Glenn Beck Rally

[Moonlight Graham]

I don't know what to make of intent of the rally. Were Beck/Palin sincerely trying to feed and echo off the civil rights movement of MLK, or were they using that date to give the rally more controversy and media-attention (if so, it worked!)? I think it may be a combo of the 2.

It doesn't matter the exact number of the crowd, the aerial shots show a big crapload & that's what matters. Glenn Beck is a hyper-active intellectual lightweight bordering on lunacy, but this doesn't frighten me. What is frightening is that such a mass of people show up to hear him speak at the rally & listen intently. What's frightening is that 2.5 million or so viewers tune in everyday to hear what this guy has to say. This man has a lot of power. It's disturbing when so many people tune in to watch a TV channel to get their "news" when it is essentially a propaganda machine where all information goes through a ideological spin-cycle before it reaches viewership. Left-wing propaganda like MSNBC isn't much better. It doesn't so much bother me that something like FOX News exists, rather that so many people embrace it & fill their minds with its garbage.

Similarly disturbing is the large political support for another intellectual lightweight such as Sarah Palin. Like her a commentator? Fine. Support her for POTUS? I fear for this world.

It's also a good thing signs were discouraged. Nothing like nutjobs waving racist hate to bring down a rally held in the shadow of "the speech".

Edited August 31, 2010 by Moonlight Graham

[Shady]

has claimed I'm a two dimensional ideologue

No, you're just an ideologue. A pure leftwing ideologue. When you're confronted with an opposing idea. You resort to childish name calling, like dubbing people racists, fascists, breitbarts, wackos, and professors something-or-other. But it's rather amusing. So don't ever change Jacko, the forum would be a less entertaining place.

[CANADIEN]

I don't know what to make of intent of the rally. Were Beck/Palin sincerely trying to feed and echo off the civil rights movement of MLK, or were they using that date to give the rally more controversy and media-attention (if so, it worked!)? I think it may be a combo of the 2.

It doesn't matter the exact number of the crowd, the aerial shots show a big crapload & that's what matters. Glenn Beck is a hyper-active intellectual lightweight bordering on lunacy, but this doesn't frighten me. What is frightening is that such a mass of people show up to hear him speak at the rally & listen intently. What's frightening is that 2.5 million or so viewers tune in everyday to hear what this guy has to say. This man has a lot of power. It's disturbing when so many people tune in to watch a TV channel to get their "news" when it is essentially a propaganda machine where all information goes through a ideological spin-cycle before it reaches viewership. Left-wing propaganda like MSNBC isn't much better. It doesn't so much bother me that something like FOX News exists, rather that so many people embrace it & fill their minds with its garbage.

Similarly disturbing is the large political support for another intellectual lightweight such as Sarah Palin. Like her a commentator? Fine. Support her for POTUS? I fear for this world.

It's also a good thing signs were discouraged. Nothing like nutjobs waving racist hate to bring down a rally held in the shadow of "the speech".

I would tend to be concerned if Beck and Palin actually had any hope of carrying the momentum into power. they don't, because they keep stumbling over and over. Like with the rally... if they had any hope of feeding off the civil rights legacy of MLK, it failed miserably the moment Beck showed his complete cluelessness by evoking MLK in support of the military.

successful demagogues in the past have succeeded in luring people not because they made sense, but because they were intelligent enough not to look like they had no clue on what they were talking about.

[Jack Weber]

I don't know what to make of intent of the rally. Were Beck/Palin sincerely trying to feed and echo off the civil rights movement of MLK, or were they using that date to give the rally more controversy and media-attention (if so, it worked!)? I think it may be a combo of the 2.

It doesn't matter the exact number of the crowd, the aerial shots show a big crapload & that's what matters. Glenn Beck is a hyper-active intellectual lightweight bordering on lunacy, but this doesn't frighten me. What is frightening is that such a mass of people show up to hear him speak at the rally & listen intently. What's frightening is that 2.5 million or so viewers tune in everyday to hear what this guy has to say. This man has a lot of power. It's disturbing when so many people tune in to watch a TV channel to get their "news" when it is essentially a propaganda machine where all information goes through a ideological spin-cycle before it reaches viewership. Left-wing propaganda like MSNBC isn't much better. It doesn't so much bother me that something like FOX News exists, rather that so many people embrace it & fill their minds with its garbage.

Similarly disturbing is the large political support for another intellectual lightweight such as Sarah Palin. Like her a commentator? Fine. Support her for POTUS? I fear for this world.

It's also a good thing signs were discouraged. Nothing like nutjobs waving racist hate to bring down a rally held in the shadow of "the speech".

You are correct,that is the scary thing...That that many people take Beck's lunacy seriously...

Frankly,it's not that hard to get alot of people together to listen to a lunatic...Louis Farrakhan did it at least a decade ago..

And you have to wonder about the motives of many in the crowd if they have to be told to NOT bring signs and placards and to behave nicely...It presupposes,by the organizers themselves,that the crowd might bring signs and placards that are offensive and expose the ugly underside of this "grass roots" uprising...And of course,everyone heared some of the things said at Palin appearances during the Presidential campaign...

[kimmy]

Out of curiosity, any media estimates at the size of Al Sharpton's "counter-rally"?

-k

[Jack Weber]

No, you're just an ideologue. A pure leftwing ideologue. When you're confronted with an opposing idea. You resort to childish name calling, like dubbing people racists, fascists, breitbarts, wackos, and professors something-or-other. But it's rather amusing. So don't ever change Jacko, the forum would be a less entertaining place.

Please prove that,without using the words I have correctly used to describe you...You could'nt run from that earlier,other than feeble one liners that said nothing...

C'mon,smart guy...Show us you have a few shining synapses up there and prove to me,and everyone else, that I'm a "left wing ideologue"...

Please be specific,Professor Kitzel...Left wing ideology...You now fancy yourself as a political scientist...Let's all see how knowledgable you really are..

[Pliny]

A two-dimensional ideologue isn't so bad. There's lots of space for different ideas on a whole two dimensional surface. It's the one dimensional ones that are really bad...

That's me! And I'm really bad!

I haven't arrived at my conclusions, opinions, beliefs regarding politics without ensuring I understand them. I'm sure Jack recognizes fascist ideology when he sees it but I believe he uses the term a little too loosely in his application. I don't care what someone believes as long as they allow me mine and aren't forcing me to believe theirs.

A little single dimensionalism can be construed as arising out of stubbornness or idealism or vision. It depends on how right one is.

MLK never waivered from his one dimensional view of civil rights and equality for all. Perhaps to get anything accomplished a combination of all three of those qualities is necessary.

[Jack Weber]

Out of curiosity, any media estimates at the size of Al Sharpton's "counter-rally"?

-k

400 Afrocentrists..

[punked]

Out of curiosity, any media estimates at the size of Al Sharpton's "counter-rally"?

-k

3000 CBS reports so according to Shady you need to take that number (the only read eastimate) and add a 220,000 to it to get the right number. So the real number for Sharpton was 3000, in Shady land it was 228,000.

[Jack Weber]

That's me! And I'm really bad!

I haven't arrived at my conclusions, opinions, beliefs regarding politics without ensuring I understand them. I'm sure Jack recognizes fascist ideology when he sees it but I believe he uses the term a little too loosely in his application. I don't care what someone believes as long as they allow me mine and aren't forcing me to believe theirs.

A little single dimensionalism can be construed as arising out of stubbornness or idealism or vision. It depends on how right one is.

MLK never waivered from his one dimensional view of civil rights and equality for all. Perhaps to get anything accomplished a combination of all three of those qualities is necessary.

I agree..But our good Professor Kitzel,who last week fancied himself an expert on 20th century history now sems to claim he's some sort of political scientist and has calimed I'm a "two dimensional ideologue"

I'be simply asked him to prove it...

As of yet,all he seems to be able to do(or at least feebly attempt to do) is to obfuscate on that subject...

One can only assume he cannot prove that I am what he says I am...But of course,the good Professor would have to admit he's made a fool of himself for like the 1000th time in the last 2 weeks...

[Pliny]

You are correct,that is the scary thing...That that many people take Beck's lunacy seriously...

Frankly,it's not that hard to get alot of people together to listen to a lunatic...Louis Farrakhan did it at least a decade ago..

And you have to wonder about the motives of many in the crowd if they have to be told to NOT bring signs and placards and to behave nicely...It presupposes,by the organizers themselves,that the crowd might bring signs and placards that are offensive and expose the ugly underside of this "grass roots" uprising...And of course,everyone heared some of the things said at Palin appearances during the Presidential campaign...

Actually, not bringing signs was a brilliant idea. Left wing infiltrators attempting to marginalize and undermine the purpose of the rally were totally neutered by being unrecognizable. they would have had to start trashing things and exposing themselves.

I believe you are more like me Jack - one dimensional. And are little short on understanding American politics. Canadians are pretty far left in comparison.

Someone like Sarah Palin as POTUS is not unthinkable. She isn't a progressive socialist and holds to American tradition - something a lot of Americans like and see disappearing under the likes of Obama.

[Jack Weber]

Actually, not bringing signs was a brilliant idea. Left wing infiltrators attempting to marginalize and undermine the purpose of the rally were totally neutered by being unrecognizable. they would have had to start trashing things and exposing themselves.

I believe you are more like me Jack - one dimensional. And are little short on understanding American politics. Canadians are pretty far left in comparison.

Someone like Sarah Palin as POTUS is not unthinkable. She isn't a progressive socialist and holds to American tradition - something a lot of Americans like and see disappearing under the likes of Obama.

Interesting...

If you think I'm more like you,you'll have to describe my one-dimensionalness for me...'Cause I ain't seein' it...

[waldo]

Actually, not bringing signs was a brilliant idea. Left wing infiltrators attempting to marginalize and undermine the purpose of the rally were totally neutered by being unrecognizable. they would have had to start trashing things and exposing themselves.

ya, ya Pliny... notwithstanding your conspiracy ramblings, those gawd-fearing folks that showed up for Beck/Palin didn't need any outside help/influence in marginalizing and undermining their purpose. Geezaz - 'cracker nation' on display!

[dre]

ya, ya Pliny... notwithstanding your conspiracy ramblings, those gawd-fearing folks that showed up for Beck/Palin didn't need any outside help/influence in marginalizing and undermining their purpose. Geezaz - 'cracker nation' on display!

Im almost positive I saw DOP and A-Dub in there.

[scribblet]

Contrary to the attempts to paint the Beck rally as white only, racist yadda yadda , it was not so white as advertised, there were many creeds, colors in attendance which refutes charges of racism against the rally. There where prominent black speakers, including Day Gardner and Alveda King.

My take on the reason for the rally is that a large portion of the U.S. are fed up with expanding big gov't and what they perceive as growing socialism. They got more than they bargained for with the Obama admin. and are not happy with the state of the nation, so to speak. I admire them for speaking out for what they believe in.

What I find interesting is the lengths that the left will go to demonize anything the protesters and opposition have to say.

[Pliny]

I don't understand why this is an issue anyways - how many people of a certain race attended. People who support the ideals of the rally attended. Whether or not they happen to be black or not is irrelevant. They are not keeping black people out of the rally, I am sure. And the message is not a racist one.

Makes sense.

Race is important to Waldo. He likes to be first playing the race card.

[Pliny]

ya, ya Pliny... notwithstanding your conspiracy ramblings, those gawd-fearing folks that showed up for Beck/Palin didn't need any outside help/influence in marginalizing and undermining their purpose. Geezaz - 'cracker nation' on display!

"Cracker"? That would be a racial epithet and just more of the same from you, Waldo. You still don't get it.

New left media,ay? Is that a message of hope from them?

[punked]

Contrary to the attempts to paint the Beck rally as white only, racist yadda yadda , it was not so white as advertised, there were many creeds, colors in attendance which refutes charges of racism against the rally. There where prominent black speakers, including Day Gardner and Alveda King.

My take on the reason for the rally is that a large portion of the U.S. are fed up with expanding big gov't and what they perceive as growing socialism. They got more than they bargained for with the Obama admin. and are not happy with the state of the nation, so to speak. I admire them for speaking out for what they believe in.

What I find interesting is the lengths that the left will go to demonize anything the protesters and opposition have to say.

Yah people who are paid to be there don't really count.

[dre]

My take on the reason for the rally is that a large portion of the U.S. are fed up with expanding big gov't and what they perceive as growing socialism. They got more than they bargained for with the Obama admin. and are not happy with the state of the nation, so to speak. I admire them for speaking out for what they believe in.

I dont think its necessarily the Obama admin per say. Theres an anti-incumbant mood thats been there for the last FEW elections. Its basically the result of 30 straight years of crappy, incompetent, and in many cases flat out dishonest and corrupt government that puts corporate needs over those of the voters.

So I agree with you for the most part, but I think Obama was basically just the president of the wrong country at the wrong time. If you get made Captain of the titanic while its already sinking, youre just NOT going to be a popular captain even if you do everything right. And thats not to say Obama has done everything right... hes been average at best, and basically just "stayed the course" set by the last few crappy admins.

Edited August 31, 2010 by dre

[Pliny]

Interesting...

If you think I'm more like you,you'll have to describe my one-dimensionalness for me...'Cause I ain't seein' it...

In the sense of being one-dimensional you have strong opinions.

I would hope that no one would construe what I said to mean we hold the same opinions.

Actually, calling someone two-dimensional is pretty much a leftist slur, painting the right as seeing only themselves and everyone else as a leftist. Leftists know there are all kinds of different political views and there should be at least ten different political parties to more properly represent all the people.

Honestly though all those political parties are usually single issue parties, running their entire political platforms from the perspective of their own special interest. The Green party, The workers party, the Humanitarian party, etc. Now that's being multi-dimensional according to the left. You can roll them all up into the big government socialist party.

It's a pity but Canada is pretty much a single minded politically left wing nation. Americans tolerate different views more than Canadians will and this thread is an illustration of that.

Harper to me is not very right wing but whenever he enacts any kind of legislation that he perceives to be the reason he was elected it is painted as right-wing fascist extremism. Basically, I think he tries to be mainstream and not cater to special interests and the special interests are offended and vocal about not being catered to. The Gun registry, the long form census. Special interests want to keep the status quo on these issues but the general populace thinks most of it a superfluous unnecessary expense or government intrusion.

But really Jack, doesn't everything on the right harbour some fascism and everything on the left harbour some socialism with you "centrists" the only logical bunch?

I might err in referring to you as a centrist. You aren't a centrist in my view, you are of the lib-left and harbour some socialist views. Do you consider yourself a centrist? I am a proponent of small government so if you're a centrist I don't know where I sit.

[Pliny]

I dont think its necessarily the Obama admin per say. Theres an anti-incumbant mood thats been there for the last FEW elections. Its basically the result of 30 straight years of crappy, incompetent, and in many cases flat out dishonest and corrupt government that puts corporate needs over those of the voters.

So I agree with you for the most part, but I think Obama was basically just the president of the wrong country at the wrong time. If you get made Captain of the titanic while its already sinking, youre just NOT going to be a popular captain even if you do everything right. And thats not to say Obama has done everything right... hes been average at best, and basically just "stayed the course" set by the last few crappy admins.

Stayed the course?

In some respects, maybe. On spending he has more than stayed the course, opening up the spigots even wider.

I wouldn't call introducing and passing a national health care bill as staying the course or turning General Motors into Government Motors? Nor would I call them measures to patch a sinking ship.

[ToadBrother]

I dont think its necessarily the Obama admin per say. Theres an anti-incumbant mood thats been there for the last FEW elections. Its basically the result of 30 straight years of crappy, incompetent, and in many cases flat out dishonest and corrupt government that puts corporate needs over those of the voters.

So I agree with you for the most part, but I think Obama was basically just the president of the wrong country at the wrong time. If you get made Captain of the titanic while its already sinking, youre just NOT going to be a popular captain even if you do everything right. And thats not to say Obama has done everything right... hes been average at best, and basically just "stayed the course" set by the last few crappy admins.

I'm not sure why any sensible person would want to be running the United States right now.

Still the loss of control of Congress, or at least the House of Representatives, was pretty much a known quantity from the 2008 election onward. I wouldn't count Obama out quite yet. If the GOP does something really stupid like put that simpering half-wit Palin anywhere on the 2012 ticket, I think Obama will make it through.

Edited August 31, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Shady]

One of my favourite takes on the media yesterday regarding the Beck rally:

Predominantly white media calls Beck rally predominantly white.

Also, you know which other groups are predominantly white? Moveon.org, Code Pink, Democrats in congress, and the Obama administration.

Wasn't Al Sharpton's rally predominantly black? Is that bad too, or is that allowed to not be characterized?

[waldo]

Race is important to Waldo. He likes to be first playing the race card.

and Pliny plays the idiot card - FTW! The point of inclusiveness was one that hits squarely on the racial divide that MLK focused on... that the Beck-Palin-a-palooza presumed to exploit for their personal agendas. The absence of blacks within that '87,000' crowd number has been discussed at length across the mainstream/blogs... the "inclusiveness fail". You puffed up and stated there were blacks present - you thought it significant to highlight the presence of "MLK's niece" (too bad you didn't do the legwork to appreciate how Beck exploited her in the lead-up... to recognize she has nothing in common with the principles/ideals of MLK). You could always presume to counter the accepted lack of inclusiveness... you know... take back your idiot card!

What Happens When A Liberal Black Man Goes To Glenn Beck's "I Have A Dream, Too" Speech?

"Where The Black Folks At?" - I know what you're wondering, how many other black people did you see? The answer is sorta complicated. This is still, after all, Chocolate City. Black folks are everywhere by default, especially on a sunny Saturday. Still, I didn't count very many non-white people there who appeared to be there specifically for the march itself. There were lots of young black teenaged vendors hawking those hideous Don't Tread On Me flags (more on that later) and buttons. There were some other black "journalists" like me there with cameras and mics, respectfully getting the viewpoints of pro-Beckers. There were black tourists milling about, obviously clueless about what was going on. There were plenty of "what's this all about" gawkers. But if you ask me to count the number of blacks who appeared to be there specifically to partake in the rally itself, the number was pretty meager. Seriously. And I walked around probably 2/3 of the Mall/event area over the course of my 5 hours out there. Trust me, I was looking and counting like this post depended on it. If I've gotta give you a total number, I'd guess less than 100. There were probably more blacks onstage singing and giving speeches than in the crowd itself.

c'mon Pliny... dispute the writers accounting and number... take exception with the author, one "AverageBro". Oh my, Pliny! I just wrote "AverageBro" since that's his nom de plume. Will this lead to another of your puffed-up claims of invective language?

[jefferiah]

c'mon Pliny... dispute the writers accounting and number... take exception with the author, one "AverageBro". Oh my, Pliny! I just wrote "AverageBro" since that's his nom de plume. Will this lead to another of your puffed-up claims of invective language?

What difference does it make how many black people there were?

People of all races are welcome to attend, I am sure. Nitpicking about racial numbers is a distraction from the issue.