Comments on: Do Limbaugh and Beck Really Believe The Nonsense They Say?

By: Eclectic Radical

Eclectic Radical — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:36:15 +0000

New developments in answer to this question: The Eclectic Radical: There Really IS An Explanation For Everything

By: Eclectic Radical

Eclectic Radical — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:27:16 +0000

Well, and of course I plant tongue firmly in cheek when I say this, I’m not sure that a member of this administration quoting Lee Atwater is much better than quoting Mao.

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:35:37 +0000

On the other hand, Dunn got the quote from Republican Lee Atwater, and many other Republicans such as a top adviser to Barry Goldwater have quoted Mao.

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:24:08 +0000

True, it is probably best not to mention Mao’s name considering how that will be twisted, and the point of the speech could have been made without it.

By: The White House at war with FOX News - Page 4 - Dodge City DodgeBoard.com

The White House at war with FOX News - Page 4 - Dodge City DodgeBoard.com — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:50:19 +0000

[...] that people like Glenn Beck are hitting people with their own words. As this example came up in the comments to this post, I thought it would be worthwhile to show where this falsehood being circulated by the right wing [...]

By: Eclectic Radical

Eclectic Radical — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:51:44 +0000

No. We don’t. Obviously we don’t want to give Glenn Beck that kind of power.

However, and this is just me, there is a ‘basic common sense’ line to be drawn. If one works for the President of the United States it is probably best not to reference Mao Tse Tung, irony or not.

I’m NOT trying to defend Beck. The guy is vile and disgusting and I think the fact that he probably believes every word he says with the zealotry of a psychotic makes him worse than if he were just a dishonest demagogue.

I do think someone working for the president is a bit dumb if they are throwing Mao’s name around in front of cameras.

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:25:34 +0000

As for the words being ill-chosen, the only way to avoid such distortions is to considerably limit what one says. Using what was obvious irony in quoting Mao and Mother Theresa to make her point makes did make it easier for Beck to distort her statement, but do we really want to limit what can be said based upon how Fox will twist something?

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:05:16 +0000

Her actual words don’t show any form of endorsement. It is far more than taking words out of context when they crop in such a way that the words are given a totally different meaning.

By: Eclectic Radical

Eclectic Radical — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:59:33 +0000

‘She didn’t endorse him at all. Glenn Beck did what Fox regularly does–edit clips to make it look like Democrats have said things entirely different from what they said.’

Even the full comments give the impression of endorsement. They don’t give it to the degree or kind that Beck claimed, but they do carry a certain endorsement of certain modes of thinking. Nor do I totally disagree that those modes of thinking should be admired.

I know her words were taken out of context, it was a Fox story for Pete’s sake. Her original words were… ill-chosen… however.

By: » How Fox Distorts The News To Promote The Republican Party Line Liberal Values

Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:37:20 +0000

[...] Ron Chusid: She didn’ ;t endorse him at all. Glenn Beck did what Fox regularly does– ;edit clips to make it look like Democrats have said things entirely different from what they said…. [...]

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:19:06 +0000

She didn't endorse him at all. Glenn Beck did what Fox regularly does--edit clips to make it look like Democrats have said things entirely different from what they said. Info on how they cropped the clip to distort it is here.

By: Eclectic Radical

Eclectic Radical — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 06:15:54 +0000

‘We do not think Mao was a swell guy. We think he was an evil dictator–sort of Bush/Cheney magnified a thousand times.’

It’s worth noting, too, that Anita Dunn was not praising Mao as a political leader but as a political philosopher. I don’t believe she endorses his actions as leader of the Communist Chinese government at all, but I can certainly understand admiration for his role as a leader against the corrupt and totalitarian Kuomintang government of Chiang Kai Shek and for his writings on revolution, freedom, and determination during this period. His political philosophy, before he actually had power, was very different in many ways from what actually happened when he took power. Some of the right wing comments about ‘Mein Kampf’ breal down because Hitler wrote exactly what he would do when he was in charge and it was all evil. Mao, on the other hand, wrote poetic and philosophical homilies about belief, endurance, and freedom that in no way foreshadowed the Cultural Revolution.

I don’t think it’s necessarily right to admire Mao, even in retrospect, knowing what he became. However, I am a big fan of the writings and speeches of Mikhail Bakunin. So I am open to a certain amount of criticism myself.

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 03:01:00 +0000

I know it is futile, but just in case Michael McCoy comes back, I guess we should hit him with a quick dose of reality:

Beck and Limbaugh are viewed by a tiny percentage of this country. Most of the country finds them to be laughing stocks for the nonsense they say. Rather than echoing the views of the majority, most people reject them for the manner in which they so strongly oppose this country and the values it was founded upon.

We do not think Mao was a swell guy. We think he was an evil dictator--sort of Bush/Cheney magnified a thousand times.

Think of this while you are waiting for Jesus to come and take you.

By: Ron Chusid

Ron Chusid — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:55:02 +0000

I thought I should let through a comment such as above just in case there is any doubt about how absolutely out of touch with reality, and for all practical purposes brain dead, the followers of Beck and Limbaugh are.

By: Michael McCoy

Michael McCoy — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:09:13 +0000

Beck and Limbaugh get good ratings in the usa because they echo the values of the majority of this nation. You liberals have no values. That is why your leaders hire people like Anita Dunn who praise evil dictators like Mao Tse Tung. Then when they are confronted on it, they run and hide like cockroaches afraid of the light. Maybe when Jesus comes back and takes the saints home, then all you cockroaches who think mao tse tung was a swell guy can just live in your own little utopia of filth that is now the modern democratic party……