Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Friday Genius Ten “What Double Standard?” Ediiton Previous entry: Against martyrdom

Glenn Beck: almost criminally negligent towards his audience

Choads

This article in Forbes about Glenn Beck is a real treasure trove of information about the moral-free crybaby teabagger pundit.  I was surprised at how Forbes, a conservative publication, really makes Beck look like the piece of shit he no doubt is. Maybe they don’t realize how bad he comes across, or maybe they don’t care, or maybe there’s an outside possibility that the reporter just decided to do his fucking job and report the truth.  The last is so uncommon nowadays that it’s hard to swallow, though. 

Beck made $32 million last year, a mind-boggling number that is grabbing much of the attention paid to this article.  But what really jumped out at me was the running theme, which I’d summarize as, “Glenn Beck thinks his audience is a bunch of morons.” 

With a deadpan, Beck insists that he is not political: “I could give a flying crap about the political process.” Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is its own coinage. “We’re an entertainment company,” Beck says.

Yeah, “deadpan”.  I get the strong impression that Beck is being perfectly honest here, and doesn’t seem to think—-for good reason—-that his target audience will be turned off by this.  Maybe it’s because he thinks his audience doesn’t read Forbes.  Or, more likely, it’s because he believes his audience doesn’t care on a certain level.  They won’t see this betrayal of their trust as betrayal.  And they need to know is that he’s adept at stoking their paranoia, hatred, and rage, and they’re going to eat that shit up, and set aside any evidence that it’s all just a dog and pony show. 

But it’s unbelievably frustrating to read quotes like this:

“I don’t necessarily believe that [what Beck says] is reflective of his own personal politics—I don’t even know if he has personal politics,” says Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers, a trade magazine devoted to talk radio. “I see him as a performer.”

Maybe the reason is that conservative audiences have already grown so accustomed to the thick level of bullshit that they’re ready to move on to a new level.  For years now, they’ve swallowed whole “family values” nonsense spewing from people who don’t play by their own rules, “Christian” preachers who are clearly living the high life, and one disingenuous argument after bad faith panic after another.  Right wing audiences delight in bullshit, as long as they can justify it as clever attempts to get the bad guys, i.e. Democrats.  So they don’t bat an eyelash at Republicans spinning on a dime about issues like the filibuster or reconciliation, now that they’re in the majority.  They all let the Bush administration lie to their faces about the Iraq war, and they supported them even after the lies became too big to ignore.  That the ACORN videos are charitably described as misleading doesn’t bother them—-who cares if you have to lie, so long as you win?  The lies and bullshit have piled up so deep that of course they’re ready to give their allegiance to a man whose actual political beliefs are irrelevant.  He may agree; he may not.  The main thing is he can act the part.

The amount of paranoia that Beck is stoking in his audience to keep them hooked is unbelievable.  Listen, for instance, to this lady calling in that got a tax refund, and how he encourages her to send it back:

There’s no reason to think the government is out to get her, or that they sent this refund for any other reason than she had it coming. Beck reads her situation with speed that kind of amazed me, since I had to listen for a full 60 seconds longer before I grasped this woman’s emotional dilemma.  But he got it immediately.  Here’s what I’m thinking is going on: The woman has been trained by right wing media to be so paranoid that she can’t emotionally handle the fact that her refund check was bigger because of the Obama tax cuts, especially since that caused her to feel a pang of gratitude towards Obama, who she know she’s supposed to hate.  And she wants to disbelieve her own eyes, but I’m guessing that her obsession with getting a treadmill comes straight from a doctor telling her that’s what she needs to do or else she may be facing even more serious health problems—-she mentions that she’s on oxygen, and I think she’s really torn.  And she could really use that money.  And Beck basically demands that she choose loyalty to right wing media and to paranoid hatred of Obama over her own health and well-being. 

To me, this is why the difference between true believer and just in it for the money isn’t as academic as I’d like.  I’d at least hope that some right wing demagogues would have enough sympathy for one of their own that they’d want her to go ahead and get this treadmill that she has probably been told she needs very badly for her health and longevity. 

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 05:01 PM • (78) Comments

On a certain level, does it really matter whether the asshat believes his own words?  The damage he’s doing is real, whether he believes it or not.  The evil he inflicts on the nation and the world is real.  And really, whether he’s doing it out of greed or heartfelt hatred doesn’t matter much - both are despicable motives.

Comment #1: libdevil  on  04/08  at  06:05 PM

I’m a little amazed he didn’t tell the woman to send her refund to him. I bet he was kicking himself afterwards for not thinking of that…

Comment #2: Scott  on  04/08  at  06:10 PM

“she could really use that money.  And Beck basically demands that she choose loyalty to right wing media and to paranoid hatred of Obama over her own health and well-being.”

God damned mother fucking asshole.

They go on & on about how the tax refunds are “their money” to begin with and he has the fucking nerve to take advantage of an elderly person who might not understand why she got more of “her money” back from the government.

God damned mother fucking asshole.

Comment #3: Mark  on  04/08  at  06:14 PM

This demagogue has feet of clay:

Glenn Beck’s ratings: Not as meteoric as people think

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/4/8/855357/-Glenn-Becks-ratings:-Not-as-meteoric-as-people-think

Comment #4: judybrowni  on  04/08  at  06:19 PM

”“We’re an entertainment company,” Beck says.”

...no kidding.  Finally admitting that out loud?...

“I’m a little amazed he didn’t tell the woman to send her refund to him. I bet he was kicking himself afterwards for not thinking of that…”

He is de facto already a cult leader. 

Now all he has to do is take that last step and have his followers give all their world possessions to him, get military hair cuts, put on some nice brown uniforms with a nice insignia on them (I’m thinking a white cross on a black circle on a red field - right up to the edge of Nazi but not quite all the way), and cut off all contact with non-believers.  Then he declares Idaho or Utah is the new fatherland, they kick out the Feds, and we’re on our way to Waco II: Statewide...

Comment #5: MikeEss  on  04/08  at  06:23 PM

Glenn Beck’s ratings: Not as meteoric as people think

I hope he’s at least not putting any money into savings or investments…

Comment #6: Scott  on  04/08  at  06:26 PM

On a certain level, does it really matter whether the asshat believes his own words? 

I think it does, because like I said, I think someone who really believes his own bullshit wouldn’t have manipulated that woman so deftly.  It wouldn’t have even occurred to them.  A non-cynical right winger would have told her to keep the money; I’m sure of it.

Comment #7: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/08  at  06:32 PM

Hm. I used my tax refund to buy language learning software for a language spoken in a predominantly Muslim country. Which just goes to show how dangerous Obama’s policies really are!

Comment #8: Tyro  on  04/08  at  06:37 PM

And by sending it back, she’ll be giving it to the gummit, which will use it for socialism.

So, good job, Glenn Beck. Way to convince others to stick it to the man.

Comment #9: Jeff Fecke  on  04/08  at  06:39 PM

For those of us who are unable or unwilling to listen, could someone describe why exactly sending back money to the government made sense here? She thought it was a trap or something, and the government would come back for the money later?

Comment #10: Seebach  on  04/08  at  06:42 PM

If you told a Glenn Beck fan that Glenn Beck was on his way over to burn his house down, they would assume that libruls wouldn’t like that, then decide that it was a good thing, and then they would have to repeat some bumper-sticker slogan over and over until it was ingrained in their minds.

Comment #11: I Heart Puppies  on  04/08  at  06:55 PM

I was surprised at how Forbes, a conservative publication, really makes Beck look like the piece of shit he no doubt is.

Forbes is money porn about HNWIs—who’s making how much, how they’re making it, how they’re spending it. The conservatives who read it don’t give a hang about social conservatism any more than they cared that the magazine’s founder was gay. And they’re for smaller government only insofar as it means less regulation and lower inheritance taxes and a flat income tax that favours the wealthy (the main platform plank of the founder’s son’s Presidential run).

What Forbes‘s publishers and readers are most assuredly not into is the sort of embarrassing, phony-baloney rabble-rousing that’s Beck’s stock in trade. After all, they’re not that kind of conservative. Whether it’s coming from the left or the right, they don’t really like populism, because they regard anyone who isn’t making at least 6-figures a year (their sole criterion) as parasites who are pretty much unworthy of the vote.

Reading the article from that Randian point of view, it becomes a lot less surprising that they’re torn between orgasms over Beck’s annual income and concern over the fact that he makes it by stirring up Teabagger Madame Defarges.

Comment #12: Gracchus.  on  04/08  at  06:56 PM

Of course, he doesn’t care.  Aren’t you down with with prosperity gospel that holds that bad things (like being poor and sick) only happen to you if you deserve them?

Dan Piraro had a cartoon where the Execs at Fox News were required by law to put quotes around news or be dinged for false advertising.  I really wish we could do that.

Comment #13: GeekGirlsRule  on  04/08  at  06:58 PM

I’d at least hope that some right wing demagogues would have enough sympathy for one of their own that they’d want her to go ahead and get this treadmill that she has probably been told she needs very badly for her health and longevity.

You’d hope in vain. It doesn’t matter if you’re talking about a right-wing pundit like Beck, or a televangelist, or a short-con grifter: all of them wouldn’t hestitate a moment before helping themselves, directly or indirectly, to a confused old lady’s money.

Comment #14: Gracchus.  on  04/08  at  07:02 PM

Think Glenn could convince all of his viewers to give back their tax returns?  Because that could be almost a million dollars for us socialists to spread around. 

I want to feel bad for brainwashed Glenn Beck acolytes, but the stupid burns my brain and makes it so hard.

Comment #15: semi_factual  on  04/08  at  07:07 PM

I’m waiting for the free speech of Beck and Hannity to cross the line into “yelling fire in a crowded theater” territory.

Comment #16: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/08  at  07:08 PM

For those of us who are unable or unwilling to listen, could someone describe why exactly sending back money to the government made sense here?

The only way it makes sense is as the kind of screwed-up statement of principle Beck specialises in: “I don’t need yer dirty gubmint money, and if you’re giving this much to a real Murkin like me God knows how much more you’re giving to some n*gger welfare queen.”

Now excuse me while I give my synapses a Silkwood shower.

Comment #17: Gracchus.  on  04/08  at  07:12 PM

“I’m waiting for the free speech of Beck and Hannity to cross the line into “yelling fire in a crowded theater” territory.”

I’m not sure there’s a line that can be crossed anymore.  If there is, is not at all clear that any of the wingnut propagandists get anywhere near it, at least as it’s currently defined…

Comment #18: MikeEss  on  04/08  at  07:14 PM

Beck has had to dial it back a couple of times already and urge his viewers not to do anything crazy or violent. I’ve never her Olbermann have to urge that, or Maddow. Beck is willfully whipping up sedition. The line may be blurry, but he’s finding a way to cross it. Give him time.

Comment #19: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/08  at  07:17 PM

This is why pointing out the hypocrisy of right-wing Republicans doesn’t bother their followers in the least. It’s all an emotional appeal. Glenn Beck’s followers are on the losing side of history and they know it. But showing up at Tea Party events and screaming makes them feel better, almost like they’re actually doing something, and it’s a social event. And having a gazillionaire on TV espouse all the same paranoid fears and grudges that keep them up at night gives them legitimacy, and then the random follower doesn’t have to take responsibility for thinking up these horribly paranoid and hateful things on his own. He can just put the responsibility on Glenn Beck.

I’m reminded of many people (including me) who turned out at antiwar protests before the Iraq war despite knowing that it wasn’t going to accomplish anything. But there wasn’t anything else to be done, and it made me feel better to at least know I was doing something, and that I wasn’t alone.

The fact that the powerful elites have so neutered public protest that this is the most people even expect from it is sad.

Comment #20: sophronia  on  04/08  at  07:27 PM

sophronia—the problem is that the left still believes that protesting is enough. The right wing protests as a way to masturbate themselves into a brick-throwing, gun-shooting frenzy.

Comment #21: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/08  at  07:29 PM

“The right wing protests as a way to masturbate themselves into a brick-throwing, gun-shooting frenzy.”

...or a “wargasm”?...

Comment #22: MikeEss  on  04/08  at  07:31 PM

Tie a yellow ribbon round the amputee.

Comment #23: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/08  at  07:34 PM

It’s even worse if he doesn’t believe his own shtick because that means he’s inciting hate and distrust and actively trying to hurt people (like the woman in the article) and doing so just for a paycheck. That makes him not just a sociopath, but a mercenary. It’s despicable.

Comment #24: Keith  on  04/08  at  07:40 PM

I recognised the Rush Limbaughish excuse of “It’s just entertainment” right away….but then I had another thought. Anyone remember that beautiful moment when Jon Stewart called out Tucker Carlson on Crossfire by pointing out that he, Stewart, was a comedian on a network called Comedy Central and that he really was entertainment….while Carlson and his ilk claimed to be real journalists. Stewart basically told Carlson that he was a partisan hack who didn’t care about real discourse, and Carlson tried to duck the accusation by comparing it to the Daily Show.

Well, Stewart came off smelling like roses, but I think that’s may be the root of some of the “it’s just entertainment” banners recently planted by Rush and Beck. If they pre-emptively claim to be entertainment, a sally like Stewarts doesn’t damage them as much, or so they think, not realising that it raises the curtain even more on their obvious Wizard-of-Ozzery.

However, I think it’s great that they are resorting to this sort of thing, because I don’t know how more obvious we could have made it to some of their followers that they are REALLY in it for the money. Of course, the biggest fans will claim otherwise….and folks who don’t want to admit they’ve been morally swindled. (And there will be a lot of those—you can get a lot of people to retrench deeper to prove they weren’t gullible.) And there are a lot of people who—entertainment or no—go along with Beck because of confirmation biases.

Comment #25: PixelFish  on  04/08  at  08:07 PM

Glenn Beck is basically a political Howard Stern.  Think of how Stern operates, how he focuses on sex and such.  Now replace his use of sex and prostitutes with government hate and right wing talk.  It’s the same basic premise.  We all know Beck came from a regular morning show and went into politics when the anger levels could reach extraordinary levels. 

If anything I think he is one of the true sociopaths who take pleasure is derailing society while confounding his believers.  The way he mocks his audience in private interviews and how he acts when giving interviews show classic signs of narcissistic sociopath tendencies.  But he is going to crumble because he can’t play nice with the other pundits on Fox.  Eventually he’ll be pushed off because O’Reilly or Hannity will eventually have to buckle and move on or push Beck off.  As much as I loathe O’Reilly he has made it abundantly clear he hates Beck as much as we do but isn’t above using him for profit.  I can see him being the first to stab him in the back when the time comes.

Comment #26: Xeranar  on  04/08  at  08:10 PM

Hey Godbagging Fucktard, how about you get out of *my* universe instead and stop spamming incoherent crap?!  There is no “scientific proof of god” because if such a thing were to occur, by his own dictates, such a god would cease to exist!  It’s true!  The bible tells me so!

I will continue to have both light *and* death, because that’s how the universe works!  Awesome!

Comment #27: Mimi  on  04/08  at  08:32 PM

THE REAL QUESTION:

DOES A TROLL POSTING RIDICULOUS RELIGIOUS CRAP

ON PANDAGON HAVE A FUTURE?  MY SOURCES SAY NO

Religioids

GET OUT OF MY FAVORITE BLOG…

you little trolls do nothing but antagonize…

and you try to eliminate all the hopes and dreams of progressives…

but you’re gonna lose…

THE DEATH OF MORONIC RELIGIOSITY - SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF TROLLS

http://some.stupid.url.in.russia

Einstein puts nails into coffins…

******************************************

http://a.link.to.a.cat.video.on.youtube.

******************************************

trolls deny their own life element…selenium…

RED OR BLUE, TROLLS?

*************************************
***************************DARKNESS**************
******************************************

Comment #28: MikeEss  on  04/08  at  08:37 PM

With a deadpan, Beck insists that he is not political: “I could give a flying crap about the political process.”

It’s part of the sell, not in spite of it.  To his audience, this just makes him sound like a political outsider.  “He doesn’t care about the political process, he just loves his country.  He’s just like me!”

Comment #29: jamie d  on  04/08  at  08:39 PM

Aw, thanks MikeEss!  I was hoping you’d come in with another hilarious parody of the godbag, and it is as hilarious as I hoped!

Comment #30: Mimi  on  04/08  at  08:46 PM

MikeEss ftw

Comment #31: jamie d  on  04/08  at  08:53 PM

Here, here! Well done, Mike!

Comment #32: Ben D.  on  04/08  at  08:53 PM

As for Beck, what do you suppose the odds are that he’s back on the booze and/or cocaine? He certainly has that dry drunk thing going on (comparing America to a hungover drunk vomiting into a toilet in his CPAC rant, for one thing), maybe the cork is back out of the bottle?

Comment #33: Ben D.  on  04/08  at  08:59 PM

If you have read the David Foster Wallace essay on talk radio it is also pretty clear on this point, i.e. talk radio DJs come at it as a profitable entertainment venue first. I think it’s from 1999-2002 or so and predates the ascendance of the Daily Show.

Comment #34: brandon  on  04/08  at  09:12 PM

For those of us who are unable or unwilling to listen, could someone describe why exactly sending back money to the government made sense here? She thought it was a trap or something, and the government would come back for the money later?

I may be misremembering, but wasn’t there something with Bush’s stimulus checks where it turned out that they were essentially a loan, not a tax cut, and the amount went back onto your taxes the following year?  I seem to vaguely recall that.  If so, and if she does, that may be what she’s thinking of.

Comment #35: Mnemosyne  on  04/08  at  09:34 PM

Great stuff, MikeEss.

I’m sure that Mabus/Markuze came to this thread out of professional pride: “You think Glen Beck is crazy? Lemme show you some real crazy.”

I keep asking him to post the good stuff on Nostradamus and Depeche Mode, but since he’s basically copypasta-ing and running here’s some background on deranged Dennis and links to his screeds (including e-mail addresses, IP, and ISP).

Comment #36: Gracchus.  on  04/08  at  09:40 PM

It’s even worse if he doesn’t believe his own shtick because that means he’s inciting hate and distrust and actively trying to hurt people (like the woman in the article) and doing so just for a paycheck. That makes him not just a sociopath, but a mercenary. It’s despicable.

It’s capitalism, baby.  Beck’s just the perfect Economic Man.

Comment #37: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/08  at  09:44 PM

For those of us who are unable or unwilling to listen, could someone describe why exactly sending back money to the government made sense here? She thought it was a trap or something, and the government would come back for the money later?

Yes.

In the real world, a tax credit was created as part of the stimulus, then given out early in the form of reduced withholdings to try to halt the slide into oblivion last year. You have to claim in on the Schedule M. (Higher-income folks don’t get it.) The IRS noticed that lots of people didn’t notice the Schedule M (since it’s brand new), so they’ve been checking automatically and sending an extra refund check for the balance ($400 for individuals, $800 for married couples) for people who didn’t claim it but should have.

In Glenn-Beck-Crazytown, it was a trap for a woman who sent an insulting email to the white house—the IRS sent it out in hopes of auditing her family to punish her for her views. (This is all from the woman. Glenn Beck was very careful to neither discourage her delusion nor say anything actionable.)

A CPA then called in with actual information. Glenn Beck immediately pivoted to declaiming how awful it was that Obama would cut taxes as a political ploy in an election year. (As always, the right wing’s collective memory extends back approximately five minutes.)

Comment #38: Llelldorin  on  04/08  at  09:55 PM

That $800 credit is the Making Work Pay tax credit.  It is a direct result of the Obama stimulus package. 

This women doesn’t realize that the IRS does this all the time (i.e., call a taxpayers attention to a credit they could be receiving).  That happened a few years ago for me with the Earned Income Tax Credit.  The IRS sent me a noticed informing me that I was entitled to it and that I would receive a check in a few weeks—and, lo and behold, I did. 

I think Beck’s listeners are so full of the idea that the government means to do them harm that they literally cannot believe it when the government tries to help them unsolicited—aside, of course, from their sense of entitlement to SSI, Medicare, and Disability, which apparently are just mana from heaven.

The fact that Beck encouraged her to send it back is truly reprehensible.

Comment #39: Captain Bathrobe  on  04/08  at  09:57 PM

A CPA then called in with actual information. Glenn Beck immediately pivoted to declaiming how awful it was that Obama would cut taxes as a political ploy in an election year. (As always, the right wing’s collective memory extends back approximately five minutes.)

Likewise the rampant wingnut meme of painting the expiry of the Bush tax cuts as a “rise in taxes”.

The tax cuts were set to expire because it allowed the Republicans to cost them out as not breaking the bank.  Without them expiring, the projected loss to revenue increased dramatically.  The expectation was precisely that there would be pressure to continue them regardless of the damage to the deficit (which the wingnuts are also screaming about).

It looks as if Obama isn’t playing that game, and is set to just do nothing, allowing them to expire. Forgetting that that’s precisely how Bush wrote the law, this is being pushed as Obama “raising taxes”.

Next up, the KenyanMarxist President will be accused of personally killing soldiers in Iraq…

Comment #40: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/08  at  10:01 PM

right wing ... sympathy

Not without a direct blood relationship, no.

Comment #41: Punditus Maximus  on  04/08  at  10:09 PM

Doesn’t lady from RightWingLand notice that Bush’s people did EXACTLY what Beck describes when they sent out the rebates a few years back? We got paid mail explaining how much to expect and when to expect it.

Comment #42: PixelFish  on  04/08  at  10:20 PM

The tax cuts were set to expire because it allowed the Republicans to cost them out as not breaking the bank.

No, not just that. IIRC that’s the only way they could pass it through reconciliation.

Comment #43: Ben D.  on  04/08  at  10:36 PM

This reminds me a lot of the discussion early in Shrub’s administration about how he really wasn’t a racist or a homophobe, he just pandered to those people to get in power. I never understood how that explanation was supposed to be exculpatory.

Oh, and Limbaugh and Coulter have been doing the “just an entertainer” thing for a long time to shield themselves from reality-based questions.  But the nature of this kind of entertainment (as post-Brecht theatre critics pointed out) is that it has to get ever more extreme to give its audience the same charge.

Hmm. From this point of view the whole tea-party madness isn’t about political dead-enderism or even the freakout at having a black president, it’s just about what Fox and friends need to keep their audience numbers up…

Comment #44: paul  on  04/08  at  10:54 PM

This reminds me a lot of the discussion early in Shrub’s administration about how he really wasn’t a racist or a homophobe

Well, to be honest, I didn’t see Shrub being an active racist: he could have easily made attempts at whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment to get votes, and he didn’t. He was actually popular (for a Republican) with Latinos. By contrast, he did realize that centering his 2004 campaign around a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage would be a great vote-getter. His racial attitudes were at worst ones of benign neglect: a belief that if things were bad for racial minorities, there was pretty much nothing he could do about it. He was a run-of-the-mill asshole/douchenozzle in that regard, but I don’t think he had animus towards Americans based simply on the color of their skin.

I never understood how that explanation was supposed to be exculpatory.

It’s not. The thing to keep in mind is that it doesn’t matter what anyone might believe “deep inside”. It’s about as useful as wondering whether a domestic abuser “really” loves his wife.

I may be misremembering, but wasn’t there something with Bush’s stimulus checks where it turned out that they were essentially a loan, not a tax cut, and the amount went back onto your taxes the following year?

What happened was that you were not getting an “extra” tax cut in your 2001 check for $300: you were just getting your refund early, though technically the idea was that this is the money you would have saved on the 2001 round of tax cuts, just given in a lump sum rather than having less withheld over the course of the year.

Comment #45: Tyro  on  04/08  at  11:14 PM

I agree, Tyro. Dubya, as much as I ate to admit it, didn’t have a racist bone in his body. He had a lot of faults (to put it lightly), but I don’t see active racism as one of them. However that might have had something to do with (1) his familiy’s close ties to the Muslim and brownish Saudi Royal Family and (2) having an hispanic sister-in-law and hispanic nieces and nephews. You have to be a REAL fucking asshole to disown your relatives on the basis of race.

This is the same reason why Cheney isn’t a total active homophobe. Conservatives only advocate against racism or homophobia when someone THEY know falls into the category of a racial minority or LGBT. Then, all of a sudden, when it impacts them, being a minority or being gay is just fine and dandy.

The exceptions to this rule are psychotic assholes like Alan Keyes, who actually disown their felsh and blood because of their sexual orientation, but they’re a real small minority. So when I say that Dubya wasn’t a racist, and Cheney not homophobe, I’m damning with faint praise.

Comment #46: Ben D.  on  04/08  at  11:30 PM

Beck is willfully whipping up sedition. The line may be blurry, but he’s finding a way to cross it. Give him time.

Yes.  Absolutely.  Very much so.  Its a tactic you see so often when dealing with the forced-birth crowd:  they know the law inside-out so they can pull their harassment & intimidation bullshit that comes oh-so-close to violating the law but *just* stops short of anything that can actually get them arrested & charged.  The westboro baptist church cretins also moonlight as lawyers, so they’re well-practiced what the can & can’t get away with.

Comment #47: Smartpatrol  on  04/08  at  11:45 PM

Shit.  That last sentence ought to read: “...so they’re well-practiced with what they can & can’t get away with.”
The commenting thread could really use an “edit” button.

Comment #48: Smartpatrol  on  04/08  at  11:49 PM

I actually know some very liberal and Democratic-identified people who write for Forbes.

Forbes more than likely views Beck as a threat to the Republican brand and to their own idea of what it means to be conservative.  Malcolm Forbes never had any use for crusading religious whackadoodles - why should the media enterprise he founded like them any more?

Comment #49: Ms Kate  on  04/08  at  11:56 PM

when I say that Dubya wasn’t a racist, and Cheney not homophobe, I’m damning with faint praise.

Yes, their respective attitudes fall into the Chris-Rockian category of, “What do you want, a cookie?! You’re not supposed to be a racist/homophobe, you low-expectation-having motherfucker!”

Comment #50: Tyro  on  04/09  at  12:15 AM

Really, I think a few points need to be clarified.  There is only ONE way that right wingers can show their lack of esteem for Obama, and that is by setting fire to themselves.  Anything less shows a lack of commitment that cannot and should not be tolerated.

Comment #51: scratchy888  on  04/09  at  01:41 AM

Beck is going to be an “entertainer” with blood on his hands before very long, possibly quite a bit of blood. When somebody is going to such lengths to ensure that deranged armed loonies go out and kill someone based on his words (and in my opinion, this event is a certainty, not a possibility), is that person really just a comedian for money? If he knows what he is doing, if he is so deliberate about it, can he be turning himself into an accessory to murder just for the cash, shits and giggles? I think there are other things deeply wrong with him: his politics (even “just in it for the money” is a political statement) and his humanity.

He might be a money-making entertainer, but he’s also a political agent, and possibly the worst kind of fanatic, make no mistake about it.

Comment #52: CassieC  on  04/09  at  03:57 AM

The poor brainwashed woman who called into Beck’s show almost makes my heart break. She clearly finds $800 to be a huge amount of money (so much so that she thinks that, if it is a discrepancy, she will get audited for sure) which she truly needs, and here’s this horrible man who made $32 million in the last year alone encouraging her to send it back! Such audacity!

Comment #53: Tesla Dethray  on  04/09  at  06:45 AM

Talkers like Beck seem to be the spawn of Howard Stern. Remember when Stern was pro-Bush? All an act. Populism sells. And no one has ever lost a dime underestimating the intelligence of the American radio-listening audience.

Forbes and Republicans keep their distance from Beck because he is a train wreck in slow motion and they don’t want to be on it when he crashes.

Comment #54: epistemology  on  04/09  at  09:43 AM

Beck is going to knock the bottom out of hell.

Comment #55: DC Fem  on  04/09  at  10:15 AM

I just thought of another interpretation: maybe he’s a born genius panderer, and in this interview, he’s pandering to the Forbes crowd “seriously, it’s just all about the money!”

Comment #56: CassieC  on  04/09  at  10:16 AM

Oh, and the other thing: If that poor woman sends the money back, unless she endorses it over and specifically writes that she’s making a donation to the US Treasury, it’s just going either get sent back to her or credited to her next year’s taxes or turned into unclaimed property. And any of those things could trigger an audit or a means-based rejection of a benefits claim down the line.

Comment #57: paul  on  04/09  at  10:19 AM

Talkers like Beck seem to be the spawn of Howard Stern.

Stern does great interviews and has an interesting array of guests. Beck is the spawn of the “morning Zoo”-style radio DJs in the 80s… that was his first job, and he always aspired to broadcast from
the NYC market (though the names of the morning zoo hosts in NYC during that era escape me).

Comment #58: Tyro  on  04/09  at  10:36 AM

Holy cow.  I just now listened to the clip (figured I could just read the post and comments, but curiosity go the best of me).  Doesn’t Beck and his followers feel that taxes are the epitome of evil, money-sucking monsters and that every dime they have to pay to the IRS comes directly from their vital bodily fluids?  So…. he’s telling a poor ill woman that she should turn down a refund that is owed to her just to spite Obama?  I’m going to throw up.

It occurred to me that it’s been so long since Beck received a tax refund (given his current salary) that he thinks refunds are all a scam.

Comment #59: NobleExperiments  on  04/09  at  11:27 AM

Lies first, entertainment second, politics third more like. 

Kind of like “reality” TV versus, you know, reality?

Comment #60: Ms Kate  on  04/09  at  12:21 PM

brandon @35:
I donb’t know about ascendance, but I was watching the Daily show back in the 90s when it still had Craig Killborn.  I remember the switch to Jon Stewart, which was in 98 or 99 as when it started to be something I looked forward to watching instead of just hearing in the background or watching because that’s what the spouse and kids had on.

Comment #61: helen w. h.  on  04/09  at  12:29 PM

THE DEATH OF ATH*ISM - SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD

Yoo keep using that word, I do not believe it means what yoo think it means.

“Glenn Beck thinks his audience is a bunch of morons.”

Yeah, well, so do we.  But we try to educate, inform and construct logical strings of reason to refure their insanity.  Beck just urges them to higher levels of paranoia.

Maybe it’s because he thinks his audience doesn’t read Forbes.

You mea like how Rush Limbaugh is repeatedly feathured in Cigar Aficionado and he’s still considered a “regular guy” by his followers?

Comment #62: cynickal  on  04/09  at  12:31 PM

Why is drmabusa99 still here?  This is clearly a spambot and not a troll, so arguing is even more pointless than usual.  This is one account that should definitely be banned.

Comment #63: bananacat  on  04/09  at  12:56 PM

Glenn Beck immediately pivoted to declaiming how awful it was that Obama would cut taxes as a political ploy in an election year.

Can we just ban the phrase “in an election year”?  When you take into account the fact that the presidential election campaign season really starts a year early, there is effectively only 1 year in 4 that is NOT an election year.  It’s like saying “blah blah on a day of the week that ends with a ‘y’.”

Comment #64: xebecs  on  04/09  at  01:11 PM

A CPA then called in with actual information.

That CPA dude sounded so incredibly angry, I could almost see him spitting with rage.

Comment #65: PhysioProf  on  04/09  at  01:32 PM

No matter what you think of Stern, comparing Beck to him is way unfair to Stern. Stern is an excellent interviewer, and says what he thinks. There’s no question his views have evolved over the years, but there has never been any reason to believe the views he espoused aren’t his.

He is probably more on your team than you realize. He’s been on board with gay marriage ever since it became an issue, supported HCR and he is the only person I know of to apologize, in person, to the Dixie Chicks for what he had said about them.

Comment #66: Bruce from Missouri  on  04/09  at  01:32 PM

I don’t know what to really say about Beck, since I know of no other human being I have ever hated this much.  I can only hope he comes to a bad end. 

If he lives a long life, never faces the consquences of any of his despicable actions, never knows finanical want, and dies peacefully in his sleep, then that would be a fucking tragedy of historic proportions.

I have to say though, I see a Joseph McCarthy-like ending in his near future.  Disgrace is definitely coming.

Comment #67: JennyLI  on  04/09  at  02:06 PM

Hm. I used my tax refund to buy language learning software for a language spoken in a predominantly Muslim country.
Comment 8—Tyro

Swahili? Russian? English?

Reading the article from that Randian point of view, it becomes a lot less surprising that they’re torn between orgasms over Beck’s annual income and concern over the fact that he makes it by stirring up Teabagger Madame Defarges.
Comment 12—Gracchus

Part of his message, though, is “you know how you don’t have any money? This isn’t because of rich people, it’s because of liberals and the government oppressing rich people.” I can see how Forbes readers could get behind that, though of course they would never listen/watch themselves.

Well, Stewart came off smelling like roses, but I think that’s may be the root of some of the “it’s just entertainment” banners recently planted by Rush and Beck. If they pre-emptively claim to be entertainment, a sally like Stewarts doesn’t damage them as much, or so they think, not realising that it raises the curtain even more on their obvious Wizard-of-Ozzery.
Comment 25—PixelFish

There’s a difference between Glenn Beck saying “I’m an entertainer” and Jon Stewart saying “I’m an entertainer.” Two differences: Stewart says it on the air, and the content of the show bears it out. The Daily Show is presented as entertainment.

Its a tactic you see so often when dealing with the forced-birth crowd:  they know the law inside-out so they can pull their harassment & intimidation bullshit that comes oh-so-close to violating the law but *just* stops short of anything that can actually get them arrested & charged.
Comment 48—Smartpatrol

Except that guy in Plano.

Comment #68: Hershele Ostropoler  on  04/09  at  02:28 PM

It’s the main reason liberal talk radio does not work.  Not entertaining.  This is why guys like Rush, Hannity et al are successful - they recognize that what they do is entertainment first, politics etc second.

I don’t believe pandagon labels itself as “news” I think it safely places itself in the “commentary” neighborhood.  But they focus on being truthful.  The problem with Rush, Hannity, and Beck is that while they aren’t “News” they do claim to be “political” which when they write books get placed next to professors and economists who have actual discourse to write about.  When you start giving them the same status as people who know what is going on then we have problems. 

If they choose to be “entertainment” they should say so, write books that are put in the humor section and stay out of politics in the sense of atleast trying to be observational about the matter.  Stewart & Colbert make efforts to be accurate or atleast so obtuse the lies become obvious.  Beck lies with the idea to confuse and befuddle.  The trio on Fox every night border on slander but because its politically based we’re taught to let it go instead of charging them with it. 

To go back to the stern defender, he was on in the 80s, he was the developer of the whole “shock jock” style.  Because it wouldn’t play well in more conservative areas others put a softer spin on it but effectively Stern is the father of Beck.  Before him there were crazy right wing talk shows but Stern showed the way to the promised land of crazy people.

Comment #69: Xeranar  on  04/09  at  03:48 PM

Part of his message, though, is “you know how you don’t have any money? This isn’t because of rich people, it’s because of liberals and the government oppressing rich people.” I can see how Forbes readers could get behind that, though of course they would never listen/watch themselves.

You have to keep in mind that Beck, like most conservatives, works from the point of view that money is a zero-sum game: every dollar I don’t have is with someone else. More importantly, for his viewers (mostly working-class and lower-middle-class whites over 40) if someone like them doesn’t have money it means one of two things: the evil big government has it and is giving it to welfare queens and artists; or wealthy people who deserve it less (because they’re educated, decadent, liberals, African-American, etc.) have it.

In other words, he ads a social/moral dimension to the question of who should have that dollar and who shouldn’t, and he claims that mantle of the patriotic white Real Murkin along with his audience.

That’s how a woman who worries over $800 will take the advice of a multi-millionaire who makes his money with no-added-value flim-flam. But that same woman will go after any other multi-millionaire who doesn’t wrap himself in the flag or who made his money the “wrong” way or is the wrong colour or who commits some other sin against the norms of the Real Murkin—there are a lot of moneyCons who fit that bill of lading for the tumbrils.

Forbes magazine and its readers, totally obsessed with money as they are, believe that there’s no moral dimension to cash beyond possessing it. To understand how sincerely they believe this, note that the Forbes 400 now includes drug dealers and other serious criminals. But for Beck’s Know-Nothing audience, it’s bad enough that it also includes, without derogatory comment: Asians, Hispanics, African-Americans, Jews, Arabs, homosexuals, immigrants, those who keep their money in banks overseas, and a host of other types they love to hate.

Comment #70: Gracchus.  on  04/09  at  04:06 PM

or wealthy people who deserve it less (because they’re educated, decadent, liberals, African-American, etc.) have it.

I read that as “decent” initially, and I think the point still stood. :p Not acting like a reactionary yelling asshole is starting to become a marker* of liberalism, and I think.

*or should I say a warning sign? Watch out for it in your children!!1 And children, watch your parents…

Comment #71: Bagelsan  on  04/09  at  05:01 PM

We are an un and/or undereducated people. We must restore required classes in civics, American history and the U.S. Constitution to every school curriculum. I’m not sure when or why these subjects disappeared from American schools but I am seeing the results. People who know nothing will believe anything. We must have a people who have at the very least, a rudimentary understanding of the very structure and story of the country they are living in. Passing basic tests on civics, American history and the Constitution should be a requirement before issuing drivers’ licenses, with classes easily available on line to anyone who needs to learn this information. Is this in any way un-American? I think we have an emergency o our hands. What could be a reasonable argument against this? Knowledge IS power.
80 year-old retired teacher

Comment #72: marya  on  04/09  at  06:37 PM

I just listened to the recording.  What a foul piece of shit this man is.  When the woman says, “I was thinking of getting a treadmill because I’m on oxygen” (her exact words), Beck makes no response, not even a polite sympathetic noise or a question about her health.  He immediately twigs that this is someone for whom $800 is a huge, potentially life-changing amount of money—and he still chooses to feed her paranoia and tell her to send it back.

Still, it’s mildly amusing to listen to him scramble when the CPA calls and explains that, no, it’s not a gubmint conspiracy against one old lady who sent the White House a mean email; the Obama administration really is sending people $800 checks.  Oh, shit, there’s no way they aren’t gonna like that.  Maybe I can play the “it’s just a rebate, it’s not real money” card?  Nah, not enough to plug this hole… What if I whine that he’s just doing it to be popular and throw a tantrum until everyone forgets what we were talking about?  If I scream and pretend to cry, those idiots’ll forget Obama made me look like a jackass again.  Okay!  I’m going with tantrum!

Comment #73: Shaenon  on  04/09  at  06:51 PM

We are an un and/or undereducated people. We must restore required classes in civics, American history and the U.S. Constitution to every school curriculum.

Uh-huh.  And when they get hijacked for mandatory indoctrination by the God, Guns and Guts crowd - what then?

Comment #74: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/10  at  06:25 AM

#74 Shaeonon… exactly. This line of argument only makes sense in that crazy way that abusers make sense. The point is that there is no point. You simply are not allowed to be right.

In law, you’re allowed to make contradictory arguments “in the alternative.” E.g., arguing that a statute doesn’t apply to your client, and then arguing that even if it did apply your client is in the right for some other reason. But that’s in the context of a highly structured debate with rules and consequences. Pulling a stunt like that on talk radio just means you’re messing with people.

Comment #75: catfood  on  04/10  at  10:12 AM

Dear Glenn Beck:
Dave Foley called.  He wants his sketch back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83tnWFojtcY

Mark & AngelScarlett, the comedy gods @ the Onion have heard your prayers: http://www.theonion.com/video/victim-in-fatal-car-accident-tragically-not-glenn,14380/

Comment #76: Smartpatrol  on  04/10  at  04:49 PM

If it weren’t for this thread and my friend looking into something he heard from a coworker, I never would have paid the least attention to that “schedule M” that’s sitting right on the front of the IRS website.  Thanks, guys!  This was definitely a year where a $400 credit did me a lot of good.

Comment #77: Kyso K  on  04/11  at  12:03 AM

My fiance is using his tax return to pay the the rent and bills for May. But I bet the right wingers think we don’t deserve our living space because we’re not out in the workforce…. Big university city and no one is hiring, not even a McDonalds. Most internships are unpaid and the school doesn’t like giving out loans for safer off campus living (seriously, the dorms get broken into too often).

So Glen Beck, I likely don’t deserve the money I am getting back….

Comment #78: SilverKitten  on  04/13  at  02:14 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.