Internet accuses Glenn Beck of raping and murdering a girl in 1990

[Gothic Walrus]

I don't do this forum often, but I figured this could generate some interesting conversation. What began as a meme on (I believe) Fark has spawned a website (http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/) and doctored documents (http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/9gjlg/durham_police_report_of_1990_rape_by_glenn_beck/).

Now, I'd be one of the first to call Glenn Beck a colossal idiot, but I think this is going way too far. I understand the "joke" here, in that challenging him to disprove this is meant to parallel some of the arguments used against Obama by conservatives. Calling the president a Kenyan or socialist, though, seems just a little different than accusing somebody of a felony.

There's also the question of what happens if (when?) this leaks onto other sites, where the doctored documents or accusations lose whatever context was claimed before. With a faked police report that (at least at first glance) looks authentic, what's to stop someone from starting viral e-mails or treating it as a serious claim?

I don't like the way this has unfolded so far. I'm afraid of what could happen if this blows up, and I'm terrified to think about this inspiring people down the line.

Thoughts on this?

[cochesecochese]

Look at the stolen property section. SANYO. Now that's comedy.

Does the rumour say what he blew the two stacks on?

[Capitalizt]

I'd be more sympathetic if he didn't do that stupid fake crying act..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Ebo4UhloU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9j_SWbpOH0

[spmahn]

To say this is in poor taste doesn't really even scratch the surface. Regardless of any political statement being made, this is going too far. These are real peoples lives here, and there's nothing funny or amusing about rape and murder. Please delete this thread.

[fullmetalfan720]

I hate the guy, but come on now. This is ridiculous.

[JolietJake]

I would feel sorry for the guy if he wasn't such a colossal waste of life.

[HowStern]

In the words of Ricky "Just remember Lahey! What goes around is all around!"

The guy accuses people of being things they aren't (obama, racist, etc) and now people are accusing him of being things he (probably)isn't

[amill007]

Don't get me wrong, I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE FRIGGIN HATE Fox News. Well, ok, I hate that they call themselves "Fair and Balanced" when they are obviously in the far right of the spectrum.
And yes, I dislike Beck, and I wish everyday that more and more advertisers will pull away from his show ( or, the whole network even. )

But this is just awful. Seriously, my liberal buddies? Like you didn't have enough stuff to make fun of him for? The crying? The screaming? You actually had to make something up? It's sad to see everyone stooping to the "Laugh at the girl in the wheelchair at the town hall health care debate" level.

Yes. it's gone too far. Sorry, Beck.

Yes, a liberal nut-job with balls (myself) just apologized to Glenn Beck.

[RedvsBlue]

Not only is it in poor taste but if the originators can be tracked down its a slam dunk libel case.

[UncleBob]

Wow. Totally in poor taste. Why am I not surprised?

[Dead of Knight]

This is in really poor taste, but I can't help but not feel bad for Glenn Beck. He is one of the few people who I wouldn't feel bad for if this happened to them.

[atreyue]

This is a horrible thing that no one deserves. I wonder how many of the people posting here about how much they hate Beck actually watch or listen to his show. And short clips on other "news" outlets (Daily Show & Colbert) or 1-liners from newspaper or net articles/blogs don't actually count. Everyone these days seems to think that making fun of someone successfully is equivalent to making true statements. Who needs to have facts to back something up? The are only 2 shows I have watched in the last year that actually offer proof for what they say: Beck and Lou Dobbs. Dobbs gets ignored because he's old and not sensationalist. Beck plays to the 'Oooooh! A car crash!' demographic (which is most of America, sadly) and says the same things, so he's dangerous because people actually listen to him.

[usickenme]

I’ve listened to his show quite a bit (when I could stomach it) Clearly, Glen Beck comes from the Alex Jones school “proof” . Out of context, slight changes in wording, misrepresentation and boom! Obama is 30 seconds away from knocking down your door. The worst part is, I’ve seen this show before under Clinton. It’s a rerun people.

As for the website, it is something Beck himself predicted about a week ago. He said on this his show. “Don’t you believe it when someone comes forth of fake pictures of me naked with a dog in Thailand”. He has been claiming that “They” are trying to shut him up and all this does is play right into it. I helps him more than anything else. Which makes be wonder if he isn’t behind it.

[mykevermin]

I see this as Beck taking a dose of his own medicine. He comes up with absurd claims and statements on his own show, and then demands they are reasonable until he is proven otherwise.

That Obama is not American
That Obama is a socialist
That Obama is a racist

As a result of this website, Beck is now the victim of his own style of "journalism." Is it in poor taste? You bet. That's the point. Of course he didn't rape and murder a young girl in 1990. So why accuse him of it?

Do you consider Swift's "A Modest Proposal" to be in good taste, by means of satirical comparison?

The website links to the fark board, and its use of language is a pretty clear indicator that it is satire for those with an elementary reading comprehension.

While it may appear that this is a "slam dunk" libel case, please do be aware of the outcome of Hustler Magazines, Inc. vs Falwell.

[thrustbucket]

This is a horrible thing that no one deserves. I wonder how many of the people posting here about how much they hate Beck actually watch or listen to his show. And short clips on other "news" outlets (Daily Show & Colbert) or 1-liners from newspaper or net articles/blogs don't actually count. Everyone these days seems to think that making fun of someone successfully is equivalent to making true statements. Who needs to have facts to back something up? The are only 2 shows I have watched in the last year that actually offer proof for what they say: Beck and Lou Dobbs. Dobbs gets ignored because he's old and not sensationalist. Beck plays to the 'Oooooh! A car crash!' demographic (which is most of America, sadly) and says the same things, so he's dangerous because people actually listen to him.

I've talked to enough people that claim they hate his guts and can't stand him to know that the vast majority of them really have not watched/listened to his show. All they have been exposed to are the clips from dailyshow or left-wing websites.

He is just a more entertaining and less flamboyant version of Alex Jones, imo.

[thrustbucket]

Show me where Beck ever got on the "Obama is not American" bandwagon. Show me where he claimed that. It may exist, but I have never heard of that claim - or are we just grouping him in with those nuts because we don't like him?

[mykevermin]

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/12701/ (from last year.)

Since then, he has, it appears, changed his tune a bit:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105898

His cause célèbre now centers around genuine, 100% McCarthyism.

[thrustbucket]

Interesting. Well I don't aim to defend him, but unlike many pundits, what I think separates him from others is that he constantly admits he's wrong. Part of his 'shtick' is that he fly's off the cuff and runs with half baked ideas, and he often, later, apologizes and says he was wrong. Some people find it entertaining that he isn't afraid to talk about new ideas before the facts are in, as they are being investigated. That's why it's not journalism and he never claims it is.

Of course that means he'd make a lousy politician, as we've seen - we prefer our politicians to hold steadfast to all their beliefs no matter what.

[atreyue]

I’ve listened to his show quite a bit (when I could stomach it) Clearly, Glen Beck comes from the Alex Jones school “proof” . Out of context, slight changes in wording, misrepresentation and boom! Obama is 30 seconds away from knocking down your door. The worst part is, I’ve seen this show before under Clinton. It’s a rerun people.

As for the website, it is something Beck himself predicted about a week ago. He said on this his show. “Don’t you believe it when someone comes forth of fake pictures of me naked with a dog in Thailand”. He has been claiming that “They” are trying to shut him up and all this does is play right into it. I helps him more than anything else. Which makes be wonder if he isn’t behind it.

Damn it, now I need to find out who the hell Alex Jones is. I hate having to educate myself.

Beck doesn't need to be behind it. Just run a search for stories on his loss of advertising that presented it as if he started going after Van Jones as retaliation because it was a group affiliated with Jones that started the petition to have sponsors abandon the show. In reality, he's been bashing Jones increasingly for months, and the petition was started in retaliation to that.

[thrustbucket]

IMO, Van Jones deserves to be bashed.

Last week Beck beat O'reilly (http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/08/27/big-beck-goes-over-3-million-viewers-beats-oreilly-in-demo-cable-news-ratings-for-wednesday-august-26-2009/25541), which for the first time made Beck the number one cable "news" show; which is quite a feat given the fact that his time slot makes it so you have to dvr his show usually to watch it. In other words, he has nothing to fear as far as sponsors.

Alex Jones is extremely hit and miss for me. I rarely follow him unless someone somewhere recommends I read or watch something. His website is www.infowars.com. There are some free videos you can watch there, if you like. I hear his recent interview with Cindy Sheehan is really interesting but haven't had time to watch it. Conversely, his interview with Peter Josef (Zeigeist) made me sick and I wanted to punch him in the face. But like just about everything in the alternative news world, there are some gems to be found.

[RedvsBlue]

I see this as Beck taking a dose of his own medicine. He comes up with absurd claims and statements on his own show, and then demands they are reasonable until he is proven otherwise.

That Obama is not American
That Obama is a socialist
That Obama is a racist

As a result of this website, Beck is now the victim of his own style of "journalism." Is it in poor taste? You bet. That's the point. Of course he didn't rape and murder a young girl in 1990. So why accuse him of it?

Do you consider Swift's "A Modest Proposal" to be in good taste, by means of satirical comparison?

The website links to the fark board, and its use of language is a pretty clear indicator that it is satire for those with an elementary reading comprehension.

While it may appear that this is a "slam dunk" libel case, please do be aware of the outcome of Hustler Magazines, Inc. vs Falwell.

Faking a campaign ad about someone having an incestuous affair with their mother is considerably less malicious than falisfying evidence of a crime as serious as rape and murder. The main opinion of that case didn't just focus on the fact that you can say whatever you'd like about someone simply because they are a public figure.

[mykevermin]

I think separates him from others is that he constantly admits he's wrong.

You have got to be kidding me.

[atreyue]

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/12701/ (from last year.)

Since then, he has, it appears, changed his tune a bit:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105898

His cause célèbre now centers around genuine, 100% McCarthyism.

So on his website was a link to an article on another website that was later proved false and you compare that that actual quotes of things he says on his show over a year later. Basically, he's saying that whether or not his birth certificate is forged is immaterial at this point. Now that he's actually had time in office, we can judge him on his actions and focus exclusively on that. Tell me what's wrong with that statement?

Then you throw out the good old McCarthyism angle without providing anything to gainsay the statements (or 'claims' if you like) that he actually makes in the second article. Clearly an attempt to use discredit everything in it by associating it with the taint from the birth certificate issue. I know it's been quite a while since I've swam these waters, but you've always held yourself as someone unafraid of real intellectual discussion. You don't need to resort to using rhetoric and smear-by association tactics to discredit someone. It's especially ineffective in print, where one has to rely on more than just swaying sentiment in the moment. Show me where he's incorrect in his facts (or 'facts' if you will) to disprove his conclusions or explain why you reach different conclusions without disputing the validity of those facts.

[atreyue]

You have got to be kidding me.

I think what Thrust is trying to say, that it's refreshing to have someone who's willing to admit that a position they held in the past was the wrong one, instead of tirelessly justifying or denying it.

[mykevermin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4FgeVOabSg

No, when I say "McCarthyism," mean exactly what I said.

Beck constantly refers to the President and Democrats not just as Socialists, but Communists as well.

This video was from fewer than two weeks into Obama's presidency, and there are significantly more videos just like this from his program online.

I'm happy to have this discussion about Beck, but I could really only think that someone who has never heard of Beck before would try to argue that he isn't calling out politicians as Communists/engaging in McCarthyism. It's exactly what he does. Turn on Fox at 5PM today, and I'll paypal you a dollar if he doesn't do it today, too.

[atreyue]

You have got to be kidding me.

I see this as Beck taking a dose of his own medicine. He comes up with absurd claims and statements on his own show, and then demands they are reasonable until he is proven otherwise.

That Obama is not American
That Obama is a socialist
That Obama is a racist

So this is the old "Here's what I think, and why I think it. If you disagree, don't just tell me that you do, tell me why." schtick, huh? And why exactly is that a problem? Very convenient to post those there statements as if that's just how he said it. Statements without proof or even underlying reasoning are certainly unreasonable and to be avoided. That's probably why detractors usually leave pesky things like context out when making claims. You're the one doing that here, not him.

[atreyue]

No, when I say "McCarthyism," mean exactly what I said.

Beck constantly refers to the President and Democrats not just as Socialists, but Communists as well.

This video was from fewer than two weeks into Obama's presidency, and there are significantly more videos just like this from his program online.

I'm happy to have this discussion about Beck, but I could really only think that someone who has never heard of Beck before would try to argue that he isn't calling out politicians as Communists/engaging in McCarthyism. It's exactly what he does. Turn on Fox at 5PM today, and I'll paypal you a dollar if he doesn't do it today, too.

I'm sorry, I thought McCarthyism is actually calling out politicians who are NOT Socialists or Communists and wrongly accusing them of those affiliations. He's said why he believes they are, as well as shown evidence when/if they have said they are themselves. Not quite the same thing as McCarthyism, is it? But it's convenient to pretend he's just on some witchhunt...

[mykevermin]

Statements without proof or even underlying reasoning are certainly unreasonable and to be avoided. That's probably why detractors usually leave pesky things like context out when making claims. You're the one doing that here, not him.

Do you even watch Glenn Beck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aigoscTpwus (1:20 in)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MI_0Kt_e3Go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQJ9md0PZ0I (Marxism and racism in a double-whammy)

Some things are so self-evident that they need not be sourced. Glenn Beck calling Obama a racist, socialist, communist, and marxist are four of them.

[atreyue]

Do you even watch Glenn Beck?

Some things are so self-evident that they need not be sourced. Glenn Beck calling Obama a racist, socialist, communist, and marxist are four of them.

I actually watch Glenn Beck almost every day. Although right now I'm about 4 shows behind on my TiVo. I try not to just throw crap out there. It would be very dumb of me to make my original post in this thread bashing people who criticize without listening and be guilty of the same myself.

Last I checked, his TV show is an hour long. So a couple of snippets aren't going to win your case with someone who actually watches it. Again, convenient to leave out his explanations for what he says. You'[re really not liking having to back anything up, are you? Must be nice to have a place to go to where you can scan quick soundbites for something that suits your needs and throw it up as an 'example' and not have to worry about things like proof. Then try to accuse me repeatedly of not watching the show to make it appear as if you actually do. :applause:

You sourced it, now tell me what the problems are in each one so there can actually be discussion. As opposed to the 'play clip, then make face' method people like Jon Stewart have used so successfully.

[mykevermin]

You've admitted to being a fan/viewer of Beck.

Your posts show that you genuinely agree with Beck's claims that Obama is a racist, a socialist, a marxist, and a communist (which would be an incredible feat to combine all those final three into one person, given the inconsistencies - but I digress).

You believe what Beck says, in other words.

So I tell you what. I'll play along with you. But you have to play along, too. Quid pro quo.

So let's go back to the topic of this thread. You prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Glenn Beck did not rape and murder a girl in 1990, and I'll prove that Obama is not a socialist, marxist, communist racist. You have the honor of going first.

[fullmetalfan720]

You've admitted to being a fan/viewer of Beck.

Your posts show that you genuinely agree with Beck's claims that Obama is a racist, a socialist, a marxist, and a communist (which would be an incredible feat to combine all those final three into one person, given the inconsistencies - but I digress).
I hate how people say that Obama is a Socialist/Marxist/Communist. He isn't. He's a corporatist, fascist, or oligarchist. So was Bush. Corporatism, and fascism are both mergers of corporation and state. 12 trillion dollars says both Obama and Bush fit this description. Oligarchy is where a few elite people have all of the power, which is basically how this country works. Those with the most legalized bribes to give get what they want.
You believe what Beck says, in other words.

So I tell you what. I'll play along with you. But you have to play along, too. Quid pro quo.

So let's go back to the topic of this thread. You prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Glenn Beck did not rape and murder a girl in 1990, and I'll prove that Obama is not a socialist, marxist, communist racist. You have the honor of going first.
Sure, let's just make up lies about everyone, because, hey, someone else did it before us. Do you really want to sink to that low?

[mykevermin]

I don't think you know what fascism is.

I also don't think you appreciate satire. The point isn't to actually get anyone to disprove Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. The point is to get people to grasp Beck's concept of claimsmaking and framing of arguments as unsourced, unevidenced hyperbole that doesn't really deserve to be refuted. Despite this, it is prime (news, anyway) time TV that is highly watched and highly regarded by uninformed masses who believe Obama is a socialist/marxist/communist/racist.

The arguments Beck makes are no more true or worthy of being a part of any discourse at all than is the argument that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. But they ARE a part of the discourse. That's the problem. Anyone who would actually try to refute the claims that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990 lacks analytical reading skills.

[atreyue]

You've admitted to being a fan/viewer of Beck.

Your posts show that you genuinely agree with Beck's claims that Obama is a racist, a socialist, a marxist, and a communist (which would be an incredible feat to combine all those final three into one person, given the inconsistencies - but I digress).

You believe what Beck says, in other words.

So I tell you what. I'll play along with you. But you have to play along, too. Quid pro quo.

So let's go back to the topic of this thread. You prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Glenn Beck did not rape and murder a girl in 1990, and I'll prove that Obama is not a socialist, marxist, communist racist. You have the honor of going first.

I'm not a fan of 'playing along'. I like speaking plainly, honestly, and openly. This is probably why I can go years without posting anything here. i'm going to make sure to deal with you in that manner, which will just make the BS you're trying to lay down now all the more apparent to anyone who reads it.

You want me to disprove a claim that no one disputes the falseness of but you know I can't actually disprove without a police investigation. You pretend that this is just to make a point: that "He comes up with absurd claims and statements on his own show, and then demands they are reasonable until he is proven otherwise." as you said earlier. And that they can't be disproven because of their absurdity.

That's a pretty clear and in no way clever attempt to just avoid backing up your own claims. Try again. And I'm only asking you to show the holes in Glenn Beck's logic or why it's not logical. In the same way that pointing out that the police report is fake invalidates the rape/murder claim.

[mykevermin]

So you're *seriously* asking me to deny/refute Beck's claims that Obama is a marxist/socialist/communist/racist?

[fullmetalfan720]

I don't think you know what fascism is.
I'm talking about Italian Fascism, not German Fascism (as in Nazism).
I also don't think you appreciate satire. The point isn't to actually get anyone to disprove Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. The point is to get people to grasp Beck's concept of claimsmaking and framing of arguments as unsourced, unevidenced hyperbole that doesn't really deserve to be refuted. Despite this, it is prime (news, anyway) time TV that is highly watched and highly regarded by uninformed masses who believe Obama is a socialist/marxist/communist/racist.

The arguments Beck makes are no more true or worthy of being a part of any discourse at all than is the argument that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. But they ARE a part of the discourse. That's the problem. Anyone who would actually try to refute the claims that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990 lacks analytical reading skills.Yeah, I know what you are trying to do. My question to you is, if you don't like this form of "journalism" why perpetuate it with these false claims you call "satire"? It's one thing to call someone racist, or a communist, but it's a totally different thing to spread a "rumor" about someone raping and murdering a child. If you really want to sink to this level, that's just sad.

[thrustbucket]

It makes me sad that I can't fully participate in this thread because I can't watch video at work.

You have got to be kidding me.
I'm not. I have watched Beck enough to enjoy him eating his words on a number of issues. It's somewhat refreshing, even though it does make him appear somewhat schizophrenic - in a sick way it's more representitive of reality for the common man. He is an emotional basket case, which many people are, but it's rare to see them openly so on TV.

I hate how people say that Obama is a Socialist/Marxist/Communist. He isn't. He's a corporatist, fascist, or oligarchist. So was Bush. Corporatism, and fascism are both mergers of corporation and state. 12 trillion dollars says both Obama and Bush fit this description. Oligarchy is where a few elite people have all of the power, which is basically how this country works. Those with the most legalized bribes to give get what they want.
This is also where I deviate from Beck, although Beck has been hitting on this stuff a lot more lately as his views of what's really going on slowly evolves beyond the old tired 'socialist/communist' brow beating. He's starting to focus more on the surprising commonalities between Obama and Bush versus trying to identify him as some new threat.

*************
Just to make sure we are all operating on the same page:

Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>
****************************************

I bolded the part that I feel applies to the word 'Fascist' being thrown around in America lately.

[atreyue]

I don't think you know what fascism is.

I also don't think you appreciate satire. The point isn't to actually get anyone to disprove Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. The point is to get people to grasp Beck's concept of claimsmaking and framing of arguments as unsourced, unevidenced hyperbole that doesn't really deserve to be refuted. Despite this, it is prime (news, anyway) time TV that is highly watched and highly regarded by uninformed masses who believe Obama is a socialist/marxist/communist/racist.

The arguments Beck makes are no more true or worthy of being a part of any discourse at all than is the argument that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. But they ARE a part of the discourse. That's the problem. Anyone who would actually try to refute the claims that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990 lacks analytical reading skills.

What I actually believe is that Obama and most politicians care about getting paid and say whatever they want to and adhere to whatever 'social agenda' allows them to do that most advantageously. Right now, marxist/socialist/communist are just the latest buzzwords. The reality is that Obama is doing big favors for big business. No matter what philosophical trappings he tries to dress it up in based on recommendations made by his team of psychologists designed to sway public opinion.

[atreyue]

So you're *seriously* asking me to deny/refute Beck's claims that Obama is a marxist/socialist/communist/racist?

I'm *seriously* asking you to refute a person's claims by pointing out their faulty evidence or reasoning. I know it's not something that's widely done in this forum or in America in general. He's constructed arguments. You're bypassing and trivializing them. The best point you could make is a well-thought-out, cogent response that's intelligent instead of seeking to appear intellectual.

[thrustbucket]

What I actually believe is that Obama and most politicians care about getting paid and say whatever they want to and adhere to whatever 'social agenda' allows them to do that most advantageously. Right now, marxist/socialist/communist are just the latest buzzwords. The reality is that Obama is doing big favors for big business. No matter what philosophical trappings he tries to dress it up in based on recommendations made by his team of psychologists designed to sway public opinion.

What do you mean? American policy, speeches, and White House PR has mostly been dictated by focus groups and polling for decades now.

[atreyue]

What do you mean? American policy, speeches, and White House PR has mostly been dictated by focus groups and polling for decades now.

What I mean is holding on to power is difficult to do in a capitalist democratic republic, and that is what the people who have power most want to achieve. So they give lip service to whatever sentiment the public at the time is most receptive to and continue to advance their agenda of changing the laws of America to make it easier for them to mantain their power. There are many who claim that the economic downturn is the fault of capitalism and America needs to look to new options. You can call it socialism, marxism, global governance, whatever you like. It's really about Oligarchy and monopolies, because the only way you can ensure you keep your power is to make sure you gather it all. Obama's not the first president to lie or have ulterior motives. But this is probably the weakest time in this country's history, because I think the machine has gone as far as it can without undermining the constitution, and that's change that probably can't be undone.

[mykevermin]

I'm *seriously* asking you to refute a person's claims by pointing out their faulty evidence or reasoning. I know it's not something that's widely done in this forum or in America in general. He's constructed arguments. You're bypassing and trivializing them. The best point you could make is a well-thought-out, cogent response that's intelligent instead of seeking to appear intellectual.

You claim, per your post above, that the "reality is that Obama is doing big favors for big business," and then you're asking me to defend claims that Obama is a Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Racist?

That's nonsense. You are like Beck in that you lack coherence. It is pure, unadulterated, self-evident nonsense that does not deserve a response. Much like the claims that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990.

Let me repeat this to make it clear to you: Beck's claims are absurd on the surface and do not deserve being treated like cogent statements.

Yeah, I know what you are trying to do. My question to you is, if you don't like this form of "journalism" why perpetuate it with these false claims you call "satire"? It's one thing to call someone racist, or a communist, but it's a totally different thing to spread a "rumor" about someone raping and murdering a child. If you really want to sink to this level, that's just sad.

You *really* don't grasp satire.

Thrustbucket, if you genuinely believe the M-W definition of fascism you placed in bold describes our current president, you've truly no idea what fascism looks like. If you believe that "forcible suppression of opposition" actually occurs, perhaps you can compare people carrying loaded automatic weapons to town hall meetings without being arrested to people the number of folks who were removed from meetings and/or arrested for simply wearing t-shirts proclaiming their opposition to Bush.

Now, given the poor reading comprehension I've encountered in this thread so far I feel the need to preemptively defend/qualify that last sentence. I am not calling Bush a fascist. What I'm saying is that we are not residents of a fascist nation, and there is nothing you can proffer to defend that definition as applicable to the current sitting President (or any of them, really).

[thrustbucket]

The word fascism used in the modern day is a catch-all word applied to a multitude of things. That was kind of my point. Generally people use the word, today, to describe anyone or anything that they feel makes them do what they don't want to do. It's a semi-valid definition, to use it that way, but not a historically valid definition, as you point out.

And no, I do not believe it describes our current president but I would believe it can describe many of the agendas of those in power. Fairness doctrine? Explain how that is not the very definition of fascism.

[VipFREAK]

I would feel sorry for the guy if he wasn't such a colossal waste of life.

Ugh.. this.

[mykevermin]

Fairness doctrine? Explain how that is not the very definition of fascism.

:shock:

[atreyue]

You claim, per your post above, that the "reality is that Obama is doing big favors for big business," and then you're asking me to defend claims that Obama is a Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Racist?

That's nonsense. You are like Beck in that you lack coherence. It is pure, unadulterated, self-evident nonsense that does not deserve a response. Much like the claims that Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990.

Let me repeat this to make it clear to you: Beck's claims are absurd on the surface and do not deserve being treated like cogent statements.

I agree with you that the way you've repeatedly posted Beck's claims without his arguments does a good job of helping to reinforce your attempt to portray them as absurd (I especially concur that it is on the surface). Seeing as how this allows you to say whatever you want about someone who clearly holds a different opinion than yours without having to offer any truly reasoned arguments or rebuttals of your own, I can understand why you have such a vested interest in doing so. :applause:

Unfortunately, I have to go to lunch, so I'll be unable to list specific examples for cases where Obama has done as I've said for the next hour or so. Please feel free post examples if you like of why my statement is "pure, unadulterated, self-evident nonsense" and I'd be happy to reply when I return. Or you can just continue to use flimsy excuses to denounce opposing viewpoints because your own are so self-evident.

[thrustbucket]

Yes, it is. And so is this (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=108604).

[thrustbucket]

I agree with you that the way you've repeatedly posted Beck's claims without his arguments does a good job of helping to reinforce your attempt to portray them as absurd (I especially concur that it is on the surface). Seeing as how this allows you to say whatever you want about someone who clearly holds a different opinion than yours without having to offer any truly reasoned arguments or rebuttals of your own, I can understand why you have such a vested interest in doing so. :applause:

Unfortunately, I have to go to lunch, so I'll be unable to list specific examples for cases where Obama has done as I've said for the next hour or so. Please feel free post examples if you like of why my statement is "pure, unadulterated, self-evident nonsense" and I'd be happy to reply when I return. Or you can just continue to use flimsy excuses to denounce opposing viewpoints because your own are so self-evident.

He has already said that believing Obama is "racist, socialist, communist" is so absurd on the surface that it's not worth even discussing.

How can you argue with that?

[mykevermin]

I agree with you that the way you've repeatedly posted Beck's claims without his arguments does a good job of helping to reinforce your attempt to portray them as absurd (I especially concur that it is on the surface). Seeing as how this allows you to say whatever you want about someone who clearly holds a different opinion than yours without having to offer any truly reasoned arguments or rebuttals of your own, I can understand why you have such a vested interest in doing so. :applause:

Unfortunately, I have to go to lunch, so I'll be unable to list specific examples for cases where Obama has done as I've said for the next hour or so. Please feel free post examples if you like of why my statement is "pure, unadulterated, self-evident nonsense" and I'd be happy to reply when I return. Or you can just continue to use flimsy excuses to denounce opposing viewpoints because your own are so self-evident.

Two of those videos are ten minute segments. If you can't contextualize an argument as a *tv show host* in ten minutes, you should not be on the air.

When I saw you post in this thread, I saw that I had you on ignore. I thought "who's this dude and why is he on my ignore list?" I now see that you're an insufferable opponent of logic, incapable of reasoning that your hero bases his popularity on conjecture and absurd leaps of logic, and someone who refuses to entertain the possibility of those points.

I don't recall what you said in the past to get on my ignore list, but I can now see that my past reason was sound.

Getting all high and mighty about "intellectual debate" and "Glenn Beck's claims" is sickening.

Back to the OP, I did chuckle when I came across this comment on the reddit forums:

Tonight we're going to talk about Glenn Beck and his dangerous connections. Specifically his love of alcohol, his connection to the mormon church, his early days in talk radio, firing a man for bringing him the wrong kind of pen.

If we put all these bolded letters together we get...

P-E-D-O-F-A-L

There you have it ladies and gentleman. We are living in dark times. A known rapist pedofal has a nationally televised show.

If you don't get it, here's your context:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5oc_U4n-p0

"ONE LETTER IS MISSING...THE ONE THAT'S MISSING IS 'Y'!"

(BTW, I'm so glad someone did the keyboard cat meme to this.)

[cochesecochese]

"ONE LETTER IS MISSING...THE ONE THAT'S MISSING IS 'Y'!"
Hilarious.

[mykevermin]

Didn't catch it. Dang it.

[atreyue]

He has already said that believing Obama is "racist, socialist, communist" is so absurd on the surface that it's not worth even discussing.

How can you argue with that?

If someone makes those claims and provides no supporting evidence, you call bullshit unless/until they supply facts.

If someone makes those claims and provides supporting evidence that you think is flimsy, you point out why it doesn't make sense and that takes care of that.

If someone puts crap out there you think is dangerous and absurd, then explain to people why. Just saying it is shouldn't be enough. "That's right/wrong and I can't be bothered to explain why. It should just be obvious to you that it is so" is just a way to make people feel stupid and shut them up. If anyone disagrees with your viewpoint, they should then be mocked. I will take issue with anyone that thinks it's worth throwing in their opinion but not worth discussing. Apparently, I would be better served by just not commenting on/to those who don't actually wish to discuss ideas, since that makes me "high and mighty". I wonder what that makes someone who thinks dismissing dissenters are.

[atreyue]

Two of those videos are ten minute segments. If you can't contextualize an argument as a *tv show host* in ten minutes, you should not be on the air.

When I saw you post in this thread, I saw that I had you on ignore. I thought "who's this dude and why is he on my ignore list?" I now see that you're an insufferable opponent of logic, incapable of reasoning that your hero bases his popularity on conjecture and absurd leaps of logic, and someone who refuses to entertain the possibility of those points.

I'm entertaining the possibility of those points when I ask you repeatedly to explain to me the faults in what he's saying. Apparently, the fact that it doesn't just automatically come to me without you being required to make your own argument for why what he's saying isn't true means that I'm a waste of space and time. I just don't see why people have become so unable to have reasoned discussion. Ten of millions of Americans clearly find his opinion worth at least considering, so maybe such callous treatment of them isn't doing them justice. Or all those people are just stupid wastes of space as well. The media and most politicians definitely do their best to convince people that every issue needs to be a polarizing one and that there's no common ground to be found between you and the "crazies" on the other side of the issue.

[mykevermin]

I'm a waste of space and time.

...

Ten of millions of Americans clearly find his opinion worth at least considering, so maybe such callous treatment of them isn't doing them justice.

http://www.freefoto.com/images/05/08/05_08_5---Cross-on-a-Hill_web.jpg

http://tiffabee.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/oprah-winfrey.jpg

http://themicrocosm.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/american-idol-judges.jpg

The "people watch his show" argument doesn't carry a lot of weight, you know. I suppose you would defend Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" as having empirical validity due to its ratings as well? Or maybe "Spongebob Squarepants"?

Some people say "there's no such thing as a stupid question." I'm not one of those people. Some people aren't worth responding to, and Glenn Beck is indeed one of those people.

[fullmetalfan720]

http://www.freefoto.com/images/05/08/05_08_5---Cross-on-a-Hill_web.jpg

Ahhaha, let's make fun of people's religion! :roll:

[mykevermin]

Don't misread me.

The argument atreyu made was "he has loads of fans, therefore he has valid opinions."

If you believe that, then it is a necessary truth that Jesus is indeed the messiah because he has millions of followers over thousands of years. Except that also means that Krishna is real and valid, as are Buddha, Mohammed, Mars, Zeus, and probably Jedis too.

Since this cannot all be true, of course, the premise on which atreyu makes his argument is invalid.

There's your logic lesson for the day.

[thrustbucket]

Hm. So I guess what you are saying is that even when most of the country believes our President doesn't really understand the proposed Health Care plan, that doesn't mean it's true? ;)

[mykevermin]

I mean that I don't trust mass opinion or belief.

Your use of double negatives in a run-on sentence made that agonizing to read. Just sayin'.

[atreyue]

The "people watch his show" argument doesn't carry a lot of weight, you know. I suppose you would defend Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" as having empirical validity due to its ratings as well? Or maybe "Spongebob Squarepants"?

Some people say "there's no such thing as a stupid question." I'm not one of those people. Some people aren't worth responding to, and Glenn Beck is indeed one of those people.

I would consider watching Countdown to try to identify what his viewpoint is, and if I don't agree with it or think he's full of crap, then what it could be that makes so many other people agree with him or at least like to watch him. And I was actually discussing Spongebob at a baby shower this past weekend with expectant parents. It was more about whether it's appropriate for young children, and whether it's worthwhile to even try to conclude anything about a parent from the decision to allow it (My wife was a psychology major). I watch Beck because his is the only alternative show to "mainstream media" I've seen on TV besides Lou Dobbs (who has the only fair and balanced show I've seen or heard) that attempts to provide any arguments to back up his statements. It seems like it would be really easy to poke logical holes in his arguments if one disagreed with his statements and watched his show. I certainly know where I stand, and had reached my own conclusions about Obama before I ever knew who Glenn Beck was. I wish more people who disagreed with his views/claims would seriously respond to them in a reasoned manner. For those who don't watch his show, his secret to success is not that he's saying what a certain demographic wants to hear, it's that he challenges issues and says "If I'm wrong, somebody prove me wrong" and asks direct questions and gets answers that are indirect at best. That makes people distrust the government more and adds to the appearance of credibility, which every other conservative/republican entertainer is now trying to cash in on.

[fullmetalfan720]

Don't misread me.

The argument atreyu made was "he has loads of fans, therefore he has valid opinions."

If you believe that, then it is a necessary truth that Jesus is indeed the messiah because he has millions of followers over thousands of years. Except that also means that Krishna is real and valid, as are Buddha, Mohammed, Mars, Zeus, and probably Jedis too.

Since this cannot all be true, of course, the premise on which atreyu makes his argument is invalid.

There's your logic lesson for the day.
Sure. Especially when you've tried to pull the card of "religious people are idiots!" before.

[mykevermin]

Lou Dobbs (who has the only fair and balanced show I've seen or heard)

Everything is suddenly crystal clear to me now.

More interesting is the discussion about SpongeBob. As someone who is very unfamiliar with the show, what about it's content makes it possibly unsuitable for children?

fullmetal: grow up and stop putting words in my mouth.

[atreyue]

Don't misread me.

The argument atreyu made was "he has loads of fans, therefore he has valid opinions."

If you believe that, then it is a necessary truth that Jesus is indeed the messiah because he has millions of followers over thousands of years. Except that also means that Krishna is real and valid, as are Buddha, Mohammed, Mars, Zeus, and probably Jedis too.

Since this cannot all be true, of course, the premise on which atreyu makes his argument is invalid.

There's your logic lesson for the day.

The argument I am making is that a lot of people believe that he has valid opinions, and so they should be addressed. That doesn't mean valid. That means if you disagree, it's worth your time to invalidate them. I'm not a fool. And if you think I am, then you certainly don't need to misconstrue my points to make me appear one, as I would already be doing a good job of that myself.

[atreyue]

Everything is suddenly crystal clear to me now.

More interesting is the discussion about SpongeBob. As someone who is very unfamiliar with the show, what about it's content makes it possibly unsuitable for children?

fullmetal: grow up and stop putting words in my mouth.

I think there are a lot of *wink-wink* adult or young adult-intended content in there. I don't think that all that stuff just goes right over a young child's head just because they can't fully understand it. I ask myself "I my child did get the inside joke, would I want to to see it?" and right now the answer is no. it's not as bad as Shrek 2, which was full of sexual humor and still got a PG rating.

[thrustbucket]

I mean that I don't trust mass opinion or belief.

Your use of double negatives in a run-on sentence made that agonizing to read. Just sayin'.

Gosh. Fine. I'll try to do less work and spend more time on what I write here.

Yes.... Yes I think I will.

[fullmetalfan720]

fullmetal: grow up and stop putting words in my mouth.

You only conjur up data when it's public opinion polls, but as has been demonstrated, the public are morons who believe Jesus is real;
I suppose that's putting words into your mouth?

[Frogurt.man]

Glad to see Fark.com memes getting on CAG.

[perdition(troy]

snoreeeee

[UncleBob]

So, Glenn Beck is a horrible guy for doing X.

In return, this group of people do "X".

And so many people applaud them?

Those of you who are defending the actions of those making these accusations and "rumors" of accusations are no better than Glenn Beck and his fans.

Actually, I'm going to say you're worse. At least Glenn Beck uses his name and shows his face.

I wonder if those who are posting this stuff about him would be willing to come forward on National TV and make these claims.

[mykevermin]

In satire, human or individual vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings are held up to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony, or other methods, ideally with the intent to bring about improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, the purpose of satire is not primarily humour in itself so much as an attack on something of which the author strongly disapproves, using the weapon of wit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

You people can't truly be so thick as to think that anyone *genuinely* believes Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. You truly can't. Well, maybe that one dude what thinks "Lou Dobbs" is a "fair and balanced" journalist. But everyone else but him.

[UncleBob]

Myke - just as there are people who believe Obama is a secret Muslim, created by the Jews to socialize health care and make us all commies, there are people who will believe this crap.

Beyond that, the purpose here is designed to be hurtful. The claim could have been something like "Glenn Beck did a lot of Cocaine in 1990"... but that wouldn't have had the same impact as this "story".

Again, trying to justify and support this makes you no better than Glenn Beck or his own supporters.

[JolietJake]

I also don't think people would have been surprised if you said Beck used to do coke.:lol:

[UncleBob]

I guess it's not all that big of a deal - even the president can do it!

[trq]

I guess it's not all that big of a deal - even the president can do it!

And the former president!

[cochesecochese]

Didn't catch it. Dang it.
Ahhhhhhh come on myke. You act like you don't even know me.

The post wasn't me being passive aggressive over the internet towards you it was me being not only crass and tasteless towards Beck and his followers but maybe going just a little off the deep end with the language. I do try and reel it back quite a bit on these boards since everyone else is pretty civil. My mouth gets the best of me at times but luckily this is the net and I have the chance to quickly go back and wipe out what I said.

It really was a funny clip (no sarcasm).

[mykevermin]

Myke - just as there are people who believe Obama is a secret Muslim, created by the Jews to socialize health care and make us all commies, there are people who will believe this crap.

Beyond that, the purpose here is designed to be hurtful. The claim could have been something like "Glenn Beck did a lot of Cocaine in 1990"... but that wouldn't have had the same impact as this "story".

Again, trying to justify and support this makes you no better than Glenn Beck or his own supporters.

Satire is not something that should be withheld or restrained because of the presumed stupidity of some people.

Should Fallout 3 not have been developed because some media outlets mistook screenshots for muslim websites' estimates of what their ideal postapocalyptic DC would look like?

Can you imagine where we would be, as a global community, developmentally, if we held back because of the stragglers? I suspect cuneiform would still be a ways off.

[Brak]

His own logic used against him? Beautiful.

[trq]

Can you imagine where we would be, as a global community, developmentally, if we held back because of the stragglers?

Probably talking about how giving poor people health care leads to "death panels." Just guessing.

[IRHari]

reminds me of the flack Bill Maher got when he said 'I wouldn't put anything past this stupid country'

[mykevermin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWL-pfCao-U

:rofl:

[IRHari]

lets take our country BACK (from the black guy) america!

[UncleBob]

Satire is not something that should be withheld or restrained because of the presumed stupidity of some people.
[...]
Can you imagine where we would be, as a global community, developmentally, if we held back because of the stragglers? I suspect cuneiform would still be a ways off.

Two things to this:

First, aren't you the one that was auguring for a specific law against texting while driving because, unless it was specifically made illegal, people would do it, even if it did fall under reckless driving laws?

Second - if you want to call this satire, then great! Satire is protected speech - so the individuals perpetrating this "Satire" should have no problems coming forward with their names and faces. Instead of hiding like cowards behind the anonymity that is the internet.

[HowStern]

^I don't want to answer for myke/put words in his mouth but I'll make the quick point that laws aren't satire/fiction/entertainment. Your analogy is no good.

[cochesecochese]

Satire is protected speech - so the individuals perpetrating this "Satire" should have no problems coming forward with their names and faces. Instead of hiding like cowards behind the anonymity that is the internet.
Oh yeah, I definitely agree on this one big time totally.

Nancy Genovese is locked up already so whoever spoofed the documents should be totally safe.

[JolietJake]

I didn't realize that Beck was an expert on art and architecture.

Simply put, people see whatever they want to see. People like Beck want to see some sort of grand communist conspiracy and guess what, there you go. Rockefeller was a communist.:roll:

[Brak]

I sometimes wonder if Glenn Beck is real, or if he's just a heel, cutting promos over the air...

[UncleBob]

^I don't want to answer for myke/put words in his mouth but I'll make the quick point that laws aren't satire/fiction/entertainment. Your analogy is no good.

Myke says that society shouldn't hold back for the stragglers. But then says that society should create laws that hold back people because of the stragglers.

Oh yeah, I definitely agree on this one big time totally.

Nancy Genovese is locked up already so whoever spoofed the documents should be totally safe.

The point is "Glenn Beck does this. We can do this." Glenn Beck uses his name. Glenn Beck shows his face. Glenn Beck doesn't hide behind a computer monitor in his mommy's basement. If you have a problem with what Glenn Beck says, you can take it up with Glenn Beck - and take it to court.

The folks behind this are cowards - plain and simple.

[mykevermin]

Myke says that society shouldn't hold back for the stragglers. But then says that society should create laws that hold back people because of the stragglers.

No, your analogy stinks.

[cochesecochese]

The point is "Glenn Beck does this. We can do this."
What? What? Who is this 'we' you are referring to?

Glenn Beck uses his name. Glenn Beck shows his face. Glenn Beck doesn't hide behind a computer monitor in his mommy's basement. If you have a problem with what Glenn Beck says, you can take it up with Glenn Beck - and take it to court.

The folks behind this are cowards - plain and simple.
So every time Beck makes overarching and outlandish comments about public figures (politicians, real journalists) they should fight him in court?

[dv8mad]

I normally don't like to participate in the political threads as, having been out of the U.S. for the past 4 years, I have lost quite a bit of perspective, but I'd like to just go ahead and make a prediction here anyway;

mykevermin wins debate

[IRHari]

"Taxes are a joke. Regardless of what a political candidate "promises," they will increase. More taxes are always the answer to government mismanagement. They mess up. We suffer. Taxes are reaching cataclysmic levels, with no slowdown in sight.

Is a Civil War Imminent? Do we have to shed blood to reform the current system? I hope it doesn't come to that. But it might.

It is a lie if we tell ourselves that the police can protect us everywhere at all times. Firearms restrictions are bad enough, but now a woman can't even carry Mace in her purse?

Go ahead, take everything I own; take my dignity. Feel good as you grow fat and rich at my expense; sucking my tax dollars and property.

The government is afraid of the guns people have because they have to have control of the people at all times. Once you take away the guns, you can do anything to the people. You give them an inch and they take a mile. I believe we are slowly turning into a socialist government. The government is continually growing bigger and more powerful, and the people need to prepare to defend themselves against government control.

Those who betray or subvert the Constitution are guilty of sedition and/or treason, are domestic enemies and should and will be punished accordingly.

It also stands to reason that anyone who sympathizes with the enemy or gives aid or comfort to said enemy is likewise guilty. I have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and I will. And I will because not only did I swear to, but I believe in what it stands for in every bit of my heart, soul and being."

This sounds like Glenn Beck right? Harmless rhetoric, right?

Wrong. Those things I posted are blurbs quoted from Timothy McVeigh, who if you don't remember, is responsible for this:

http://www.oklahomacitybombing.com/oklahoma-city-bombing-4.jpg

Note most of this post is paraphrased from elchip's post from Fark.com, the same thread that started the glenn beck 1990 rape/murder rumor.

[UncleBob]

No, your analogy stinks.

Myke - you're one of a kind.

What? What? Who is this 'we' you are referring to?
[quote]
"We" being the people who are perpetrating this "rumor", of course.

[quote]So every time Beck makes overarching and outlandish comments about public figures (politicians, real journalists) they should fight him in court?

They have four options:
1.) Tell their side of the story.
2.) Ignore him and his fans.
3.) Fight him in court (if the comments are untrue).
4.) Make overarching and outlandish comments in return about him (a la Keith Olbermann)

In this particular case, the perpetrators of this "rumor" have removed two of the four options from Beck. Oddly enough, these are the two options that likely scare them the most.

[cochesecochese]

They have four options:
1.) Tell their side of the story.
2.) Ignore him and his fans.
3.) Fight him in court (if the comments are untrue).
4.) Make overarching and outlandish comments in return about him (a la Keith Olbermann)

Only the court option is removed (boo hoo) so he's still got plenty of options.

When's he going to prove his innocence once and for all? Until he does he's still a horrible SANYO phone stealing thief and a rapist in my mind.

Edit: And how. It looks like I'm not the only one! (http://www.twiigs.com/poll/Politics/38512?results=1)
http://www.mediaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/gbeckpoll.jpg

[UncleBob]

Only the court option is removed (boo hoo) so he's still got plenty of options.

When's he going to prove his innocence once and for all? Until he does he's still a horrible SANYO phone stealing thief and a rapist in my mind.

And you're no better than crazy Glenn Beck fans. Congrats!

[cochesecochese]

And you're no better than crazy Glenn Beck fans. Congrats!
Le sigh.

Sarcasm. Subtlety. Shades of ambiguity. You are able to discern none of these.

Discussion over.

[IRHari]

cochese, that poll, like all polls, needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Depending on how the question is phrased, it can lead to a certain answer.

Frank Luntz, a pollster and frequent contributor to FOXNews, was on Penn & Teller's 'Bullshit', where he was quoted as saying that the key to survey polling is "to ask a question in the way that you get the right answer."

How does this guy still have credibility as a pollster? Dunno. It's FOXNews, stupid.

[cochesecochese]

FFS
cochese, that poll, like all polls, needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Depending on how the question is phrased, it can lead to a certain answer.
Le sigh.

Sarcasm. Subtlety. Shades of ambiguity. You are able to discern none of these.

Discussion over.

[IRHari]

I know that poll was bombed by 4chan or something, just like the Time 100. Stop trying to act like you're better than everyone else. I was being sarcastic too, and I'm on your side, I don't know what your problem is.

[Kirin Lemon]

FFS

Le sigh.

Sarcasm. Subtlety. Shades of ambiguity. You are able to discern none of these.

Discussion over.

:rofl: Man, you're dealing with some seriously dense people today. My condolences.

[UncleBob]

FFS

Le sigh.

Sarcasm. Subtlety. Shades of ambiguity. You are able to discern none of these.

Discussion over.

Sorry, but when it comes to posting something so hateful and full of spite, following it up with 'haha it was a joke" doesn't cut it for me.

Not only does this resort to the type of tactics you folks seem to be so much against, but if you're claiming it's humor, you're making light of rape and murder?

[depascal22]

Quit acting like you give a shit about someone other than yourself, Bob.

[Msut77]

Quit acting like you give a shit about someone other than yourself, Bob.

The thing Bob doesn't get (intentionally or otherwise) is that this would only be equivalent if say Lou Dobbs or whoever took this on tv and started saying the onus is on Beck to prove it wrong.

[UncleBob]

Quit acting like you give a shit about someone other than yourself, Bob.

Oh, now, see! That's a great counter argument. I can see why so many people look up to you.

The thing Bob doesn't get (intentionally or otherwise) is that this would only be equivalent if say Lou Dobbs or whoever took this on tv and started saying the onus is on Beck to prove it wrong.

Actually, that'd be great if Lou Dobbs (or, more likely, Keith Olbermann) were to do this. Because then, they wouldn't be pansies. They wouldn't be hiding behind the internet.

Again, satire is protected under free speech. If the individuals who are creating this rumor, perpertrating it and falsifying records all believe what they're doing is honestly and truly satire, then awesome! Let's see some names and faces to go with these claims.

[cochesecochese]

:rofl: Man, you're dealing with some seriously dense people today. My condolences.
Much obliged. That's me back to lurking VS for a while....

[IRHari]

Allow me to pull a Lou Dobbs, for the sake of argument:

Well, the Glenn Beck rape/murder accusation is a dumb thing. I think we have to all admit this is a dumb thing either way, because, I mean, I can't understand why Glenn Beck wouldn't just move to get this stuff out of the way. Show the documents, get it done -- I mean, he -- think about it.

[mykevermin]

:rofl:

LOU DOBBS!

[KingBroly]

So...his records were sealed, right? You're telling me someone can't find a newspaper article from 1990 that was archived on the internet that details why he was arrested? And even though names may not be there, you can't tell me it'd be hard to figure out because descriptions of the suspect are usually given.

[fatherofcaitlyn]

I heard Glenn Beck was raping somebody called Journalism on a daily basis in 2009.

[IRHari]

Question with boldness America....question with boldness....

[KingBroly]

I heard Glenn Beck was raping somebody called Journalism on a daily basis in 2009.

I heard everyone who's been writing for a major newspaper since 1970 has done the same.