Do Americans consider talk show hosts like Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or any other talk show host credible? I can't find very many Americans (from either side of the isle) who think so. The excerpt below was taken from a post from a Conservative blog titled, News With Views written by Devvy.
"The only reason these talk show hosts get away with putting out half truths or outright lies on the air waves is because the listening audience puts up with it. If listeners would call the radio or TV network and tell them they will no longer listen to Hannity, O, Rush, Boortz or any other talk show host that broadcasts propaganda, you would see change in a heartbeat. Talk radio and television is ratings driven. If the stations get thousands of phone calls letting them know you will no longer be a listener or viewer, it will shake the tree, believe me. Also, listeners should call in each and every time one of these talk show hosts makes a comment or expounds on any issue that is clearly wrong and has no basis in fact or law. If they cut you off, the listening audience will wonder why."So, what do you think? Is Devvy right when she opined, "FACT-CHALLENGED TALK SHOW HOSTS DO ENORMOUS HARM?"
I know some people who listen to at least some of them. And obviously some people do, Glenn Beck had a rather large rally. Personally I don't, though.
ReplyDeleteWhat does enormous harm is the tatters of conventional media simply treating all this in a lazy "he said, she said" style of reporting.
ReplyDeleteOn the question of whether Obama is a Muslim, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell recently told a talk show host, "I take the president at his word," as if that is the only objective measure of the matter, that no other evidence or facts exist. The host let McConnell's rank intellectual dishonesty lie--his very next question should have been, "Do you believe there is or could be objective evidence to answer the question? What would convince you, other than pure faith in the president's words?"
The "he said/she said" style creates a false equivalence, as does the frequent assertion that "both sides of the aisle are to blame." Oh, really? I can't think of anything on the left that approaches the Beck/Limbaugh/Palin/FOX axis of venality. It's interesting how all of them are on the payroll of News Corp.
It's okay to listen to Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Heck I do, if I'm stuck in traffic and bored.
ReplyDeleteBut Anonymous2 raises an important point. the he said/she said style creates a false equivalence.
Unfortunately, recent polls have shown that a growing number of Americans consider these entertainers to be a credible source of information.
I worry that many Americans are no longer able to discern reality from entertainment.
>I worry that many Americans are no longer able to discern reality from entertainment.
ReplyDelete...By design.
I agree with the idea that if listeners revolted the shows would change, and while it's a beautiful thought I highly doubt it would ever happen. Most of the audience for those programs, in my opinion, aren't looking for information. They want the emotional high of self-righteousness and feeling like a community under attack.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that it's necessarily a reality/entertainment issue, but rather that many of them seems to believe that they already know everything that they need to. There are informative sources available but they aren't looking for them.
Politifact indicates the following true statements from our governing parties leadership.
ReplyDeleteNancy Pelosi tells the accurate truth 15% of the time when checked by Politifact.
Harry Reid tells the truth when checked by Politifact 15% of the time.
President Obama tells the truth 25% of the time when checked by Politifact.
Who really cares what Glenn Beck or John Stewart are saying, look at the people who are running our country today, if you want to look for people who have tremendous power to do harm, by not telling the truth.
Folks blaming Beck or Limbaugh are missing the larger point, which is do these guys really have any power, because if not, why should we care.
As the Democratic Party is on the verge of being fired by the voters after having the reins of power for a few scant years, the Liberal or Progressives, or whatever they wish to re-brand themselves, are beginning to blame everyone except themselves for being "fired" by the American people.
It is all Glenn Beck's fault??
Right.
Get serious.
The American public is being forced deep into government debt, and we have 16% of our fellow Americans unemployed, or under-employed.
I suppose this is the result of a talk show host too.
Big surprise, you're more tolerant than I Elisabeth.
ReplyDeleteIf I were to listen to the king of (can't even say it and don't want to dumb it down with a Bravo Sierra or any circuitous attempts at vagueness) I would be tearing apart the upholstery in my vehicle like the Tiger in Hangover.
That's why, though back in the day I was a sometimes guest on KGMI's Haines Fay or Bill Quehrn's show-- I stopped supporting or listening to KGMI, Kause Gross (ignorance is not) My Inclination, except when the power goes out and there's a big countywide weather or disaster event that I want to know about-- since the day they put that moron on their airwaves and slid into irrelevance as that stupidity blared from every construction site in the county.
I sure hope I was able to convey what a lowlivea I believe Limburger and his deluded stations, willing to trade their integrity for total (again, whatever) I believe any media organization is for even furthering this (agains)pathetic little (again, *#%terd's) and mostly ($$$$$##*king) idiots career.
And anonymuse-----read between the asterisks.
Whew, I only feel partially cleansed... ;)
Dave,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your thoughtful post!
e
Shaun,
ReplyDeleteI grew up in a Republican household ( a Teddy Roosevelt Republican household).
My parents taught me that it is important to be tolerant of all belief systems (after all, we were a military family and my dad traveled the world).
:)
P.S. Limbaugh pushes my buttons too!
ReplyDelete:)
Shaun,
ReplyDeleteWay to stay on subject. Here I was afraid that you would fall into your old habit of attacking the messenger, rather than the message.
You and Limbaugh are cut from the same cloth.
Although I doubt you would understand that both of you use the partisan hyperbole almost exclusively. (Different parties though)
I grew up in a Republican household too, but they quit the R's after W's first term and blew me away by voting for Kerry. My Mom passed shortly after, but my Dad voted for Obama.
ReplyDeleteI liked Ike. But I was too young to vote.
But I apologize for soiling your nest. I haven't been getting my recommended daily dose of argumentum. And no one has ever mistaken me for Mahatma.
While I practice civility and tolerance on a personal level, (I even have friends who are of the other persuasion ;) ), I have little for the right wing and their ideas these days and tend to go all Howard Beale.
But you've heard this before....
Anonymous, not sure where you got your list of supposed lies, but check this one out. And please note that when they fact check the Liar statements, truth only pops up in relation to small inconsequential details that can be easily explained by misspeaks or that expose the bias of those claiming the 'lie' and end up making the Liar claim a tortured shoehorning of details to support that he 'lied'. And none of the so called lies are as blatant an exercise in prevarication for propaganda's sake as those of the Becksputin at his Beckinalia...
ReplyDeletehttp://truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-lies.htm
Fact checking Anonymous...
ReplyDelete"Way to stay on subject. Here I was afraid you'd fall into your old habit of attacking the messenger, rather than the message." (Delivered sarcastically)
False , False, False and Not Enough Information
The subject was talk show hosts like Beck and Limbaugh and most of Shaun's statements, except personal responses to E were on those two. It was in fact Anonymouse who strayed off topic by introducing Stewart to the mix, but he is a show host so we'll let that speak for itself.
If by attacking the messenger he refers to attacking the message of Beck, that's true, but since it was a sarcastic statement that alleges a personal bias of Shaun towards anonymous and his message supporting Beck, then that is suspect because it was a difference of opinion in a back and forth discussion where anyone could claim they were being attacked for their position.
Also, Anon was not 'afraid' Shaun would attack, the sarcasm seems to suggest that anon knew he would attack.
It's also impossible to know from this discussion if this an old habit or a new one as there is not enough information on this thread to support that.
"You a Limbaugh are cut from the same cloth."
False. There is no information to suggest Shaun is a supporter of Limbaugh or a relative or a right wing talk show host--or made of cloth. The statement is, in fact, just hyperbole.
"Although I doubt that you would understand that
both of you use partisan hyperbole almost exclusively. (Different parties though)"
Unproven, unproven and true.
There is nothing to suggest that Shaun does not understand he uses partisan hyperbole or that Limbaugh does.
There is nothing to suggest he uses hyperbole almost exclusively. Not enough information available here.
The only partial truth is that he is of a different party than the party line Limbaugh often supports. But it is partial because while the rhetoric might suggest Shaun is of a different party it is not definitively stated in this thread.
The overall conclusion is that anonymous was spreading falsehoods about Shaun based on insufficient information.
Isn't it interesting how truths can be tortured into lies.... ;)
Shaun,
ReplyDeleteWhat I find fascinating is that this post about radio talk show hosts, is thought to be a serious discussion.
It is almost as if folks have lost the ability via partisan politics to think critically. (Although they will deny it ad nauseum)
To find the truth, I simply used Politifact, which Liz has cited, to eliminate the argument over the integrity of whom decides the "facts".
Here is what is so disappointing. When I look at Politifact and divide the number of truths, by the total statements analyzed, I find that Glenn Beck only tells the whole, accurate truth 5% of the time.
Before you celebrate, consider this Nancy Pelosi only tells the truth 5% of the time also.
All polls show very few people are actually swayed by the talk show entertainers, but consider this.
Nancy Pelosi, as the Speaker of the House control close to $4 trillion dollars in annual spending. She controls more money annually than any person on earth.
Yet folks like yourself want to focus on Glenn Beck and you want to be considered a serious observer of American politics.
Glenn Beck is a passing fancy and has no real power to speak of. He is a shock jock, much like the Reverend Wright.
Nancy Pelosi on the other hand wields some very serious power, and can't seem to get her facts straight, and that is worrisome as she gets all her money from our wallets.
Any honest analysis of critical thinking skills would lead to a serious discussion of Nancy Pelosi's honesty, long before analyzing Glenn Beck.
Of course some partisan folks would like to avoid any criticism of their party.
Which solves nothing.
Shaun,
ReplyDeleteYou mis-understand my comparing you to Limbaugh.
Limbaugh will say anything to support his partisan view, even if it is not entirely true.
His mind cannot be swayed by facts, and he has a difficulty in ever changing his mind or graciously giving the other debater a valid point.
Limbaugh will argue, even in the face of clear facts, and will go to the grave swearing he is correct in all his analysis.
In short he is a died in the wool partisan, which is probably why he has little power.
He is more of a shit stirrer, than a serious critical thinker.
But he does entertain a small segment of our society. The KKK had more sway than Limbaugh.
He is un-important, because his analysis is weak.
Commentators who have political power, always have good analysis and good facts.
A paper by T. Donovan - This paper examines the potential for strategic Republican crossover voting in the March 4, 2008 Democratic primaries.
ReplyDeleteSome observers note that conservative media figures encouraged Republicans to raid the Democratic primary in order to weaken the Democratic Party's chances in the November election. Analysis of exit poll data from 38 states suggests that Republicans may have been voting strategically in Democratic primaries, but there is little evidence that March 4th was unusual in the scope of strategic behavior.
http://www.bepress.com/forum/vol6/iss2/art6/
Oh Anonymous---please....
ReplyDeleteI got the comparison, did you not get my sarcastic satire?
If it's not a serious discussion why are you lending your voice? I take the influence of shock jocks and pontificators seriously because every day I hear politicos and others using their hyperbole--as well as average citizens, like Tea Party identifiers, who get most of their info from Faux News. Have you forgotten how credible they have become to some?
Also the same sort of tortured logic I used in my fact check of you is how those figures you cite are arrived at. Those leaps of logic put you in the low range of veracity too.
Beck is hardly a passing fancy. Did you not look at the old clips of him from years ago in my links? He makes 32 million dollars a year spewing his bile and bilking the very audience that flocks to him for Golden Fleecing. (See Mother Jones last month.)
"All polls show very few people are swayed.."
Are you kidding me? How do you explain that now only a small percentage of the Republican party disbelieves the birther argument and the Obama as Muslim argument. That's not coming from the leaders who only hedge, with comments like "I can't be sure" or he "needs to address the birth certificate argument." That phrap is coming right off the Faux tube and the Limburger show and the rest of that ilk who give voice to intellectually devoid miscreants like Orly Taitz.
I am a serious observer of American politics.
I'm also an Anti-Culture Warrior and a lover of satire expressed through humor.
But again, your last post flies in the face of all the polls lately showing just how much influence Faux News and the shock jocks have on the befuddled right.
And again the increase in viewership. Faux News is the number one channel that the confused right listens to and watches and if you seriously think that it is a small segment, like the KKK, then you are smoking something you should share.
"Commentators who have political power, always have good analysis and good facts." Given all the above that is worth a good snort.
It isn't just commentators, it's politicians like the former quitter from Alaska who beguiled John McCain. Or Sharron Angle who a lot of deluded Nevadans listen to despite her being daily shown to be a complete idiot. (Although she is dropping like a rock with 'serious' citizens the more she spews.) Or
Alveada King, a distant cousin of MLK whom most of her family thinks is out to lunch and an opportunist. Or just about anyone on the podium behind the Beckinator. Or the Koch brothers who are the originators and supporters of the Tea Party who also are totally two faced.
Or Dick Armey who is a prime example of opportunistic former leaders for whom one could write a song like "Don't You Turn My Brown Eyes Blue."
Also I have plenty of criticism for the Dems. I have written Obama scathing messages in spite of the fact that my wife and I donated a couple of grand. Mostly for not calling Bravo Sierra on the other side more often or for continuing this war in Afghanistan and saying stupid things like the surge worked. Hint: It was bribing Al Sadr and the militias that all but ended major opposition to the U.S. before the sham of the so-called surge.
But I stick with him and other Dems at the polling place because I believe they represent my core values better than their opponents.
Oh Anonymous---please....
ReplyDeleteI got the comparison, did you not get my sarcastic satire?
If it's not a serious discussion why are you lending your voice? I take the influence of shock jocks and pontificators seriously because every day I hear politicos and others using their hyperbole--as well as average citizens, like Tea Party identifiers, who get most of their info from Faux News.
Also the same sort of tortured logic I used in my fact check of you is how those figures you cite are arrived at.
Beck is hardly a passing fancy. Did you not look at the old clips of him from years ago in my links? He makes 32 million dollars a year spewing his bile and bilking the very audience that flocks to him for Golden Fleecing. (See Mother Jones last month.)
"All polls show very few people are swayed.."
Are you kidding me? How do you explain that now only a small percentage of the Republican party disbelieves the birther argument and the Obama as Muslim argument. That's not coming from the leaders who only hedge, that phrap is coming right off the Faux tube and the Limburger show who give voice to intellectually devoid miscreants like Orly Taitz.
Faux News is the number one channel that the confused right listens to and watches and if you seriously think that it is a small segment, then you need to share whatever you're imbibing.
I have plenty of criticism for the Dems. I have written Obama scathing messages in spite of the fact that my wife and I donated a couple of grand. Mostly for not calling Bravo Sierra on the other side more often or for continuing this war in Afghanistan and saying stupid things like the surge worked.
But I stick with him and other Dems at the polling place because I believe they represent my core values better than their opponents.
Re: Conservative media influence, Paul Krugman writes:
ReplyDelete"Utah Republicans have denied Robert Bennett, a very conservative three-term senator, a place on the ballot, because he’s not conservative enough. In Maine, party activists have pushed through a platform calling for, among other things, abolishing both the Federal Reserve and the Department of Education. And it’s becoming ever more apparent that real power within the G.O.P. rests with the ranting talk-show hosts."
and,
"The seamless success of this model in creating issues and crafting narratives has made the out-of-power Republican Party effectively subservient to the conservative media crowd. The tail is wagging the dog; partisan media is driving the GOP message and not the other way around."
http://themoderatevoice.com/72937/is-talk-radio-the-real-power-in-the-republican-party/
Anonymous, Here are a few more examples.
ReplyDeleteRassmussen Reports Poll: "67% Say News Media Have Too Much Influence Over Government Decisions."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2010/67_say_news_media_have_too_much_influence_over_government_decisions
Voters under 40: (in regards to programs like The daily show and Colbert Report)
"Thirty-nine percent (39%) of adults say programs of this nature are making Americans more informed about news events, while 21% believe they make people less informed. Twelve percent (12%) say they have no impact.
Twenty-one percent (21%) characterize programs like The Colbert Report and The Daily Show as at least somewhat influential in shaping their political opinions, including seven percent (7%) who say they are Very Influential. Most (70%) say they are not influential, with 44% who say they are not at all influential."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/entertainment/march_2009/nearly_one_third_of_younger_americans_see_colbert_stewart_as_alternatives_to_traditional_news_outlets
Shaun,
ReplyDeleteYou are obsessed with Fox News, but you conveniently ignore Nancy Pelosi's inability to tell the whole truth, while controlling more money annually than anyone on earth.
Dual standards??
I understand your obsession, better than you do.
Liz,
ReplyDeleteI said that Limbaugh has very little power. Zero of the links above address my comments, but rather the media in general.
Of course the media in general has power. Media includes TV, Radio, Newspapers, Magazines, and of course the Internet.
There is worldwide voter revolt in progress, as their institutions both political and media have are widely viewed as failing to protect the public, while they are all too happy to stuff their own pockets.
This revolt is hitting not just Democrats, but Republicans as well.
Those who were in power are going to pay a price for their failures. Only fair when you think about, considering many in America and elsewhere have already begun paying the price for politicians poor governance.
Folks who have had their hands on the levers of power, are going to be fired.
More Dems will be fired simply for two reasons. Folks don't like their policies, and of course there are more of them in power today.
Politicians are looked at by many as two faced and self-centered.
This broad generality is not fair, but arguing that this reputation has not been earned is folly as well.
Of course they have earned this reputation, and many good politicians sat on the sidelines saying nothing, in order to make the party bosses happy.
So I guess in some backwards sense, even the well intentioned politicians have earned a bad reputation, by intentionally remaining silent.
The cozy relationship between old media and those in power, is being upset by Fox News.
Well screw cozy.
It is cozy for those in power, but is it cozy for the American people?
Screw cozy.
Go Fox News.
Local party bosses, screw you too.
Power to the voters.
First you rag on me for straying off topic, then you want to talk about Pelosi who was not part of this discussion.
ReplyDeleteI understand your obsession with me d, better than you.... ;)
Even worldwide they recognize what power Limbaugh has.....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4402218/Rush-Limbaugh-in-the-lead-in-battle-with-Barack-Obama.html
And of course here too....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Rush_Limbaugh
Anon, I want to see your papers.... ;)
ReplyDeleteBecause you would have to have been living in a cocoon for years to not recognize the influence this pantload has.....
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/rush-limbaugh-sarah-palin-and-party.html
No, this man has no influence....
ReplyDeletehttp://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/white-house/is-rush-limbaugh-the-new-face.html
Oh, if onlhttp://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/radio/rush_limbaughs_silent_influence__75315.aspy he were silent....
ReplyDeleteThat was weird, once more with feeling....
ReplyDeleteOh, if only he were silent.....
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/radio/rush_limbaughs_silent_influence__75315.asp
Which way are you going to spin now anon?
ReplyDeletehttp://vodpod.com/watch/2133136-listening-post-rush-limbaughs-influence
Don't get yer hopes up by the last word in the link, the point of the article is it's not...
ReplyDeletehttp://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2008/01/24/cnn-rush-limbaugh-talk-radio-s-power-diminishing
Limbaugh is a joke, but no one's laughing at the punch lines....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.statehornet.com/2.4408/rush-limbaugh-is-a-joke-1.560354
I gotta get something else done today so I will leave you with a few good jokes at Limberger's expense.....
ReplyDeletetp://hubpages.com/hub/Rush-Limbaugh-Is-An-Idiot--Rush-Limbaugh-Jokes-and-Political-Musings
How about a local angle...
ReplyDeletehttp://open.salon.com/blog/seattlecb/2009/02/06/rush_limbaugh_is_a_big_fat_joke
Adieu...
ReplyDeletehttp://politicalhumor.about.com/od/rushlimbaugh/a/limbaughjokes.htm?nl=1
Shaun,
ReplyDeleteYou are so obsessed that you missed the whole point of this post. The point of the post was not Limbaugh, but the power of people who do not tell the truth.
In this vain, Pelosi and Beck are in the same category.
Too bad you are so blind that you cannot admit that a Democratic hack could lie, and regularly.
And when it comes to having power, and lying, Beck is not even in the same category as Pelosi.
You make my point for me. You are only upset at those who lie, because the disagree with your world view.
Lying is okay, if they agree with you.
You can cure ignorance, but not blindness.
You're idea of a serious discussion, is that you are always right.
Shaun, Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI realize Sam's blog hiatus has been difficult for the two of you - so Latte is happy to let you continue your long-standing dispute of conservative v. liberal.
Have fun!
And thanks for respecting the baby truce over on the Bellingham Herald Political Blog!
:)
And you don't pick the dandelions and claim they are petunias? I state my opinions and defend them.
ReplyDeleteWhen was the last time you acquiesced or does that word only stick in your throat?
Why don't you wash it down with that Chardonnay you're holding in your latest Facebook photo. ;)
Nice shirt too. Is it a Tommy's, or a Bamboo Cay?
(Hint: I'm not insulting your wardrobe or your choice of wine. I have a few dozen of those and love the feel of silk. But the last white wine I drank was Annie Green Springs out of a box in the 70's. So lambast me for that if you want something to lambast me for. ;))
But Sir Lacksalot,(and thanks for the backhanded "you're ignorant and blind" reference) I never said that Dems don't parse words.
But lets hear 5 lies Pelosi has uttered, this year only with links (as I did for the dumb duo)and I don't want to hear about the waterboarding briefing controversy from 2006 which is about the only thing you can find by Googling.
And Hastert, political hack that he was, also attacked Pelosi with lies.....
Should I conclude that all Republican office holders are political hacks and, like Hastert and lie 95% of the time?
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/26/hastert-pelosi-immigration/
Also anon, why don't you drop the anon charade.
ReplyDelete"Ye shall know them.." by their style of carping...and trademark phraseology.
But as I once said, you complete me,
like fire and water. Like a brother from another mother.
When one is on fire, the other is always tinkling on the embers. ;)
I gotta go finish mowing...
E--- ;) ;)
Let's mine a richer vein of lies...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.whatistheword.com/story/USWorld_21.html
This was then..
(Yeah I know, how can we miss you when you won't go away)
ReplyDeleteThis is now....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wires/2010/09/02/illegal-immigration-decli_ws_703139.html
Oh but that was then too since the reports says it has been declining for several years, including at the time of the so called Pew report cited earlier.
Shall I generalize that the anti-illegal immigration crowd always lies?
Related, from the cheap shot column...did anyone see Jan 'papers please' Brewer's stellar performance?
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/20100902/cm_atlantic/lunchtimevidjanbrewersmortifyingdebateperformance4901_1
A partisan hack, and never one to resist a microphone or a soap box...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/roy-sekoff-ed-show-glenn-beck-phony-gospel_b_704250.html
Keep going.
ReplyDeleteYou are making more sense all the time.
Boy someone has snark down cold.
ReplyDeleteI always find Shaun's comments to be clever, funny, pointed and thoughtful--especially when he's using his sarcastic, rapier like wit in satirical fashion. It gives me goose bumps.
ReplyDeleteHe does draw a lot of fire for being aggressive about his viewpoint. That's fine with me. You go Shaun. ;)
I also agree that Beck and Limbaugh are a couple of twits. We shouldn't just dismiss them as if they're not a threat to the national conscience, anonymous.
I also don't love Pelosi all that much, but compared to Boehner of Orange she is several cuts above.
I don't think you own that name Shaun.
ReplyDeleteGet over it.
I liked all your links though and you're right about Beck and Limbaugh.
If any group deserves the title of partisan hacks, it's the tired old Ron Paul people now calling themselves the Tea Party.
ReplyDeletehttp://modern-esquire.blogspot.com/2009/03/tea-party-protestors-are-partisan-hacks.html
I'm with Shaun on this one. Whenever someone with that big of a microphone and connected to a source that most on the right hand of the spectrum get their news from, it is dangerous.
ReplyDeletehttp://seattle.craigslist.org/see/rnr/1936243780.html
Anyone who doesn't believe a lot of people, especially Tea Party folks are listening to and repeating the kind of nonsense that comes off of Fox News is really kidding themselves.
ReplyDeleteI too could find only one instance of Pelosi lying on line form back in 2006 or so, but many by Beck and even Boehner that are more recent.
http://www.usforacle.com/glenn-beck-is-spreading-dangerous-ideas-1.1877824
Boehner lies with impugnity.
ReplyDeletehttp://politicalirony.com/2009/10/07/john-boehner-doesnt-care-how-obvious-his-lies-are/
Sorry for that g in impunity.
ReplyDeleteOn this one link, Boehner lies at least 80% of the time if I were to used the stilted logic of some here.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/john-boehner/
Earlier anonymous, Is this the person you'd rather be lied to by?
ReplyDeletehttp://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/boehner-lies-about-bush-tax-cuts-and-deficits
If I wanted to make some absurd allegations that all Republicans lie their buns off, I might be close, but would that be fair.
ReplyDeletehttp://crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy/john-boehner-backpeddling-stimulus-li
Lying seems to be practised all too often by both parties.
ReplyDeleteSome people are unable to recognize when their favorite party lies.
Of course, they are then, lying to themselves.
No Beck has no power.
ReplyDeleteJust an entire so-called Tea Party movement reading and conducting brainwashing classes in the fantasies of a "Mormon nutter' who is the Golden Fleecer's guru...
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2009/09/glenn-beck-and-his-crazy-5000.html
The only person seriously paying attention to Beck, is you Shaun.
ReplyDeleteIf you think that anon you are living in a fantasy land. What else is new huh?
ReplyDeleteSo anonymess are all the people in this photo just morons who's opinions matter not one wit to you or anyone else?
ReplyDeleteThey all traveled there just because they knew they weren't going to be paid any attention?
They spent their hard earned dollars in a recession to travel hundreds or thousands of miles to gather like lemmings for no reason at all?
The local Tea Party conducts classes on the book written by Beck's Mormon 'nutter' guru just because they like to get together, fold tinfoil hats and act inconsequential?
It all means nothing?
The anti-incumbent wave is just that of moist pachydermal dreams?
Yet you feel compelled to snark at anyone who calls attention to the deluded masses.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100830/cm_yblog_upshot/glenn-beck-rally-sparks-debate-over-crowd-size
Shaun, what you fail to support is the actual depth of Beck persuasion.
ReplyDeleteYou see if Beck only has sway over 100,000 voters out of 100 million, then I would ignore him just like many fringe elements on both sides of the ailse.
For all the brouhah over Rush, nobody has ever proved that he actually influences a significant number of voters.
By the way, proof of influence is more scientific then citing a bunch of Internet sites who espouse opinions that agree with your world view.
Two similar opinions do not equal one fact.
And even if 100 people agree with your opinion, doesn't ensure that your are correct.
There are plenty of people who have soapboxes and draw a crowd.
Few have real influence (in my opinion)
You may wish to keep in mind that not everything that Beck spews is inaccurate, and he does have a following that finds some value.
Not everything Republican, Conservative, or Tea Party is evil, and everything Democratic, or New Progressive is saintly.
You seem to write like a the world is black and white, but even Mother Theresa made mistakes. A little balance is in order.
Unfortunately many expect politicians to lie. This is a far more serious concern, in my opinion. Politicians have enormous power.
Last it is my observation that changing the character of today's political character is more effectively done by self-critisism within the party's than the external partisan attacks.
The Tea Party is doing more to change the Republican Party than all the Democratic partisan.
Look at the number of primary losses that are being handed to the Republican Party bosses hand-picked candidates.
I hope that the Republican Party once again produces a Contract with America. At least I know in black and white what candidate is committing to.
I will withold comment until I see what is actually in it, but I suspect that to make the Tea Partiers happy, it will have to be clear hard commitments, and not some sort of slippery lawyer language.
That would backfire.
Last c
PS, I would like to see the Democrats also produce a Contract with America.
ReplyDeletePut it in writing.
Well Anon, what you're going to hear more of is my world view...It's all I have born of experience, education and general awareness.
ReplyDeleteScientific proof that Beck is an influence? I thought you guys didn't believe in science.
Turn all that transference around and admit your opinion does not equal fact either.
That's the nature of a disagreement. You think you're right and I think a body of evidence shows otherwise. And there is quite a body of evidence.
I agree the Tea Party is challenging the R's. They are their worst instincts come to life and the R's have to decide if they're going to use the fear that can be stirred up to get out this body of voters or take a higher road.
Of course it's not all black and white,m but like the old joke goes, told in Josey's saga..."don't piss down my neck and tell me it's raining."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27282.html
Beck and Limbaugh are both cultists on a grand scale.
ReplyDeleteIf the media has no influence why does every major corporation in the world advertise on it?
Why is Fixed News the number one channel? Better yet, why is the National Enquirer of the cable media the number one channel people go to for information on politics?
No influence?
Again pass that over here....Bogey
Forgot my link...
ReplyDeletehttp://mediamatters.org/research/201008270031?lid=1136476&rid=52635687