are LIBERALS, including the overwhelming majority of the Bible professors at our local Southern Baptist affiliated university are card-carrying liberal Democrats. Christ, if he were walking the fact of the earth today, would be chastised by people like you for being too liberal.

Political ideology has NOTHING to do with religious beliefs.

Van Jones has no part in this discussion. He was co-founder of CoC, but has had nothing whatsoever to do with this issue, no matter how hard Beck wants his blind followers to believe it.

Do your own research. Beck is an ENTERTAINER whose backside is on the line because of his stupid, lying comments.

Your ignorance in your post is astounding.

Um, *binx* how exactly can you argue that Van Jones has "no part in this discussion"? It seems to me that if a show, like GB, aims to expose someone, like Jones, and then an organization that was co-founded by that particular someone launches a massive Internet campaign to boycott said show, then that person in question has a very large part to play in this discussion. Am I wrong? It just seems to me like the CoC is acting as damage-control against potential negative press for their former co-founder. I'm not saying it's wrong, they have a total right to try and help their old friend out. I just think it's a little strange (I think "ignorant" is a better word, however I might be accused of being inciteful) that everyone is denying the obvious connection.

And why is it that questioning credentials is all of a sudden "hate-mongering"? When did the credentials, affiliations, political/social history and fundamental beliefs of a political appointee become ignored, unimportant, or irrelevant? Aren't those factors precisely how we supposedly choose our political officers? Just a thought.

On another note, I'm new to this forum and came across it while trying to understand what is happening in our country today. I am in my mid-twenties and considered myself a conservative with liberal social views (that is, before this administration changed the game on what that really means). By the time of the 2008 elections, I was a registered Republican who had been so disgusted with how the party had screwed things up that I bought what the Obama campaign was selling and, hoping for the best, I voted for Obama. Sadly, I still think that (at the time) he was the better choice - they lost me at Palin.

However, now I find myself thoroughly disenfranchised with Obama and his administration and have recently become more and more concerned as the debates on healthcare, the stimulus, etc... play out on our TV and computer screens. I had not heard of Glenn Beck until I noticed Jon Stewart (again, I am ashamed to say that a year ago THAT is where I got the bulk of my political news) paying an increasing amount of attention to GB and his show. So, I watched it. And, I'm sorry to say this here (as it seems I will likely be insulted for saying it) but I honestly don't think GB is the hate/fear-monger he is being accused of. If you haven't yet, at least WATCH the show before slamming him. If you have watched it, LISTEN to what he is asking. So what if he is concerned with ratings, isn't every show? Does that somehow negate the fact that the questions he asks on his show NEED TO BE ANSWERED by the administration, and yet rarely are?

So, every once in a while he says something hugely vapid, even inciteful. Do you know anyone out there not guilty of that, either in the media or not? I think some people want you to only focus on the things he is saying and not on finding answers to the QUESTIONS he is asking. Perhaps the reason the media is so bent on silencing him is that he might have a point. I mean, if he really is just an "ENTERTAINER whose backside is on the line because of his stupid, lying comments" then why even spend the energy dragging his name through the mud? Why not just put him in the same category as something as inane as Larry the Cable Guy and be done with it? Why consistently make a point to call him names and attempt to discredit him?

Why doesn't America, or better yet the Administration, just answer GB's "crazy" questions with logical, truthful, fact-based ANSWERS and move on? Unfortunately for liberals - and for America - I truly believe that we don't answer them because we can't, and the Administration doesn't answer them because... well because they can't either. And to me, liberal or not, conservative or not, THAT is the scariest thing of all. So now is when you all call me a troll or something, right?

Most here just try to make Beck out to be a madman with an ax to grind but no one here has checked out this guy Van Jones. I used to walk around with my eyes closed but then I woke up. Do the research Beck is not that far off. I was for change but I woke up and grew up and you all may shun the right but do your research and come to your own decisions. If you want the government to birth you, feed you, house you, educate you, care for you and take 40 to 60 percent of your pay check that is fine but just admit it. like I said I used to think like that, What a wonderful place this would be no poverty everyone working and healthy, but then I grew up and realized that for everyone you help there are two others milking the system and wasting my tax dollars. I realized that organizations like my church, the united way and others get much more bang for my dollars than the government when it comes to helping people who really need it. I want the money I work for then give up to help as many as possible that need it and the government wastes too much of it that could be put to good use.