Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Idle Politics

Glen Beck Warns Viewers Not To Use Google 1276

Posted by samzenpus
from the the-sky-is-falling dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Glenn Beck has told his viewers to do research, but to not use Google, because 'Google is pretty deeply in bed with the government.' He points to the fact that Google is having some problems overseas, as well as Jared Cohen. Cohen is Director of Google Ideas, has worked with the State Department, and has played a role in the 2009 unrest in Iran. He also mentions social networking in sinister undertones, asking if it's government propaganda."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Glen Beck Warns Viewers Not To Use Google

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:30AM (#35209106)

    Seriously, this guy is about one step away from saving his urine in jars and going all David Koresh on a compound somewhere. Anyone who still takes that clown seriously is either already a paranoid schizophrenic or too stupid to be reasoned with anyway. You would have more luck arguing with a religious fanatic.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:34AM (#35209142)

      You would have more luck arguing with a religious fanatic.

      I thought Glen Beck and his viewers were already religious fanatics, on top of their rampant paranoia.

    • by Lose (1901896) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:37AM (#35209190)
      Nobody took a hint when he moved to FOX news?
      • by dunezone (899268) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:52AM (#35209406) Journal
        Well its all an act / business to him. He did his stint on CNN but exploiting fear in liberals is difficult compared to exploiting fear in conservatives. The current liberal market is younger and college level educated. The conservative market are older and although contains college level educated individuals its not as high as the liberal market.

        Which market is better to exploit / market fear? A young, highly educated market or a older less-educated market?

        As for the act, The Daily Show showed 2 clips, one from his CNN show and one from his FOX NEWS show, they were separated by about 18 months. On CNN he was saying the USA had the worst health care system in the world, but 18 months later he is on FOX NEWS saying its the best health care system in the world. So somehow the USA went from the worst to the best in 18 months with no legislation, reform, or any anything.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by tophermeyer (1573841)

          Well its all an act / business to him.

          Boom, right there. Glenn Beck plays a character on TV, named Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck's character is a huge douchebag. And I presume that if Glenn Beck the actor can play as ridiculous a character as Glenn Beck on TV, he must also be a fairly big douche himself.

          But his character is fabulously successful. So maybe he's got some things figured out.

          • by OzPeter (195038)

            But his character is fabulously successful. So maybe he's got some things figured out.

            He has figured out a wonderful way to make money through pandering to a massive audience.

            I also say that the character he plays is a douche, but not knowing the guy personally I can't say if he is actually a douche. But if he is really not a douche in real life then he knows it is all an act - which given the stuff he says (and yes I have listened to him) it seems like a douche thing to be doing anyway.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:05AM (#35209560)

          Which market is better to exploit / market fear? A young, highly educated market or a older less-educated market?

          I think /. regularly shows the young, "highly educated" market is plenty susceptible to fear & paranoia.

          • by Nimey (114278) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:44AM (#35210204) Homepage Journal

            That's just the libertarians, who aren't so far away from Beck's demographic.

            • by amiga3D (567632)

              Hey! Just cause I like the Constitution doesn't mean I'm a follower of Beck. I'm more of a Ron Paul fan. The only real threat from the government is they may tax us to death. They're too incompetent to do much else.

              • by uniquename72 (1169497) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @01:14PM (#35211618)

                I'm more of a Ron Paul fan. The only real threat from the government is they may tax us to death.

                Yes, they "might." But here I am paying less taxes then at any other period during my lifetime, and the Ron Paul fans won't shut up about how I'm being taxed to death.

                As a right-leaning person, there is no party for me. Republicans can't stop spending and starting pointless wars, Libertarians can't stop being misrepresenting themselves (either you're a "Constitutional originalist" or you support the Civil Rights Act, pick one) and fear-mongering, and Democrats don't have enough backbone to actually DO anything (Health Care is a perfect example. It's a gift to insurance companies that does little more than fleece the rest of us.)

        • by Dachannien (617929) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:25AM (#35209876)

          but exploiting fear in liberals is difficult compared to exploiting fear in conservatives

          You have heard of Al Gore, yes? Or Michael Moore?

          What about the recent campaign by MoveOn.org to "save public broadcasting" because of Republicans moving to cut off funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, despite the fact that public broadcasting as a whole gets only a small portion of its financing from the government?

          People from across the political spectrum are open to FUD. The only real difference is which buttons you have to push.

          • by The Hatchet (1766306) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:48AM (#35210274)

            That is not about fear, it is about anger and outrage at the actions of certain wealthy, rich people in America destroying the things we hold most dear as a country, and have since the days of our founding.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward

              Beck could say the same thing, substituting buzzwords like "limousine liberals" or "champagne socialists" in place of "wealthy, rich". The "destroying America" meme is universal. Beck says "the liberals are destroying America - be angry and outraged!", you say "the wealthy rich are destroying America - be angry and outraged!".

              It's quite clear. Either both of you are using fear, or neither of you are. So which is it?

          • by gtbritishskull (1435843) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @12:28PM (#35210912)

            Public Broadcasting? Really? Is that the best you can come up with?

            You are comparing defunding of a public service to "the muslims are gonna kill us".

            You know us liberals, if we don't have public broadcasting then our life isn't worth anything. We might just all commit suicide.

        • by tompaulco (629533) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:49AM (#35210292) Homepage Journal
          The current liberal market is younger and college level educated. The conservative market are older and although contains college level educated individuals its not as high as the liberal market.
          Statistics show that there are percentage wise more college educated republicans than democrats. Statistics also show that there are percentage-wise for more high school dropouts among democrats than among republicans. The only statistic which shows higher education among democrats is the slightly higher percentage of post graduate among democrats
          I hate to point this out, but those same fearful old conservatives 40 years ago were probably young educated liberals, and 40 years from now, today's young educated liberals will be fearful old conservatives. That's just the way it works. When we are young and essentially have not much money money and little responsibility and are getting supported more or less by the government through the education system, we selfishly want the government to continue those social and educational benefit programs which benefit us, then when we get older, get a job, get responsibilities, get taxed, we tend to selfishly want to keep the money which we have been working so hard to get. Looking out for number one is the name of the game in both cases, but don't feel bad, because if it weren't for looking out for number one, then we wouldn't be here today.
        • by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @12:36PM (#35211058) Journal

          exploiting fear in liberals is difficult compared to exploiting fear in conservatives

          I WISH someone would try to exploit my fears. If there were more people out there afraid of over reaching police powers and corporate control of the justice system, this country would be a much better place.

          The difference between conservative fears and liberal fears is that conservative fears are based in fantasy, liberal fears are based in reality. No, there are not, nor will there ever be Death Panels. On the other hand, yes the US government does actually spend over a billion dollars a year imprisoning its own citizens for doing nothing more than growing plants and consuming them.

    • The sad thing is that most of the viewers are going to believe this stuff. Is so much easier to just take something verbatim rather than question it.

      Jared Cohen works for Google and is inciting revolutions, therefore Google must be in bed with the government.

      His argument makes no sense.

    • Google his name (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mangu (126918) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:43AM (#35209274)

      Let's see: Glenn Beck [google.com].

      Hmmm, yes he has reasons to be afraid of Google. However that's just because he refuses to deny it. Why? Why doesn't he come forth and deny it?

    • by Quiet_Desperation (858215) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:45AM (#35209296)

      No, he's selling books and getting ratings and a lot of money. Folks who think Beck is crazy are just as bamboozled as any of his fans. It's really hilarious.

      Anyone who still takes that clown seriously is either already a paranoid schizophrenic or too stupid to be reasoned with anyway.

      Yes, but by saying that, *you* have taken him seriously! The attacks on him just make his supporters circle the wagons, and maybe even gain him followers from the stupid "Well, if he's pissing people off he must be doing something right!" crowd.

      I'm thinking of writing a crazy book, and shopping it to one of these neo-con publishers, all to get me some early retirement on the backs of the ideological loons. I'm not sure yet if I should invent a new angle, or tie together multiple existing memes in a new way.

      • by Ephemeriis (315124) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:58AM (#35209468) Homepage

        No, he's selling books and getting ratings and a lot of money. Folks who think Beck is crazy are just as bamboozled as any of his fans. It's really hilarious.

        I don't know if he's clinically diagnosed or if he's just putting on an act to make money. And it really doesn't matter. Regardless of the cause of his actions, the guy is spewing flaming ignorance all over the place.

        Yes, but by saying that, *you* have taken him seriously!

        As opposed to what, ignoring the loony? Just letting him spew his ignorance without any kind of rebuttal?

        The fact of the matter is that he's on national TV, publishing books, and presenting some truly deranged stuff as "truth".

        If he was just some kind of comedian and everybody laughed and went on with their lives, that'd be one thing. But people believe him. Folks base their world view on what he says. They cast their votes based on his insane rantings.

        You can't just ignore him, because he affects American politics whether you like it or not.

        The attacks on him just make his supporters circle the wagons, and maybe even gain him followers from the stupid "Well, if he's pissing people off he must be doing something right!" crowd.

        So, what... Plug your ears, hum real loud, and hope the crazy isn't there when you open your eyes?

        I'm thinking of writing a crazy book, and shopping it to one of these neo-con publishers, all to get me some early retirement on the backs of the ideological loons. I'm not sure yet if I should invent a new angle, or tie together multiple existing memes in a new way.

        There are a lot of crazy ideas out there. And most of them are just languishing in obscurity. I have absolutely no doubt that you could throw together some really insane horseshit and make money off of it. There are plenty of paranoid/gullible/curious folks out there who'd gobble it up.

        But that isn't going to put you on par with Glen Beck.

        There are tons of raving loonies out there that get absolutely no attention.

        What differentiates Glen Beck from some homeless idiot claiming that the world is flat is that he has an audience. He has thousands (millions?) of viewers. They actually listen to him. If he claims that Google is in league with the devil, they'll believe it. They'll go use Bing instead.

        And while it might not matter to me what search engine a bunch of paranoid neocons use... It does matter to me how they vote in elections, because I live in the same country that they do. And when he gets them all riled up to vote against some random bill that would actually be quite beneficial, I suffer for it.

        Don't get me wrong... I'm not arrogant enough to think that my way is the only right way to do things. I have no problem being wrong or being out-voted or whatever. But I'd prefer to be out-voted based on reality. Not the ravings of some lunatic - regardless of whether it's a genuine clinical problem or simply an act to make money.

      • by MillionthMonkey (240664) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:04AM (#35209542)

        No, he's selling books and getting ratings and a lot of money.

        This is the way a lot of psychopaths make a living.

        Folks who think Beck is crazy are just as bamboozled as any of his fans. It's really hilarious.

        I've read this exact sentence many times on this site. Whether or not Beck is schizophrenic is his own dirty secret. He manifestly lacks a sense of compassion for anyone else; whether that's "crazy" or not is irrelevant.

      • No, he's selling books and getting ratings and a lot of money. Folks who think Beck is crazy are just as bamboozled as any of his fans. It's really hilarious.

        Anyone who sacrifices their honor and dignity, and encourages others to not just abandon rational thinking but to engage in acts of violence [mediamatters.org], all in order to pad their bank account, is crazy.

        In other words, Beck has to be one sort of crazy (some sort of personality disorder) in order to pretend to be the sort of crazy (sort of paranoid schizophrenia) that he does.

  • But... (Score:5, Funny)

    by terminalhype (971547) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:34AM (#35209140)
    If nobody uses Google Search, how will Bing! ever improve?
  • by MetalliQaZ (539913) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:35AM (#35209150)

    I think it's safe to say that /. has a left-leaning bias. Why give him the time of day? I wonder how many followers that loud-mouthed ignoramus would have if the "liberal" media didn't get all flustered every time he says something like this.

    • I wonder how many followers that loud-mouthed ignoramus would have if the "liberal" media didn't get all flustered every time he says something like this.

      I don't think liberal media has anything to do with since I doubt his viewers don't actually watch anything but Fox News.

    • by CRCulver (715279) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:40AM (#35209228) Homepage
      I'm not sure Slashdot is that left-leaning. At least, not those readers who leave comments. Any time a discussion of the welfare state comes up, one can always expect a flood of Libertarian comments.
    • by gman003 (1693318) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:41AM (#35209248)
      In other words, Glenn Beck is a professional troll?
  • by skydude_20 (307538) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:35AM (#35209156) Journal
    he doesn't want to you read about what he might have done back in 1990
    • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:38AM (#35209200)

      "he doesn't want to you read about what he might have done back in 1990"

      I googled this... it was a sex change operation. He used to be a man.

      • by OzPeter (195038) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:26AM (#35209888)

        "he doesn't want to you read about what he might have done back in 1990"

        I googled this... it was a sex change operation. He used to be a man.

        No No No .. you aren't doing this right. You can't come out and make a statement of absolute fact that can be checked. You need to allude to it and let your audience ASSUME that it was a fact. This is simple Beckism 101. What you should have said is:

        I googled Beck looking to see if he had a sex change. Did he lose his balls in the past? I don't know. But you have to admit he acts pretty strange all the time, and I haven't seen him deny not losing his balls. But don't believe anything I say .. you have to make up your own mind over this.

        And while you are pondering that let me tell you about [Fear mongering sponsor de jour] whose products I have been buying for years. If you don't have this [end of the world survival product] then you don't [love your family] ...

  • by Attack DAWWG (997171) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:35AM (#35209158)

    If someone does a Google search, they may, just possibly, find out the truth about something.

    And that possibility is what people like Glenn Beck find the most frightening.

  • by Drakkenmensch (1255800) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:36AM (#35209172)
    Oh geeze, he's not going to cry on television again, is he?
  • From his rant:

    I would look into all the people the State Department are working with; MSNBC, CBS, gosh, MTV.

    Just say it, every news outlet but Fox, right? It's the only thing stopping you from busting out the "trust no one" hyperbole, right?

    Maybe we should start watching those networks a little bit and seeing what their news coverage is like.

    Why don't we watch all of them and judge them fairly against each other? Or do you just want scrutiny only on the networks you're not on?

    Who are these groups? Who are they? Are they right, are they left, are they clean, are they dirty, are they front groups? I don't know.

    Wait, wait, wait, so what are you accusing them of? Absolutely nothing? And if you don't know then why are you telling us to investigate them? Maybe because you know nobody will do it and instead they'll just continue listening to you? "Is Glenn Beck, good, bad, is he left, is he right, is he clean, is he dirty? I don't know. Maybe you should keep your eye on him?"

    May I recommend, if you're doing your own homework, don't do a Google search. Seems to me that Google is pretty deeply in bed with the government. Maybe this is explaining why Google is being kicked out of all the other countries?

    My god, would you please just make a statement instead of repeated leading questions?! How is Google any more "in bed" with the government than Microsoft or Yahoo?

    Are they just a shill now for the United States government? Who is Jared Cohen? Is he private citizen or government operative? And isn't this the second Google guy we've found? This is the second Google executive now being exposed as an instigator of a revolution.

    Your little pointer stick and board didn't do much to lead to conclusive evidence that Cohen has "instigated a revolution."

    I couldn't get the MM site to load but the Youtube version worked for me [youtube.com] and holy crap what a load of horseshit. I saw Glenn Beck on TV in a waiting room once and thought it was a joke. The amount of faulty, leading, incomplete logic here is just staggering, even in this video. Instead of wasting my time itemizing everything wrong about what he's saying and pointing out the obvious, I should have just taken Salon's advice and done something more constructive [salon.com].

    • Maybe this is explaining why Google is being kicked out of all the other countries?

      Man, you just gotta love how backwards Glenn Beck's thinking is, CONSISTENTLY.

      What countries would those be? China is the only one I remember, but perhaps I've forgotten some.

      In my mind, getting kicked out of China is pretty much a badge of honor, not something to be suspicious of them for. I'd be more suspicious of the companies NOT getting kicked out of repressive foreign countries - but apparently Beck thinks you should only trust the companies who are trusted by autocrats. So, I guess, Fox News.

      • He acts like he's all about facts, but really it's all about politics. As you point out, getting kicked out of China should be a good thing if it happened because they wouldn't compromise on their principles and filter search results... In other words, they got kicked out because they wouldn't be a government's lackey, but he's trying to use them getting kicked out as a reason not to trust them, somehow tying it to being our government's lackey. In reality, it's probably all about net neutrality, which Gl
    • "Asking questions" is how he can slander and libel without being sued.

      I strongly recommend watching the South Park episode Dances with Smurfs for a pretty accurate (and lulzy) overview.

    • by MachineShedFred (621896) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:14AM (#35209684) Journal

      It's not like his schtick is new. See: Joseph McCarthy.

  • by Junior J. Junior III (192702) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:39AM (#35209218) Homepage

    Well, it is kindof true. Google is very big brother in the way they gather data about their users.

    For that matter, just about any large internet company is going to be in bed with whatever governments whose jurisdiction they operate within. It's called "compliance with law enforcement". It's very patriotic for corporations to work with governments. Of course, if you have nothing to hide, it's fine, right?

    The other reason Beck might hate the internet, of course, is that the internet is just an outgrowth of yet another giant government project. We all remember ARPA and DARPA, right?

    • by Nemyst (1383049)

      It's more than that. The Internet is anarchist, there's no central power. You can't influence the Internet, only parts of it, often small. Pockets of resistance will always exist.

      For somebody whose entire agenda rests on influencing people, that must be scary.

  • by RevWaldo (1186281) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:42AM (#35209264)
    You can't explain that.

    .
  • by twoallbeefpatties (615632) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:54AM (#35209438)
    Do other countries have conspiracy theorists with such depth and wide-reaching audiences that have radio or television programs?
    • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @01:18PM (#35211674) Journal

      Well it depends on how you look at it. And what you consider a conspiracy theorist/nutter. The BBC has a clear agenda of promoting a multicultural society while being run by the oxford elite and including very little of the multicultural society and villifying anyone who dares question this.

      Does that count? Probably not to someone who agrees with this point of view. Moron is such a subjective label after all. It always seems to apply to people you disagree with.

      Media tends to be owned by someone and that someone doesn't always have to be a single person. But overtime any company or group tends to hire like-minded individuals turning it more and more into a singular voice because you don't hire someone who disagrees with you.

      An example? In holland the Labour party PvDA (Partij van de Arbeid) is being called the (Partij van de Allochtonen/Immigrants) because of its soft stance. BUT this is a left leaning WORKER party, didn't they use to be dead against immigrants being used to take jobs away from local people and drive minimum wages down? Wasn't it in fact right wing parties that wanted immigrant labour from Turkey in europes to do jobs the companies didn't want to pay local workers for?

      Ah yes! So how can a party AGAINST immigration become labelled as PRO-immigration?

      Because over the years the leadership changed. From worker background/union to highly educated bleeding hearts. Some people think union and bleeding hearts are both left wing but that just goes to show the sillyness of trying to represent the whole political spectrum on a single axis. You wouldn't call Stalin a bleeding heart would you?

      But at the same time, how comes the dutch VVD (Right wing by dutch standards, commies by US standards) is now leading a government with a so-called strong anti-immigration agenda and even spawned Geert Wilders whose whole agenda is anti-immigration? Did they forget who championed the whole immigration move from Turkey in the first place?

      Yes, we got our nutters, but it depends on who you ask as to who is pointed out as the nutter. Geert Wilders and Job Cohen (leader of the PvDA) are BOTH considered insane by their opposition.

      Really, we had the queens speech a while ago, a person with her own far reaching audience and a guaranteed tv spot and half the nation hailed her speech and half condemned it.

      Glen Beck is a conspiracy theorists in your eyes, not in the eyes of his followers. Conspiracy is in the eye of the beholder. So it makes no sense to ask this question if you want an honest answer.

  • by nedlohs (1335013) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:55AM (#35209442)

    anyone who actually believes anything Beck says can't do a google search anyway, since the drool keeps shorting out the keyboard.

  • 1. Glenn Beck works for Fox News

    2. Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal owns a 7 percent stake in News Corp

    3. Saudia Arabia is deeply unnerved by the revolutions sweeping aside the old crusty strongmen in the Middle East

    So Prince bin Talal gets on the phone with Glenn Beck's bosses. Next day, Glenn Beck starts spouting off against internet tools that Middle Eastern revolutionaries use.

    Yes, the same Glenn Beck who wears a Revolutionary War era Tricorner Hat and wraps himself in the American flag.

    The tragedy is the people who reject, for example, Barack Obama as a "communist" and "secret muslim" and "antiamerican who wants to destroy the USA" and doubt he was born here. Incredibly low IQ lies and smears. Low IQ lies and smears spread by people who wrap themselves in the American flag, but who are of course working for corporate and foreign interests, corporate interests squarely pointed against what is good for Americans and American interests. And millions of Americans beleive this nonsense! Why? Because the "information" is presented to them, not by appealing to their sense of reason, but by appealing to their emotions: fear, hysteria, panic. Classic propaganda psychology.

    The tragedy is people who view Fox News as "American" and don't know they are basically being propagandized and programmed against, for example, their own self-intererests, like higher quality, more affordable health care. Because the insurance industry might make less money. Better that Grandma die 10 years earlier than we succumb to evil SOCIALISM. Seriously?!

    Sheep, whose Real American (tm) opinions are bought and paid for by Saudi Oil money, fat cat corporate dollars, and yes, the Chinese Communist Party.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/world/asia/26murdoch.html [nytimes.com]

    So to summarize: Obama is a Communist and a Muslim Terrorist and anti-American... propaganda deeply believed by millions of Americans whose brains are basically programmed via a regular dose of fear and hysteria by smearmongers like Glenn Beck, whose ideological whoring... drum roll please... is paid for by actual Saudi Wahhabists and Chinese Communist controlled corporations!

    If it wasn't so tragic, it would be hilarious.

    • by Evtim (1022085) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:45AM (#35210228)

      You know, I was expecting your post to be modded up, but no. Alas, I spent my mod points yesterday.

      Anyway, here is a funny thing. My country (Bulgaria) was building for many years a second nuclear power plant. The first one was almost completely closed because EU would not accept us with it (the reactors were dangerous bla bla..). So, since few years a massive debate about the second one rages across the media. Over time the two major opinions settled as such:

      The so-called progressive, right wing, pro-western people are against it, because, they say it will need the Russians for the fuel and processing the waste. So we will INCRESE our energy dependence from Russia.

      The left-leaning, pro-Russian crowd is for it. As you can guess their motives are exactly like the one above, only in their book this is a good thing.

      There was of course the infinitely small minority of realists and nerds who were always for it, because of reality (let’s not go deeper into this – why nuclear power is back in the world and why did it take 50 years to realize the obvious)

      And then Wikileaks came around. And one of the cables was dealing exactly with this power station. Now, pay attention:

      According to the American diplomats in Bulgaria building the station DECREASES our energy dependence from Russia and Russian oil and gas tycoons intentionally crafted the anti- power station propaganda. The cable explains the logic behind this statement at length; I won’t reproduce it here.

      I almost fell from the chair reading this cable. Why, oh why I don’t have the possibility to high jack all the media in BG and just shout, “Go read the cable, you idiots!”
      The people still argue like crazy about the issue and none has read the wikileaks. What a bunch of idiots we humans are, no?

  • Insulting as news (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lttlordfault (1561315) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @11:33AM (#35210032)
    As a UK citizen I only ever see Glen Beck in satire shows, the first thing that struck me after watching this was how insulting the spinning fox news icon in the corner of the screen was. Could anyone point out a single factual piece of news in that entire piece? Everything he said was qualified with clauses like "it seems to me" or simply forming his babble in questions.

    How on earth can this tripe be paraded on a news channel, giving it a faux sense of authority over the facts.

    I have no problem with political opinion pieces on tv but don't try masquerade it as news as that simply insults my intelligence.

  • by Beelzebud (1361137) on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @04:11PM (#35214042)
    I wish he'd finally have his Lonesome Rhodes moment, and get it over with.

Save a little money each month and at the end of the year you'll be surprised at how little you have. -- Ernest Haskins

Working...