Beck: "I Have A Feeling We're Headed For A Monarchy"

[smackababy]

Why can't this thread be a deeper examination of the political undertones of 'Odelay'?

This was what I was hoping as well. =( I guess I just came in with a devil's haircut in my mind.

 

[TheVrolok]

Take away the profit motive and I doubt even Glenn Beck believes his own crap.

That's what makes it even worse to me.

 

[jackstar7]

This was what I was hoping as well. =( I guess I just came in with a devil's haircut in my mind.

So glad I have an external drive at work full of my music, for times like these when I now need to hear that song.



Please forgive this distraction from your discussion of G. Beck and his absurdity.

 

[Theb]

So we're not Zimbabwe or the Weimar Republic anymore? A monarchy sounds relatively optimistic for Beck.

 

[lotus503]

That's what makes it even worse to me.

I agree and its what makes the people who buy into Beck's line of crazy nothing but sheeple. Beck is a modern day, televangelist, I suspect the folks that give his crap creedence had older realtives donating to jim baker and all the other Sunday TV donation whores.

This is my personal opinion of course.

 

[Bowfinger]

I agree and its what makes the people who buy into Beck's line of crazy nothing but sheeple. Beck is a modern day, televangelist, I suspect the folks that give his crap creedence had older realtives donating to jim baker and all the other Sunday TV donation whores.

This is my personal opinion of course.

The truly sad part is even Beck seems to agree with you. He has often called himself an entertainer. From Forbes:

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. He has managed to monetize virtually everything that comes out of his mouth. He gets $13 million a year from print (books plus the ten-issue-a-year magazine Fusion). Radio brings in $10 million. Digital (including a newsletter, the ad-supported Glennbeck.com and merchandise) pulls in $4 million. Speaking and events are good for $3 million and television for $2 million.

Playing to the lunatic fringe is most profitable.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Don't be fooled by the "entertainer" label. People like Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity haul out only when convenient -- such as when they are being criticized. If you actually listen to them, and more importantly, their listeners, they are not just trying to entertain. They flatly refer to themselves as being primary sources of information and even "news" to their followers.

 

[Bowfinger]

Don't be fooled by the "entertainer" label. People like Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity haul out only when convenient -- such as when they are being criticized. If you actually listen to them, and more importantly, their listeners, they are not just trying to entertain. They flatly refer to themselves as being primary sources of information and even "news" to their followers.

Fooled by it? It's the truth. He is an entertainer. He foments outrage for profit. It's when he claims to be a "source of information" that one should not be fooled. Sadly, much of the fringe right is fooled and take his act seriously.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I didn't actually think you would be fooled by these charlatans. I was just trying to point out that they are duplicitous in their use of that word. They know their listeners don't think of them as just "entertainers", and I honestly don't think they view themselves that way either. They think what they are doing is important. They only trot out the "entertainer" crap when someone challenges them on the damage the crap they spew does to society.

 

[shortylickens]

At first I was thinking "why do I care what that smelly hippy thinks?" then I realized "oh, GLENN Beck!".

Then I cared even less than before.

 

[Moonbeam]

I didn't actually think you would be fooled by these charlatans. I was just trying to point out that they are duplicitous in their use of that word. They know their listeners don't think of them as just "entertainers", and I honestly don't think they view themselves that way either. They think what they are doing is important. They only trot out the "entertainer" crap when someone challenges them on the damage the crap they spew does to society.

I agree with this. I honestly think they view themselves as representatives of truth and what is good for America, that they are crusaders for a glorious cause and supporters of all the standards of conservative morality rather than just the few ascribed to by liberals.

But you speak of the damage the crap they spew does to society. Yet this is the point that I harp on over and over that causes so much contention, that they are dangerous, to themselves and to the rest of us.

How many school children must die before we do something little, like gun registration, how long are we going to live in a constant, 'every man is an island', state of competition, and all the mental health issues that creates? How long are we going to live with this cancer of irrational insanity center stage and filibustering rational thought? We have a potentially fatal disease.

And we have had the opportunity to redress this issue with counter-speech for a long long time.

The wonderful thing about the mental illness of excessive ego protection and the fear of feeling negatives is that the more rational thought is applied to correct it, the more convinced the affected are that they are right. A fool convinced against his will is of the same opinion still, and this has been known for hundreds and more of years. Think of the parable of the sower.

Until we are willing to face our own self hate we are doomed to hate each other because self hate is the only hate their is. Everything that is wrong with the world is wrong because there is something wrong with each of us. We are the world we see, the projection of what we will not face, the manifestation of our own fears. There is this one truth and it covers everything. And the only reason we can hate is because we were meant to love, that love is the ground of our being.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

At first I was thinking "why do I care what that smelly hippy thinks?" then I realized "oh, GLENN Beck!".

Then I cared even less than before.

LOL.

Moonbeam, what you have never seemed to understand is that they think you are dangerous to the country exactly as much as you think they are. They think you are foolish and mentally ill just the way you think they are. And neither left nor right has a monopoly on good or bad ideas.

 

[Moonbeam]

LOL.

Moonbeam, what you have never seemed to understand is that they think you are dangerous to the country exactly as much as you think they are. They think you are foolish and mentally ill just the way you think they are. And neither left nor right has a monopoly on good or bad ideas.

Where did you get this idea. I seem to recall that I was the only person defending Cybrsage in the troll banning trials he was subjected to because there was no objective way to determine the difference between where he stands and I do. And this is why, also, in P & N, that I often have suggested you are way to certain in what you believe. My opinion is that you are far more dogmatic and inflexible and self certain than I am, and I know everything.

M: Furthermore, I have pointed out time and time again that conservative morality has survival value, possibly a genetic adaption for success in group competition whereas liberal thinking is similarly adaptive when groups need to cooperate such that the value of each style of thought, if you will, can only be judged contextual for its validity.

So let me ask you what difference it would make anyway, if I were actually unaware how conservatives see me. Does that change which of us is right. Are you saying that the truth is relative regardless of context? Is it possible that I am right regardless of how they see me or my awareness of it.
In short, I am asking why you raise this issue and what is its importance to you. You are, in my opinion, not only unbelievably wrong but raise a point in which I can't see any relevance. Help me out.

Again also, I do not see myself as left or right but a believer that truth is the integration of paradox, the synthesis of opposites as a third way via a higher level of understanding, the aha experience produced by the spark in intuition that can occur following the absorption and cogitation of data and experience, the bound that leaps over unconsciously held assumptions and programming facilitated by a constant struggle to hold their presence in constant awareness.

If this makes no sense, I am sorry. But at least try to believe that I may at least be talking about something that I understand that is impossible, really, to put words to.