Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 83
  1.    #1  
    Glenn Beck has become a lightning rod for people on both the left and the right. I would like to discuss his show with those that disagree with him. But, instead of name calling...Racist...*****...Why would anyone watch him, etc. A civil discussion just about things he discussed on today's or at least this week's shows.

    If you just want to attack him, and not the ideas presented on his show, creating another thread is easy to do.
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2  
    Just once complaint... (maybe for the other thread?). I can't watch his show cause it's at 5pm EST. I usually work until 5:30, hit the gym on the way home, etc. I do catch parts of his radio program once a week or so, but he usually just hints on what he's going to cover on his cable show.

    Most of what I do catch about "cable" Glenn is through commentary about his show in the later segments of other broadcasts, and sometimes on Fox and Friends.

    Maybe I'll get some insight on what he's rolling out during his show in this thread? lol
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #3  
    As with all these types of shows the same result should accure. It does not matter if you like, dislike, agree or disagree. These shows make you aware of issues allowing you to investigate them to make, hopefully, own educated decision.
  4. #4  
    The CSM has a show? And what is controversial about it that would lead to any sort of discussion?

    For what it's worth I don't watch Glenn Beck. Have caught a few minutes here or there while surfing the channels but it's not something I stop for.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Just curious, but why not use the Christian Science Monitor as the basis of discussion, as just one balanced, neutral example rather then Mr Apocolypto? Why a talking-head of any stripe as the basis of discussion?
    Hmmmm, anything with the word Christian in its title cannot be a "balanced, neutral example".
  6. #6  
    I love Glenn Beck.....the main thing I hear from folks is that they think it is a news program, however it is an opinion show......two different animals. He certainly makes you think, especially with his recent shows regarding ACORN, SEIU....etc.
  7. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by djdisturbed View Post
    Hmmmm, anything with the word Christian in its title cannot be a "balanced, neutral example".
    You'd prefer "Satans Science Monitor" perhaps? Oh wait, thats FNC.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  8.    #8  
    Today's show he is supposed to talk about Propaganda. The good thing about his shows is that he does not take sides. He bashes things Bush and the Republicans have done as well as Obama and the Democrats and the people behind them.

    Would we even know about Van Jones or the problems in ACORN if it wasn't talked about on this show? How about the recent movements to Socialism, while it has been slowly coming a long time, Bush sped it up and Obama is taking off with it. This is a good show to put on your DVR!
  9.    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Today, any joker, talking fool with good writers can present infotainment without making it clear to those watching/listening that they are not presenting the news of the day, though their presentation certainly implies that it is. If your cup of tea is A**hole TV (as in everybody's got one), feeding at their trough still doesn't make their view worth serious consideration.
    I knew someone couldn't discuss the issues on his show without stooping to name calling.

    Any particular issues discussed on his show you disagree with?
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    A problem is that this "entertainment", such as it is, used to be ethically required to identify itself as such formally, on the air. That was the standard held when there were only the Big 3 networks involved in presenting the news as journalism of the day.

    Today, any joker, talking fool with good writers can present infotainment without making it clear to those watching/listening that they are not presenting the news of the day, though their presentation certainly implies that it is. If your cup of tea is A**hole TV (as in everybody's got one), feeding at their trough still doesn't make their view worth serious consideration.
    So when does your show air?
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  11. wjclint's Avatar
    Posts
    40 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #11  
    Many of these shows have transcripts. Is there somewhere you can post a link to that has transcripts of his shows? That would make it much easier to discuss the actual issues he tries to discuss rather than relying on everyone to watch and recall.
    Phone History: VisorPhone --> Treo180 --> Treo650--> Treo700p--> PalmCentro --> HTCTouchDiamond (2weeks) --> PalmCentro --> Palm Pre
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by djdisturbed View Post
    Hmmmm, anything with the word Christian in its title cannot be a "balanced, neutral example".
    And you just made the same mistake I made when someone was hipping me to The Monitor in College. I dismissed it for the same reason, then later discovered it is possibly the most respected journalistic source on world news you can get.

    Have a look: CSMonitor.com.
  13. larnapp's Avatar
    Posts
    171 Posts
    Global Posts
    181 Global Posts
    #13  
    I've watched Beck evolve from an informed, entertaining talk radio guy in Tampa Bay, to an ever more dramatic, radical, end-of-the-world info-tainer. I guess he's more of a reflection of contemporary rhetoric and whatever it takes to get ratings, than a leader, and to me it seems he has become a caricature of his former self (as have so many others).

    In other words, as the radical left and radical right spin up in their various lovable ways, each side becomes hyper-radical and dramatic, just to be heard.

    I guess whoever is right, we're all gonna die. Either from out of control global warming, flooding our cities with melted ice... or... Communism causing our well-armed society into street-fighting or bunkers to avoid the anarchy that's sure to arise when the world economy crumbles.

    In the mean time, I think I'll turn on some jazz music.

    _
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    How about the recent movements to Socialism, while it has been slowly coming a long time, Bush sped it up and
    Ok, I'll bite. How did the Bush admin move this Nation towards Socialism?

    And if you want to DVR something worthwhile, try the News Hour every evening on PBS.
  15.    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    I differ with any talking-head who passes themselves off as informed and retaining journalistic integrity, but is clearly vacated on both. Simply put: If I had a neighbor who spoke to me like Beck does his audience, with the complete lack of respect for their ability to think for themselves outside of his influence, free of bloody-meat jingoisms, that neighbor would find themselves isolated and alone with their fears to keep them company.

    How often have you watched his complete show?
    Or, do you just take things out of context?

    What kind of Journalist with integrity speaks of someone at a rally being a gun-toting anti-Obama racist, ...all that was shown by most media was a closeup of the back of the person, with the gun on his shoulder. If the complete clip was shown, as the camera panned out it was obvious the man in the clip was Black (and he had a permit for the gun and was there supporting his rights under the Second Amendment). Journalistic Integrity?

    It would be nice if those of you with grudges, who don't (or won't) watch the show, start a different thread. We can use this thread to discuss issues on the show.
  16. #16  
    Due to time constraints I listen to the radio broadcast, not the show.

    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    Glenn Beck has become a lightning rod for people on both the left and the right. I would like to discuss his show with those that disagree with him. But, instead of name calling...Racist...*****...Why would anyone watch him, etc. A civil discussion just about things he discussed on today's or at least this week's shows.

    If you just want to attack him, and not the ideas presented on his show, creating another thread is easy to do.
  17. #17  
    Christian Science Monitor is not neutral and neither is Beck. Beck is a commentator and makes no bones about it. Thing is though, Beck supports neither side - he has slammed them both.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Just curious, but why not use the Christian Science Monitor as the basis of discussion, as just one balanced, neutral example rather then Mr Apocolypto? Why a talking-head of any stripe as the basis of discussion?
  18. #18  
    Ok - from your comment it is very evident that you have not watched the show or listened to the radio broadcast. You speak of pulp fiction that cannot be sustained - he spoke of Jones for a long time, ACORN and its actions, and many other issues. Can you point to anything he has said that was not correct? I do not think so. Look real hard.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    When the goal is divisiveness and ratings, those who rely on them can only feed on what's "controversial", I suppose, even if they have to embellish facts with pulp fiction to sustain either. That doesn't mean one has no power to resist such trainwreck commentary.
    Last edited by bclinger; 09/22/2009 at 12:45 PM.
  19. #19  
    Barry has writers. Letterman has writers. Beck writes his own material. Have you listened to him?

    You speak of news journalism - the head of ABC News did not know about ACORN. Goodness gracious. ACORN has been all over the place except main stream media. Listen to Fox.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    A problem is that this "entertainment", such as it is, used to be ethically required to identify itself as such formally, on the air. That was the standard held when there were only the Big 3 networks involved in presenting the news as journalism of the day.

    Today, any joker, talking fool with good writers can present infotainment without making it clear to those watching/listening that they are not presenting the news of the day, though their presentation certainly implies that it is. If your cup of tea is A**hole TV (as in everybody's got one), feeding at their trough still doesn't make their view worth serious consideration.
  20. #20  
    Ok, when has he been wrong though? ACORN? Van Jones? There are many issues he has discussed. Tell us. You are most aware that the mainsteam media ignored the Van Jones controversy. You are most aware that the mainstream media ignored ACORN until they were shamed to report on it. You are most aware that Barry does not do Fox because he will be asked hard questions and not have a teleprompter.

    Quote Originally Posted by larnapp View Post
    I've watched Beck evolve from an informed, entertaining talk radio guy in Tampa Bay, to an ever more dramatic, radical, end-of-the-world info-tainer. I guess he's more of a reflection of contemporary rhetoric and whatever it takes to get ratings, than a leader, and to me it seems he has become a caricature of his former self (as have so many others).

    In other words, as the radical left and radical right spin up in their various lovable ways, each side becomes hyper-radical and dramatic, just to be heard.

    I guess whoever is right, we're all gonna die. Either from out of control global warming, flooding our cities with melted ice... or... Communism causing our well-armed society into street-fighting or bunkers to avoid the anarchy that's sure to arise when the world economy crumbles.

    In the mean time, I think I'll turn on some jazz music.

    _
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions