Beck revived falsehood that Bill Clinton said, "We've got to slow down our economy" to fight global warming

SUMMARY: On his nationally syndicated radio show, Glenn Beck falsely claimed that former President Bill Clinton said, "We've got to slow down our economy" in order to combat global warming, and aired a portion of a speech Clinton made in January. However, as Clinton's full remarks make clear, he did not suggest "slow[ing] down our economy" to fight global warming.
On the May 21 broadcast (subscription required) of his nationally syndicated radio show, Glenn Beck falsely asserted that former President Bill Clinton said, "We've got to slow down our economy" in order to combat global warming. Beck cropped a comment from a speech Clinton made in January so that the only audio that aired was: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions, 'cause we've got to save the planet for our grandchildren." After playing the clip, Beck said, "There it is. 'We've got to slow down our economy to save the planet for our grandchildren.' If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know, nothing will." In fact, as Clinton's full quote makes clear, he did not say that we "have to slow down our economy" to fight global warming. Beck's false claim echoed a months-old blog post by ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper.
Earlier in the show, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said, "[T]he people that are advancing this cap-and-trade want to slow our economy down, want to reverse our economy." Beck -- who also hosts a show on CNN Headline News -- said, "[D]o we have the audio of Bill Clinton saying that in a speech? We have -- we'll have to find it. We have audio of Bill Clinton talking to an environmental group. He was talking about green energy and everything else, and he said, 'We all know that the only way to really do this is to halt the economy.' And we were dumbfounded that this man would actually admit to that."
As Media Matters for America noted, Clinton's full quote makes clear that he did not say "[w]e've got to slow down our economy" or "the only way to really do this is to halt the economy." Rather, he said that "rich" countries could take that approach, but it would not work. He said that the "only way" to fight global warming is to prove that doing so "is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy":
CLINTON: And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada -- the rich counties [sic] -- would say, "OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren." We could do that. But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work.
And guess what? The only places in the world today in rich countries where you have rising wages and declining inequality are places that have generated more jobs than rich countries because they made a commitment we didn't. They got serious about a clean, efficient, green, independent energy future... If you want that in America, if you want the millions of jobs that will come from it, if you would like to see a new energy trust fund to finance solar energy and wind energy and biomass and responsible bio-fuels and electric hybrid plug-in vehicles that will soon get 100 miles a gallon, if you want every facility in this country to be made maximally energy efficient that will create millions and millions and millions of jobs, vote for her. She'll give it to you. She's got the right energy plan.
Beck's false characterization of Clinton's quote as "We've got to slow down our economy" echoes the original headline of Tapper's January 31 blog post: "Bill: 'We just have to slow down our economy' to fight global warming." By 9:30 a.m. ET on January 31, Internet gossip Matt Drudge provided a link echoing Tapper's false headline. Tapper subsequently updated his post twice, once to add a response from the Republican National Committee to Clinton's supposed assertion that "we must 'slow down the economy' to stop global warming," and once to change the headline to read "What Did Bill Clinton Mean By 'We Just Have to Slow Down Our Economy' to Fight Global Warming?" In his second update, Tapper wrote: "The original headline of this post was too definitive, while the larger blog post tried to express that I wasn't sure just what Clinton meant by his statement. So I changed the headline to reflect that. I understand after many, many emails that many folks think I misunderstood what the President was saying." On the January 31 edition of Fox News' America's Pulse, host E.D. Hill aired the same portion of Clinton's comments as Beck did, asserting, as Media Matters noted, that "when it seems Democrats and Republicans have finally united on one thing, and that is that our economy is slowing and we need to kick it into gear, Bill Clinton comes out and says, 'No, we need to slow it.' "
From the May 21 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
KING: I've just stepped out of a conference this morning and listened to a presentation by the Heritage Foundation, and I've been convinced of this for a long time -- they've go the empirical data and it's very convincing -- that the people that are advancing this cap-and-trade want to slow our economy down, want to reverse our economy, and they know that if they shut down energy, they back the economy off. And they're doing it all because they worship the -- they worship Mother Nature.
BECK: Dan, do we -- Dan, do we have the audio of Bill Clinton saying that in a speech? We have -- we'll have to find it. We have audio of Bill Clinton talking to an environmental group. He was talking about green energy and everything else, and he said, "We all know that the only way to really do this is to halt the economy." And we were dumbfounded that this man would actually admit to that. But we have it on tape. We'll try to find it for you.
KING: Occasionally, Bill Clinton told the truth evidently.
BECK: Evidently, he did.
[...]
KING: Well, you laid this thing out at the beginning of the program. I don't know how anyone could contrive more things to do to drive up the cost of energy and slow our economy than the list of things that the Democrats have done to take energy off the marketplace and intimidate the futures market as well.
BECK: Well, for anybody who -- anybody who thinks that it is -- that is not their intent -- Dan, roll the speech from Bill Clinton. Listen to this clip.
CLINTON [audio clip]: We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions, 'cause we've got to save the planet for our grandchildren.
BECK: There it is. "We've got to slow down our economy to save the planet for our grandchildren." If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know, nothing will.
KING: I think Bill Clinton has told the truth on that. That is their agenda. I've been saying it from the floor of Congress this whole 110th Congress, that they have convinced me that they want to increase the cost of energy and they want to do that and it'll slow down the economy. And increasing the cost means people will use less energy. If they use less energy, they'll be more -- there will be fewer carbon emissions and they believe that it keeps the greenhouse gases out, as Bill Clinton said, and it -- and it will save our planet.
















I don't think he would call it a lie. Maybe "cropping for the purpose of quality".
How long has this guy been on?
F##k CNN. I hope they follow his lead to the bottom of the barrel.
How long has this guy been on?
Far too long.
LOL. Actually, Glenn won, under a pseudonym.
Few things enrage me more than this particular dirty trick: taking what was originally presented as reported speech, or a hypothetical, or a counterfactual example, and representing that utterance as the speaker's sincere statement. This is more than just taking someone out of context -- it is deliberate misrepresentation.
A reporter for any serious newspaper would be fired for making this kind of "mistake", but I would be surprised if Beck and his show's crew got so much as a warning for this.
No Beck, to fight global warming we need to stop all the hot air coming out of pieholes like you.
P.S. I'm really enjoying Austin's new 1st - 100+ degree weather in May. Please stop coming here.
We CANT CHANGE GLOBAL WARMING!
C'mon people, have ANY of you done the math? The human contribution to increasing temperatures is statistically insignificant. Furthermore, if America goes it alone, the major offenders like India, Russia and China will keep pumping out pollutants. Even so, it still does not have a statistacally significant impact on our planetary temperatures. The friggin ice fields are actually increasing in size, but the left can't seem to digest the photographic proof.
But, I know I can't change any opinions here. Al Gore will make billions in profit in his green scam and liberals will applaud it will griping about the billions in oil profits. I wonder if Gore will reap anything higher than the 10% profit margin that 'big oil' generates. I bet you a cow fart he will.
Al Gore will make billions in profit in his green scam, etc., etc., etc.
You got anything to back up all of your bullsheit?
Al Gore will make billions in profit in his green scam, etc., etc., etc.
And if that was true wouldn't it just reinforce Clinton's point?
I don't know where you got your "information", Cannonball, but it's all wrong:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,328146,00.html
I bet you a cow fart he will.
By the way, farting cows do in fact a greater contributor to global warming than vehicle emissions. Vegetarians are good for the environment.
clearly clinton was presenting a hypothetical by using "would say" as a preface. he makes it very clearly that there is no need to do that, that going green is also good business. "the only way we can do this is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove that is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that will save the planet for our children and grandchildren. it is the only way it will work".
obviously beck's show had to do some selective editing here, to make it something that is the opposite of the intent. and the editing also plays into that false choice that green and good for your wallet are mutually exclusive. one of our resident trolls was mocking those "goofy spiral light bulbs" yesterday. those goofy bulbs use 1/4 of the electricity of the old incandescent bulb, and last years longer. sounds like a win-win to me.
beck should be called to account for this, and if he refuses to correct it, then the responsibility falls to cnn.
There you go with the big words again.
No wonder Beck has to shorten President Clinton's comments
Sarcasm? See now you've got me using the big words.
On a serious note, I love to hear the trolls and their masters talking about burning all of their incandescent bulbs as a form of protest against those of us who actually believe in science.
Unless they really are living in their mom's basement as I suspect, they've got to pay the electric bill. They don't mind paying more to the electric company yet scream to high heavens when they've got to pay their fair share of their taxes to live in a free society.
I guess they're not the brightest bulbs.
Especially if they are "those goofy spiral things."
I hear those rebels calling in to El Rushbo, WK. It is pretty funny, the same ones crying about a few bucks difference in taxes will pay a higher electricity bill just to make sure everybody knows that nobody tells them what to do.
There was a poster here who assured us that he was not going to pay 4 bucks for a light bulb.Never mind that I find 4 packs of CFLs for $4 (that's called pulling up yer bootstraps),it must be maddening to be so programmed to resist change that you can overlook the longer life span of the bulb, and the savings in electricity that, together, actually make the bulb cheaper.
The best effort I've seen at a rational opposition to CFL's is that using them with a dimmer switch can shorten the life of the bulb. There are CFLs designed for use with dimmers, and I think they're more expensive, but how many dimmer switches do most people have in their home? How often do they use the dimmers?
Dimmers are very inefficient, energy-wise, even with standard incandescent bulbs anyay.
Oh well,I won't argue with them. The same religious fervor that has the nuts linking to Inhofes Global Warming denier site and the GW petition Project will probably empower them to cling to their old-timey light bulbs.
I have seriously heard right wing talk show hosts using that as an excuse not to get them.
"...mercury vapor being in the bulbs, and if they fall and break, they'll KILL YOU!! "
I forgot that one, I have heard it.Republicans seem to be scared of the weirdest things.
Actually.....lol
EPA models indicate that even a slight difference in the amount of mercury dissolved in airborne vapor could have an enormous effect on the amount of mercury deposited on the earth's surface. (think fish, lakes, streams, soil etc.)
Mercury is a potent neurotoxin and, If you improperly dispose of products with mercury in them, they may break and release mercury vapors which are harmful to human and ecological health.
CFLs contain at least 5 milligrams of mercury each. That is more than enough to warrant "special clean up procedures" should one of the bulbs break in you own home. Check out those procedure at the EPA site, just for clean up in your home.
Not to mention mercury is a "KNOWN" toxic element and we at one time (it's been recently banned) put it in vaccines (it was called thimorosal [sp]) to preserve them, and then gave those vaccines to our children.
It's indicated in Alzheimer's. It is also one of the things women, elderly and children are advised every day on the EPA site that is high in fish, and which fish specifically you are advised to NOT eat.
Just a thought....if something is poison to humans, why put it in your homes, in your vaccines, in your air..when the environment is already rife with it from other pollution sources? Is that a sane thing to do?
i don't think anyone is advocating just throwing them in the trash, or not doing a proper cleanup. there should be mandatory recycling programs run by stores that sell a certain dollar amount of the bulbs. but the fact is mercury is produced in greater quantities by many manufacturing and energy producing processes. see link. some bulb manufacturers are also reducing the amount of mercury in the bulbs. and the fact is the bulbs can last many years. it's not like you're disposing of nearly as many as regular bulbs. i have a small box where i keep the very few i have had to replace, until i go to the county recycling center. overall, the environmental advantages make them well worth it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp
...and he said, "We all know that the only way to really do this is to halt the economy." And we were dumbfounded that this man would actually admit to that.
Oh, yea, Glenn... we all know how stupid Bill Clinton is. You're the freakin' genius... ;>)
What a stupid friggin comment. Have any of you wathed Glenn? Have any of you seen the facts that he presents? Have any of you watched him interview people that he disagrees with to let them defend their opinions? Glenn is an incredibly ethical human being (I've met him several times). He presents facts and issues that most people won't touch. He cares about America and wants to help people help themselves. His life has been threatened by the so-called compassionate left and radical islamists that hate the fact that he calls out their b.s.
Give the man a tr. Put your closed minds into a different position, You might start learning a few things that the rest of the media simply refuses to discuss.
Cannon,
He's a proven liar. Why should anyone listen to him?
Because Cannonball says he's met him, and he tells CB everything he wants to hear,What more do you want?
But just to humor you, Cannonball, I turned on Beck right now. He's got some old geezer talking about diplomacy, and here's what their conversation produced;
Kennedy met with Kruschev. Kruschev perceived JFK as weak, and shortly thereafter, the Berlin wall went up, and we came as close as we ever have to nuclear war.
Reagan walked out of meetings with Gorbachev because he refused to give up Star Wars.He was strong.
Then Beck said "That's the real story!"
Is that really what you want ?
Well, if you add how Reagan single handedly defeated the Soviet Union then we'd be talkin'!!!
And that was before Blockbuster instituted their no late fees policy.
I hope that by now Nancy or one of the kids has returned it.
You elitist.
My Betamax still works and I'm still waiting for color TV to be perfected before I buy into that color TV scam.
Glenn is an incredibly ethical human being (I've met him several times). He presents facts and issues that most people won't touch.
From what I've seen and read (and from listening to his radio pukefest), I couldn't disagree with you more, Cannonball. Glenn Beck is a LIAR - pure and simple. And he says what people like you want to hear, which is why you're standing up for this scumbag.
Here's a sample of Glenn Beck's work from Wikipedia:
Criticism and controversial statements
In January 2006 the media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting criticized CNN president Ken Jautz's description of the newly-hired Beck as "cordial" by pointing out statements he made against figures like Michael Berg, Michael Moore, Hurricane Katrina rioters, and certain 9/11 victims. FAIR brought up a 2005 comment Beck made on his radio program where he noted he was "thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could." Beck responded to FAIR by saying that these comments were taken out of context.
Another watchdog group, Media Matters for America, highlighted comments Beck made in an interview with Keith Ellison, the first practicing Muslim elected to the United States Congress. In the November 14, 2006 interview on CNN Headline News, Beck said to Ellison, "...I have to tell you, I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.'" Beck later said that his remarks were "poorly worded" and he "wish[ed]" he "could take back and rephrase."
He described activist Cindy Sheehan as a "pretty big prostitute" and a "tragedy pimp". This was in reference to a question that he posed earlier, "Who'll do anything for power or money?".
He compared Vice President Al Gore to Joseph Goebbels "for Gore's statement, during his testimony before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, that he would initiate a "mass persuasion campaign" to urge Congress to act on climate change."
Beck said about Hillary Clinton: "There's something about her voice that just drives me – it's not what she says, it's how she says it. She is like the stereotypical bitch – excuse the expression". On his October 18, 2007 broadcast on CNN, Beck referred to Clinton as "Stalin in a pantsuit."
On June 28, 2007, Beck read on his radio program a fake ad created by the "Insiders" - a group of subscribers to his web site - that recommended turning the bodies of Mexican illegal immigrants into fuel. Beck noted at the outset that "sometimes the Insiders go too far," and remarked "I don't think we need to make the illegal aliens into fuel....That would be evil conservative, yeah. I don't even know if that's conservative. That would be...psychotic, perhaps? Sociopathic, perhaps?" Despite Beck's comments distancing himself from the fake advertisement, Media Matters pointed out that "the ad was posted on the front page of Beck's website under the title 'Picture of the Day,' with a caption that described the 'ad' as a 'brilliant creation.'"
On his radio show on October 22, 2007, referring to wildfires raging in Southern California, Beck said "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." A Los Angeles Times opinion blog asked: "Who knew those poor homeowners in San Diego, Orange County and the Inland Empire were pinko-commie America haters? Or did Beck forget that Southern California includes more than left-wing movie types who populate fire-ravaged Malibu?" In response, the show's producer, Chris Balfe, told USA Today through a spokesman, "To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately."
Beck called "a small percentage" of people "who decided to stay in New Orleans" "scumbags." Beck has said that these statements were taken out of context, arguing in An Inconvenient Book that he was referring specifically to the "looters and murderers," not to just any victim.
Soource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Beck
I cringe when I hear some of the stuff that comes out of his mouth.
I wonder to myself, do people REALLY think like that? Are all conservatives really that asinine?
Are all conservatives really that asinine?
Rhetorical question...? ;>)
Snoop, I was wondering it to myself....when I listen to Beck....
He described activist Cindy Sheehan as a "pretty big prostitute" and a "tragedy pimp". This was in reference to a question that he posed earlier, "Who'll do anything for power or money?".
Seems to me Beck is one who will do anything for power or money. He's proving that lying is as easy for him as breathing.
Beck's just another blowhard, projecting like a thirty-screen Cineplex.
Yes, I have.
Not only that my ex has been on his show. The guy is scum....hah, not my ex...he is ok.....Beck is scum.
Har har, he's shorter than I originally thought.
And not as absurd as he is on the radio/TV, but I suppose that is true of most personalities. (Course it has been quite a while back, so maybe he grew, lol)
It seems that after he got married and had kids he became more and more conservative tho, and that was a huge surprise. He seemed much more liberal before those events.
I'm guessing most of the stuff he spouts is for, as with most of the other personalities, is for: ratings, and money...selling yourself.
I have more respect for someone who sells their body than for someone who sells his views.
but every one alive tries to sell their views
And some people sell Amway... ;>)
http://www.landoverbaptist.net/PS3.htm
I figure I'll hold on to my soul for now and sell it later to get a Plasma TV.
And others have been known to sell their souls to the devil. For example, Satan got a package deal with Dick and Lynn Cheney.
Then there was the dyslexic who sold his soul to Santa.... :-)
>>What a stupid friggin comment. Have any of you wathed Glenn? Have any of you seen the facts that he presents?
There are a lot of them in MMFAs archives.
>>Have any of you watched him interview people that he disagrees with to let them defend their opinions?
Can't say I have.
>>Glenn is an incredibly ethical human being (I've met him several times). He presents facts and issues that most people won't touch.
So does Art Bell but that doesn't prove that Bigfoot walks among us.
>>He cares about America and wants to help people help themselves.
As opposed to the rest us us who hate America and want to crush people.
There he goes again. The Beavers attempt at serious subject matter shows just how superficial his knowledge base really is.
Isn't this the same guy who always complains that others take him out of context. The dumbing down of "news" is alive and well on CNN.
Thats it in a nutshell, "if people were aware".
Problem is, they are not aware. That is the biggest reason why people like Beck and his ilk can remain on television with no accountability.
AND that is why places like MM is needed, why each and every person that posts on these places where media is called to account for their words is a small voice in the wilderness that gets the attention of the big boys. We need these places to keep us free, to keep our media honest...hard job...too!
Keep it up everyone!!!!
I just love it when Bush holds hands with King Fahd or whatever his name is. He looks like a little boy that he is being led around by a savvy oil profiteer.
Instead, a few days later, Israel opened up talks with Syria. - Irony
Yeah, but I bet they had PRECONDITIONS! ;)
Yeah, but I bet they had PRECONDITIONS! ;)
Yep...Syria had to agree not to take the negotiators hostage. ;>)
I honestly think Bush expected the Israeli Knesset to carry him out on their shoulders and erect a statue in his honor after his speech warning of the evils of appeasement
Instead, they gave him a bicycle. A fitting toy for one they consider a child.
" C'mon people, have ANY of you done the math? The human contribution to increasing temperatures is statistically insignificant. "
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have to admit that I haven't been working on mathematical formulas to determine the significants of human impact on global warming . I don't have the mathematical formula for that . I'm sure thats the reason most people posting on this site probably haven't been working on their mathematical formulas . I'm guessing they haven't been using alot of sofisticated scientific equipement or computor models either . Cannonball , you should let us in on what math you have been working on that makes you so much wiser than the majority of climatologists and meteorologists who claim human activity has an adverse affect on the planet . Maybe you could share your wisdom with them .
Recycling Energy Seen Saving Companies Money
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90714692&ft=1&f=1001
I find it ironic that Republicans hate America so much that they ignore
there own ideology: money , money, greed, and more money.
Fox News Team ...are they fired yet?