The war on terror is over officially \o/

Prime Junta said:

Which ones? Again, I haven't followed what Rev. Wright has said all too closely, but while I've seen plenty of anti-Zionist statements from him, I haven't seen anything anti-Semitic. But again, it's quite likely I've just missed them.

Click to expand...

I try not to kill brain cells with Wright's drivel, so I just went with the quote you were "happy" to serve up:

GLENN: Now, when Jeremiah Wright says "Them Jews ain't gonna let him talk to me, an ethnic cleansing is going on in Gaza, ethnic cleansing by the Zionist is a sin and a crime against humanity and they won't want Barack talking like that because they will say that he's anti Israel." What's the difference between the language of an anti Semite that is also nuts and goes, kills people, and the language of Jeremiah Wright?

Click to expand...

Prime Junta said:

It is, but such attempts are as easy to debunk as it is to identify the oblique technique I'm referring to. If a quote is taken out of context, providing the missing context will do it.

Click to expand...

When Barack made his Philly speech, he was actually saying, "Kill whitey." Sure, he didn't actually say anything of the sort, but he meant it. After all, he was in a room full of black people and talking with them about race. He can't come out and say it directly, but we all know what he really meant. Look at his very words! "The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America." It's obvious to anyone what he means by highlighting "bitterness and bias".

Care to easily debunk this one by adding context? Even one as obviously silly as that?

dteowner said:

I try not to kill brain cells with Wright's drivel, so I just went with the quote you were "happy" to serve up:

Click to expand...

That was actually Beck (mis?)quoting Wright. If you'll dig up the original Wright quote, I'll be happy to comment.

When Barack made his Philly speech, he was actually saying, "Kill whitey." Sure, he didn't actually say anything of the sort, but he meant it. After all, he was in a room full of black people and talking with them about race. He can't come out and say it directly, but we all know what he really meant. Look at his very words! "The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America." It's obvious to anyone what he means by highlighting "bitterness and bias".

Care to easily debunk this one by adding context? Even one as obviously silly as that?

Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, dte: are you seriously claiming that it's impossible to divine the intention of a speaker or writer if s/he doesn't explicitly state it in precise language? That there are no layers of meaning to a text beyond the surface one, or that it's impossible to tell what these layers of meaning are?

That's terribly sad.

What I got out of the egregious Reverend's comments was that Rahm Emannuel wasn't letting him within arm's reach of Barack, which put his panties in a wad and caused him to start spouting his anti-Israel line, since nobody in Chicago is suicidal enough to start a flame war with Emannuel. I.E. Wright was just doing some CYA hate speech.

Prime Junta said:

That was actually Beck (mis?)quoting Wright. If you'll dig up the original Wright quote, I'll be happy to comment.

Click to expand...

That quote was good enough when you posted it. Why is it not good enough now?

Prime Junta said:

Let me get this straight, dte: are you seriously claiming that it's impossible to divine the intention of a speaker or writer if s/he doesn't explicitly state it in precise language? That there are no layers of meaning to a text beyond the surface one, or that it's impossible to tell what these layers of meaning are?

That's terribly sad.

Click to expand...

Of course not, but let's not act like it's an exact science and 100% reliable, either. I'm claiming that it's far too easy to put anything between the lines that you so desire, and there's no ironclad defense against such deception.

"I didn't say that"--nope, but you meant it.
"There's no evidence that I meant that"--sure you did, we all know what you really think.
"But look at the context of the entire statement"--all a clever ruse so you can plead innocence.
"Strange that nobody else took it that way"--they're just too stupid to see the vile truth.

You'll find examples of most of those scams in the last 20 or so posts if you care to look. Of course, perhaps you're blinded by your partisanship or merely a little too uneducated to notice them... (See how I did that? Tricky, I is. Tricky.)

dteowner said:

That quote was good enough when you posted it. Why is it not good enough now?

Click to expand...

Because I was asked for a reference for Beck blaming Obama for the shooting. It's good enough for that. I was not asked for a reference for Wright making an anti-Semitic statement, and, being second-hand, it's not good enough for that. Would you take Michael Moore quoting Charlton Heston as a reliable reference for Charlton Heston's views? I think not -- but you probably would take it as a reliable reference for Michael Moore's views.

Of course not, but let's not act like it's an exact science and 100% reliable, either. I'm claiming that it's far too easy to put anything between the lines that you so desire, and there's no ironclad defense against such deception.

Click to expand...

Nope, but it's pretty easy to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard your courts use to convict. (When we're talking political propaganda, anyway. Works of art that are intentionally open to multiple interpretations are a whole 'nuther story, of course.)

"I didn't say that"--nope, but you meant it.
"There's no evidence that I meant that"--sure you did, we all know what you really think.

Click to expand...

Bruup, wrong. There's usually plenty of evidence -- the individual's previously stated views, the context, the association chain of ideas, and so on and so forth. Just like it's relatively easy to tell if we're talking about a single line taken out of context and put in another one. (The Charlton Heston "out of my cold, dead hands" clip in Bowling for Columbine is a pretty good example that you ought to appreciate.)

Point being: if you're arguing that Beck and Malkin WEREN'T making a "America now is Weimar Germany and Obama is Hitler" analogy, you're being seriously disingenuous. They were, and I'm pretty sure you're intelligent enough to know it too.

Sometimes a google says a thousand words, or in this case 69,000 search results.

Results 1 - 10 of about 69,500 for Glen Beck nazi germany. (0.25 seconds)

Click to expand...

There's stuff in there going back to 2006--including Al Gore creating Hitler Youth, FEMA creating concentration camps, every leftie organization known to man pointing it all out , etc.

I'd say this is one of his favorite comparisons and arguing he hasn't compared Obama to Hitler after he showed those clips of goose-stepping soldiers earlier this year would be a little difficult.

His point --which I'm only guessing at because I don't speak righty too well-- that Wright's anti-semitism is no different than Von Brun's has some validity, but as usual it gets lost in the political manifesto of the moment.

dteowner said:

So then, you went frothing about Glenn Beck based on a statement by Malkin? Or because Beck didn't immediately throw Malkin off the set? Hell, if disagreeing with the guest was grounds for pulling the plug on the report, we'd never see a Republican on network news again.

Beck's no angel, but let's hang him for crimes HE actually committed.

Click to expand...

No, because he did not disagree with her. She said that, and he IMMEDIATELY LAUNCHED INTO A TIRADE ABOUT THE US BEING WEIMAR GERMANY!

Prime Junta said:

Because I was asked for a reference for Beck blaming Obama for the shooting. It's good enough for that.

Click to expand...

Interesting, since the only mention of Barack in that quote is by Wright, not Beck. I see no laying of blame anywhere in that quote. The only potentially contentious comparison is between Wright and the memorial shooter. I suppose you're welcome to attack the validity of your own supporting quote on that issue, but that's up to you.

Prime Junta said:

Point being: if you're arguing that Beck and Malkin WEREN'T making a "America now is Weimar Germany and Obama is Hitler" analogy, you're being seriously disingenuous. They were, and I'm pretty sure you're intelligent enough to know it too.

Click to expand...

Not quite sure about that one, actually. As I read the discussion, it seems that Obama is getting slammed for "letting it happen" or even "cavorting with the enemy" rather than actually leading the anti-semetic parade. Wouldn't that functionally equate Barack with the Reichstag, rather than Uncle Adolf? If we're going to stuff compost between the lines, let's at least be accurate with it, eh? Of course, "Beck is equating Obama with Hitler" has a lot more zip to it, and since we're building our tower on inference we might as well go full monty--it's not like Beck will be able to refute it (see last post).

dteowner said:

Interesting, since the only mention of Barack in that quote is by Wright, not Beck. I see no laying of blame anywhere in that quote. The only potentially contentious comparison is between Wright and the memorial shooter. I suppose you're welcome to attack the validity of your own supporting quote on that issue, but that's up to you.

Click to expand...

And why is Wright a nationally known figure? That's right -- because of Obama. Propagandists like Beck wouldn't give two hoots for him without that connection; with the connection, it gives them an indirect way to pin stuff on Obama without actually ever having to mention his name. See how this works?

Second, Malkin did explicitly bring up Obama in her reply, with which Beck enthusiastically concurred.

Not quite sure about that one, actually. As I read the discussion, it seems that Obama is getting slammed for "letting it happen" or even "cavorting with the enemy" rather than actually leading the anti-semetic parade. Wouldn't that functionally equate Barack with the Reichstag, rather than Uncle Adolf? If we're going to stuff compost between the lines, let's at least be accurate with it, eh? Of course, "Beck is equating Obama with Hitler" has a lot more zip to it, and since we're building our tower on inference we might as well go full monty--it's not like Beck will be able to refute it (see last post).

Click to expand...

But he *is* equating Obama with Hitler. He's doing everything he can to create that association in his listeners' minds -- without going as far as to state it openly.

Prime Junta said:

But he *is* equating Obama with Hitler. He's doing everything he can to create that association in his listeners' minds -- without going as far as to state it openly.

Click to expand...

So, he led you down the road (invoking the whole "rise of the Nazis" scenerio), you finished the thought incorrectly (Hitler rather than the Reichstag), it's his fault for bringing it up, and you now get to credit him with equating Obama to Hitler cuz we all know that's what he meant? That's interesting.

dteowner said:

So, he led you down the road (invoking the whole "rise of the Nazis" scenerio), you finished the thought incorrectly (Hitler rather than the Reichstag), it's his fault for bringing it up, and you now get to credit him with equating Obama to Hitler cuz we all know that's what he meant? That's interesting.

Click to expand...

Not only that. It's also consistent with what he's said previously, as Mags pointed out. It's the association game that counts; it doesn't matter how flawed the analogies are. Hell, most of his viewers wouldn't even know what a Reichstag is, and couldn't care less. They do know that Hitler was a charismatic leader who was voted into power following a period of social and economic turmoil. That's the bell that Beck is enthusiastically ringing in their heads -- "charismatic leader," "economic turmoil," oh and, the Nazis were really Socialists. Hint hint?

Boy, equating Barack and Uncle Adolf is really pushing that "horseshoe spectrum" concept about as far as it will go...

OK, Beck, whom y'all think is an idiot mind you, is carefully setting the table for his broad flock of mindless sheep to all fill in the blank with the same wrong answer. That's pretty high-powered manipulation there, for an idiot. A little more craft and artistry, and he could attempt "party of the rich" reporting, eh?

dteowner said:

OK, Beck, whom y'all think is an idiot mind you, is carefully setting the table for his broad flock of mindless sheep to all fill in the blank with the same wrong answer. That's pretty high-powered manipulation there, for an idiot. A little more craft and artistry, and he could attempt "party of the rich" reporting, eh?

Click to expand...

Beck may be an idiot, but he's not stupid. Nor is Limbaugh, O'Reilly, nor any of these talking heads. They're *good* at what they do -- really good. Otherwise they wouldn't have the audiences they have, nor make the piles of money they make.

And what they do, dte, is propaganda.

I view him as a less dangerous Father Coughlin. Take away the anti-semitism/support for fascism and replace it with anti-Muslim and anti-Liberal/Democratic views, throw in a mix of xenophobic jingoism, and you have Glenn Beck.

I think he's not as outwardly evil/bad/villainous as Coughlin was, though.

Not meaning to pile on, here--I applaud dte's moxie in digging into the bunker against all comers and without any backup to reload and pass the rifle for him.

But this is an interesting discussion for me with my bad attitude toward the talkie-talkie people on the cable machine, so I have to get in my socialist two cents(--or perhaps they're someone else's two cents if I'm really a socialist???)..anyway, moving on..

Beck has a very likable persona--hell, even I want to like him when I watch him, with that aw shucks kind of regular guy thing he does---but then he starts talking. I can understand that if you already agree with his general drift, he sounds very plausible, and he definitely is adept at manipulation, pushing those hot buttons for the base. He's very very good at what he does, much better than either Limbaugh or O"Reilly, who frequently appear unlikable, arrogant and off-putting before they even start talking.

dte, all this damnation from the left should really be seen as praise for the guy's effectiveness. That's what makes him dangerous ( from my side of the aisle.) He can make even rational people like you identify with his message so strongly that you don't think 69,000 google hits referencing Beck referencing nazis says anything dubious about the man's outlook on life.

Ummm, you might try "Barack Obama Nazi Germany" in Google before getting too excited about that search result. 423,000 hits in 0.26 seconds. I knew he was hiding something.

I don't mind this gang tackle. I don't get my news, or even my interpretation of events, from Glenn so I've got minimal personal investment in the issue. I enjoy him as entertainment because he doesn't have any of the bible thumper aspects that most of the rare rightie talking heads have. Sure, he's "selling it", so there's going to be some over-the-top silliness mixed in there, but beggars can't be choosers and the cupboard is pretty bare.

My main angle for sticking with the discussion is the subtle way y'all put words in his mouth and savagely attacked a postion he didn't voice. After two pages, y'all still don't see it, or won't admit it. Either Beck's a zen master at getting y'all to fill in the blank with whatever strikes your fancy, or you're being blinded by the fact that he's a right side clown. I'm sure there's some sort of logical fallacy in there--one of you debate scholars can fill in that blank. It's not really a strawman, but it's close.

It's not like my side doesn't play the same games, but you won't catch me clinging to denial this long if we get called on it.

dteowner said:

My main angle for sticking with the discussion is the subtle way y'all put words in his mouth and savagely attacked a postion he didn't voice. After two pages, y'all still don't see it, or won't admit it. Either Beck's a zen master at getting y'all to fill in the blank with whatever strikes your fancy, or you're being blinded by the fact that he's a right side clown. I'm sure there's some sort of logical fallacy in there--one of you debate scholars can fill in that blank. It's not really a strawman, but it's close.

Click to expand...

Not whatever strikes our fancy, dte. Beck *was* aiming to create a specific association in his readers' minds, using a very basic propaganda technique. We've explained exactly how the association game works, and how he used it. As I said, I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to see how it works too, and are being wilfully pig-headed in pretending you don't -- but, of course, being the resident redneck fascist, that's sort of your function in life, so I don't blame you for it.

I hereby award this thread the coveted RPGWatch "Most Off-Topic Moments" award. That's quite an honor on this board.

We started out with Obama sponsoring Hitler youth camps and the draft from mudsling, moved on to Gitmo and whether the war on terror should be considered military or law enforcement material, the religious and political aspects of the war in Iraq, all the terrorist attacks over the last ten years, some Bush bashing and Obama analyzing, the spin on Nixon and past US presidents, the famous World's Fair Spoon, followed by a sidetrip to Afghanistan, the Von Brun incident, freakin gun control, and now full circle to Beck and Obama nazism. It's a beautiful thing.

Ah, Pinnen would be in 7th heaven!! Pity he dropped off the face of the earth once he got married.

magerette said:

I hereby award this thread the coveted RPGWatch "Most Off-Topic Moments" award. That's quite an honor on this board.

We started out with Obama sponsoring Hitler youth camps and the draft from mudsling, moved on to Gitmo and whether the war on terror should be considered military or law enforcement material, the religious and political aspects of the war in Iraq, all the terrorist attacks over the last ten years, some Bush bashing and Obama analyzing, the spin on Nixon and past US presidents, the famous World's Fair Spoon, followed by a sidetrip to Afghanistan, the Von Brun incident, freakin gun control, and now full circle to Beck and Obama nazism. It's a beautiful thing.

Click to expand...

It is nothing comparing this to the derailed campaign promises provided that obamabots can keep their eyes open. Now, don't put those stupid neocons' words into my mouth. If it is a draft/manditory service, please don't camouflage it with volunteerism. It is about fascism vs. nazism, if you care to distinguish the terms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVFdAJRVm94

LMAO