When Lying Right Wing Hacks Attack (or, Patterico the Idiot)

Wingnuts • Views: 40,052

Here we see the unmitigated idiocy that passes for “debunking” in the right wing blogosphere these days, as wingnut hack Patterico attacks me for things I never wrote and do not believe: No, Charles Johnson, Glenn Beck Did Not Tell His Viewers to Shoot Anyone in the Head.

Patterico begins with his patented mind-reading trick:

On Twitter, Charles Johnson excitedly says…

Here’s the tweet he seems to think is “excited:”

Video: Glen Beck ‘You’re Going to Have to Shoot Them in the Head’ clip lgf.bz #LGF #lgfpages #tcot #tlot #p2

Was it the word “video” that gave away my overweening excitement? Or is Patterico just making it up? Answer: the latter.

To start with, I didn’t write that LGF Page he’s attributing to me. It was written by LGF reader “Conservative Moonbat.”

I retweet a lot of the Pages posted by LGF readers if I think they’re interesting, and rarely do I feel “excited” by that. But demonization requires attributing evil intent to your opponents, and that’s the right wing script Patterico is following.

To make it still more ridiculous, the Page by Conservative Moonbat contains no obvious “excitement” either, and certainly makes no claim at all that Beck told anyone to shoot people in the head. Here’s the entire comment he/she posted:

I’ve heard a couple of people mention this in various places but nobody has been able to find the clip. Well, now somebody found it.

Patterico takes this and constructs a complete fantasy around it, summed up in this blatant lie:

Johnson wants you to believe that the “you” is Beck’s audience, whom Beck is inciting to violence. Nothing could be further from the truth.

But Charles Johnson doesn’t care about context or truth any more.

I don’t want anyone to believe anything — I didn’t even write that post. But it gets even stupider, because despite Patterico’s lies, I even posted a link to the complete transcript in the comments for Conservative Moonbat’s Page, so that the full context would be clear to everyone.

Patterico knows this, because I tweeted those links to him last night, and he replied. But he hasn’t updated or corrected his smears, of course, because that’s how the right wing blogosphere plays it these days.

And by the way, it’s ludicrous to try to excuse Beck’s disgusting comments by saying he was “only” talking about Nancy Pelosi shooting her left wing followers in the head. How does that make it better? It’s completely freaking insane either way.

For the record, here’s a longer, fully in-context version (h/t Simoom) of the clip the right wing is desperately trying to make excuses for:

Youtube Video

And here’s the full transcript of Beck’s crazed, incoherent rant.

Jump to bottom

498 comments

1 dragonfire1981  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:18:23am

I think he was hearing some fictionalized voice of yours on that tweet and that’s where he got the crazy context from.

Regardless of intent, how is such a comment by Beck NOT cause for some kind of investigation?

2 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:18:59am

If I’m reading the context right, he also named Van Jones as one of the radicals that would have to be shot in the head by Pelosi. And also Bill Ayers, his wife, etc.

I really don’t get the fascination with Van Jones. Is it his kick-ass name?

3 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:21:30am

“Shoot them in the head” is the new “throw them under the bus”. /

4 MrSilverDragon  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:23:02am

re: #1 dragonfire1981

Regardless of intent, how is such a comment by Beck NOT cause for some kind of investigation?

Because Fox has deep, deep pockets.

5 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:23:21am

re: #3 iossarian

“Shoot them in the head” is the new “throw them under the bus”. /

6 okonkolo  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:25:20am

Kos and others have the video clip up today, but only the money quote.

7 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:28:00am

re: #2 Obdicut


I really don’t get the fascination with Van Jones. Is it his kick-ass name?

I must admit that some kind of blaxploitation theme song kicks off in my head whenever I hear it.

8 elizajane  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:28:16am

Beck’s rant is hard to understand, even in transcript form when you can re-read it and ponder its finer points. He suggests that if you don’t understand him it’s because you don’t believe in anything. So there, Godless Commies, take that!

His exact words: “You’ve been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You’re going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.”

So he’s encouraging DEMOCRATS to shoot other DEMOCRATS. Perhaps that’s what makes it OK. You know, he’s not trying to suggest that Republicans should go out and shoot Godless Commies, oh no. The Democrats should shoot each other and that, of course, is perfectly reasonable and in no sense hateful.

9 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:30:14am

Hi all. Did anyone else happen to overhear Limbaugh talking about Rep. Steven Cohen yesterday? He was distinguishing between “the Steven Cohen who is on the floor…” and the Wall Street Steven Cohen; and he said ..”there are a lot of them out there… Steven Cohen on the floor now is not the billionaire Steven Cohen”
Quote are not verbatim, but close. I cannot decide whether Limbaugh was implying there are a lot of Jews “out there”, or simply guys named Steven Cohen. Any thoughts?

10 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:31:05am

Leaving aside the ‘shooting in the head’ language, Beck is still predicting a violent communist revolution here, and telling his listeners they can’t just be spectators, but should “prepare.” How is that message defensible?

11 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:32:33am

re: #10 jaunte

Leaving aside the ‘shooting in the head’ language, Beck is still predicting a violent communist revolution here, and telling his listeners they can’t just be spectators, but should “prepare.” How is that message defensible?

Bingo. No matter how they twist his comment he’s still telling his audience that violence and killing is inevitable.

12 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:33:24am

re: #10 jaunte

Leaving aside the ‘shooting in the head’ language, Beck is still predicting a violent communist revolution here, and telling his listeners they can’t just be spectators, but should “prepare.” How is that message defensible?

Good point. I must say I was distracted by the Nazi flag in the background and could not focus on what he was saying, because I kept imagining him with a little toothbrush moustache flinging his arm up and down.

13 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:34:41am

re: #2 Obdicut

If I’m reading the context right, he also named Van Jones as one of the radicals that would have to be shot in the head by Pelosi. And also Bill Ayers, his wife, etc.

I really don’t get the fascination with Van Jones. Is it his kick-ass name?

Some of these guys, they’re just not very exciting, so they have to be built up a little. I mean, Ayers was really a Weatherman, so he’s ideal, but some of these guys are just boring. Gotta jazz ‘em up, make ‘em scary.

14 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:34:45am

re: #3 iossarian

“Shoot them in the head” is the new “throw them under the bus”. /

It’s the new black.

15 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:36:42am

I would appreciate any feedback on my post #9. I found the way Limbaugh sai “there are lots of them out there” to be very disturbing.

16 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:37:07am

re: #3 iossarian

“Shoot them in the head” is the new “throw them under the bus”. /

He does like the phrase, he tries it out in a couple of contexts in that clip.

One does kind of have to wonder the last time the Speaker of the House shot anyone. In the head or anywhere else.

17 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:37:41am

re: #7 iossarian

I must admit that some kind of blaxploitation theme song kicks off in my head whenever I hear it.

He does sound a bit as though he and Pam Grier should be kicking dope dealer’s asses.

18 Wozza Matter?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:38:06am

re: #16 SanFranciscoZionist

He does like the phrase, he tries it out in a couple of contexts in that clip.

One does kind of have to wonder the last time the Speaker of the House shot anyone. In the head or anywhere else.

Vice President’s have though………..

19 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:38:52am

Please retweet this post — hundreds of right wingers on Twitter have been retweeting Patterico’s smear, and we need to make sure my reply gets seen too.

Robert Stacy McCain has jumped on it now, of course — he wrote another 2000-word post mocking me for failing and being irrelevant and having no traffic. That would be about the 97th post by McCain on that theme.

20 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:38:59am

re: #2 Obdicut

I always think of Van Johnson when I hear Van Jones’ name.

They’re two different guys. Right?

21 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:39:11am

re: #9 imp_62

Hi all. Did anyone else happen to overhear Limbaugh talking about Rep. Steven Cohen yesterday? He was distinguishing between “the Steven Cohen who is on the floor…” and the Wall Street Steven Cohen; and he said ..”there are a lot of them out there… Steven Cohen on the floor now is not the billionaire Steven Cohen”
Quote are not verbatim, but close. I cannot decide whether Limbaugh was implying there are a lot of Jews “out there”, or simply guys named Steven Cohen. Any thoughts?

Rush Limbaugh is, by profession, a race-baiting asshole, but that sounds like a statement with plausible enough deniability that I wouldn’t waste any time on it.

22 Locker  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:39:26am

Patterico? Never heard of him.

23 wrenchwench  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:40:31am

re: #19 Charles

Robert Stacy McCain has jumped on it now, of course — he wrote another 2000-word post mocking me for failing and being irrelevant and having no traffic. That would be about the 97th post by McCain on that theme.

That sounds like a major case of projection.

24 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:41:54am

re: #9 imp_62

I’m guessing he meant there are a bunch of Steven Cohens out there.

12 in Wikipedia.

25 Locker  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:42:24am

re: #19 Charles

Please retweet this post — hundreds of right wingers on Twitter have been retweeting Patterico’s smear, and we need to make sure my reply gets seen too.

Robert Stacy McCain has jumped on it now, of course — he wrote another 2000-word post mocking me for failing and being irrelevant and having no traffic. That would be about the 97th post by McCain on that theme.

Careful. Don’t say [APPLESAUCE] or you might get busted by the razor sharp wingnut blogosphere.

26 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:42:44am

re: #21 SanFranciscoZionist

Rush Limbaugh is, by profession, a race-baiting asshole, but that sounds like a statement with plausible enough deniability that I wouldn’t waste any time on it.

You’re right, of course. But if there is one phrase I live by (other than the universally applicable “Don’t Panic!”) it is “Never Again”. Aside from perceived threats to my family, anti-semitic statements are the only thing that I have ever gotten into a physical alteration about.

27 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:42:50am

re: #20 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I always think of Van Johnson when I hear Van Jones’ name.

They’re two different guys. Right?

I don’t know. Did anyone ever see the two of them together at the same time?

28 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:45:01am

re: #19 Charles

Please retweet this post — hundreds of right wingers on Twitter have been rewteeting Patterico’s smear, and we need to make sure my reply gets seen too.

Robert Stacy McCain has jumped it now, of course — he wrote another 2000-word post mocking me for failing and being irrelevant and having no traffic. That would be about the 97th post by McCain on that theme.

ReTweet Done. I know what it is like to have someone “paraphrase” or lie and attribute an opinion to me that I never said.

29 Locker  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:45:09am

re: #20 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I always think of Van Johnson when I hear Van Jones’ name.

They’re two different guys. Right?

Nope, they are both Van Wilder.

30 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:46:09am

re: #29 Locker

Nope, they are both Van Wilder.

“In a van; down by the river!”

31 MrSilverDragon  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:47:32am

re: #29 Locker

Nope, they are both Van Wilder.

How about Van De Kamps? I haven’t had fishsticks in forever.

32 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:50:17am

So Glen beck is talking about how a party has been infected by radical and is now tearing itself apart in the battle between the true believers and those who just want to get rich…

Are we all sure he’s not talking about the Republicans?

33 bluewater  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:51:25am

re: #24 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I’m guessing he meant there are a bunch of Steven Cohens out there.

12 in Wikipedia.

I had 4 in my class in college (way back when). We had to give them strange nicknames to keep them straight.

34 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:52:13am

re: #33 bluewater

I had 4 in my class in college (way back when). We had to give them strange nicknames to keep them straight.

Punch McRunfast?

35 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:52:27am

re: #32 jamesfirecat

Hmmm - I wonder if he has any more Vietnam War era C-rations left for sale. I have a hankering for tinned hash.

36 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:56:21am

re: #34 iossarian

(Out loud, he laughed in the hotel lobby, folks looking up)

I was thinking of two threads back.

37 wrenchwench  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:57:08am

Congratulations to Conservative Moonbat for being dubbed a “second-banana henchperson” by RS McCain. Quite the honor.

38 Varek Raith  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:57:21am

re: #34 iossarian

Punch McRunfast?

39 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:58:20am

Here’s about the 9 minutes around the “shoot them in the head” clip:

And here’s a link that jumps to about a minute and a half before the above clip for more of Beck’s nutty rant:
[link]

40 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:58:42am

re: #37 wrenchwench

Congratulations to Conservative Moonbat for being dubbed a “second-banana henchperson” by RS McCain. Quite the honor.

We should have a dinner and awards ceremony. I am quite jealous.

41 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:58:57am

I haven’t followed all this as closely as I probably should. I am just amazed with the number of people who are completely (purposefully, I am guessing) misquoting Charles and the Lizard Hoard.

42 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:59:51am

re: #33 bluewater

I had 4 in my class in college (way back when). We had to give them strange nicknames to keep them straight.

Oh, so now you’re saying that people named “Steven Cohen” are gay? And that they can be made straight by giving them strange names???

////

43 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:00:21am

re: #38 Varek Raith

I knew you’d step up before I’d get it.

44 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:01:28am

re: #37 wrenchwench

Congratulations to Conservative Moonbat for being dubbed a “second-banana henchperson” by RS McCain. Quite the honor.

My eyes have gone quite green with envy.

///

45 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:01:40am

re: #41 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I haven’t followed all this as closely as I probably should. I am just amazed with the number of people who are completely (purposefully, I am guessing) misquoting Charles and the Lizard Hoard.

Being a primary point of rhetorical attack by the WingBats is a commentary on Charles’ influence. When they stop paying attention to him and LGF, the center is in trouble.

46 Surabaya Stew  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:01:54am

re: #41 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I haven’t followed all this as closely as I probably should. I am just amazed with the number of people who are completely (purposefully, I am guessing) misquoting Charles and the Lizard Hoard.

Their interest is what us Lizards say has everything to do with massive insecurities and misplaced feelings of rejection concern for the truth.

47 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:02:26am

re: #38 Varek Raith
Bob Duncan?

48 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:02:37am

re: #41 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I haven’t followed all this as closely as I probably should. I am just amazed with the number of people who are completely (purposefully, I am guessing) misquoting Charles and the Lizard Hoard.

They’re people who seem to think Beck’s prediction of armed insurrection and civil war between liberals and communists happening here is sober political analysis, so factor that into their ability to gauge reality.

49 Romantic Heretic  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:06:29am

God, even twenty two seconds of Glen Beck is enough to ruin my entire day.

I think I’ll go play Plants vs. Zombies for a while. It has more to do with reality than Mr. Beck does.

50 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:06:36am

Beck’s “Howard Beale” schtick got old to me the first time he quoted Howard Beale, which, IIRC… didn’t take him long once he got his Fox show.

I have steadfastly ignored him since.

51 Surabaya Stew  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:07:30am

re: #49 Romantic Heretic

God, even twenty two seconds of Glen Beck is enough to ruin my entire day.

I think I’ll go play Plants Dems vs. Zombies GOP for a while. It has more to do with reality than Mr. Beck does.

There, fixed!

52 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:14:31am

Has anyone seen the whole clip?

Beck is accusing certain people of plotting a revolution. Who, exactly, is he leveling that charge against?

Again, I am struck by how completely the right controls the playing field. A few public figures say that Palin’s rhetoric might contribute to an atmosphere of violence; thus far I’ve seen a total of exactly one (alleged) example where someone actually said Palin was responsible for the AZ shootings (a poster here said that Kos supposedly tweeted something on the order of “mission accomplished Sarah Palin” shortly after the shootings) .

And all over the media we hear about how “the left” said that Palin was “complicit” in a murder - which is “blood libel.”

But Beck says that people are plotting a revolution, and not only is it basically a non-issue, the rightwing media circles the wagons to defend him.

I hate people that whine about how “unfair” the media is - but this double-standard is striking, and an indication of just how effectively the righting claims of left-wing media bias has resulted in the media twisting themselves in knots to go in the other direction.

So who is it, exactly, that Beck says is plotting a revolution (without attribution, of course)?

53 engineer cat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:15:40am

But Charles Johnson doesn’t care about context or truth any more

how do you fight back against people who find nothing wrong with telling you what you are about to think and then condemning you for thoughts and opinions that they made up for you?

54 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:16:38am

re: #19 Charles

I extracted a much better and longer clip of the rant (it’s about 2 1/2 min). Here it is:

Glenn Beck’s Irresponsible Rant (06-09-2010)

55 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:17:20am

re: #49 Romantic Heretic

God, even twenty two seconds of Glen Beck is enough to ruin my entire day.

I think I’ll go play Plants vs. Zombies for a while. It has more to do with reality than Mr. Beck does.

Have you managed to get 20 flags in endless survival yet?

56 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:17:32am

re: #53 engineer dog

But Charles Johnson doesn’t care about context or truth any more

how do you fight back against people who find nothing wrong with telling you what you are about to think and then condemning you for thoughts and opinions that they made up for you?

It is impossible, unless you have help. If others come to your defense, then you can fight back. BUT if you are alone, it is impossible.

57 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:17:48am

I’m amazed that ANYBODY would defend Beck in this context.

58 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:18:50am

re: #52 Talking Point Detective


But Beck says that people are plotting a revolution, and not only is it basically a non-issue, the rightwing media circles the wagons to defend him.


And not simply to defend him, because it would require that they agree with the crazy ‘revolution is coming’ idea, but to distract from that and quibble over who said who’s to shoot who in the head. Night and fog.

59 elizajane  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:19:22am

I’ve just posted a page on this, but check out the CCR asking Ailes to step in and stop Glen Beck from inciting violence against Professor Frances Priven (as I recall, the only non-Jew on Beck’s “enemies of America” list).

A sample from the article:

“…Beck compares Piven to the Hutaree militia… and equates her calls for social movements to “terrorism.” On December 31, a headline on The Blaze read, “Frances Fox Piven Rings in the New Year by Advocating Violent Revolution,” further stating that “violence has always been Piven’s preferred method of collapse.”
The Center for Constitutional rights details a backlash through some of the many violent quotes on Beck’s website. Examples include, “Maybe they should burst through the front door of this arrogant elitist and slit the hateful cow’s throat,” “We should blow up Piven’s office and home,” and “I am all for violence and change Frances: Where do your loved ones live?””


Evidently she has received death threats and feels that her life is in danger.

60 Kragar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:19:31am

re: #57 Fozzie Bear

I’m amazed that ANYBODY would defend Beck in this context.

Why do you hate America?
/

61 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:19:36am

re: #56 Buck

It is impossible, unless you have help. If others come to your defense, then you can fight back. BUT if you are alone, it is impossible.

In the end you can’t even “fight back” in the true sense of the word as in managing to get them to rethink their opinions/position or even get them to stop saying it… all you can do is come out ahead in the court of public opinion….

62 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:20:16am

re: #53 engineer dog

But Charles Johnson doesn’t care about context or truth any more

how do you fight back against people who find nothing wrong with telling you what you are about to think and then condemning you for thoughts and opinions that they made up for you?

You cannot, without huge difficulty. That is the old example of trial advocacy “leading the witness” no-nos: “when did you stop beating your wife?” These are attack-dog tactics which leave the rational debater trying to disprove negatives.

63 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:22:03am

re: #56 Buck

It is impossible, unless you have help. If others come to your defense, then you can fight back. BUT if you are alone, it is impossible.

And if enough others come to your defense, it doesn’t matter what the truth actually is. That’s why Beck gets away with his rampant antisemitism; he has enough people leaping to his defense on the subject that really, really obvious things like his anti-semitic sources, his antisemitic conspiracy theories, and 8 out of 9 of his ‘villains’ being Jewish get overlooked or dismissed.

Likewise, people who attempt to defend the rhetoric on being equally bad on all sides are giving cover to people like Beck, Malkin, Coulter, and others who dehumanize, demonize, and espouse violent rhetoric at volume so much higher than anyone on the ‘left’.

It’s a sad state of affairs.

64 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:22:18am

re: #59 elizajane

I’ve just posted a page on this, but check out the CCR asking Ailes to step in and stop Glen Beck from inciting violence against Professor Frances Priven (as I recall, the only non-Jew on Beck’s “enemies of America” list).

A sample from the article:

“…Beck compares Piven to the Hutaree militia… and equates her calls for social movements to “terrorism.” On December 31, a headline on The Blaze read, “Frances Fox Piven Rings in the New Year by Advocating Violent Revolution,” further stating that “violence has always been Piven’s preferred method of collapse.”
The Center for Constitutional rights details a backlash through some of the many violent quotes on Beck’s website. Examples include, “Maybe they should burst through the front door of this arrogant elitist and slit the hateful cow’s throat,” “We should blow up Piven’s office and home,” and “I am all for violence and change Frances: Where do your loved ones live?””

Evidently she has received death threats and feels that her life is in danger.

It was a good post. Even if I only clicked it initially because I though Creedence Clearwater Revival had got back together.

65 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:23:49am

re: #54 simoom

I extracted a much better and longer clip of the rant (it’s about 2 1/2 min). Here it is:

Glenn Beck’s Irresponsible Rant (06-09-2010)

[Video]

Thanks! I replaced the shorter clip with yours.

66 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:26:29am

OK - so from the extended clip just posted, we know that these revolutionaries are comparable to OBL, and revolutionaries in Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, and Germany.

We know that they have “called for revolution.” They have said that they want to “overthrow our entire system of government.”

Who be “they,” exactly?

Who has called for revolution and said they want to overthrow our government?

67 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:28:49am

re: #66 Talking Point Detective

OK - so from the extended clip just posted, we know that these revolutionaries are comparable to OBL, and revolutionaries in Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, and Germany.

We know that they have “called for revolution.” They have said that they want to “overthrow our entire system of government.”

Who be “they,” exactly?

Who has called for revolution and said they want to overthrow our government?

well there’s a guy I work with who’s a wingnut/libertarian who says we should revolt.

68 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:29:08am

re: #66 Talking Point Detective

OK - so from the extended clip just posted, we know that these revolutionaries are comparable to OBL, and revolutionaries in Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, and Germany.

We know that they have “called for revolution.” They have said that they want to “overthrow our entire system of government.”

Who be “they,” exactly?

Who has called for revolution and said they want to overthrow our government?

Cthulhu. Duh.

69 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:29:11am

re: #66 Talking Point Detective

OK - so from the extended clip just posted, we know that these revolutionaries are comparable to OBL, and revolutionaries in Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, and Germany.

We know that they have “called for revolution.” They have said that they want to “overthrow our entire system of government.”

Who be “they,” exactly?

Who has called for revolution and said they want to overthrow our government?

Them, of course. They did.

70 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:29:16am

re: #59 elizajane

Evidently she has received death threats and feels that her life is in danger.

Why doesn’t this reach the legal bar of libel? He is deliberately lying and doesn’t receiving death threats (assuming they could be tied to Beck - but how many people making these threats had any idea who she was before listening to Beck) reach the bar to pass legal muster?

71 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:30:51am

re: #70 Talking Point Detective

Why doesn’t this reach the legal bar of libel? He is deliberately lying and doesn’t receiving death threats (assuming they could be tied to Beck - but how many people making these threats had any idea who she was before listening to Beck) reach the bar to pass legal muster?

The response to such charges: “It’s just satire. I’m just an entertainer.”

72 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:31:13am

re: #67 Dreggas

re: #69 Fozzie Bear

But doesn’t he mention names earlier in the show? Or does he leave enough wiggle room by mentioning names earlier in the show but not making it certain that the “they” here are those same people?

73 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:31:39am

re: #66 Talking Point Detective

OK - so from the extended clip just posted, we know that these revolutionaries are comparable to OBL, and revolutionaries in Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, and Germany.

We know that they have “called for revolution.” They have said that they want to “overthrow our entire system of government.”

Who be “they,” exactly?

Who has called for revolution and said they want to overthrow our government?

“Them”. Anybody who is not “Us”. Same old juxtaposition since the beginning of time:

1) “Us”: this cave. “Them”: all other caves
2) “Us”: this village. “Them”: all other villages
3) “Us”: Christians. “Them”: Levantine occupiers of Jerusalem
4) “Us”: FOX Newsians. “Them”: Godless motherlovers.

74 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:31:59am

By the way, the Hotlanta airport (Hartsfield-Jackson to you fellow travelers) is a little busy right now. I don’t recommend anyone visiting me here. Loootsa people.

75 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:32:09am

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

The response to such charges: “It’s just satire. I’m just an entertainer.”

He was on the Today show the other day saying that calling Obama was a “joke,” just like the Simpsons or John Stewart.

76 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:33:03am

re: #74 Aceofwhat?

By the way, the Hotlanta airport (Hartsfield-Jackson to you fellow travelers) is a little busy right now. I don’t recommend anyone visiting me here. Loootsa people.

Why, what’s up?

77 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:33:09am

re: #66 Talking Point Detective

I guess thew answer would come from anyone who could identify exactly what the “revolutionaries in Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, and Germany” had in common.

Beck would identify them as being on the left.

I would place the extreme Left and extreme Right in their own political sphere. I do not believe they actually have anything in common with liberals or conservatives.

It is my belief that the political spectrum does not sit on a line, but is actually on a circle. The political center is at the bottom of the circle, and different ideoligies can be placed left or right of that spot. With the extreme left and extreme right meeting at the top in crazyville. That is where they share many views and traits.

78 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:33:25am

re: #75 Talking Point Detective

He was on the Today show the other day saying that calling Obama was a “joke,” just like the Simpsons or John Stewart.

Problem is, to his minions it’s not a joke and since he is on a “News” channel and not comedy central people don’t see it as a “joke”.

79 Kragar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:33:44am

re: #73 imp_62

“Them”. Anybody who is not “Us”. Same old juxtaposition since the beginning of time:

1) “Us”: this cave. “Them”: all other caves
2) “Us”: this village. “Them”: all other villages
3) “Us”: Christians. “Them”: Levantine occupiers of Jerusalem
4) “Us”: FOX Newsians. “Them”: Godless motherlovers.

5) Us: humanity - THEM: Giant Ants

80 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:34:26am

re: #75 Talking Point Detective

Sorry - that calling Obama a racist was a joke.

81 rwdflynavy  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:34:27am

re: #79 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

5) Us: humanity - THEM: Giant Ants

I for one welcome our new Ant overlords.//

82 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:34:42am

re: #70 Talking Point Detective

Why doesn’t this reach the legal bar of libel? He is deliberately lying and doesn’t receiving death threats (assuming they could be tied to Beck - but how many people making these threats had any idea who she was before listening to Beck) reach the bar to pass legal muster?

look up the concept of “actual malice”.

83 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:35:54am

re: #76 imp_62

Why, what’s up?

nothing. just sitting here bored in the airport. Friday afternoons = busy flying time. Friday afternoons when there are weather systems afoot in the lower 48 = really busy flying.

84 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:36:40am

re: #79 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

5) Us: humanity - THEM: Giant Ants

Us: Humans. Them: Tritovores

85 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:36:40am

OT: Here’s an interesting column regarding guns. Guess what? More guns don’t make people safer or drive down crime. Quite the opposite: states with higher gun ownership have higher rates of gun violence.

[Link: opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com…]

86 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:37:04am

re: #78 Dreggas

Problem is, to his minions it’s not a joke and since he is on a “News” channel and not comedy central people don’t see it as a “joke”.

he is on an “opinion” show. he’s a moron and a douchebag, but it ain’t libel.

87 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:37:15am

re: #78 Dreggas

Problem is, to his minions it’s not a joke and since he is on a “News” channel and not comedy central people don’t see it as a “joke”.

Yeah, when Beck made that excuse on the Today Show I was thinking to myself: “Wait a second… have you ever told your audience that you’re just joking about all this stuff? Because in interview after interview all I see from Tea Partiers is that they take you completely seriously as some sort of brilliant scholar that’s lifting a veil of progressive historical revisionism.”

88 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:37:39am

re: #80 Talking Point Detective

Sorry - that calling Obama a racist was a joke.

He has since admitted that saying that was a mistake. And that he doesn’t believe it.

Let only he who has never made a mistake in their lives, keep bringing that up.

89 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:37:42am

re: #83 Aceofwhat?

nothing. just sitting here bored in the airport. Friday afternoons = busy flying time. Friday afternoons when there are weather systems afoot in the lower 48 = really busy flying.

Yeah. Hartsfield on a Friday afternoon is a zoo on a good day. When there’s weather, it is absolutely nuts.

90 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:37:58am

re: #78 Dreggas

No one could look at the clip where he called Obama a racist, and with any credibility, claim that it was a joke.

I actually think that Limbaugh’s claims of sarcasm or satire or whatever can, at least sometimes, be credibly argued - there’s enough wiggle room there.

Beck’s claim that his calling Obama racist was a joke is simply not credible.

91 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:38:00am

re: #83 Aceofwhat?

nothing. just sitting here bored in the airport. Friday afternoons = busy flying time. Friday afternoons when there are weather systems afoot in the lower 48 = really busy flying.

I hear ya. I have 8 flights on my Flight Tracker just through Feb 10.

92 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:38:28am

re: #77 Buck

The spectrum doesn’t exist as a line, or a circle, or any other simplistic representation. There is no relationship between being, say ‘right’ on economic issues and ‘right’ on social issues.

And the final positions have nothing to do with the starting precepts, as is easily visible as those on the ‘right’ now arguing vociferously against a universal health plan that originated with the ‘right’.

One can come to a libertarian argument for single-payer care as easily as one can argue from a socialist perspective.

A large part of the problem in politics is people thinking of the political spectrum as a line, a circle, or in any way two or even simply three dimensional. It is not.

93 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:39:33am

re: #88 Buck

He has since admitted that saying that was a mistake. And that he doesn’t believe it.

Let only he who has never made a mistake in their lives, keep bringing that up.

Funny then that he chose a different answer on The Today Show. He could have just said it was a mistake. He didn’t. He played the “I’m just a comic” card.

94 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:39:40am

re: #88 Buck

He has since admitted that saying that was a mistake. And that he doesn’t believe it.

Let only he who has never made a mistake in their lives, keep bringing that up.

I think he owes it to us to explain why he made that particular mistake before we truly think about forgiving him…

95 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:40:24am

re: #13 SanFranciscoZionist

Some of these guys, they’re just not very exciting, so they have to be built up a little. I mean, Ayers was really a Weatherman, so he’s ideal, but some of these guys are just boring. Gotta jazz ‘em up, make ‘em scary.

You know what bothers me most about Bill Ayers? The fact that he remains unrepentant and unapologetic for his crimes and violence. In other words, he’s still no more than a smartass kid.

He wasn’t then or is now a particularly smart guy- when you have to establish your bona fides throwing bombs and then bragging about it, intellectual depth isn’t a real strong suit. He likes the attention, he likes being a bad boy and probably hasn’t had an original thought in decades.

Other than the spoiled brats of suburbia, Ayers is pied piper to no one.

Why the right have turned this twerp into an icon they can hate I will never understand.

They have Che to chew on, Castro to castigate and Lenin and Stalin to smash. That’s enough evil for 100 lifetimes.

I miss Bill Buckley. A Lot.

96 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:40:47am

re: #85 garhighway

OT: Here’s an interesting column regarding guns. Guess what? More guns don’t make people safer or drive down crime. Quite the opposite: states with higher gun ownership have higher rates of gun violence.

[Link: opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com…]

how fortunate, then, that my right to own a firearm is constitutional!

97 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:41:13am

re: #94 jamesfirecat

I think he owes it to us to explain why he made that particular mistake before we truly think about forgiving him…

Well he has, publicly on the air. However you didn’t see it because you don’t watch.

Again, we have ALL said things we regretted later.

98 PhillyPretzel  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:41:59am

re: #95 researchok
I miss William F Buckley Jr too.

99 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:42:33am

re: #95 researchok

You know what bothers me most about Bill Ayers? The fact that he remains unrepentant and unapologetic for his crimes and violence. In other words, he’s still no more than a smartass kid.

He wasn’t then or is now a particularly smart guy- when you have to establish your bona fides throwing bombs and then bragging about it, intellectual depth isn’t a real strong suit. He likes the attention, he likes being a bad boy and probably hasn’t had an original thought in decades.

Other than the spoiled brats of suburbia, Ayers is pied piper to no one.

Why the right have turned this twerp into an icon they can hate I will never understand.

They have Che to chew on, Castro to castigate and Lenin and Stalin to smash. That’s enough evil for 100 lifetimes.

I miss Bill Buckley. A Lot.

Because Bill Ayers is a lot easier to connect to Obama than the actual historical monsters/major villains you mention…

(What Ayers did was wrong but obviously not in the same league as Che or Castro I think we can all agree on that….)

100 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:42:46am

re: #97 Buck

Well he has, publicly on the air. However you didn’t see it because you don’t watch.

Again, we have ALL said things we regretted later.

That’s true, for sure.

That said, Beck has a recurring pattern that bothers me.

101 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:42:54am

re: #97 Buck

Well he has, publicly on the air. However you didn’t see it because you don’t watch.

Again, we have ALL said things we regretted later.


What did he say his reasons were then since I wasn’t watching?

102 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:43:19am

re: #100 researchok

That’s true, for sure.

That said, Beck has a recurring pattern that bothers me.

(Channeling Glen Beck) It’s all connections!

103 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:43:31am

re: #88 Buck

He has since admitted that saying that was a mistake. And that he doesn’t believe it.

Let only he who has never made a mistake in their lives, keep bringing that up.

Also, it is interesting that he parses that into two different things:
1> It was a mistake. (Why does he think it was a mistake? because it splashed on his shoes a little?)
2> That he doesn’t believe it.

The lack of linkage between the two indicates that him saying stuff he doesn’t believe isn’t necessarily a mistake from his point of view. Whether it is a mistake depends, I guess, on whether uttering the lie results in adverse consequences to him. If it doesn’t, then uttering the lie is not a mistake?

His ethical scheme is unusual.

104 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:44:17am

re: #72 Talking Point Detective

But doesn’t he mention names earlier in the show? Or does he leave enough wiggle room by mentioning names earlier in the show but not making it certain that the “they” here are those same people?

From the transcript:

OK. America, here is why I think this has really been a problem for most Americans — I think this has been a problem, because, do you see Bill Clinton as a communist? I don’t. As a revolutionary? Do you see Joe Biden? Please, anybody who gets hair plugs isn’t a revolutionary. They’re not. And so, it hasn’t connected with people.

See, this doesn’t work. The Clintons, Bidens, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi — they’re not Nazis and they’re not communists. It doesn’t work, OK?

And this is where it has been confusing. I put it next to Van Jones? Yes. Bill Ayers? Yes. Dohrn, his wife? Yes. Jeff Jones? Sure.

Jodie Evans from Code Pink? You bet. Andy Stern? You bet. They’re all on record saying it.

I don’t know where Barack Obama fits. Is he over here? Or is he over here?

Cass Sunstein — I don’t know where he fits.

Nancy Pelosi, I’m not sure. I don’t think she fits over there but I’m not sure she fits over here. I don’t know. It’s for you to decide.

105 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:44:26am

re: #89 garhighway

Yeah. Hartsfield on a Friday afternoon is a zoo on a good day. When there’s weather, it is absolutely nuts.

i didn’t bargain for much in terms of extra benefits for this job, but i did ask for them to sport for a Delta Skyclub membership for me…wow…was that ever a good idea.

Bourgeoisie has its perks;)

106 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:44:27am

re: #92 Obdicut

I remember hearing about some really interesting psychology research out there on what goes into how people determine what is true or false in the realm of politics; one thing I remember is that, what I will call “confirmation bias,” is a huge factor no matter where you lie in the constellation of beliefs.

Good thing that confirmation bias never interferes with my reasoning, however. I’m always checking for biases in my reasoning, and I’ve never found that I have any!

107 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:46:22am

re: #59 elizajane

I’ve just posted a page on this, but check out the CCR asking Ailes to step in and stop Glen Beck from inciting violence against Professor Frances Priven (as I recall, the only non-Jew on Beck’s “enemies of America” list).

A sample from the article:

“…Beck compares Piven to the Hutaree militia… and equates her calls for social movements to “terrorism.” On December 31, a headline on The Blaze read, “Frances Fox Piven Rings in the New Year by Advocating Violent Revolution,” further stating that “violence has always been Piven’s preferred method of collapse.”
The Center for Constitutional rights details a backlash through some of the many violent quotes on Beck’s website. Examples include, “Maybe they should burst through the front door of this arrogant elitist and slit the hateful cow’s throat,” “We should blow up Piven’s office and home,” and “I am all for violence and change Frances: Where do your loved ones live?””

Evidently she has received death threats and feels that her life is in danger.

A woman in her late seventies who teaches grad school, and of whom basically no one had heard until the wingnuts got obsessed with her.

SUPER.

108 PhillyPretzel  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:46:29am

re: #100 researchok

Beck has a recurring pattern that bothers me. That is the key to his problem.

109 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:46:59am

re: #105 Aceofwhat?

i didn’t bargain for much in terms of extra benefits for this job, but i did ask for them to sport for a Delta Skyclub membership for me…wow…was that ever a good idea.

Bourgeoisie has its perks;)

Didn’t the new club at Hartsfield open today?

110 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:48:02am

re: #99 jamesfirecat

Because Bill Ayers is a lot easier to connect to Obama than the actual historical monsters/major villains you mention…

(What Ayers did was wrong but obviously not in the same league as Che or Castro I think we can all agree on that…)

Yes- and as you note, Ayers was no Stalin, to be sure to me he is just a criminal pretending to be something else). He was and remains a lightweight ass.

All the right (and any civilized person) had to do was stay focused on the evil and excesses of the Stalins and Ches and Castros. Maybe then they wouldn’t be lionized by the academics.

Classical liberals were not evil nor malignant. Never were.

I miss them as well.

111 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:48:09am

re: #88 Buck

He has since admitted that saying that was a mistake. And that he doesn’t believe it.

Let only he who has never made a mistake in their lives, keep bringing that up.

You forgive people when they apologize and take responsibility. Saying “oh I was just joking” isn’t admitting a mistake. It’s saying you were “only kidding” and therefore, bear no responsibility for the consequences of your actions and words.

112 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:48:24am

re: #109 imp_62

Didn’t the new club at Hartsfield open today?

beats me. i scurried over here to the club in the A terminal because the Atl-Jax flight is always out of the A.

What terminal did they put a new one in?

113 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:49:06am

re: #108 PhillyPretzel

Beck has a recurring pattern that bothers me. That is the key to his problem.

He is always trying to make thing “fit” into his conspiracy theories. Like the ridiculous interpretation of the friezes outside Rockefeller Center. He realized early on that conspiracy theories are infinitely malleable and can be set up to accomodate all sorts of craziness, so he uses them as rhetorical “all-terrain” vehicles to carry whatever the lunatic message of the day is.

114 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:49:11am

re: #110 researchok

Yes- and as you note, Ayers was no Stalin, to be sure to me he is just a criminal pretending to be something else). He was and remains a lightweight ass.

All the right (and any civilized person) had to do was stay focused on the evil and excesses of the Stalins and Ches and Castros. Maybe then they wouldn’t be lionized by the academics.

Classical liberals were not evil nor malignant. Never were.

I miss them as well.

Just so I can better understand the history of the world and politics, what are the key factors of classical liberals that you feel are missing from today’s version?

115 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:49:28am

Patterico made Glenn Beck’s Blaze website: Did Glenn Beck Really Tell His Audience to ‘Shoot’ People ‘In the Head’?

Maybe LGF will get a mention on tonight’s Birch Society News Hour.

116 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:50:24am

re: #96 Aceofwhat?

how fortunate, then, that my right to own a firearm is constitutional!

How unfortunate that the current 5 of 9 so badly screwed up their interpretation of the 2nd amendment. They committed a cardinal sin: in their haste to get to a pre-ordained conclusion they read out of the amendment an entire phrase. (Leaving aside their contempt for precedent, for now.) The rules are supposed to be that we assume the framers intended for every word to have meaning. Instead, they erased the phrase “A well-regulated militia being necessary…”

“Well-regulated”. Interesting phrase, isn’t it? Wouldn’t a well-regulated militia include some rules on the sorts of weapons its members would carry? If only for logistics and ammo resupply, wouldn’t you, as the regulator of that militia, think that you would have the ability to require that its members carry firearms that are of maximum utility to the militia?

At any rate, do read Egan’s piece. It is pretty good.

117 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:50:52am

re: #104 simoom

Thanks:

And this is where it has been confusing. I put it next to Van Jones? Yes. Bill Ayers? Yes. Dohrn, his wife? Yes. Jeff Jones? Sure.

Jodie Evans from Code Pink? You bet. Andy Stern? You bet. They’re all on record saying it.

So - Van Jones, Bill Ayers, Ayers’ wife, Jeff Jones, Jodie Evans, and Andy Stern. According to Beck, they are all communists and/or revolutionaries who are “on record” calling for a revolution and overthrow of our entire system of government?

It’s obviously slander, but not that I think about it more, I guess there is legal wiggle-room. What, exactly, does “overthrowing our entire system of government” mean, exactly? Or even “calling for a revolution?”

And that wiggle room is what rightwingers will exploit - say that he was only speaking metephoriically, and in line with our founding fathers who talked about watering trees with the blood of tyrants.

118 Surabaya Stew  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:50:58am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

Patterico made Glenn Beck’s Blaze website: Did Glenn Beck Really Tell His Audience to ‘Shoot’ People ‘In the Head’?

Maybe LGF will get a mention on tonight’s Birch Society News Hour.

I’m sure all Lizards are tingling with excitement.

119 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:51:32am

re: #112 Aceofwhat?

beats me. i scurried over here to the club in the A terminal because the Atl-Jax flight is always out of the A.

What terminal did they put a new one in?

My bad, i misread. The new club opened in Minne and they will be renovating the Terminal B club at ATL
[Link: www.bizjournals.com…]

120 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:51:39am

re: #113 imp_62

He is always trying to make thing “fit” into his conspiracy theories. Like the ridiculous interpretation of the friezes outside Rockefeller Center. He realized early on that conspiracy theories are infinitely malleable and can be set up to accomodate all sorts of craziness, so he uses them as rhetorical “all-terrain” vehicles to carry whatever the lunatic message of the day is.

The Milkman has the Key, I’m not the Milkman, I’m the Watchman.

121 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:51:57am

re: #101 jamesfirecat

What did he say his reasons were then since I wasn’t watching?

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

I can’t find the video. But this is basically what he has said in multiple interviews, including on O’Reilly. The internet is so polluted with the original sin, that it is hard to find what he said later about it. However I saw it on O’Reilly when it first aired. He made it very clear that he regrets saying it, and that he does not believe it.

122 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:52:17am

re: #111 Fozzie Bear

You forgive people when they apologize and take responsibility. Saying “oh I was just joking” isn’t admitting a mistake. It’s saying you were “only kidding” and therefore, bear no responsibility for the consequences of your actions and words.

Also: we joke about whether or not somebody’s eyebrows knit in the middle. We joke about whether Palin can shoot straight. We joke about what Biden will say next.

We don’t joke about whether the prez is a racist. It wasn’t funny 4 years ago and it’s not funny now.

124 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:53:37am

re: #121 Buck

I can’t find the video. But this is basically what he has said in multiple interviews, including on O’Reilly. The internet is so polluted with the original sin, that it is hard to find what he said later about it. However I saw it on O’Reilly when it first aired. He made it very clear that he regrets saying it, and that he does not believe it.

How does that make it better? That makes it WORSE in any rational world where honesty and integrity are valued.

125 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:53:52am

re: #114 jamesfirecat

Just so I can better understand the history of the world and politics, what are the key factors of classical liberals that you feel are missing from today’s version?

Tolerance and a willingness to work to reach their goals in stages (none of the ‘I’m forcing this down your throat, you can read it when it’s passed, if you disagree you are a Nazi’ kind of stuff.

Think Patrick Moynihan, Scoop Jackson, the Kennedy’s, Tip O’Neill, Hubert Humphrey types, etc.

Now those were the guys I respected- and they were the real and inclusive liberals.

They couldn’t get elected today.

That said, the GOP reps are equal as pipsqueaks as their Dem counterparts.

126 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:54:56am

re: #125 researchok

Why on earth do you think Pat Moynihan couldn’t get elected today?

127 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:55:05am

re: #88 Buck

He has since admitted that saying that was a mistake. And that he doesn’t believe it.

Let only he who has never made a mistake in their lives, keep bringing that up.

Buck. He was on the air the other day saying that it was a “joke.”

Which is it? Was it a mistake that he didn’t mean, or was it a joke?

He’s lying. And that’s why his explanation is inconsistent.

He said it to be inflammatory, and doesn’t have the balls or integrity to be accountable.

Watch the clip from the Today show the other day and tell us if you believe his explanation.

128 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:55:25am

re: #125 researchok

I am of the opinion that your analysis couldn’t be further off the mark if you tried.

129 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:55:44am

re: #124 Fozzie Bear

How does that make it better? That makes it WORSE in any rational world where honesty and integrity are valued.

He made a mistake, and he admitted it. How does that make it worse?

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

130 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:56:55am

re: #129 Buck

He made a mistake, and he admitted it. How does that make it worse?

So he has said that he didn’t mean it, and didn’t believe it. So, was he lying then, or is he lying now?

131 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:57:04am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

Patterico made Glenn Beck’s Blaze website: Did Glenn Beck Really Tell His Audience to ‘Shoot’ People ‘In the Head’?

Does anyone else find it strange that Glenn Beck’s news site is pushing Patterico’s explanation, which essentially appears to be, “He’s not telling his audience to kill progressive revolutionaries — he’s telling the left to do it… and somehow that makes it totally alright!”

You’d Beck’s people would instead be pushing, “He was obviously speaking metaphorically!”

132 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:57:30am

re: #121 Buck

I can’t find the video. But this is basically what he has said in multiple interviews, including on O’Reilly. The internet is so polluted with the original sin, that it is hard to find what he said later about it. However I saw it on O’Reilly when it first aired. He made it very clear that he regrets saying it, and that he does not believe it.

Then why did he say it?

133 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:57:36am

re: #110 researchok

Yes- and as you note, Ayers was no Stalin, to be sure to me he is just a criminal pretending to be something else). He was and remains a lightweight ass.

All the right (and any civilized person) had to do was stay focused on the evil and excesses of the Stalins and Ches and Castros. Maybe then they wouldn’t be lionized by the academics.

Classical liberals were not evil nor malignant. Never were.

I miss them as well.

The problem facing Beck and Co. is that they want to turn the far left into a genuine threat to America. They’re not. They never were. Ayers, that aging, arrogant poseur, was the height of it all in his day.

134 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:57:38am

re: #125 researchok

(none of the ‘I’m forcing this down your throat, you can read it when it’s passed, if you disagree you are a Nazi’ kind of stuff)

Again with the forcing things down people’s throats. Tiresome.

135 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:57:54am

re: #126 Obdicut

Why on earth do you think Pat Moynihan couldn’t get elected today?

1) Because he is dead. Even New York can’t get dead people on the ballot.
2) Because he was usually so deep in his cups, that his stump speeches sounded something like this:

I did like the guy, btw.

136 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:58:12am

re: #116 garhighway

How unfortunate that the current 5 of 9 so badly screwed up their interpretation of the 2nd amendment. They committed a cardinal sin: in their haste to get to a pre-ordained conclusion they read out of the amendment an entire phrase. (Leaving aside their contempt for precedent, for now.) The rules are supposed to be that we assume the framers intended for every word to have meaning. Instead, they erased the phrase “A well-regulated militia being necessary…”

“Well-regulated”. Interesting phrase, isn’t it? Wouldn’t a well-regulated militia include some rules on the sorts of weapons its members would carry? If only for logistics and ammo resupply, wouldn’t you, as the regulator of that militia, think that you would have the ability to require that its members carry firearms that are of maximum utility to the militia?

At any rate, do read Egan’s piece. It is pretty good.

i read Egan’s piece…it was good.

and do remember - a prefatory clause does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause.

137 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:58:20am

re: #130 Fozzie Bear

So he has said that he didn’t mean it, and didn’t believe it. So, was he lying then, or is he lying now?

Thats a very high standard you have. I suppose you are perfect, and have never said anything you regretted later. Congrats.

138 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:58:28am

re: #126 Obdicut

Why on earth do you think Pat Moynihan couldn’t get elected today?

His defense of marriage in minority communities, his uneasiness with abortion, for starters.

Further, he was always willing to cross the aisle to compromise and craft deals.

139 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:59:35am

re: #136 Aceofwhat?

i read Egan’s piece…it was good.

and do remember - a prefatory clause does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause.

Updinged for “prefatory”. All I needed to know.

140 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 11:59:51am

re: #137 Buck

Thats a very high standard you have. I suppose you are perfect, and have never said anything you regretted later. Congrats.

No. I just don’t have a television show where I call the leader of the entire country a racist, despite the fact that I never believed it to be true. I also never called for my political opponents to kill each other either, on the air.

Yeah, guess I’m just as flawed as beck. BTW, I’m not a Christian. If somebody crosses that fucking far over the line, I have no fucking problem casting the first stone.

141 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:00:24pm

re: #134 iossarian

Again with the forcing things down people’s throats. Tiresome.

why is it tiresome?

142 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:00:42pm

re: #125 researchok

Tolerance and a willingness to work to reach their goals in stages (none of the ‘I’m forcing this down your throat, you can read it when it’s passed, if you disagree you are a Nazi’ kind of stuff.

Think Patrick Moynihan, Scoop Jackson, the Kennedy’s, Tip O’Neill, Hubert Humphrey types, etc.

Now those were the guys I respected- and they were the real and inclusive liberals.

They couldn’t get elected today.

That said, the GOP reps are equal as pipsqueaks as their Dem counterparts.

I disagree with you on how much of those qualities have been lost by the current crop of liberals (if the fact that us having a super majority in the Senate resulted in a healthcare plan that to my knowledge was largely designed based on what the Republicans offered as a counter proposal when Clinton tried to reform healthcare in his Presidency doesn’t show a willingness to work towards things gradually I don’t know what does…)

But that said I am in firm agreement with you on the importance of the willingness to compromise for the good of the nation as something that is very important to any political party and woe betide the one who looses it….

143 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:01:04pm

re: #138 researchok

His defense of marriage in minority communities, his uneasiness with abortion, for starters.

Further, he was always willing to cross the aisle to compromise and craft deals.

Totally unlike the DNC today. //////////////

144 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:01:32pm

re: #137 Buck

Thats a very high standard you have. I suppose you are perfect, and have never said anything you regretted later. Congrats.

Ha ha ha.

Glenn Beck: “Liberals are nazis, ACORN are stealing the election, the Tides Foundation is evil and must be stopped, people running soup kitchens are communists, Obama is a racist, Pelosi is an evil witch, the government is coming to kill your grandmother, whoops, shouldn’t have said Obama’s a racist, I apologize, Van Jones is a terrorist…”

145 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:01:42pm

re: #139 imp_62

Updinged for “prefatory”. All I needed to know.

full disclosure: i remember it from the opinion and am therefore borrowing it rather than using it originally…although i do intend to adopt it…

146 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:01:50pm

re: #137 Buck

Thats a very high standard you have. I suppose you are perfect, and have never said anything you regretted later. Congrats.

There’s a difference between a slip of the tongue from someone who normally strives to speak true and fair, and a statement that someone like Beck, who is a poison-tongued weasel, decides to back off from.

After everything he’s said and insinuated about Obama, I’m supposed to believe that calling him a racist was a mistake, in some sense other than, ‘I guess that was a mistake, I’m getting called on it’?

Beck has no presumption of honesty or honor with me.

147 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:02:26pm

re: #138 researchok

His defense of marriage in minority communities, his uneasiness with abortion, for starters.

Are you really saying that defending marriage in minority communities makes you ineligible for election on the left? Obama did so.


Further, he was always willing to cross the aisle to compromise and craft deals.

Crossing the aisle to compromise depends on a rational set on the other side of the aisle. That doesn’t exist at the moment, unfortunately.

148 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:02:37pm

re: #133 SanFranciscoZionist

The problem facing Beck and Co. is that they want to turn the far left into a genuine threat to America. They’re not. They never were. Ayers, that aging, arrogant poseur, was the height of it all in his day.

You are and have always been, way too nice.

Ayers is a putz. He has always been a putz.

The current right is obsessed with a putz.

For 20 plus years, Ayers could have crapped on Broadway in broad daylight and no one would have cared because Ayers is a putz.

Along comes an idiot like Beck who is only to happy to rehabilitate a putz into something he never was.

(This may have set a record for the number of times I have used the word ‘putz’ in a month)

149 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:02:51pm

re: #129 Buck

Do you remember what he said? He said:

I’m saying he has a problem, this guy is, I believe, a racist.

So he said that he believes something that he doesn’t believe. That’s not just having a fat mouth. That’s lying. I fact, I doubt that he believes it - he said that he believed it - a lie - to be inflammatory.

And he didn’t own up to lying. He owned up to “making a mistake.”

What can you possibly defend about that kind of weaselly behavior?

150 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:02:56pm

re: #141 Aceofwhat?

why is it tiresome?

Because it’s a hilariously unsubtle reference to forced oral sex, aka rape, and tells us a lot about the mindset of people who use the phrase unthinkingly.

151 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:03:24pm

re: #137 Buck

Thats a very high standard you have. I suppose you are perfect, and have never said anything you regretted later. Congrats.

i have never accidentally called the president anything nasty, and feigning a valid opinion on matters political isn’t even what i do for a living.

not bad for an amateur, huh?

152 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:03:42pm

re: #141 Aceofwhat?

why is it tiresome?

Because its tiresome to be told that a bill that felt like it was debated for the better part of a year and wailed on with every possible delaying tactic you can imagine was “shoved down anyones throat”.

153 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:04:30pm

re: #150 iossarian

Because it’s a hilariously unsubtle reference to forced oral sex, aka rape, and tells us a lot about the mindset of people who use the phrase unthinkingly.

if i’m not mistaken, he was quoting a Democrat congressman.

154 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:04:37pm

re: #148 researchok

For 20 plus years, Ayers could have crapped on Broadway in broad daylight and no one would have cared because Ayers is a putz.

This, right here, is what makes conflating the left with Ayers such an obscene distortion of reality. NOBODY likes that asshole, and nobody would stand up and say “I totally agree with what he did in the 60’s”.

And yet, he is repeatedly heralded as the hero of the left.

155 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:04:43pm

re: #142 jamesfirecat

I disagree with you on how much of those qualities have been lost by the current crop of liberals (if the fact that us having a super majority in the Senate resulted in a healthcare plan that to my knowledge was largely designed based on what the Republicans offered as a counter proposal when Clinton tried to reform healthcare in his Presidency doesn’t show a willingness to work towards things gradually I don’t know what does…)

But that said I am in firm agreement with you on the importance of the willingness to compromise for the good of the nation as something that is very important to any political party and woe betide the one who looses it…

Honestly James, you are better person than I.

I can see none of the qualities mentioned in great numbers that you do.

I am fed up with the whole bloody lot.

156 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:04:48pm

re: #127 Talking Point Detective

Buck. He was on the air the other day saying that it was a “joke.”
Watch the clip from the Today show the other day and tell us if you believe his explanation.

Are you sure that he said that the comment “Obama is a racist” was a joke?

“Anything I have said in jokes, no”

“Anything I said uh uh like with the president I have already apologized, and I have said that many times”

SO WHEN YOU SAY that he has said that the comment about the President was a joke is a LIE by you. You are doing the exact same thing the haters are doing to Charles.

157 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:05:26pm

re: #154 Fozzie Bear

This, right here, is what makes conflating the left with Ayers such an obscene distortion of reality. NOBODY likes that asshole, and nobody would stand up and say “I totally agree with what he did in the 60’s”.

And yet, he is repeatedly heralded as the hero of the left.

EXACTLY.

He was and remains a nothing.

158 Kragar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:06:23pm

That crazy doctor whose been killing patients for years now, take a guess?

Obama’s fault, according to Bryan Fischer

Who has made this kind of barbarity possible? For an accomplice, look no further than the Oval Office. The sitting president of the United States used his influence no less than four times as an Illinois state senator to prevent newborn babies from receiving medical care that could have saved their lives.

He used his political power to make sure that babies born alive in Illinois after surviving an abortion attempt were tossed in a corner of the room and left to die.

What is the moral difference between discarding a baby and allowing it to die with no care, no comfort, no medical attention, and killing the same baby with a pair of scissors? Perhaps there is a difference in savagery, but there is no difference in barbarity.

I submit that the president of the United States shares moral culpability for creating a climate in which this kind of Mayan-era butchery could take place. He too, just like Dr. Gosnell, has shown a “disdain for the lives and health of … infants.”

Utter moral failure can be found on all fronts. One cannot imagine the darkness of a man’s heart who could enrich himself by sticking scissors into the necks of newborn babies, or fathom the conscience of government officials who deliberately refuse to exercise accountability. They could have saved the lives of these seven babies, but were absent without leave for at least 14 years.

And yet even worse, the man who sits in the most powerful office in the world does not believe in the sanctity of newborn human life. If he doesn’t, why should a butcher in Philadelphia?

159 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:06:41pm

re: #150 iossarian

Because it’s a hilariously unsubtle reference to forced oral sex, aka rape, and tells us a lot about the mindset of people who use the phrase unthinkingly.

oh, and i have no idea what you’re talking about. when something is ‘forced down my throat’, i think of having to choke down lima beans as a kid.

it’s fine if that’s where your mind goes. assuming that others follow is not fine; actually, it’s worse than not fine. it’s unacceptable.

160 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:06:50pm

re: #156 Buck

Wow. The exact same thing. Not leaving any room for, even if you are right that Beck’s incoherent apology didn’t call it a ‘joke’, that it was an honest mistake.

Amazing.

161 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:07:11pm

re: #153 Aceofwhat?

if i’m not mistaken, he was quoting a Democrat congressman.

If it’s not an objectionable phrase, why does it matter who used it originally?

162 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:07:50pm

re: #160 Obdicut

Wow. The exact same thing. Not leaving any room for, even if you are right that Beck’s incoherent apology didn’t call it a ‘joke’, that it was an honest mistake.

Amazing.

‘oh, did i say “racist”? i meant “commie”. my bad.’

163 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:08:20pm

re: #138 researchok

His defense of marriage in minority communities, his uneasiness with abortion, for starters.

Further, he was always willing to cross the aisle to compromise and craft deals.

What do you mean by “defense of marriage in minority communities” and how is it at odds with the current party platform of the democrats?

Also there are at least four remaining democratic members of the house who are pro-life and there were at least 11 of them before the 2010 election…

[Link: www.jillstanek.com…]


And that just covers the ones who voted against Obama-Care….

Being Pro-Life isn’t a deal breaker for the Democrats….

164 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:08:28pm

re: #131 simoom

Does anyone else find it strange that Glenn Beck’s news site is pushing Patterico’s explanation, which essentially appears to be, “He’s not telling his audience to kill progressive revolutionaries — he’s telling the left to do it… and somehow that makes it totally alright!”

Ha! His newsbuster’s link interprets it the same way:

[Link: newsbusters.org…]

*****UPDATE 2: In response to reactions from a few readers, here are a couple clarifications I should make. First, I’m not sure why Beck thought it would be neccesary for the establishment left to shoot its revolutionary partners once the latter found out that they’d been played for fools. Apparently he thought violence would neccesarily ensue and that one group would have to off the other. I have no idea how he arrived at that conclusion.

Clearly this statement was pure hyperbole. Beck often attributes his most controversial statements to a tongue-in-cheek attitude. Maybe the 10 words the left is fixated on were just an overly-dramatic (and ill-advised) means to get accross just how volatile and dangrous he thought the situation was. Maybe he actually does think the two groups will eventually turn violent towards each other. I have no idea. I can’t read the man’s mind.

Is the statement an example of civil, moderate discourse? Of course not. But that fact does not excuse the lies certain folks on the left are trying to push.

So that’s two of his Blaze links that lead to Righties interpreting his rant as a call for the left to shoot their revolutionaries, and not as metaphor. I’m not sure he’s helping his case…

165 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:09:53pm

Beck, on the today show separates any jokes that he has said (and said the he does not regret them) and the comment about the President.

He does NOT say that the comment about the President was a joke. Pure and simple.

Anyone who says that he said that is “paraphrasing” and making stuff up (again).

166 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:10:15pm

re: #161 iossarian

If it’s not an objectionable phrase, why does it matter who used it originally?

seemed to me that one who objects ought to know the source. i didn’t object, remember.

but i just checked for you, and it was my mistake. Cohen went to Goebbels but not to “forced down throats”. So i was incorrect about that part.

167 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:10:17pm

re: #156 Buck

Are you sure that he said that the comment “Obama is a racist” was a joke?

“Anything I have said in jokes, no”

“Anything I said uh uh like with the president I have already apologized, and I have said that many times”

SO WHEN YOU SAY that he has said that the comment about the President was a joke is a LIE by you. You are doing the exact same thing the haters are doing to Charles.


Let’s get this straight. From the Today show:

VIEIRA: I’m just, I’m ticking off a couple of them. That the President was a racist. You, you said, at one point, you were joking around, that you wanted to poison Nancy Pelosi. You wanted to beat Congressman Charlie Rangel to death with a shovel. In the spirit of this book-

BECK: Like eight years ago.

VIEIRA: In the – that doesn’t matter. It’s in the past. I understand that. But in the spirit of this book, do you regret that stuff now – having gone through this crisis – say you know what, that was dumb?

BECK: I regret that anything that I said – let me, let me give you this. Anything that I said in jokes? No. Ask Jon Stewart, ask The Simpsons okay?


You are arguing that he is saying there that calling Obama a racist wasn’t a joke?

Really?

168 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:10:34pm

re: #156 Buck

You are a fucking joke, Buck. I mean that. From the bottom of my heart.

Do you not understand that this is a part of a longstanding pattern, of which there are many, many examples? Of course you do. You just don’t give a shit, because you are dissembling. When you find yourself having to stretch, twist, and spin the truth at every turn to defend your heroes, it’s time to find new ones.

169 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:11:25pm

re: #167 Talking Point Detective

Let’s get this straight. From the Today show:


You are arguing that he is saying there that calling Obama a racist wasn’t a joke?

Really?

YOU ARE MISSING THE LINE HE SAYS FURTHER DOWN!

Where he specifically addresses the line about the President.

170 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:11:47pm

re: #159 Aceofwhat?

oh, and i have no idea what you’re talking about. when something is ‘forced down my throat’, i think of having to choke down lima beans as a kid.

it’s fine if that’s where your mind goes. assuming that others follow is not fine; actually, it’s worse than not fine. it’s unacceptable.

Fair enough, I’ll give you the relatively benign interpretation.

It’s still tiresome to hear the phrase used in conjunction with a bill that was endlessly watered down so that precisely zero Republicans could vote in favor of it.

171 zora  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:11:59pm

ot: Colbert Calls Out Limbaugh For His Chinese Impression


Last night, Stephen Colbert helped his viewers understand just what Rush Limbaugh was saying when Limbaugh imitated the Chinese president’s language with a string of sounds that might have featured in a movie or radio show from the first half of the last century.

“My favorite doughnut is every doughnut,” Colbert’s translation read. “When I stand up, my chair smells like a cat shelter.”

[Link: tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

172 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:12:52pm

re: #171 zora

ot: Colbert Calls Out Limbaugh For His Chinese Impression

[Link: tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

“Don’t be an impression hog! Not that you don’t do a great impression of a pig…..”

173 Kragar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:12:55pm

Christine O’Donnell Sets Up ‘ChristinePAC’

Newly available documents from the Federal Election Commission show that one of Ms. O’Donnell’s close political advisers filed paperwork to set up a new political entity for Ms. O’Donnell called ChristinePAC.

Under new campaign-finance rules, Ms. O’Donnell can use the new political action committee to raise unlimited sums of money to run television ads or send political mailings to help Republican candidates win. But election rules bar the new organization from donating money to candidates.

174 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:13:00pm

re: #156 Buck

SO WHEN YOU SAY that he has said that the comment about the President was a joke is a LIE by you. You are doing the exact same thing the haters are doing to Charles.


So, are you just going to let that completely inaccurate accusation lie there? Or, are you going to show some accountability?

Were you “joking” when you called me a liar?

Did you not really mean it, and are now saying it was a mistake?

175 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:14:21pm

re: #170 iossarian

Fair enough, I’ll give you the relatively benign interpretation.

It’s still tiresome to hear the phrase used in conjunction with a bill that was endlessly watered down so that precisely zero Republicans could vote in favor of it.

fair.

176 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:15:06pm

re: #169 Buck

YOU ARE MISSING THE LINE HE SAYS FURTHER DOWN!

Where he specifically addresses the line about the President.

Do you mean this?”

Anything that I’ve said, like with the President, I’ve apologized for and I’ve explained several times. That’s not where we…-

I’m not questioning whether he “apologized” for it.

I’m saying he was lying when he said it was a joke.

And he said it was a joke.

And you called me a liar for correctly pointing out that he said that calling Obama a racist was a joke.

Are you going to keep digging your hole deeper?

177 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:15:58pm

re: #174 Talking Point Detective

So, are you just going to let that completely inaccurate accusation lie there? Or, are you going to show some accountability?

Were you “joking” when you called me a liar?

Did you not really mean it, and are now saying it was a mistake?

You specifically leave out where Beck says: “Anything I said uh uh like with the president I have already apologized, and I have said that many times”

That is from the Today Show and it is relevant. Joke are jokes he says, and the line about the president was a mistake that I apologized for many times.

Your conscience should be your guide on if that is a lie or not. I have stated what I think it is.

178 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:16:12pm

The problem I have with “shoved down our throats” is that it implies an unfair process.

The GOP got to vote on it, and they got outvoted, because they won less seats in the previous election. They lost, fair and square. Nothing was shoved, it was just something that they didn’t like. So of course, its time to resort to bizarre violent metaphors.

179 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:16:30pm

re: #169 Buck

YOU ARE MISSING THE LINE HE SAYS FURTHER DOWN!

Where he specifically addresses the line about the President.

i have a hunch that i’ve advanced to being only the world’s second-worst chess player. you up for a game?

180 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:17:00pm

re: #178 Fozzie Bear

The problem I have with “shoved down our throats” is that it implies an unfair process.

The GOP got to vote on it, and they got outvoted, because they won less seats in the previous election. They lost, fair and square. Nothing was shoved, it was just something that they didn’t like. So of course, its time to resort to bizarre violent metaphors.

like Cohen’s?

181 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:17:18pm

re: #163 jamesfirecat

What do you mean by “defense of marriage in minority communities” and how is it at odds with the current party platform of the democrats?

Also there are at least four remaining democratic members of the house who are pro-life and there were at least 11 of them before the 2010 election…

[Link: www.jillstanek.com…]

And that just covers the ones who voted against Obama-Care…

Being Pro-Life isn’t a deal breaker for the Democrats…

Moynihan was outspoken about out of wedlock childbirth and the abandonment of marriage and fathers in minority communities. Remember the heat Obama took from Jackson when he made similar remarks?

Marriage and out of wedlock births are now third rail subjects, sadly. Moynihan’s point was made by the numbers, even back then. Children from stable homes with fathers present are more likely to get an education, earn more money, be successful, etc. He was a tireless advocate for minorities- when he spoke of civil rights and potential, it was stirring. He was a most eloquent advocate for the hand up.

Also, Moynihan was just pro life- he took a firm stand against abortion. He said it undermined the morality of a culture. No one can say that today.

You didn’t always have to agree with him but there were few more decent, honest and patriotic American politicians in the latter half of the 20th century.

The same applies to all the others I mentioned as well.

182 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:17:20pm

re: #180 Aceofwhat?

like Cohen’s?

Who is Cohen?

183 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:17:48pm

re: #182 Fozzie Bear

Who is Cohen?

An idiot from TN.

184 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:18:36pm

re: #182 Fozzie Bear

Who is Cohen?

He is the sole example of some questionable rhetoric coming from the Democratic party. Expect to hear his name quite frequently over the next few weeks/months/decades.

185 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:18:50pm

re: #176 Talking Point Detective

Do you mean this?”

I’m not questioning whether he “apologized” for it.

I’m saying he was lying when he said it was a joke.

And he said it was a joke.

And you called me a liar for correctly pointing out that he said that calling Obama a racist was a joke.

Are you going to keep digging your hole deeper?

He didn’t say it was a joke. Vieira lumps the Racist comment with other comments that were jokes. Beck tries to separate them out because he can’t answer it with one answer.

Jokes are jokes, and the comment about the president was not a joke, but something he apologizes for.


VIEIRA: I’m just, I’m ticking off a couple of them. That the President was a racist. You, you said, at one point, you were joking around, that you wanted to poison Nancy Pelosi. You wanted to beat Congressman Charlie Rangel to death with a shovel. In the spirit of this book-

186 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:18:50pm

re: #178 Fozzie Bear

The problem I have with “shoved down our throats” is that it implies an unfair process.

The GOP got to vote on it, and they got outvoted, because they won less seats in the previous election. They lost, fair and square. Nothing was shoved, it was just something that they didn’t like. So of course, its time to resort to bizarre violent metaphors.

although in fairness, agreeing on your point would then require you to nod in acceptance of any prior or upcoming GOP ‘maneuvering’. i wouldn’t say that this bill was shoved down our throats, but i’d certainly say that something of this size and importance could have used a lot more time in the light of day.

187 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:19:02pm

re: #181 researchok

Moynihan was outspoken about out of wedlock childbirth and the abandonment of marriage and fathers in minority communities. Remember the heat Obama took from Jackson when he made similar remarks?

Yes. From Jackson. But he got supported by others, and, if you recall, won the presidency. So the ‘third-rail’ topic that you’re citing is something that Obama touched on. So it’s not really a third rail.

188 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:19:17pm

re: #184 iossarian

He is the sole example of some questionable rhetoric coming from the Democratic party in the past week. Expect to hear his name quite frequently over the next few weeks/months/decades.

fixed. this one’s on the house.

189 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:19:46pm

re: #187 Obdicut

Yes. From Jackson. But he got supported by others, and, if you recall, won the presidency. So the ‘third-rail’ topic that you’re citing is something that Obama touched on. So it’s not really a third rail.

Maybe not in the SS sense.

How about ‘Hot Potato’?

190 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:19:54pm

re: #186 Aceofwhat?

although in fairness, agreeing on your point would then require you to nod in acceptance of any prior or upcoming GOP ‘maneuvering’. i wouldn’t say that this bill was shoved down our throats, but i’d certainly say that something of this size and importance could have used a lot more time in the light of day.

The metaphor personalizes a legislative agenda, which is something we could use a lot less of, imo.

191 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:20:50pm

re: #182 Fozzie Bear

Who is Cohen?

that’s interesting. i have this hunch that if a republican had stood up and compared democrats to Goebbels, you’d have heard about it already and been lecturing me about it already.

just a hunch, though;)

192 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:21:13pm

re: #188 Aceofwhat?

fixed. this one’s on the house.

Ha! Do you want to offer an over/under on similar rhetoric coming from the right over the past week?

193 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:21:20pm

re: #189 researchok

Sure. But again: I don’t see any validity in your position that Moynihan couldn’t get elected today. You seem to be ascribing a radicalism to the Democratic electorate that isn’t there. The Republican electorate has become radicalized. Not the Democrats.

194 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:21:25pm

re: #190 Fozzie Bear

The metaphor personalizes a legislative agenda, which is something we could use a lot less of, imo.

a sentiment with which i will always, always agree.

195 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:21:25pm

re: #186 Aceofwhat?

although in fairness, agreeing on your point would then require you to nod in acceptance of any prior or upcoming GOP ‘maneuvering’. i wouldn’t say that this bill was shoved down our throats, but i’d certainly say that something of this size and importance could have used a lot more time in the light of day.

What bill, exactly, are we talking about?

196 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:21:55pm

re: #165 Buck

Beck, on the today show separates any jokes that he has said (and said the he does not regret them) and the comment about the President.

He does NOT say that the comment about the President was a joke. Pure and simple.

Anyone who says that he said that is “paraphrasing” and making stuff up (again).

Let’s try that again, Buck:

VIEIRA: I’m just, I’m ticking off a couple of them. That the President was a racist. You, you said, at one point, you were joking around, that you wanted to poison Nancy Pelosi. You wanted to beat Congressman Charlie Rangel to death with a shovel. In the spirit of this book-

BECK: Like eight years ago.

VIEIRA: In the – that doesn’t matter. It’s in the past. I understand that. But in the spirit of this book, do you regret that stuff now – having gone through this crisis – say you know what, that was dumb?

BECK: I regret that anything that I said – let me, let me give you this. Anything that I said in jokes? No. Ask Jon Stewart, ask The Simpsons okay?

VIEIRA: You don’t think that, that contributes at all to a climate of anger or hate?

BECK: No, I think. No, ask Jon Stewart that question. Ask The Simpsons-

VIEIRA: But I’m asking you that question.

BECK: But I’m saying if you ask that question, to those guys, I think you’ll get the same answer. No. Comedy is comedy.

You are saying that in that excerpt he is not claiming that his comment about Obama being a racist was a “joke?”

She asked him, specifically, about that comment. And in response he said… “Anything I said in jokes? No. Ask Jon Stewart.”

She offered him the opportunity to affirm that the comment - that she referred to specifically - was “dumb.” He decline, and instead said she should ask Jon Stewart that question.

Obviously, you’re not going to be convinced here. I’ve said my piece.

197 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:22:00pm

re: #179 Aceofwhat?

i have a hunch that i’ve advanced to being only the world’s second-worst chess player. you up for a game?

Fine ignore it all you want. just because the biased site stops the transcript just before he addresses (separately) the comment about the president doesn’t mean he didn’t say it.

Simply put, he did not say that calling the president a racist was a joke. Vieira lumped that comment together with what SHE admitted were jokes. He tried to separate the two.

198 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:22:10pm

re: #192 iossarian

Ha! Do you want to offer an over/under on similar rhetoric coming from the right over the past week?

oh, that’s where i left the balance fairy. you’re right…Goebbels references are fine as long as one side makes less of them than the other.

silly me.

199 lawhawk  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:22:35pm

re: #158 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He’s blaming Obama?

You know who might be much more at fault?

Tom Ridge.

The former Governor of Pennsylvania who took over for Casey in 1993 when the decision was made to reduce oversight/investigations into abortions because it might chill access. [page 9 of the grand jury report.] Throw in the DoH that looked the other way and law enforcement that didn’t take complaints seriously enough to investigate until they began looking into whether he was running a pill mill when they stumbled onto the house of horrors.

200 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:22:37pm

re: #197 Buck

So he earnestly called Obama a racist.

Which is even worse.

201 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:22:46pm

re: #195 Fozzie Bear

What bill, exactly, are we talking about?

hcr.

and my laptop battery is failing, so i apologize in advance if at some point in the next 10 min i don’t respond.

202 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:23:21pm

re: #186 Aceofwhat?

although in fairness, agreeing on your point would then require you to nod in acceptance of any prior or upcoming GOP ‘maneuvering’. i wouldn’t say that this bill was shoved down our throats, but i’d certainly say that something of this size and importance could have used a lot more time in the light of day.

As I recall it debate went on from Summer of 2009 to March of 2010… how much longer did you want it to go on for?

203 Aceofwhat?  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:23:31pm

re: #197 Buck

see #200.

204 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:23:32pm

re: #195 Fozzie Bear

What bill, exactly, are we talking about?

Health care reform. You know, the one that wasn’t extensively debated.

205 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:23:55pm

re: #186 Aceofwhat?

although in fairness, agreeing on your point would then require you to nod in acceptance of any prior or upcoming GOP ‘maneuvering’. i wouldn’t say that this bill was shoved down our throats, but i’d certainly say that something of this size and importance could have used a lot more time in the light of day.

When ‘you have to pass it before you can know what is in it’, I submit the bill is being forced down our throats.

And understand, not just forced down the GOP’s throat but the national throat as well.

For the record, I’m all for health care reform. Certainly there is room for improvement but I agree we need reform. I also believe we should have been afforded the opportunity to read the bill, as was promised.

I honestly don’t see how that is a partisan view, by the way.

206 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:24:11pm

re: #188 Aceofwhat?

fixed. this one’s on the house.

I fixed one of Walter’s posts like that. Once. He went off on me like Angle on illegal immigrants :)

207 darthstar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:25:52pm
208 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:26:04pm

re: #201 Aceofwhat?

hcr.

and my laptop battery is failing, so i apologize in advance if at some point in the next 10 min i don’t respond.

A year isn’t long enough? lol

209 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:26:17pm

re: #205 researchok

When ‘you have to pass it before you can know what is in it’, I submit the bill is being forced down our throats.

And understand, not just forced down the GOP’s throat but the national throat as well.

For the record, I’m all for health care reform. Certainly there is room for improvement but I agree we need reform. I also believe we should have been afforded the opportunity to read the bill, as was promised.

I honestly don’t see how that is a partisan view, by the way.

I will stand by you on this as long as in turn the other side agrees that they would stop lieing about the bill thus making it impossible for Americans to understand what is in it no matter how much Democrats try to tell them.

210 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:26:46pm

re: #193 Obdicut

Sure. But again: I don’t see any validity in your position that Moynihan couldn’t get elected today. You seem to be ascribing a radicalism to the Democratic electorate that isn’t there. The Republican electorate has become radicalized. Not the Democrats.

I disagree.

I cannot see Moveon and Truthout defending and endorsing a Dem who is pro life and pro marriage- especially in minority communities, etc.,

211 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:00pm

re: #198 Aceofwhat?

oh, that’s where i left the balance fairy. you’re right…Goebbels references are fine as long as one side makes less of them than the other.

silly me.

To be clear, I’m not saying that “Goebbels references are fine”. My point was that we’ll be hearing a lot more about Cohen’s comments, due to the relative scarcity of such rhetoric coming from Democratic politicians.

212 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:18pm

re: #209 jamesfirecat

I will stand by you on this as long as in turn the other side agrees that they would stop lieing about the bill thus making it impossible for Americans to understand what is in it no matter how much Democrats try to tell them.

Hell yes, I’m on board with that!

213 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:26pm

re: #210 researchok

So what? Moveon and Truthout aren’t necessary to win elections as a Democrat.

214 Randall Gross  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:26pm

Ouch P, that’s going to leave a mark.

215 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:36pm

re: #196 Talking Point Detective

OK - one more piece. I will point out that up-thread, your first response what that his later statement was what proved that he wasn’t calling the “Obama is a racist” comment a joke.

Now you’re saying that in his earlier thread, he was “separating out” the racist comment from his other comments.

What do you think the lack of consistency in your argument indicates?

Have you ever seen a little kid throw all kinds of stuff at the wall as they try to convince their parents of something that they’re obviously wrong about?

216 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:41pm

re: #210 researchok

I disagree.

I cannot see Moveon and Truthout defending and endorsing a Dem who is pro life and pro marriage- especially in minority communities, etc.,

Having never even heard of Truthout… and never visiting Moveon, I feel fairly confident in saying that they are not the be all and end all of the democratic base….

217 TedStriker  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:27:48pm

re: #19 Charles

Please retweet this post — hundreds of right wingers on Twitter have been retweeting Patterico’s smear, and we need to make sure my reply gets seen too.

Robert Stacy McCain has jumped on it now, of course — he wrote another 2000-word post mocking me for failing and being irrelevant and having no traffic. That would be about the 97th post by McCain on that theme.

I love how the wingnuts’ cognitive dissonance works…they screech that LGF is irrelevant and is swirling around the drain, yet they never miss an opportunity to attempt to counter what Charles (and other Lizards) reports about them. That says to me that, to the wingnuts, LGF is most certainly relevant, because they could otherwise ignore it.

To paraphrase the old saying, the more flak you get, the closer you are to the target.

218 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:28:28pm

re: #210 researchok

I disagree.

I cannot see Moveon and Truthout defending and endorsing a Dem who is pro life and pro marriage- especially in minority communities, etc.,

Sadly, there are quite a few successful pro-life Dems. “Getting endorsed by MoveOn” =/= getting elected.

219 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:28:53pm

re: #213 Obdicut

So what? Moveon and Truthout aren’t necessary to win elections as a Democrat.

How many Dem candidates who won without their endorsement?

I don’t know.

220 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:29:19pm

re: #218 iossarian

Sadly, there are quite a few successful pro-life Dems. “Getting endorsed by MoveOn” =/= getting elected.

Really? I didn’t know that.

221 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:29:55pm

re: #200 Obdicut

So he earnestly called Obama a racist.

Which is even worse.

I don’t believe that. There is simply no credible evidence that Obama is a racist.

Beck is a manipulative lair who thrives on making inflammatory statements. And actually, I think that is worse than if he believed Obama is a racist and said something he actually believes.

But worst of all is that he’s such a weasel - and that apologists either can’t see how weaselly he is or just don’t care for some bizarre, partisan need to defend inflammatory rhetoric.

222 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:29:55pm

re: #196 Talking Point Detective

Let’s try that again, TPD:

There was more in the interview. You are cutting off the transcript just before he specifically addresses the remark about the president.

AND YOU KNOW THIS, as I have mentioned it many times. So you are purposely, and with forethought leaving out the answer that is relevant, and only quoting the part that is out of context.

The person doing the interview lumps TWO different questions into one. Do you regret the comment about the president, and do you regret the JOKES you told about ….

His reply is in TWO parts. He separate the jokes by saying “Anything that I said in jokes? No.”

He then later says “Anything I said uh uh like with the president I have already apologized, and I have said that many times”

Separating her two questions (that she lumped into one) and gave two answers. One answer for the JOKES, and one for the Comment about the President.

223 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:30:15pm

re: #216 jamesfirecat

Having never even heard of Truthout… and never visiting Moveon, I feel fairly confident in saying that they are not the be all and end all of the democratic base…

LOL- James, you speak the gospel on that.

They are pretty influential, though.

224 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:30:50pm

BBL

Work call

225 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:31:18pm

re: #220 researchok

Really? I didn’t know that.

“I don’t belong to any organized political party. I’m a democrat”

226 zora  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:31:46pm

re: #213 Obdicut

So what? Moveon and Truthout aren’t necessary to win elections as a Democrat.

i have never seen an anti-marriage candidates of either party.

227 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:32:53pm

re: #221 Talking Point Detective

I don’t believe that. There is simply no credible evidence that Obama is a racist.

Beck is a manipulative lair who thrives on making inflammatory statements. And actually, I think that is worse than if he believed Obama is a racist and said something he actually believes.

But worst of all is that he’s such a weasel - and that apologists either can’t see how weaselly he is or just don’t care for some bizarre, partisan need to defend inflammatory rhetoric.

He admits that that was a mistake.

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

EVERYONE has made a comment they regretted later. He has apologized.

AND he did not say that the remark about the president was a joke.

228 darthstar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:33:17pm

More evidence President Obama is a seekrit-mooslim commie…his daughter speaks Chinese - to President Hu!!11ty!

229 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:34:17pm

re: #227 Buck

So, was he joking when he called for democrats to shoot other democrats in the head? Was he joking when he likened american progressives to Nazis?

Does it even fucking matter at that point if he was joking, or merely lying?

230 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:34:48pm

re: #219 researchok

How many Dem candidates who won without their endorsement?

I don’t know.

If you don’t know, why are you making assertions about it?

231 darthstar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:36:20pm
232 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:37:16pm
VIEIRA: But let me just, again, because this book is about finding your truth and, and owning it do you feel, do you look back over and say, “Yeah I’ve, there are places where I’ve crossed the line and I have to readjust the way, the discourse?”

BECK: Absolutely, absolutely! Absolutely. You’re not human if you don’t look back and say that was a mistake, that was a mistake.

VIEIRA: Like what? What are the mistakes you’ve made that you think that you say, “Geesh I wish I hadn’t done that.”

BECK: Let me, let me answer it this way. Back – we, we have such an interesting view of history. Political discourse is sometimes really in your face. Telling somebody that you’ve got a real problem, sometimes you really get into their face.

ABLOW: You have to.

BECK: Just like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went back and forth. John Adams was called a hermaphrodite by Thomas Jefferson. Adams responded and said [about] Jefferson, “Your children will be raped and your towns will be burned if he becomes the President.” Let’s keep political discourse in context of history. Children weren’t raped. Nobody killed each other


She asks him to distinguish what was a mistake. In response, he said “sometimes you really get into their face,” with reference to our “history.” And he goes on to defend his getting into their face by comparing himself to Jefferson and Adams - because no children were raped.

Now, after saying that he made mistakes, he backtracks and explains that he was only doing what the founding fathers did.

He says he made a mistake, and then proceeds to defend that mistake as being patriotic.

What is amazing is that anyone actually falls for this obvious manipulative lying.

233 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:38:13pm

[Link: www.priestsforlife.org…]
[Link: www.democratsforlife.org…]
[Link: catholickey.blogspot.com…]

Unfortunately, there are plenty of pro-life democrats.

234 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:38:52pm

re: #229 Fozzie Bear

So, was he joking when he called for democrats to shoot other democrats in the head? Was he joking when he likened american progressives to Nazis?

Does it even fucking matter at that point if he was joking, or merely lying?

You can continue to make stuff up, but that is not at all what he said. In the Today Show interview I do not think the subject of “shooting in the head” came up.

He said that when he makes a joke, that he is doing the same thing that others do every day.

235 [deleted]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:39:47pm
236 darthstar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:40:12pm

re: #233 Fozzie Bear

[Link: www.priestsforlife.org…]
[Link: www.democratsforlife.org…]
[Link: catholickey.blogspot.com…]

Unfortunately, there are plenty of pro-life democrats.

Anti-choice. Even pro-choice people are pro-life. I hate that fucking term because it implies people who are pro-choice are pro-death or anti-life.

237 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:41:30pm

re: #236 darthstar

Anti-choice. Even pro-choice people are pro-life. I hate that fucking term because it implies people who are pro-choice are pro-death or anti-life.

Yes, well, I figure that their position comes from a position of ‘defending life’, which I find ridiculous, but it is what it is. I would bristle at being called “anti-life”, so I use that term, albeit uneasily.

238 wrenchwench  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:41:49pm

re: #236 darthstar

Anti-choice. Even pro-choice people are pro-life. I hate that fucking term because it implies people who are pro-choice are pro-death or anti-life.

How about “anti-self-determination for females”?

OK, it’s a bit awkward.

239 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:42:58pm

re: #232 Talking Point Detective

You are dancing around the direct reply that he made about the comment about the President.

Does your transcript omit it?

He refers directly to the comment that she asks about what he said about the president, and says? Come on, you can say it…. You don’t have to cut and paste around it.

We are not talking about what he does every day. We are not talking about what you THINK he means. We are not talking about what you think he is inferring.

WE ARE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT if he addressed the comment about the president, and if he said that he was joking about calling the president a racist.

240 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:43:42pm

re: #239 Buck

Do you realize that ‘joking’ is the best possible outcome, and him seriously calling the president a racist is much, much, much worse?

241 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:45:24pm

Ah, I see Patterico’s moving straight to stalker talking points now. Through obsessive searching of years-old comments, they’ve discovered that I once deleted a comment in which I (gasp!) used the term “Saint Pancake.”

I had to look up the comment in the DB because I don’t remember it, and the reason is simple - the timestamp shows it was deleted very soon after I posted it (8 years ago!), probably because I didn’t like it (as I’ve always said), regretted using it, and didn’t want to encourage its use. I say “probably” because this was so long ago and so completely insignificant I have no memory of it at all. I didn’t “lie” about it - I didn’t remember it. I’ve posted more than 45,000 comments over the life of LGF, in addition to nearly 38,000 articles. Anyone who thinks I remember each and every one, even the deleted ones, has a much higher opinion of my memory and intelligence than I do.

I’d say this is pathetic how they’re reaching back for every tiny comment I ever made to find a smear, but if they want to waste their time I say go for it. And it’s ironic that the people who are most enthusiastically promoting the smear are exactly the same people who were banned for using “St. Pancake” constantly — and for much worse.

242 sizzleRI  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:46:00pm

re: #233 Fozzie Bear

[Link: www.priestsforlife.org…]
[Link: www.democratsforlife.org…]
[Link: catholickey.blogspot.com…]

Unfortunately, there are plenty of pro-life democrats.

Yeah, this is such a strange talking point to me. I come from a solidly blue and solidly Catholic state. That leads to many pro-life democrats. As in the majority of our General Assembly. Oh, and the Representative for my House district. Jim Langevin. Pro-life democrat who won re-election by quite a large margin.

243 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:46:01pm

And by the way, the commenter they quote, NC, is now a very well-known right wing blogger who uses a pseudonym.

244 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:46:07pm

re: #235 Fozzie Bear

Fozzie, you’re a communist/socialist/racist/lying/dangerous man, who has an “army of thugs,” who wants to destroy our system of government, and who is the “enemy of humanity.” *

* Of course, I shouldn’t be held accountable for saying that, because I didn’t really mean it and I call people a communist/socialist/racist/lying/dangerous man, who has an “army of thugs,” who wants to destroy our system of government, and who is the “enemy of humanity - day after day on TV and radio for audiences of millions - but don’t really mean it.

245 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:47:36pm

re: #244 Talking Point Detective

Pure comedy, that’s what it is.

246 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:49:18pm

re: #245 jaunte

Pure comedy, that’s what it is.

Comedy Central should buy in Beck’s show and run it with a laughter track.

247 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:49:45pm

re: #235 Fozzie Bear

I don’t know of any others that ‘joke’ about things like this.

Hey, Buck, you are a pedophile mass murdering baby rapist.

JUST KIDDING!

Aww shucks I feel bad. You know what, buck, I apologize. Also, I was kidding. I don’t mean anything I say. I’m just an entertainer.

Am I forgiven?

248 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:50:34pm

re: #246 iossarian

Comedy Central should buy in Beck’s show and run it with a laughter track.

it’s been done:

249 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:52:32pm

re: #247 Fozzie Bear

Mr. Fozzie Bear, some liberal commenters have said that your characterization of Mr. Buck as a pedophile mass murdering baby rapist is uncalled for, and lowers the tone of LGF discourse. How do you respond to that?

250 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:53:15pm

re: #239 Buck

[Link: american-conservativevalues.com…]

The transcript. Knock yourself out. Come back and tell me what I “omitted,” and “lied” about.

Also, come back and explain how, when she asked about three specific things he said, and he responded …

“Anything I said in jokes?,”

he “separated the ‘racist’ comment out.

I’d say that obviously, the other two comments were jokes. Perhaps the “racist” comment was less obviously a joke, and you may have interpreted that he made some “separation” as a result, but that distinction is in your mind and not his words.

251 wrenchwench  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:53:19pm

re: #241 Charles

The nitwits have tweeted that about 5,000 times. You’d think they’d found a new species or something.

252 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:53:41pm

re: #247 Fozzie Bear

Aww shucks I feel bad. You know what, buck, I apologize. Also, I was kidding. I don’t mean anything I say. I’m just an entertainer.

Am I forgiven?

Your comment would only be relevant if anyone thought that calling someone that was ever explained as a joke. Otherwise it is a form of Strawman. Beck never said that about anyone, and I never said that about anyone.

That rude and pornographic comment YOU MADE is now forever on the internet about me. You did that. No one else.

253 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:55:44pm

re: #245 jaunte

Pure comedy, that’s what it is.

Just ask Jon Stewart or Bart Simpson.

254 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:56:33pm

re: #246 iossarian

Comedy Central should buy in Beck’s show and run it with a laughter track.

Wingnuts say the darndest things…

255 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:56:52pm

re: #251 wrenchwench

The nitwits have tweeted that about 5,000 times. You’d think they’d found a new species or something.

It’s kind of cool that they have such awe of me, actually, to believe that I remember every single comment I’ve ever posted at LGF, even one-sentence comments posted 8 years ago. I must be pretty smart, and diabolical too.

256 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:57:10pm

re: #250 Talking Point Detective

[Link: american-conservativevalues.com…]

The transcript. Knock yourself out. Come back and tell me what I “omitted,” and “lied” about.

Also, come back and explain how, when she asked about three specific things he said, and he responded …

he “separated the ‘racist’ comment out.

I’d say that obviously, the other two comments were jokes. Perhaps the “racist” comment was less obviously a joke, and you may have interpreted that he made some “separation” as a result, but that distinction is in your mind and not his words.

This is what he said about the comment regarding the President that she refers to as “That the President was a racist.”:

“Anything that I’ve said, like with the President, I’ve apologized for and I’ve explained several times. “

That is from the transcript, and you have been very careful to omit it every time you quote the Today Show interview.

257 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:57:47pm

re: #255 Charles

It’s kind of cool that they have such awe of me, actually, to believe that I remember every single comment I’ve ever posted at LGF, even one-sentence comments posted 8 years ago. I must be pretty smart, and diabolical too.

Well, you just know that last bit will be quoted out of context.

258 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:57:52pm

re: #256 Buck


How has he ‘explained’ it, though, Buck? What was his explanation of why he called the president a racist?

Somehow, you don’t seem to consider that important.

259 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 12:59:51pm

re: #252 Buck

Your comment would only be relevant if anyone thought that calling someone that was ever explained as a joke. Otherwise it is a form of Strawman. Beck never said that about anyone, and I never said that about anyone.

That rude and pornographic comment YOU MADE is now forever on the internet about me. You did that. No one else.

Personal accountability for my statements for me, an anonymous nobody on the internet but not for Beck, a man with millions of daily viewers? At least you have finally made your position perfectly clear.

260 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:00:21pm

re: #252 Buck

Buck. You are a communist/socialist/lying/racist/who wants to take away our guns and who has an army of thugs. and I want to beat you to death with a shovel. *


*I don’t really mean it when I call you a communist/socialist/lying/racist. And I was joking about the beating you to death with the shovel part.

261 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:00:51pm

re: #230 Obdicut

If you don’t know, why are you making assertions about it?

Safe bet.

A strong pro marriage, pro life Dem moderate is a likely as CPAC endorsing a gay, pro choice, pro gun control conservative.

262 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:01:04pm

“I’m not responsible,” Beck explained.

263 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:02:08pm

re: #255 Charles

It’s kind of cool that they have such awe of me, actually, to believe that I remember every single comment I’ve ever posted at LGF, even one-sentence comments posted 8 years ago. I must be pretty smart, and diabolical too.

And part of a now exposed Zionist conspiracy.

264 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:02:11pm

re: #261 researchok

Safe bet.

No, it’s not. That is your assertion. You’ve done nothing to support it, at all.


A strong pro marriage, pro life Dem moderate is a likely as CPAC endorsing a gay, pro choice, pro gun control conservative.

Why on earth do you think that ‘pro marriage’ is a negative for a Democrat? Can you please explain this?

265 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:02:27pm

some weird shit going down

266 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:02:43pm

He explained it multiple times.

I have quoted that explanation many times in this thread. Here it is again:

With regards to the comment he made about the President being a racist:

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

Somehow some people here (who have said things that they regret, and would hope people would forgive and MOVEON) don’t seem to consider that important.

267 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:02:53pm

re: #261 researchok

Safe bet.

A strong pro marriage, pro life Dem moderate is a likely as CPAC endorsing a gay, pro choice, pro gun control conservative.

Except there are plenty of pro-life (who the fuck isn’t pro-marriage?) elected Democrats.

268 jc717  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:02:59pm

re: #106 Talking Point Detective

I remember hearing about some really interesting psychology research out there on what goes into how people determine what is true or false in the realm of politics; one thing I remember is that, what I will call “confirmation bias,” is a huge factor no matter where you lie in the constellation of beliefs.

Good thing that confirmation bias never interferes with my reasoning, however. I’m always checking for biases in my reasoning, and I’ve never found that I have any!

Confirmation bias is part of the human condition and affects our thinking in everyday lives, not just in politics. It’s one of the things keeping psychics in business and couples arguing over never/always putting the toilet seat down.

269 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:03:03pm
“Anything that I’ve said, like with the President, I’ve apologized for and I’ve explained several times. “

Right. And his apology and his explanation was that he was joking.

Why would I be “omitting” it from the interview. I never questions whether he issued an apology. I said that the credibility of his apology is laughable. And the reason why is that first he says he doesn’t mean it, and then he says that he was joking, and then he says that when you get in someone’s face you’re doing your patriotic duty to emulate the founding fathers.

Oh, and no children will get raped.

270 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:03:10pm

re: #262 jaunte

“I’m not responsible,” Beck explained.

271 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:03:42pm

re: #267 Fozzie Bear

Except there are (who the fuck isn’t pro-marriage?)

“Pro-marriage” is code for “bigoted against gay people”.

272 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:03:52pm

re: #266 Buck

He explained it multiple times.

I have quoted that explanation many times in this thread. Here it is again:

With regards to the comment he made about the President being a racist:

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

Somehow some people here (who have said things that they regret, and would hope people would forgive and MOVEON) don’t seem to consider that important.

That isn’t an explanation, Buck. It was ‘poorly said’? What does that mean? Why did he say it?

Why do you consider that an explanation? It’s nothing like one.

273 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:04:11pm

re: #267 Fozzie Bear

Except there are plenty of pro-life (who the fuck isn’t pro-marriage?) elected Democrats.

okay, name 10

274 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:04:54pm

re: #269 Talking Point Detective

Right. And his apology and his explanation was that he was joking.

NO, he is specific that he will not apologize for the jokes.

He NEVER said that his comment about the President being a racist was a joke. The jokes are just jokes. The comment about the President he apologizes for.

275 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:05:07pm

re: #271 iossarian

“Pro-marriage” is code for “bigoted against gay people”.

Moynihan was no bigot.

No way.

276 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:05:09pm

re: #266 Buck

He explained it multiple times.

I have quoted that explanation many times in this thread. Here it is again:

With regards to the comment he made about the President being a racist:

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

Somehow some people here (who have said things that they regret, and would hope people would forgive and MOVEON) don’t seem to consider that important.

There is no obligation to forgive people when they apologize. We aren’t all catholic priests in the confession booth. It is often reasonable to dismiss an apology as bullshit, especially when the person in question REPEATEDLY says things very similar to the statement for which he was criticized initially, both before and after the “apology”.

277 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:05:27pm

Well, this has been fun. Time to start cooking for Friday / shabbat dinner.

278 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:05:38pm

re: #261 researchok

Safe bet.

A strong pro marriage, pro life Dem moderate is a likely as CPAC endorsing a gay, pro choice, pro gun control conservative.

Sorry to just jump in, but Steve Driehaus is a prolife, pro marriage Dem from Ohio 1. Recently lost to Steve Chabot, prolife, promarraige Rep.

279 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:05:54pm

re: #267 Fozzie Bear

Except there are plenty of pro-life (who the fuck isn’t pro-marriage?) elected Democrats.

Endorsed by Moveon/Truthout?

280 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:06:49pm

re: #278 Jeff In Ohio

And by pro marriage, I’m assuming you mean anti gay marriage.

281 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:09:10pm

re: #279 researchok

Endorsed by Moveon/Truthout?

First of all, I have never heard of TruthOut before today.

Secondly, MoveOn isn’t the influential powerhouse that some seem to think it is. Most democrats I know stopped listening to them when they went full-bore BDS.

282 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:09:15pm

re: #279 researchok

Endorsed by Moveon/Truthout?

You’ve now gone in a circle, dude.

You’ve made a wide variety of assertions, none of them backed up with anything approaching evidence or argument.

You’ve said that being ‘pro-marriage’ is somehow a negative for a Democrat, while acknowledging that Obama, who won the Democratic primaries, is pro-marriage.

You’ve said that Democrats need Moveon and Truthout to win— and this belief is entirely based on faith. And you’ve said that they’d never endorse anyone pro-life.

The existence of ANY pro-life Democrats disproves your contention, since you’re saying BOTH that pro-life Democrats can’t get elected and that those not supported by Moveon can’t get elected.

This is getting really weird.

Can you please, please, please explain why ‘pro-marriage’ is a negative for Democrats? What does it even mean?

283 Interesting Times  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:09:37pm

re: #276 Fozzie Bear

Any so-called “apology” from Beck is worth less than a unit of Zimbabwean currency. And it’s fascinating how his defenders obsessively fixate on trivial bits of wording, ignoring the big picture completely.

Let’s see them defend the death threats against this woman who Beck viciously maligned:

Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) issued a written appeal to Fox News president Roger Ailes to help put a stop to the increasing threats against progressive Professor Frances Fox Piven, largely incited by Fox News host Glenn Beck.

284 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:09:39pm

re: #281 Fozzie Bear

First of all, I have never heard of TruthOut before today.

Secondly, MoveOn isn’t the influential powerhouse that some seem to think it is. Most democrats I know stopped listening to them when they went full-bore BDS.

I can’t even find a list of their 2010 endorsements. That’s how influential they are.

285 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:09:42pm

re: #241 Charles

He who laughs last, laughs best.

The stalkers may soon be getting more attention than they desire. The clever part of my plan was simple, take the politics out and expose their insanity using humor.
They have littered the internet with hundred of hilarious comment, it will be easy to expose the Tampa mama’s boy, who fancies himself as being an internet warrior on a divine mission.

286 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:10:40pm

re: #266 Buck

He explained it multiple times.

I have quoted that explanation many times in this thread. Here it is again:

With regards to the comment he made about the President being a racist:

“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

Why are you quoting something he said in April to defend what he said this week on the Today show?

Now you’ve given three defenses: (1) what he said in response to being asked directly about the racist comment proves the he wasn’t saying it was a joke (it doesn’t), (2) what he said later on proves that he wasn’t saying it was a joke (it doesn’t), (3) what he said months ago proves that he didn’t say this week that it was a joke (it doesn’t).

My whole point is that his “explanation,” such as it were, is inconsistent - and for that reason, is completeness lacking in credibility and/or accountability.

287 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:11:10pm

re: #276 Fozzie Bear

There is no obligation to forgive people when they apologize. We aren’t all catholic priests in the confession booth. It is often reasonable to dismiss an apology as bullshit, especially when the person in question REPEATEDLY says things very similar to the statement for which he was criticized initially, both before and after the “apology”.

Sure, but you don’t get to make up things. Beck NEVER said that his comment about the President was a joke. He said EXACTLY the opposite. He said that he apologized for it (many times). I couldn’t give a shit if you forgive him, I just think you should be honest about what he really said.

He says a lot of shit you can attack him for, but saying that he was joking about the President being a racist isn’t one of them. He has been clear that the comment shouldn’t have been said. He has been clear that he regrets it.


“It shouldn’t have been said; it was poorly said; I have a big fat mouth sometimes, and I say things, … and that’s not the way people should behave, and it was not accurate,”

And I say that anyone without sin should throw the first rock.

288 sizzleRI  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:11:13pm

Ooooh, they even have a website!

[Link: www.democratsforlife.org…]

289 Kragar  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:11:24pm

Ah, the joys of a new manager who doesn’t have a clue and is feeling overloaded. Glad I got my prescriptions refilled.

290 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:11:37pm

re: #284 Obdicut

I can’t even find a list of their 2010 endorsements. That’s how influential they are.

Moveon usually endorses in the primaries, not the main election.

291 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:12:26pm

re: #290 Jeff In Ohio

Moveon usually endorses in the primaries, not the main election.

I can’t find that list, either. It’s apparently state by state. So far, I found two candidates they endorsed who won, and two who lost.

They’re a powerhouse!

292 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:13:01pm

re: #276 Fozzie Bear

There is no obligation to forgive people when they apologize. We aren’t all catholic priests in the confession booth. It is often reasonable to dismiss an apology as bullshit, especially when the person in question REPEATEDLY says things very similar to the statement for which he was criticized initially, both before and after the “apology”.

I keep saying things that I don’t believe, and I will continue to say things that I don’t believe, but I’m sorry for that.

293 BishopX  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:13:10pm

re: #261 researchok

Can you please define what you mean by pro-marriage? specifically what legislative proposals does one have to support to be considered pro-marriage?

From where I sit “pro-marriage” is an anti gay dog whistle, I’m assuming you don’t mean that however, which leaves me confused about what you do mean.

294 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:13:47pm

re: #281 Fozzie Bear

First of all, I have never heard of TruthOut before today.

Secondly, MoveOn isn’t the influential powerhouse that some seem to think it is. Most democrats I know stopped listening to them when they went full-bore BDS.

They were pretty influential Recall the Petraeus/Betray us ad, among others.

At one time they bragged about the Democrat Party, ‘We bought them, we own them..’

See the wiki entry.

295 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:14:39pm

re: #2 Obdicut

If I’m reading the context right, he also named Van Jones as one of the radicals that would have to be shot in the head by Pelosi. And also Bill Ayers, his wife, etc.

I really don’t get the fascination with Van Jones. Is it his kick-ass name?

explosions and a cartwheeling Barracuda behind him as he leaps onto the runners of a waiting helicopter

296 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:14:57pm

re: #294 researchok

That brag wasn’t true, though

Can you please explain what being ‘pro-marriage’ means?

297 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:15:28pm

re: #287 Buck

He has been clear that he regrets it.

Was that before or after he explained that Jefferson and Adams also got into people’s faces?

298 Big Steve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:15:48pm

re: #255 Charles

I must be pretty smart, and diabolical too.

You forgot handsome, witty, and suave as well!

299 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:16:24pm

re: #286 Talking Point Detective


Now you’ve given three defenses: (1) what he said in response to being asked directly about the racist comment proves the he wasn’t saying it was a joke (it doesn’t), (2) what he said later on proves that he wasn’t saying it was a joke (it doesn’t), (3) what he said months ago proves that he didn’t say this week that it was a joke (it doesn’t).

I don’t understand ANY of that. I don’t recognize ANY of that as what I have been saying.

Let me summarize ONE MORE TIME:

IN THE TODAY SHOW INTERVIEW Beck did not say that calling the President was a joke. He specifically says that the comment about the President was something he apologizes for.

ANYONE WHO WATCHES the interview should see that clearly. He does NOT regret jokes, but does apologize for the comment he made (and the interviewer refers to).

300 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:16:47pm

re: #297 Talking Point Detective

He’s acting just like a Founding Father.

301 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:16:58pm

re: #293 BishopX

Can you please define what you mean by pro-marriage? specifically what legislative proposals does one have to support to be considered pro-marriage?

From where I sit “pro-marriage” is an anti gay dog whistle, I’m assuming you don’t mean that however, which leaves me confused about what you do mean.

Moynihan was talking about children out of wedlock, which he saw as devastating to the African American community. He decried the lack of fathers, over reliance on welfare, etc.

He saw marriage as a part of the remedy.

He cited the numbers a lot- children from stable, two parent homes were more likely to be educated, escape poverty, etc.

His pro marriage stance had nothing to do with gay marriage.

302 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:17:35pm

re: #295 WindUpBird

explosions and a cartwheeling Barracuda behind him as he leaps onto the runners of a waiting helicopter

LOL
this thread is in dire need of relief, made that visual twice as funny
chuckle chuckle oooffa

303 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:17:36pm

re: #299 Buck

I’m just so glad we have someone who will unironically be Glenn Beck’s advocate on this thread

Seems like a very invigorating pasttime :D

304 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:18:04pm

re: #302 albusteve

LOL
this thread is in dire need of relief, made that visual twice as funny
chuckle chuckle oooffa

I literally just woke up :D

305 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:18:09pm

I would also like to know what “pro-marriage” means. I have yet to see a single candidate in any election ever in this country that is “anti-marriage”. So I am forced to assume that this is a reference to gay marriage, a practice which, if you endorse its legality, most certainly puts you in a position of being pro-marriage, by definition.

I would even go so far as to argue that advocating the legality of gay marriage is about as pro-marriage as you can get, far more so than any position characterized by a desire to prevent gays from marrying, once again, by definition.

306 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:18:36pm

re: #287 Buck

Buck - do you really believe that he is contrite? That he is sorry about saying things that he doesn’t believe are true?

Do you really believe that he won’t continue to say things that he doesn’t believe are true?

It’s clear that he won’t quit making “jokes” like saying things like he wants to beat Rangel with a shovel - because he’s just acting like Jon Stewart or the Simpsons when he does that - but do you really think that he is “apologizing,” that he’s “sorry?”

Really?

307 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:18:38pm

re: #301 researchok

What Democrats can you cite that have been hurt by a ‘pro-marriage’ position?

308 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:18:57pm

re: #296 Obdicut

That brag wasn’t true, though

Can you please explain what being ‘pro-marriage’ means?

Pro marriage means in defense of the institution of marriage.

As I have made clear on many occasions, I am all for gay marriage, if that is what you wanted to know.

309 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:19:19pm

re: #297 Talking Point Detective

Was that before or after he explained that Jefferson and Adams also got into people’s faces?

And apparently believed in government run health care.

(heads explode)

[Link: voices.washingtonpost.com…]

310 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:19:45pm

re: #308 researchok

I know you’re for gay marriage. I’m really confused as to what antipathy you see for the institution of marriage among democrats. Because it really doesn’t exist.

311 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:19:49pm

re: #303 WindUpBird

I’m just so glad we have someone who will unironically be Glenn Beck’s advocate on this thread

Seems like a very invigorating pasttime :D

maybe for the participants…it’s not about Beck, but you know that right?…if it is, he shirley has some powerful influence, especially amongst his haters….fascinating

312 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:19:49pm

re: #308 researchok

Pro marriage means in defense of the institution of marriage.

As I have made clear on many occasions, I am all for gay marriage, if that is what you wanted to know.

Who is attacking the institution of marriage?

313 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:19:51pm

re: #305 Fozzie Bear

Pro Marriage is what you get when you’ve been divorced twice, and you’re on your third wife, and she’s on her third husband, and both of you are like “okay, we think we have this shit down now”

314 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:19:59pm

re: #312 Fozzie Bear

Who is attacking the institution of marriage?

(such that it needs defending)

315 zora  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:20:08pm

re: #261 researchok

Safe bet.

A strong pro marriage, pro life Dem moderate is a likely as CPAC endorsing a gay, pro choice, pro gun control conservative.

have you heard of blue dogs?

316 webevintage  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:20:30pm

re: #274 Buck

NO, he is specific that he will not apologize for the jokes.

He NEVER said that his comment about the President being a racist was a joke. The jokes are just jokes. The comment about the President he apologizes for.

yes yes, if you call anything a joke then you don’t have to apologize…you know my kid tried that a few times when he was like 5 or 6 and it did not work for him either.
You can’t say something shitty and then turn around and go “dude, I was just kidding when I said someone should shoot you in the head”.
Grow up Glenn and take responsibility for the crap you say…own it like a true comedian does…tell people to fuck off if they don’t like it, but at least stop acting like a weasel.

317 Ghost of Sionainn  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:21:33pm
318 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:21:48pm

re: #307 Obdicut

What Democrats can you cite that have been hurt by a ‘pro-marriage’ position?

I don’t know.

Along the same lines, how many pro life, anti abortion candidates have moveon/truthout endorsed?

I don’y suspect very many.

319 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:21:50pm

re: #304 WindUpBird

I literally just woke up :D

you know you’re good when you can post in your sleep

320 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:21:56pm

I shot a hooker in the face with a shotgun, but don’t worry guys, I totally apologized, so its cool.

321 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:22:04pm

re: #314 Fozzie Bear

(such that it needs defending)

No one I know.

322 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:22:32pm

re: #299 Buck

I don’t understand ANY of that. I don’t recognize ANY of that as what I have been saying.

Let me summarize ONE MORE TIME:

IN THE TODAY SHOW INTERVIEW Beck did not say that calling the President was a joke. He specifically says that the comment about the President was something he apologizes for.

Buck - how you can say that is beyond me. But you’re saying it and sticking to it. So be it.

Do you really think he was “sorry” for saying:

I’m saying he has a problem, this guy is, I believe, a racist.

Really?

323 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:22:38pm

re: #305 Fozzie Bear

I would also like to know what “pro-marriage” means. I have yet to see a single candidate in any election ever in this country that is “anti-marriage”. So I am forced to assume that this is a reference to gay marriage, a practice which, if you endorse its legality, most certainly puts you in a position of being pro-marriage, by definition.

I would even go so far as to argue that advocating the legality of gay marriage is about as pro-marriage as you can get, far more so than any position characterized by a desire to prevent gays from marrying, once again, by definition.

For some, (not me) Marriage is defined as “something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

So if you are pro marriage, then you support the “Defense of Marriage Act” (which I do not)

324 webevintage  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:23:21pm

Been away from the computer all day, but I see that bastard Randall Terry is going to primary Obama as a, get this, “theocentrist libertarian”….hahahahahahahaha….

325 BishopX  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:23:52pm

re: #301 researchok

Moynihan was talking about children out of wedlock, which he saw as devastating to the African American community. He decried the lack of fathers, over reliance on welfare, etc.

He saw marriage as a part of the remedy.

He cited the numbers a lot- children from stable, two parent homes were more likely to be educated, escape poverty, etc.

His pro marriage stance had nothing to do with gay marriage.

Okay, so what does this mean policy wise? Weakening divorce laws? Penalizing unwed mothers? Mandatory paternity testing?

I’m all for people having relatively stable relationships, but in most cases of the cases I can think of the legislative remedy is worse than the disease.

Also, one of the primary causes of single caregiver families among African-Americans is the prison time, mostly due to fucked up drugged laws.

326 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:24:09pm

re: #317 Sionainn

20 Awesome Pro-life Democrats and 2 Tremendous Phonies

and there it is…nice snag

327 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:24:30pm
328 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:24:31pm

re: #318 researchok

I don’t know.

Along the same lines, how many pro life, anti abortion candidates have moveon/truthout endorsed?

I don’y suspect very many.

Those aren’t the same lines though.

You made the claim that being ‘pro-marriage’ was harmful to Democrat’s chances of getting elected.

You have no support for this position whatsoever.

I would think that zero anti-abortion candidates have been endorsed by Moveon. I fail to see the relevance to this to anything whatsoever, since Moynihan was pro-choice, not anti-abortion.

329 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:24:42pm

re: #323 Buck

Well, that’s an explicitly religious definition, and therefore, not a valid basis for legislating. But hey, that never stopped the GOP before.

330 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:24:49pm

re: #311 albusteve

maybe for the participants…it’s not about Beck, but you know that right?…if it is, he shirley has some powerful influence, especially amongst his haters…fascinating

yeah I know, beck’s sort of the shiniest bauble over in the land of the flying logos. I used to think he was influencing opinion more than not, I’m starting to believe it’s the other way, the viewership just already was there with this stuff and he just happened to be the broadcasting pro (morning zoo talker, come on) who saw the opportunity

I tell ya, after I quit my job and stopped watching cable news, it’s nice, I don’t feel like I’m missing anything, If someone says something bonkers, I’ll learn about it here!

331 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:26:11pm

re: #325 BishopX

Okay, so what does this mean policy wise? Weakening divorce laws? Penalizing unwed mothers? Mandatory paternity testing?

I’m all for people having relatively stable relationships, but in most cases of the cases I can think of the legislative remedy is worse than the disease.

Also, one of the primary causes of single caregiver families among African-Americans is the prison time, mostly due to fucked up drugged laws.

I think Moynihan wanted to push for culture change more than anything else. I don’t believe he wanted to burden anyone with excessive (and onerous) legislation.

332 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:26:23pm

re: #327 researchok

Good catch.

See this: Republican Majority for Choice

Is there a single national GOP name on that website?

333 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:26:47pm

re: #319 albusteve

you know you’re good when you can post in your sleep

I got friends who do this in bed, I find that too weird :D they’re all with their iPads and their smart phones under the covers

Not me, I have a big ugly loud computer that goes fast that I sit at

334 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:27:52pm

re: #333 WindUpBird

I got friends who do this in bed, I find that too weird :D they’re all with their iPads and their smart phones under the covers

The trifecta!

335 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:27:56pm

re: #328 Obdicut

Those aren’t the same lines though.

You made the claim that being ‘pro-marriage’ was harmful to Democrat’s chances of getting elected.

You have no support for this position whatsoever.

I would think that zero anti-abortion candidates have been endorsed by Moveon. I fail to see the relevance to this to anything whatsoever, since Moynihan was pro-choice, not anti-abortion.

No, I firstt made the claim re moveon/truthout.

I apologize if in follow up I didn’t make that distinction.

336 webevintage  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:27:58pm

re: #283 publicityStunted

Any so-called “apology” from Beck is worth less than a unit of Zimbabwean currency. And it’s fascinating how his defenders obsessively fixate on trivial bits of wording, ignoring the big picture completely.

Let’s see them defend the death threats against this woman who Beck viciously maligned:

Jesus, that poor woman.
This is the shit Beck needs to apologize for…..

337 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:28:25pm

re: #323 Buck

For some, (not me) Marriage is defined as “something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

So if you are pro marriage, then you support the “Defense of Marriage Act” (which I do not)

Are you aware that countries and states with same-sex marriage have lower divorce rates?

It’s more a correlation than a proven causation at this point - but it is certainly interesting that places that are more “concerned” about “protecting” one man and one woman marriages also have higher divorce rates, no?

338 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:28:46pm

re: #322 Talking Point Detective

Buck - how you can say that is beyond me. But you’re saying it and sticking to it. So be it.

Do you really think he was “sorry” for saying:

Really?

Yes I think he is, I believe he regrets it, and he has said so MANY times.

I think it was unscripted, and not fully thought out.

I think he was really meaning that the Rev Wright was a racist. That was really the topic, and I think the pother thing slipped out.

I don’t agree with everything this guy says, or defend everything he says or does.

Everyone one has said things they regret later. If they apologize, I feel it is correct to accept that and move on.

You can attack them for the other things they say, you don’t have to use the stuff they admit were a mistake and apologized for.

339 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:29:36pm

re: #330 WindUpBird

yeah I know, beck’s sort of the shiniest bauble over in the land of the flying logos. I used to think he was influencing opinion more than not, I’m starting to believe it’s the other way, the viewership just already was there with this stuff and he just happened to be the broadcasting pro (morning zoo talker, come on) who saw the opportunity

I tell ya, after I quit my job and stopped watching cable news, it’s nice, I don’t feel like I’m missing anything, If someone says something bonkers, I’ll learn about it here!


yes you will, every little shred and whisper…when you don’t track it every hour, it seems a lot less significant…too bad people will post for hours whether Beck apologized or not…it’s outside my realm of interest, considering all the other far more important events goin down

340 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:30:01pm

re: #338 Buck

Did he ever apologize for his Scary Democratic Jews Run Everything Be Afraid!!! schtick? :D

341 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:31:03pm

re: #328 Obdicut

Those aren’t the same lines though.

You made the claim that being ‘pro-marriage’ was harmful to Democrat’s chances of getting elected.

You have no support for this position whatsoever.

I would think that zero anti-abortion candidates have been endorsed by Moveon. I fail to see the relevance to this to anything whatsoever, since Moynihan was pro-choice, not anti-abortion.

Actually,

In the mid-1990s, Moynihan was one of the Democrats to support the ban on the procedure known as partial-birth abortion. He said of the procedure: “I think this is just too close to infanticide. A child has been born and it has exited the uterus. What on Earth is this procedure?” Earlier in his career in the Senate, Moynihan had expressed his annoyance with the adamantly pro-choice interest groups petitioning him and others on the issue. He challenged them saying, “you women are ruining the Democratic Party with your insistence on abortion.”[18][19]

342 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:32:06pm

re: #333 WindUpBird

I got friends who do this in bed, I find that too weird :D they’re all with their iPads and their smart phones under the covers

Not me, I have a big ugly loud computer that goes fast that I sit at

alas, my Com Central is hidden in a secure corner of my bunkhouse…but I have to hop over there on one leg, so that blows my cover right there

343 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:32:09pm

re: #335 researchok

No, I firstt made the claim re moveon/truthout.

I apologize if in follow up I didn’t make that distinction.

I asked why you thought Moniyhan couldn’t get elected today.

You said:

His defense of marriage in minority communities, his uneasiness with abortion, for starters.

You have provided absolutely nothing to show that his ‘defense of marriage’ would be harmful to him. And he was pro-choice, not pro-life. He was ‘uneasy’ with abortion, but still pro-choice.

Your assertions about the importance of Moveon and Truthout are likewise not supported in the least by any actual proof. In my brief research, I’ve found an equal number of candidates enorsed in primaries by Moveon who lost and who won. So, that contention is simply wrong.

Your contention that Moynihan could not be elected today is an unsupported one.

344 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:32:49pm

re: #329 Fozzie Bear

Well, that’s an explicitly religious definition, and therefore, not a valid basis for legislating. But hey, that never stopped the GOP before.

Actually that is from what Obama said was his opinion about marriage.

345 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:33:00pm

It’s really immaterial to me whether Glenn Beck has made a “joke” or a “mistake”, or has apologized for such.

The rock bottom truth of the thing is that he promotes John Birch Society brand conspiracy theories and ideologies, which should be more than enough for any rational human being to dismiss him as a dishonest shit-heel.

346 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:33:00pm

re: #338 Buck

I have stayed out of this argument, but I have to say that I do not believe that anything about GB is unscripted. When something is as valuable as his show, and his entire livelihood and fortune depend on it, you can be sure that while he may appear impromptu at times, every major talking point he covers has been well-rehearsed. Calling POTUS a racist is a pretty major point. The entire scenario was well-thought through, and played out according to time-honoured tradition: Say something outrageous, then apologize, knowing full well that what has been said cannot be made unsaid, and that the dog whistle will be heard.

347 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:33:15pm

re: #341 researchok

So what? He was pro-choice. he was against third-trimester abortions. These are not opposed. He supported abortion rights for everything other than third-trimester abortions. That is being pro-choice.

348 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:33:20pm

re: #340 WindUpBird

Did he ever apologize for his Scary Democratic Jews Run Everything Be Afraid!!! schtick? :D

Nope, so if you can find that quote, you can go to town.

349 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:33:21pm

A comment from the reddit thread on the “shoot them in the head” clip:

Hi America

Why does one of your most popular TV personalities have a swastika displayed behind him?

Sincerely
Other countries

Heh.

350 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:34:16pm

re: #341 researchok

Being prochoice is not an absolutist position.

351 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:34:50pm

re: #344 Buck

Actually that is from what Obama said was his opinion about marriage.

Did Obama vote for, or have any part in writing the DOMA? (The answer is no)

352 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:35:09pm

re: #350 Jeff In Ohio

At least for some, and apparently Moynihan.

353 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:35:47pm

re: #339 albusteve


yes you will, every little shred and whisper…when you don’t track it every hour, it seems a lot less significant…too bad people will post for hours whether Beck apologized or not…it’s outside my realm of interest, considering all the other far more important events goin down

I gotta say I agree with this *_* Beck is frustrating almost to the point where I have to make myself not care, I just say ‘all right, so he’s sticking around, that’s where we’re at”

I’m always really interested in think tanks, power brokers shaping opinion and pushing it to blogs/news/etc

354 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:35:56pm

re: #343 Obdicut

I asked why you thought Moniyhan couldn’t get elected today.

You said:

You have provided absolutely nothing to show that his ‘defense of marriage’ would be harmful to him. And he was pro-choice, not pro-life. He was ‘uneasy’ with abortion, but still pro-choice.

Your assertions about the importance of Moveon and Truthout are likewise not supported in the least by any actual proof. In my brief research, I’ve found an equal number of candidates enorsed in primaries by Moveon who lost and who won. So, that contention is simply wrong.

Your contention that Moynihan could not be elected today is an unsupported one.

See above, Moynihan on abortion. Not as you stated.

And yes, since Moynihan is dead we will never know if he would be elected nowadays. Nor do we know if he would be endorsed by Moveon/Truthout despite his stated beliefs.

355 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:36:40pm

re: #350 Jeff In Ohio

Being prochoice is not an absolutist position.

Not me. I think it should be legal right up until the 54th trimester. After that, they just run too fast to abort easily.

356 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:36:48pm

re: #348 Buck

Nope, so if you can find that quote, you can go to town.

Quote? it was like a whole produced segment with graphics and everything! :D

complete with SCARY FOGGY BLACK AND WHITE DISSOLVES OF A STAR OF DAVID

357 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:37:06pm

re: #355 Fozzie Bear

Not me. I think it should be legal right up until the 54th trimester. After that, they just run too fast to abort easily.

ahahahahahahahahah

358 Usually refered to as anyways  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:37:48pm

Haven’t seen this posted:

Wounded US congresswoman leaves hospital

US Representative Gabrielle Giffords has left the Arizona hospital where she has remained since being shot in the head on January 8, and began her trip to a Texas medical facility to continue her recovery.

A crowd of about 80 well-wishers gathered on a street corner near the entrance to Tucson’s University Medical Centre, one holding a “Giffords for Congress” campaign sign and another holding an American flag.

The congresswoman, 40, was taken by ambulance at the head of a motorcade through town en route to an Air Force base.

359 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:37:54pm

re: #347 Obdicut

So what? He was pro-choice. he was against third-trimester abortions. These are not opposed. He supported abortion rights for everything other than third-trimester abortions. That is being pro-choice.

Yes, a perfect candidate for moveon/truthout.
/

360 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:38:07pm

re: #356 WindUpBird

Quote? it was like a whole produced segment with graphics and everything! :D

complete with SCARY FOGGY BLACK AND WHITE DISSOLVES OF A STAR OF DAVID

The Soros episode.

361 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:38:12pm

re: #355 Fozzie Bear

BAD FOZZIE! No cake for you.
:P

362 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:38:23pm

re: #338 Buck

Yes I think he is, I believe he regrets it, and he has said so MANY times.

I think it was unscripted, and not fully thought out.

I think he was really meaning that the Rev Wright was a racist. That was really the topic, and I think the pother thing slipped out.

I don’t agree with everything this guy says, or defend everything he says or does.

Everyone one has said things they regret later. If they apologize, I feel it is correct to accept that and move on.

You can attack them for the other things they say, you don’t have to use the stuff they admit were a mistake and apologized for.

You think that when Beck said that Obama is, he believes, a racist, that Obama has a seated hatred of white people, he was actually referring to Wright?

Even though he never provided that as an explanation?

Ok. You’re entitled. Here’s what I think:

He doesn’t really believe that Obama is a racist. He said he believes that because he likes to make inflammatory statements. He knows that the argument attending Wright’s church makes Obama a racist is bogus. But he deliberately fanned the flames of that argument for months, because he likes to make inflammatory statements.

I’m not sure why he likes to make inflammatory statements. Maybe it’s because he really is an extremist ideologue, or maybe he does it because it furthers his career. I don’t know how anyone could know the real answer.

But he strikes me as a completely insincere person, who for whatever reason, has NO PROBLEM saying shit on the are that he doesn’t believe.

And the fact that he provides numerous “explanations” for his comments, even as he justifies them as “jokes” or doing as the founding fathers did, only reinforces my believe that he is a completely insincere person. And it astounds me that anyone believes that he is sincere.

He will continue to make inappropriate “jokes,” and he will continue to make statements that he doesn’t believe. The man is completely insincere in his apologies and in his “explanations.”

363 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:38:40pm

re: #354 researchok

See above, Moynihan on abortion. Not as you stated.

He supported the right of women to get abortions. He objected to it in one specific circumstance.

That is being pro-choice, not anti-abortion. In fact, Cardinal O’Conner specifically objected to Notre Dame giving him an award due to his support of abortion.

[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

It is true that you crated an impossible-to-test scenario. However, as it has already been proved that there are actual pro-life Democrats who have been elected, your contention is already disproved.

You have also failed to show, at all, in the least, any Democrat that has been harmed by a ‘pro-marriage’ stance.

364 zora  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:39:00pm

re: #279 researchok

Endorsed by Moveon/Truthout?

these organizations are not the standard bearers nor kingmakers of the democratic party.

365 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:39:00pm

re: #355 Fozzie Bear

LOL, fetus in a jar back at ya.

366 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:39:19pm

re: #359 researchok

Yes, a perfect candidate for moveon/truthout.
/

If I was arguing he was a perfect candidate for Moveon, that statement would be relevant.

367 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:39:35pm

re: #351 Fozzie Bear

Did Obama vote for, or have any part in writing the DOMA? (The answer is no)

Correct. It was signed into law by President Clinton.

368 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:39:43pm

re: #360 imp_62

The Soros episode.

remember when Beck said Soros was shipping jews to concentration camps?

Ahhhh memories

369 Ghost of Sionainn  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:40:02pm

re: #344 Buck

Actually that is from what Obama said was his opinion about marriage.

Is Obama trying to legislate his opinion regarding this?

370 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:40:06pm

I think if Beck came out and said “Jews are bad evil people as a group”, he would still have plenty of defenders. It scares the shit out of me, because he has come so fucking close to that position. Yet, he still has defenders.

371 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:40:34pm

re: #367 Buck

is this where you try and tell me the GOP is a better advocate for gay people?

PLEASE SAY YES

372 wrenchwench  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:40:35pm

I’ve had long hair, down to my waist, about half my life. (I have four foot-long braids saved from haircuts.) So I have a lot of “untangling” experience.

No matter how large the snarl, if you patiently work it out, almost always at the center is a little piece of fluff that the snarl formed around, like a pearl around a grain of sand.

That piece of fluff, to me, represents our Buck.

373 webevintage  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:40:55pm

I missed this yesterday…..If you find polls interesting here is a new one from the NYTs.
[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

Full Poll and information:
[Link: documents.nytimes.com…]

374 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:41:10pm

re: #359 researchok

Yes, a perfect candidate for moveon/truthout.
/

I will say this- I’m impressed with your defense of Moynihan, given many of his beliefs, from welfare reform, to encouraging marriage and working to cross the aisle with political opponents, given your previous remarks regarding compromise.

375 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:41:26pm

Going off about Moveon is so ten years ago :D

376 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:41:41pm
377 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:42:31pm

re: #376 Killgore Trout

Open the pod bay doors, Hal

LOL.

What are they staring into? What is that gigantic machine?

378 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:42:44pm

re: #376 Killgore Trout

Open the pod bay doors, Hal

DON”T GO TO THE LIGHT! DON’T GO TO THE LIGHT!

379 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:42:57pm

re: #370 Fozzie Bear

I think if Beck came out and said “Jews are bad evil people as a group”, he would still have plenty of defenders. It scares the shit out of me, because he has come so fucking close to that position. Yet, he still has defenders.

Stupid is a commodity given out by God in great abundance.

-My grandfather

380 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:43:01pm

re: #359 researchok

Yes, a perfect candidate for moveon/truthout.
/

You keep saying that Move on and Truth out are the equivalent of the Democratic base.

Do you have any proof for this statement?

381 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:43:01pm

I’m sorry Dave, I can’t do that right now.

382 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:43:17pm

re: #377 Fozzie Bear

LOL.

What are they staring into? What is that gigantic machine?

a jet engine I think

383 Jeff In Ohio  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:43:19pm

re: #376 Killgore Trout

That suit looks like it came off the rack.

384 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:43:36pm

re: #377 Fozzie Bear

LOL.

What are they staring into? What is that gigantic machine?

Image: tardis1.jpg

385 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:43:59pm

re: #375 WindUpBird

Going off about Moveon is so ten years ago :D

Who are the powerhouse progressive/dem organizations today?

386 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:44:06pm

re: #374 researchok

Again: Your contention that encouraging marriage is somehow a negative amongst Democrats is unsupported, and I believe has no validity whatsoever. I really wish you’d stop saying it, or support it.

Working across the aisle when the other side of the aisle is sane and reasonable: great.

Working across the aisle when the other side of the aisle is batshit crazy: useless, but luckily, also pretty much impossible.

387 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:44:07pm

re: #382 albusteve

a jet engine I think

It looks like the worlds highest-wattage clothes dryer.

388 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:45:04pm

re: #383 Jeff In Ohio

That suit looks like it came off the rack.

so does the person wearing it

389 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:45:12pm

re: #385 researchok

Who are the powerhouse progressive/dem organizations today?

It’s so fragmented now, it would be hard to identify any one that has huge influence.

390 garhighway  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:45:23pm

re: #136 Aceofwhat?

i read Egan’s piece…it was good.

and do remember - a prefatory clause does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause.

Nor do you read the prefatory clause out of existence as the 5 did.

391 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:45:28pm

re: #385 researchok

Who are the powerhouse progressive/dem organizations today?

Do we have any? Democratic organizations tend to be split up by special interest.

392 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:45:38pm

re: #385 researchok

Who are the powerhouse progressive/dem organizations today?

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.

393 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:45:51pm

re: #380 jamesfirecat

You keep saying that Move on and Truth out are the equivalent of the Democratic base.

Do you have any proof for this statement?

No, I did not say that.

There are plenty of dems who aligned themselves with that group just as there are lots of GOP’s who align with the TP.

394 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:46:11pm

re: #389 Fozzie Bear

It’s so fragmented now, it would be hard to identify any one that has huge influence.

Trying to look at Dems by Republican standards, it doesn’t work because THEY’RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PARTIES

395 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:46:59pm

re: #393 researchok

No, I did not say that.

There are plenty of dems who aligned themselves with that group just as there are lots of GOP’s who align with the TP.

But if a democrat can get elected without their support why must we find a pro life candidate who they support to prove the modern Democrat party is open to pro-life politicians?

396 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:47:01pm

re: #389 Fozzie Bear

It’s so fragmented now, it would be hard to identify any one that has huge influence.

I’d have to agree with that (save for the getting out the vote efforts, though by now they may have been surpassed by the unions).

397 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:47:37pm

re: #394 WindUpBird

Trying to look at Dems by Republican standards, it doesn’t work because THEY’RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PARTIES

Yep. Not just different positions on issues, but a totally different way of operating in general. The left is a million loosely-affiliated fragments right now. I couldn’t name a single PAC or organization (apart from the DNC itself) without which the DNC would crumble.

398 shutdown  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:48:21pm

re: #397 Fozzie Bear

Yep. Not just different positions on issues, but a totally different way of operating in general. The left is a million loosely-affiliated fragments right now. I couldn’t name a single PAC or organization (apart from the DNC itself) without which the DNC would crumble.

The Tea Party.

399 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:48:21pm

re: #394 WindUpBird

Trying to look at Dems by Republican standards, it doesn’t work because THEY’RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PARTIES

400 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:48:26pm

re: #395 jamesfirecat

But if a democrat can get elected without their support why must we find a pro life candidate who they support to prove the modern Democrat party is open to pro-life politicians?

yeah, a strong pro-life position for a democrat usually means a democrat being elected in a red state or a conservative district or a traditional GOP district

Politics is local!

401 albusteve  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:48:31pm

re: #394 WindUpBird

Trying to look at Dems by Republican standards, it doesn’t work because THEY’RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PARTIES


one just rips you off, the other rips you off ‘for your own good’

402 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:49:30pm

re: #395 jamesfirecat

But if a democrat can get elected without their support why must we find a pro life candidate who they support to prove the modern Democrat party is open to pro-life politicians?

This conversation has moved off into too many directions (unfortunately).

My contention was (and remains) that Moynihan would have a tough time getting elected today- as would O’Neill, Jackson, Humphrey, etc.

Very few classical liberals left.

403 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:50:01pm

re: #401 albusteve

one just rips you off, the other rips you off ‘for your own good’

My choice currently is between being pissed off and being pissed on :D

404 recusancy  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:50:04pm

re: #219 researchok

How many Dem candidates who won without their endorsement?

I don’t know.

LOLz

405 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:50:07pm

re: #338 Buck

BTW, Buck. Maybe this will help you get where I’m coming from.

I had the same assessment of Clinton. Almost all politicians are insincere to at least some degree. Clinton seemed to me to be over-the-top smarmy. I never understood how anyone could find Clinton sincere either.

What I’m saying here is that Beck’s “explanations” and “apologies” rank in exactly the same spot on my smell test as Clinton’s:

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is…”

406 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:50:27pm

re: #404 recusancy

LOLz

Do you know?

407 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:50:35pm

re: #405 Talking Point Detective

BTW, Buck. Maybe this will help you get where I’m coming from.

I had the same assessment of Clinton. Almost all politicians are insincere to at least some degree. Clinton seemed to me to be over-the-top smarmy. I never understood how anyone could find Clinton sincere either.

What I’m saying here is that Beck’s “explanations” and “apologies” rank in exactly the same spot on my smell test as Clinton’s:

Bill Clinton is the Steve Jobs of democrats, hahah

408 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:50:52pm

re: #370 Fozzie Bear

I think if Beck came out and said “Jews are bad evil people as a group”, he would still have plenty of defenders. It scares the shit out of me, because he has come so fucking close to that position. Yet, he still has defenders.

I see a lot more ACTUAL anti-semitism on Huff Po, The Guardian and DKOS than I do on Becks show or website Blaze.

409 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:51:17pm

re: #402 researchok

This conversation has moved off into too many directions (unfortunately).

My contention was (and remains) that Moynihan would have a tough time getting elected today- as would O’Neill, Jackson, Humphrey, etc.

Very few classical liberals left.

And you still have not supported this position at all.

410 recusancy  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:52:35pm

re: #351 Fozzie Bear

Did Obama vote for, or have any part in writing the DOMA? (The answer is no)

Obama campaigned against DOMA. It was one of the few places during the primary where he and Hillary differed on an actual policy.

411 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:52:37pm

re: #408 Buck

I see a lot more ACTUAL anti-semitism on Huff Po, The Guardian and DKOS than I do on Becks show or website Blaze.

What about the multitude of anti-semitic books and articles that Beck quotes from and sources and recommends, and his singling out eight Jews out of a total of nine people as ‘villains’?

412 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:52:51pm

re: #408 Buck

I see a lot more ACTUAL anti-semitism on Huff Po, The Guardian and DKOS than I do on Becks show or website Blaze.

Is this sorta like how I can claim New York is more anti-semitic than me, because I can find some skinheads in NYC?

You crack me up, dude

413 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:53:24pm

re: #402 researchok

This conversation has moved off into too many directions (unfortunately).

My contention was (and remains) that Moynihan would have a tough time getting elected today- as would O’Neill, Jackson, Humphrey, etc.

Very few classical liberals left.

I’d argue that this is because what it means to be a liberal is always changing.

In the 40’s it was liberal to say that blacks should be allowed to drive tanks so long as they were kept segregated from the rest of the army with a white officer in command of the unit at the top.

In the 60’s it was progressive to say that Black’s deserved to be treated the same as whites.

In the 90’s it was liberal to say that gays should be allowed to serve so long as they kept their sexual preference quiet.

If you ask “why aren’t there any more liberals like there were back in the old days” your answer is because the positions they held are probably now considered conservative/quaint/openly out dated…

414 bratwurst  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:53:25pm

re: #411 Obdicut

What about the multitude of anti-semitic books and articles that Beck quotes from and sources and recommends, and his singling out eight Jews out of a total of nine people as ‘villains’?

On Planet Buck these are merely coincidences.

415 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:53:56pm

re: #408 Buck

I see a lot more ACTUAL anti-semitism on Huff Po, The Guardian and DKOS than I do on Becks show or website Blaze.

The stuff in the comments != the content itself.

416 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:54:16pm

re: #413 jamesfirecat

advancing social policy takes lots of time, money, power, and will, and it moves slowly

417 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:54:44pm

re: #415 Fozzie Bear

The stuff in the comments != the content itself.

A WEBSITE WITH A MILLION PARTICIPANTS EACH HOUR IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS A TV SHOW

418 jamesfirecat  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:55:05pm

re: #416 WindUpBird

advancing social policy takes lots of time, money, power, and will, and it moves slowly

None the less… it moves.

419 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:55:05pm

re: #413 jamesfirecat

I’d argue that this is because what it means to be a liberal is always changing.

In the 40’s it was liberal to say that blacks should be allowed to drive tanks so long as they were kept segregated from the rest of the army with a white officer in command of the unit at the top.

In the 60’s it was progressive to say that Black’s deserved to be treated the same as whites.

In the 90’s it was liberal to say that gays should be allowed to serve so long as they kept their sexual preference quiet.

If you ask “why aren’t there any more liberals like there were back in the old days” your answer is because the positions they held are probably now considered conservative/quaint/openly out dated…

And because we are smart enough to take a quarter of a loaf when that’s all we can get.

420 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:55:34pm

re: #419 Decatur Deb

And because we are smart enough to take a quarter of a loaf when that’s all we can get.

eggggzactly

421 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:56:43pm

re: #405 Talking Point Detective

BTW, Buck. Maybe this will help you get where I’m coming from.

I had the same assessment of Clinton. Almost all politicians are insincere to at least some degree. Clinton seemed to me to be over-the-top smarmy. I never understood how anyone could find Clinton sincere either.

What I’m saying here is that Beck’s “explanations” and “apologies” rank in exactly the same spot on my smell test as Clinton’s:

AND ALL OF THAT IS FINE BY ME. not that you need my approval, but it has NOTHING to do with what we are talking about. You can feel that beck is the Devil himself, and if you put it that way, I could care less.

However when you paraphrase his comment, and it no longer has the original meaning, then I call bullshit.

You made the statement that “He was on the Today show the other day saying that calling Obama (a racist) was a “joke,” just like the Simpsons or John Stewart.”

I say that it is clear from watching the entire clip, that he did not say that.

You can smell test his actual comment, but it is wrong to make up comments. You don’t have to. You can find real comments that you don’t like. Attack and smell them.

422 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:56:54pm

re: #342 albusteve

alas, my Com Central is hidden in a secure corner of my bunkhouse…but I have to hop over there on one leg, so that blows my cover right there

{steve}
Good to see you’re able to have a sense of humor.

423 recusancy  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:56:57pm

re: #385 researchok

Who are the powerhouse progressive/dem organizations today?

There kind of aren’t any. The unions and CAP and Obama. But dems win with and without their endorsement all the time. There’s no centralized power source on the left.

424 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:57:10pm

re: #351 Fozzie Bear

Did Obama vote for, or have any part in writing the DOMA? (The answer is no)

President Obama, in a recent interview in The Advocate, on DOMA:

… Congress is a complicated place with 535 people that you have to deal with in order to get anything done. And my belief was when I first came in, and it continues to be, that by getting “don’t ask, don’t tell” done, we sent a clear message about the direction, the trajectory of this country in favor of equality for LGBT persons. The next step I think would be legislatively to look at issues like DOMA and ENDA. …

So what I’m saying is that we’re probably not going — realistically, we’re probably not going to get those done in the next two years unless we see a substantial shift in attitudes within the Republican caucus.

As I said, though, that outside of legislative circles, attitudes are changing rapidly. They’re changing in our culture. They’re changing in our workplaces. One of the most important things I can do as president is to continually speak out about why it’s important to treat everyone as our brothers and sisters, as fellow Americans, as citizens.

And looking for constant opportunities to do that I think is going to be critically important because that helps set the tone and changes the ground beneath the feet of legislators so that they start feeling like, gosh, maybe we are behind the times here and we need to start moving forward. And so you chip away at these attitudes. It also continues to require effective advocacy from groups on the outside.

So I guess my general answer to your question is when it comes to legislation, it took us two years to get “don’t ask, don’t tell” done. I know that there are a whole bunch of folks who thought we could have gotten it done in two months. There were people who thought with a stroke of a pen it could get done. That, in fact, was not the case. But it got done.

And I’m confident that these other issues will get done. But what they require is a systematic strategy and constant pressure and a continuing change in attitudes. And as I said, there are things that we can continue to do administratively that I think will send a message that the federal government, as an employer, is going to constantly look for opportunities to make sure that we’re eliminating discrimination.

What about not defending DOMA?
As I said before, I have a whole bunch of really smart lawyers who are looking at a whole range of options. My preference wherever possible is to get things done legislatively because I think it — it gains a legitimacy, even among people who don’t like the change, that is valuable.

So with “don’t ask, don’t tell,” I have such great confidence in the effective implementation of this law because it was repealed. We would have gotten to the same place if the court order had made it happen, but I think it would have engendered resistance. So I’m always looking for a way to get it done, if possible, through our elected representatives. That may not be possible in DOMA’s case. That’s something that I think we have to strategize on over the next several months.

425 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:57:26pm

re: #423 recusancy

There kind of aren’t any. The unions and CAP and Obama. But dems win with and without their endorsement all the time. There’s no centralized power source on the left.

which is a blessing and a curse

426 zora  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:58:09pm

re: #370 Fozzie Bear

I think if Beck came out and said “Jews are bad evil people as a group”, he would still have plenty of defenders. It scares the shit out of me, because he has come so fucking close to that position. Yet, he still has defenders.

he has said this in dozens of ways. those who deny it like to parse words. as in” the constitutions does not say there is separation of church and state” or they eat it up like manna from heaven. check the white supremacists websites if you have the stomach for it. beck is telling the truth for all to hear in their eyes. if beck wore a klan hood in the next episode, there would be apologists.

427 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:59:38pm

re: #425 WindUpBird

which is a blessing and a curse

Blessing, mostly. We are part of a herd, not part of a wagon train.

428 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 1:59:56pm

re: #414 bratwurst

On Planet Buck these are merely coincidences.

Don’t answer for me. You don’t know me.

I am purposely not replying to Obdicut. I don’t actually see his comments, I only see him at all when others reply and quote him. More work to do on my chrome plugin.

429 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:01:04pm

re: #428 Buck

Don’t answer for me. You don’t know me.

You don’t know buck. Buck does what he wants. He whips his hair back and forth.

430 bratwurst  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:01:45pm

re: #428 Buck

Don’t answer for me. You don’t know me.

I am purposely not replying to Obdicut. I don’t actually see his comments, I only see him at all when others reply and quote him. More work to do on my chrome plugin.

I know enough about you to know that your default position is tu quoque. You have proven it yet again in this thread.

431 iossarian  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:03:05pm

re: #424 simoom

Interesting, thanks for posting that. I have been irritated with Obama’s apparent slowness on such issues, but it is certainly true that progress takes time.

I did like his off-the-cuff point about “treating everyone as our brothers and sisters”. Nice to see that he didn’t restrict that to a particular religious group…

432 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:03:27pm

re: #428 Buck

Don’t answer for me. You don’t know me.

I am purposely not replying to Obdicut. I don’t actually see his comments, I only see him at all when others reply and quote him. More work to do on my chrome plugin.

Grow up, Buck, this isn’t the school yard at a middle school.

433 simoom  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:04:08pm

re: #410 recusancy

Obama campaigned against DOMA. It was one of the few places during the primary where he and Hillary differed on an actual policy.

Yup — In his recent interview with the Advocate he reaffirms his full support for repealing DOMA:

… I would distinguish between things that should get done and I fully support but may still be stalled with a Republican-controlled Congress — or Republican-controlled House of Representatives that’s not inclined to go there, versus things that can happen in society at large.

I have been struck — let me take the former — repealing DOMA, getting [the Employment Non-Discrimination Act] done, those are things that should be done. I think those are natural next steps legislatively. I’ll be frank with you, I think that’s not going to get done in two years. I think that’s — we’re on a three- or four-year time frame unless there’s a real transformation of attitudes within the Republican caucus.

434 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:05:49pm

re: #428 Buck

Don’t answer for me. You don’t know me.

I am purposely not replying to Obdicut. I don’t actually see his comments, I only see him at all when others reply and quote him. More work to do on my chrome plugin.

That is hilarious, and a very bad plan, all at the same time.

435 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:06:11pm

re: #430 bratwurst

I know enough about you to know that your default position is tu quoque. You have proven it yet again in this thread.

Like I say, you don’t know me. You just think you do.

436 Usually refered to as anyways  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:06:56pm

re: #434 Obdicut

That is hilarious, and a very bad plan, all at the same time.

Should I quote that so Buck can see it?

437 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:08:22pm

re: #436 ozbloke

Should I quote that so Buck can see it?

I just have no clue why someone would think it was a good idea to ignore disproofs of his argument.

Like the fact that in assiduously defending Beck from the charge that he was ‘joking’ about Obama’s racism, he’s actually making Beck look much, much, much worse.

438 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:08:54pm

re: #409 Obdicut

And you still have not supported this position at all.

Yes.

It is easy to see how a liberal who spoke out against out of having out wedlock children, family stability, encouraged welfare reform and against welfare dependency and encouraging marriage in minority communities would be embraced today by progressives.

Oh yes- he was anti communist and anti Castro as well.

And he wanted to cut payroll taxes.

439 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:10:37pm

re: #438 researchok

You are still not making an argument. You are simply being sarcastic, and, for some reason, equating Democrats with Progressives.

And Obama just cut payroll taxes. And he spoke out against out of wedlock children. And encouraged marriage in minority communities.

You haven’t dealt with that problem in your argument at all; many of the aspects you say make Moynihan problematic are aspects that Obama has.

440 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:11:59pm

re: #432 Reginald Perrin

Grow up, Buck, this isn’t the school yard at a middle school.

Well some people are treating it that way. I am quite public about how I don’t like being bullied and lied about. Certain people are not interested in dialog but only in bullying, name calling and profanity.

Obdicut has made himself clear that he is purposely picking on me. That I am special to him in that way. I am left with NO OTHER CHOICE but to ignore him.

441 Talking Point Detective  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:13:49pm

re: #421 Buck


This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture,” Beck said. “I don’t know what it is.”

Following up on Beck’s ridiculous claim, Fox’s Brian Kilmeade pointed out that Obama is surrounded by white advisers like David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel.

“I’m not saying he doesn’t like white people,” Beck said. “I’m saying he has a problem. He has a — this guy is, I believe, a racist.”

Ok - he didn’t really mean that. He actually thought he was talking about Reverent Wright when he said “This president, I think.

For a minute there, he thought that Wright had been elected president.

Got it.

And although he never actually distinguished his comment about racism when he was asked directly about that comment as well as other comments - and in response said he was joking - you believe that he actually meant to distinguish them.

You are very, very good at figuring out what Beck means despite what he actually says.

I am very, very impressed, Buck.

We’ve long ago reached the point where we’re essentially just repeating ourselves. I really am done this time. Have a good weekend.

442 Usually refered to as anyways  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:14:05pm

re: #437 Obdicut

I just have no clue why someone would think it was a good idea to ignore disproofs of his argument.

Like the fact that in assiduously defending Beck from the charge that he was ‘joking’ about Obama’s racism, he’s actually making Beck look much, much, much worse.

I know there was a plugin written some time ago that allowed people to hide others comments.

I suppose some people get irritated by other peoples reasoning or comments to the point where they would rather not see them.

443 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:14:51pm

re: #440 Buck

Obdicut has made himself clear that he is purposely picking on me. That I am special to him in that way.

Heh. The irony of someone like Buck complaining about paraphrasing, and then misrepresenting what I said through a paraphrase: awesome.

444 sizzleRI  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:15:19pm

re: #439 Obdicut

You are still not making an argument. You are simply being sarcastic, and, for some reason, equating Democrats with Progressives.

And Obama just cut payroll taxes. And he spoke out against out of wedlock children. And encouraged marriage in minority communities.

You haven’t dealt with that problem in your argument at all; many of the aspects you say make Moynihan problematic are aspects that Obama has.

Yes, and of course to be elected as a Democrat today one must be pro-communist???

445 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:17:49pm

re: #438 researchok

Yes.

It is easy to see how a liberal who spoke out against out of having out wedlock children, family stability, encouraged welfare reform and against welfare dependency and encouraging marriage in minority communities would be embraced today by progressives.

Oh yes- he was anti communist and anti Castro as well.

And he wanted to cut payroll taxes.

I would have no trouble with any of those positions, except the freaking quaint anti-Castro shtick.

446 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:23:18pm

re: #427 Decatur Deb

Blessing, mostly. We are part of a herd, not part of a wagon train.

I agree!

But man there’s sometimes where the democratic party is massively self-injurious

447 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:24:07pm

re: #446 WindUpBird

I agree!

But man there’s sometimes where the democratic party is massively self-injurious

Sometimes herds run off cliffs.

448 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:24:21pm

re: #440 Buck

Well some people are treating it that way. I am quite public about how I don’t like being bullied and lied about. Certain people are not interested in dialog but only in bullying, name calling and profanity.

Obdicut has made himself clear that he is purposely picking on me. That I am special to him in that way. I am left with NO OTHER CHOICE but to ignore him.

NO OTHER CHOICE
NO OTHER CHOICE
NO OTHER CHOICE
NO OTHER CHOICE

449 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:24:36pm

re: #447 Decatur Deb

Sometimes herds run off cliffs.

yes *_*

450 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:25:22pm

re: #445 Decatur Deb

I would have no trouble with any of those positions, except the freaking quaint anti-Castro shtick.

re: #439 Obdicut

You are still not making an argument. You are simply being sarcastic, and, for some reason, equating Democrats with Progressives.

And Obama just cut payroll taxes. And he spoke out against out of wedlock children. And encouraged marriage in minority communities.

You haven’t dealt with that problem in your argument at all; many of the aspects you say make Moynihan problematic are aspects that Obama has.

Of course. You are right.

Moynihan would be embraced by the progressives.

451 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:25:33pm

re: #447 Decatur Deb

Sometimes herds run off cliffs.

much like genetic diversity is good for survival, political diversity in a party is good for longevity

452 Decatur Deb  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:25:47pm

re: #447 Decatur Deb

Sometimes herds run off cliffs.


re: #449 WindUpBird

yes *_*

I voted for McGovern.

453 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:26:36pm

re: #452 Decatur Deb

Sorry DD-

Comment above wasw meant for Obdi only.

454 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:27:26pm

re: #435 Buck

Like I say, you don’t know me. You just think you do.

we just know your behavior on LGF!

so within the context of LGF, we “know you”. we are familiar with your behavior and are never surprised at anything you say

I know that’s a bummer, but you’re not really going to bring any staggering new insights to the table, you basically just come here with a poker hand of talking points and apologies for bad behavior by talking heads

455 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:27:36pm

re: #450 researchok

re: #439 Obdicut

Of course. You are right.

Moynihan would be embraced by the progressives.

Please stop putting words in my mouth. You are better than this. I have never claimed that he would be embraced by the progressives, so why pretend that I have? Where does that get you?

456 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:27:43pm

re: #452 Decatur Deb

re: #449 WindUpBird

I voted for McGovern.

I actually liked McGovern.

He was another classical liberal that had no trouble crossing the aisle in search of a deal.

457 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:28:04pm

re: #452 Decatur Deb

re: #449 WindUpBird

I voted for McGovern.

Maybe I did too, in a previous life :D

458 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:29:51pm

re: #440 Buck

Actually, there is another choice, act like an adult and debate honestly.

459 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:32:06pm

re: #455 Obdicut

Please stop putting words in my mouth. You are better than this. I have never claimed that he would be embraced by the progressives, so why pretend that I have? Where does that get you?

Obdi, you are trying to make the point that Patrick Moynihan would be perfectly acceptable as candidate today.

Sad as it is, that just isn’t true.

Can you imagine Humphrey or Scoop Jackson running as Dems today? Or even Jack or Bobby Kennedy? Tax cuts, anti leftist ideologies, etc?

Like the GOP, the Dems have moved away from the center and there isn’t enough lipstick in the world that can change those political realities.

460 researchok  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:32:37pm

re: #458 Reginald Perrin

Actually, there is another choice, act like an adult and debate honestly.

No one does that anymore.

Anywhere.

461 prairiefire  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:42:08pm

re: #458 Reginald Perrin

Actually, there is another choice, act like an adult and debate honestly.

There are many centric dems. Many, many, many.

462 prairiefire  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:44:48pm

re: #461 prairiefire

There are many centric dems. Many, many, many.

President Obama just hired a bunch of them.

463 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 2:49:51pm

re: #459 researchok

Obdi, you are trying to make the point that Patrick Moynihan would be perfectly acceptable as candidate today.

Sad as it is, that just isn’t true.

Can you imagine Humphrey or Scoop Jackson running as Dems today? Or even Jack or Bobby Kennedy? Tax cuts, anti leftist ideologies, etc?

Like the GOP, the Dems have moved away from the center and there isn’t enough lipstick in the world that can change those political realities.

You are ignoring that there are Democrats who are more conservative than Moynihan who have been elected today, like Stupak. You have provided no argument. You are simply asserting your belief over and over. While misrepresenting what I’m saying, constantly.

It’s really mystifying what you think you’re achieving.

464 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:02:38pm

re: #458 Reginald Perrin

Actually, there is another choice, act like an adult and debate honestly.

Easy to say. It is obviously my opinion that I am honest. You assume that I am dishonest. There you go.

465 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:15:45pm

re: #460 researchok

No one does that anymore.

Anywhere.

And whose fault is that?

466 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:19:10pm

re: #464 Buck

Easy to say. It is obviously my opinion that I am honest. You assume that I am dishonest. There you go.

Your minus 1579 karma score begs to differ.
Buck, nobody is buying what you are peddling.

467 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:39:24pm

re: #466 Reginald Perrin

Your minus 1579 karma score begs to differ.
Buck, nobody is buying what you are peddling.

Clearly Karma doesn’t mean what you think it means. I am not dishonest.

BUT it is interesting that you think you are acting honestly and adult like.

468 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:44:45pm

re: #467 Buck

Clearly Karma doesn’t mean what you think it means. I am not dishonest.

BUT it is interesting that you think you are acting honestly and adult like.

It is even more interesting that you think I’m not acting honestly, Reggie always has the goods to back up what he writes. Rather than argue, feel free to post comments where I’m being less than honest.

Put up or shut up
469 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:54:57pm

re: #468 Reginald Perrin

It is even more interesting that you think I’m not acting honestly, Reggie always has the goods to back up what he writes. Rather than argue, feel free to post comments where I’m being less than honest.

You have it reversed. You said that I should be honest, and to back up that slur you pointed to my karma. Personally I don’t find either action adult like, or truly honest.

470 happyface  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:59:34pm

Anybody who listens to GB knows that he wasn’t expressing a call to violence. Yeah, he gets impassioned. Yeah, sometimes he goes a bit overboard. But darn-it, most of the time he’s right. And he comes up with the evidence to prove it.
He’s a muckraker, that’s for sure. But there’s so darn much muck that somebody needs to be raking through it.
In this case he got a tad graphic about what the sell-out dems might need to do to get away from their even more radical fellow travelers. But I don’t think he was necessarily wrong in his judgment of what it might come down to. But he did want to make his point in a powerful way.
Those are radical revolutionaries with a documented history of violence behind them. It is no land for old democrats. Or new ones for that matter.
His remark, taken completely out of context by a left that has become, en masse, radicalized and disingenuous is a blood libel among many perpetrated against another conservative powerhouse. It too shall pass.

471 wrenchwench  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:01:31pm

re: #470 happyface

Those are radical revolutionaries with a documented history of violence behind them. It is no land for old democrats. Or new ones for that matter.
His remark, taken completely out of context by a left that has become, en masse, radicalized and disingenuous is a blood libel among many perpetrated against another conservative powerhouse. It too shall pass.

What the hell are you talking about?

472 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:05:44pm

re: #468 Reginald Perrin

It is even more interesting that you think I’m not acting honestly, Reggie always has the goods to back up what he writes. Rather than argue, feel free to post comments where I’m being less than honest.

I really don’t want to get into an argument with you about this. I feel that I am being bullied by Obdicut. I can show multiple instances of this behaviour. My plan is now to ignore him and also expose him. I think that others will see it, and the others who are bullied by him will come forward as well. The best way to stop a bully is to expose him.

You can disagree. You can even defend him. I don’t really care. That is for you to live with. You will however witness his behaviour and I hope you will see what I am talking about.

473 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:07:01pm

re: #470 happyface

blood libel


lol

474 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:08:40pm

re: #470 happyface

…and nobody took his comment out of context.

475 Buck  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:16:02pm

No need to reply to happyface. he is already blocked. I suppose he was a sock.

476 prairiefire  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:17:01pm

re: #470 happyface

Anybody who listens to GB knows that he wasn’t expressing a call to violence. Yeah, he gets impassioned. Yeah, sometimes he goes a bit overboard. But darn-it, most of the time he’s right. And he comes up with the evidence to prove it.
He’s a muckraker, that’s for sure. But there’s so darn much muck that somebody needs to be raking through it.
In this case he got a tad graphic about what the sell-out dems might need to do to get away from their even more radical fellow travelers. But I don’t think he was necessarily wrong in his judgment of what it might come down to. But he did want to make his point in a powerful way.
Those are radical revolutionaries with a documented history of violence behind them. It is no land for old democrats. Or new ones for that matter.
His remark, taken completely out of context by a left that has become, en masse, radicalized and disingenuous is a blood libel among many perpetrated against another conservative powerhouse. It too shall pass.

I’m going to take a wild guess~~you are referencing Bill Ayers?

477 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:24:32pm

re: #472 Buck

Jesus christ, seriously? The ‘bullied by Obdicut support group’?

What a sad, sad meeting that would be:

“And then he said I was bad for not knowing Michelle Malkin contributed to the white supremacist website VDARE and then I refused to discuss Michelle Malkin anymore and lied and claimed that merely discussing her would get you a timeout”.

“I was a global warming denier and he told me I was an idiot and it still hurts so bad.”

478 Dancing along the light of day  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:32:54pm

re: #477 Obdicut

The ‘bullied by Obdicut support group’?


Well, it’d be empty except for Buck!

479 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:39:13pm

re: #472 Buck

I really don’t want to get into an argument with you about this. I feel that I am being bullied by Obdicut. I can show multiple instances of this behaviour. My plan is now to ignore him and also expose him. I think that others will see it, and the others who are bullied by him will come forward as well. The best way to stop a bully is to expose him.

You can disagree. You can even defend him. I don’t really care. That is for you to live with. You will however witness his behaviour and I hope you will see what I am talking about.

Buck, you make me ashamed to be a Canadian.
*gaze*

480 Interesting Times  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 4:53:59pm

re: #479 Reginald Perrin

Buck, you make me ashamed to be a Canadian.

Bwahaha, you took the comment right out of my keyboard :) It isn’t so much his dissembling disingenuous dishonesty, but the fact he thinks we’re all dumb enough to fall for it. Really now, if one insists on trolling, is it too much to ask that at least some finesse and skill go into the effort? :P

481 Stauff  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 5:42:30pm

I fail to see how any one could defend that Glenn Beck video.

482 jaunte  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 5:44:06pm

re: #470 happyface

But darn-it, most of the time he’s right. And he comes up with the evidence to prove it.


Comedy gold.

483 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 5:48:33pm

re: #480 publicityStunted

Glad to catch you online, what I wrote to you about, has taken an one eighty.
Eleventy.co is going up a lot faster than anticipated. ninety days is the goal. I figured out a way to get the trolls to write for me a couple years ago, but a prank I pulled on Eric Odom’s, Troll Central put things on hold.
To the trolls, it is some kind of war, even Barret Brown has joined the gang who couldn’t shoot straight. What is more he came out of the closet today.
I never would have figured a hoity toity writer to be little more than a high priced troll, fighting an imaginary war. The sound you may soon hear is his career at Vanity Fair circling the toilet. That what he gets for joining the stalkers down at Troll Central.

484 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 6:36:10pm

re: #481 Stauff

I fail to see how any one could defend that Glenn Beck video.

There is no intellectually honest way to defend that rant , so they spin like tops.

485 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 6:44:13pm

re: #477 Obdicut

Jesus christ, seriously? The ‘bullied by Obdicut support group’?

What a sad, sad meeting that would be:

“And then he said I was bad for not knowing Michelle Malkin contributed to the white supremacist website VDARE and then I refused to discuss Michelle Malkin anymore and lied and claimed that merely discussing her would get you a timeout”.

“I was a global warming denier and he told me I was an idiot and it still hurts so bad.”

Better days are coming.

486 celticdragon  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 7:48:13pm

re: #19 Charles

Please retweet this post — hundreds of right wingers on Twitter have been retweeting Patterico’s smear, and we need to make sure my reply gets seen too.

Robert Stacy McCain has jumped on it now, of course — he wrote another 2000-word post mocking me for failing and being irrelevant and having no traffic. That would be about the 97th post by McCain on that theme.

Patterico is the sort of dishonest, authoritarian asshole that gives prosecutors a bad name. The commenters at his blog would have been at home wearing brown shirts in 1928 Germany, I think sometimes. Hate to Godwin, but there they seem to love it when cops shoot unarmed people, no matter the circumstances.

487 Dancing along the light of day  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 8:55:55pm

re: #484 Reginald Perrin

Wasn’t Patterico exposed as an LAPD officer? Maybe a retired one?
I’ll go researching. It was a few years ago, IIRC.

488 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 9:45:48pm

I have no idea because I have never looked into anyone’s background.

My thing is finding finding their fetid turd droppings.

I never keep records, that is so last century.

Eleventy.co was conceived as a way to collect the droppings.

Nice little prizes will convince readers to do all the work.

If you make finding things a little contest and offer cell phones, I Pads or similar goodies, it can’t miss.

Remember, this site is not political in any shape or form.

Humour dripping with irony, coming soon to a blog near you.

…and did I mention there were going to be some really cool prizes?

489 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 9:47:48pm

re: #487 Floral Giraffe

I almost forgot
*smack*

490 Dancing along the light of day  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 9:52:37pm

re: #489 Reginald Perrin

Patterico is/was lapd, and got disciplined for his blog.
Need to spend some time on the research.

491 Dancing along the light of day  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:02:05pm

re: #489 Reginald Perrin

You know, I’d like that, Sir.

492 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:08:55pm

re: #490 Floral Giraffe

I honestly knew nothing about this twit until a few days ago.
I never read a single thing he posted.

I figured out how to write and not kill off Reggie.

Of course everyone knows Reggie never really dies

I am hanging up the Troll Mallet and officially announcing my retirement from Whack a Troll.

493 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:11:13pm

re: #491 Floral Giraffe

You know, I’d like that, Sir.

I know you would, you are so naughty
And sometimes my friend
I honestly think you have earned one
*wink*

494 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:16:11pm

re: #491 Floral Giraffe

Here is the best part

If this blog should actually succeed, !00% of all profits will be donated to rape crisis centers.

I get not one red cent

495 Dancing along the light of day  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:27:22pm

re: #488 Reginald Perrin

If two minds met, would the world try to change? I don’t know, but it’s worth looking at, IMHO. What do you think? Sir.

496 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:29:33pm

re: #495 Floral Giraffe

If two minds met, would the world try to change? I don’t know, but it’s worth looking at, IMHO. What do you think? Sir.

Possibly, but not if the minds meet when they are butting heads.

497 Reginald Perrin  Fri, Jan 21, 2011 10:32:53pm

re: #495 Floral Giraffe

We will talk soon, better days are ahead

Goodnight Flo

Did I mention the website is going to be offering prizes?…lol

498 DrBoobooday  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 6:41:51am

After seeing the longer clip, I find it even more appalling. More context reveals that it is not just a poorly chosen metaphor, but part of a deeply paranoid, chillingly insane rant. A modern-day Father Coughlin.

The man is seriously creepy. He makes Bill O’Reilly look like Walter Cronkite.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2016-01-01 10:29 am PST
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Square Cash Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
2 Proud Boys Members Sentenced to 4 Years Pride goeth before the fall Two members of the far-right Proud Boys were sentenced Tuesday to four years in prison for their roles in a street fight after a speech last year at New York's Metropolitan Republican Club. More ...
Rightwingconspirator
6 hours, 25 minutes ago
Views: 106 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
But Her emailzzzzzzz….Here's a great post by Digby regarding the emails pseudo controversy and how it begat President Trump. The big worry is that it will continue -- and there are signs it already is. As long as Russian bots set what ...
Thanos
8 hours, 5 minutes ago
Views: 122 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
Canada’s Right-Wing Populist, Anti-Immigrant Party Got Crushed Bernier spent the campaign promoting a divisive and exclusionary message that could have easily come from far-right parties such as Germany’s AfD or France’s National Front. He vowed to build a border fence to keep out asylum seekers, stoked ...
Thanos
9 hours, 5 minutes ago
Views: 132 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
ROXY MUSIC - RE-MAKE/RE-MODEL LIVE at the APOLLO 2001 Cpl593h ROXY MUSIC - RE-MAKE/RE-MODEL LIVE AT THE APOLLO 2001Original by the first Roxy Music Album , the very first song , 1972lyrics below :I tried, but I could not find a wayLooking back, all I did was look awayNext ...
Thanos
2 days, 16 hours ago
Views: 288 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
“Midnight Picnic Near the Ocean” - Forest BaileyRecorded live at Snaggy Mountain in Burnsville North Carolina. 24-bit Studio Master digital download available at: forestbaileymusic.com Buy/Listen:Spotify: open.spotify.comApple Music: music.apple.com Visit Forest BaileyWebsite: forestbaileymusic.comInstagram: instagram.comFacebook: facebook.comYouTube: youtube.comBandsintown: bandsintown.com
Thanos
3 days, 22 hours ago
Views: 339 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 191014After three weeks of meh pictures and invisible progress, we were determined to have something to photograph today. And we were eager to start on the upper shelf. We were close, but not quite there, and we were determined! To ...
DangerMan
1 week ago
Views: 517 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 3
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
Jack Klatt - Highway Lines (Live at Radio Heartland)Jack Klatt performs 'Highway Lines' from his 2019 album, 'It Ain't The Same,' live in the studio of Radio Heartland at The Current.
Thanos
1 week, 3 days ago
Views: 477 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Brittany Howard Performing ‘13th Century Metal’ Live on KCRW Brittany Howard's solo debut album Jaime puts her powerhouse vocals on full display. It also takes us front and center to her very personal journey of loss, love and self-discovery. We're thrilled to welcome her back to KCRW to ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 675 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
(15) Rodrigo Y Gabriela - Electric Soul (Live on KEXP) kexp.org presents Rodrigo y Gabriela performing "Electric Soul" live in the KEXP gathering space. Recorded July 14, 2019. Host: Stevie ZoomAudio Engineers: Kessiah Gordon & Kevin SuggsAudio Mixer: David MarchantCameras: Jim Beckmann, Alaia D'Alessandro, Luke Knecht & Justin WIlmoreEditor: ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 686 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Fresh Air (Remastered) Quicksilver Messenger Service Provided to YouTube by Universal Music Group Fresh Air (Remastered) · Quicksilver Messenger Service Classic Masters ℗ 2001 Capitol Records, LLC Released on: 2007-01-01 Producer: Quicksilver Messenger ServiceStudio Personnel, Mastering Engineer: Robert VosgienComposer: Jesse Oris Farrow Auto-generated by YouTube. ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 748 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook