More Glenn Beck

londonfog

Well-Known Member
the truth hurts... it hurts so soo bad doesn't it??

in spanish we call it: verguenza ajena.

it's the feeling one gets when you feel bad, when someone else gets embarrassed.

tell me, how bad does it hurt??

no wonder you people are mis informed when you spend all day looking at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq9Dmoiwxo

there ain't no one making that shit up boy...

tell me, how bad does it hurt????
I agree some Americans never have even left there state let alone the country, so they go by what ever info they look at ...sad that fox (not)news is one of those places...Glen Beck is not someone I would ever take seriously, he is a entertainer ( and a recovering alcoholic as well as heavy coke user who drop out of Yale ). I tend to lean more to people who have a more stable background to get my information. When I look at most of the folks that follow this nut I realize that America has some really uninformed people.. To hear them answer questions is comedy...most don't even know what a freakin Czar is or what country the word comes from, but they holding signs saying no more Czars..geeezzzzz... asked to explain socialism or fascism and they get stuck on stupid, but still holding signs as Obama as hilter or reference to mussolini... I guess someone gave them a sign to hold..poor sheeple ....teabaggers unite to your calling but at least get better information.... The mind is a terrible thing if not use properly..lol.... Maybe at the next teabagger party Geico could sponsor it so you guys can use the slogan "So easy even a caveman can do it". Me cave man me hate Obama he bad he hitler ogga ogga me like war no health care ogga ogga..
 

Parker

Well-Known Member
I think Beck is funny. When a News item is mentioned that contains serious consequences I'll research that item and make a judgment from my research.
The Acorn story he did is a good example. Getting the story out is important as I dislike the ones who hide and cover up under the guise of it's better when you don't know. lol all that is, is bullshit.
As far as taking someones "word" on a story I'll go with Lou Dobbs over any of them. I think he's the best of the lot.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
I quote the findings mentioned above:

October 6, 2003

Study shows Fox News viewers misinformed about war, Iraq, WMD


Posted October 6th, 2003 at 11:43 am Spotlight | Permalink

I have naively believed for years that staying informed about current events by getting some news is better than blissful ignorance derived from getting no news. Then Fox News Channel helped demonstrate just how wrong I was.
The Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland conducted a thorough study of public knowledge and attitudes about current events and the war on terrorism. Researchers found that the public’s mistaken impressions of three facets of U.S. foreign policy — discovery of alleged WMD in Iraq, alleged Iraqi involvement in 9/11, and international support for a U.S. invasion of Iraq — helped fuel support for the war.
While the PIPA study concluded that most Americans (over 60%) held at least one of these mistaken impressions, the researchers also concluded that Americans’ opinions were shaped in large part by which news outlet they relied upon to receive their information.
As the researchers explained in their report, “The extent of Americans’ misperceptions vary significantly depending on their source of news. Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions. Those who receive most of their news from NPR or PBS are less likely to have misperceptions. These variations cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographic characteristics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the demographic subgroups of each audience.”
Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were “three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions. In the audience for NPR/PBS, however, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any of the three misperceptions, and hardly any had all three.”

Looking at the misperceptions one at a time, people were asked, for example, if the U.S. had discovered the alleged stockpiles of WMD in Iraq since the war began. Just 11% of those who relied on newspapers as their “primary news source” incorrectly believed that U.S. forces had made such a discovery. Only slightly more — 17% — of those who relied on NPR and PBS were wrong. Yet 33% of Fox News viewers were wrong, far ahead of those who relied on any other outlet.
Likewise, when people were asked if the U.S. had “clear evidence” that Saddam Hussein was “working closely with al Queda,” similar results were found. Only 16% of NPR and PBS listeners/viewers believed that the U.S. has such evidence, while 67% of Fox News viewers were under that mistaken impression.
Overall, 80 percent of those who relied on Fox News as their primary news source believed at least one of the three misperceptions. Viewers/listeners/readers of other news outlets didn’t even come close to this total.
In other words, Fox News viewers are literally less informed about these basic facts. They have, put simply, been led to believe things that are simply not true. These poor dupes would have done better in this survey, statistically speaking, if they received no news at all and simply guessed whether the claims were accurate.
And, in addition to a fun bash-Fox-athon, I wanted to add that the PIPA study also documented that those who relied on newspapers as their primary news source were better informed than those who watched any of the television news broadcasts. The only folks more informed than newspaper readers were NPR listeners.


but no... it is the left's fault for not believing all the truth spewing from fox news. FOX NEWS VIEWERS: "were three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions."

damn, the truth hurts. it hurts soooo bad.
Here are some results from more recent polls that seem to indicate that republicans have completely different "facts" about the proposed health reform legislation than democrats do, and republicans watch a lot more Fox News than democrats:

These are common myths that nonpartisan fact-checkers have confirmed to be untrue, but republicans overwhelmingly still believe them.

Does the health care reform plan being considered by President Obama and Congress require elderly patients to meet with government officials to discuss "end of life" options including euthanasia? Yes 19
No 58
Not sure 23
That's a larger "yes" and "unsure" response to the question compared to "death panels" in the first question, suggesting a lack of information, misinformation (or, alternatively, not understanding the poll question.)
Yes No Not sure
Dem 9 74 17
Rep 37 31 32
Ind 17 61 22
Northeast 11 78 11
South 26 31 43
Midwest 17 68 15
West 20 64 16

Check the "no" column. Only 31% of Republicans answered "no" (the correct answer) to this question compared to 61% Independents and 74% Dems, and only 31% in the South answered no. Southerners were 3-4x more likely to answer "not sure" than other regions.


Which of the following do you consider to be the most accurate reflection of the health care reform plan being considered by President Obama and Congress? (ROTATED): A government take over the entire health care system OR The government will provide a non-profit health insurance option to compete with private firms.
Compete 47
Take over 26
Not sure 27
Compete Take Over Not sure
Dem 74 8 18
Rep 17 60 23
Ind 44 21 35
Northeast 62 10 28
South 28 45 27
Midwest 53 20 27
West 51 23 26


The idea that Obama is suggesting competition rather than a take-over is established with Dems and Independents (but not surprisingly, Republicans are inclined to believe it a take-over) and polls a majority response everywhere but the South. As is the usual pattern, Democratic-leaning response to the question is strongest in the Northeast and weakest in the South.


Republicans are also more likely to be unaware that Medicare is a government program.


Is Medicare a government program or not?
Yes 83
No 9
Not sure 8
Yes No Not sure
Dem 89 7 4
Rep 76 14 10
Ind 83 8 9
Northeast 86 8 6
South 80 10 10
Midwest 84 9 7
West 83 9 8


ow often do you watch ___; daily, at least once a week, a few times a month, rarely, or never?
Daily Weekly Monthly Never
FOX NEWS 12 13 5 66
Dem 11 12 5 68
Rep 25 27 7 38
Ind 7 7 4 76
Northeast 6 7 4 78
South 19 20 6 51
Midwest 10 11 5 70
West 11 12 5 68
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
I agree some Americans never have even left there state let alone the country, so they go by what ever info they look at ...sad that fox (not)news is one of those places...Glen Beck is not someone I would ever take seriously, he is a entertainer ( and a recovering alcoholic as well as heavy coke user who drop out of Yale ). I tend to lean more to people who have a more stable background to get my information. When I look at most of the folks that follow this nut I realize that America has some really uninformed people.. To hear them answer questions is comedy...most don't even know what a freakin Czar is or what country the word comes from, but they holding signs saying no more Czars..geeezzzzz... asked to explain socialism or fascism and they get stuck on stupid, but still holding signs as Obama as hilter or reference to mussolini... I guess someone gave them a sign to hold..poor sheeple ....teabaggers unite to your calling but at least get better information.... The mind is a terrible thing if not use properly..lol.... Maybe at the next teabagger party Geico could sponsor it so you guys can use the slogan "So easy even a caveman can do it". Me cave man me hate Obama he bad he hitler ogga ogga me like war no health care ogga ogga..
Dude, this cracks me up. bongsmilie
 

MexicanWarlord420

Active Member
Well, going by his and Fox News' ratings, the popularity (overwhelming) of his radio show, live show tour, paperback (17 weeks #1 NYT bestseller list), new hardcover book (debuting #1 NYT BSL) and the fact he gets some of the most brilliant and influential people in their fields on a regular basis... I guess they make sense to quite a few people.
Just because more sheeple/fat white racists watch his show, it doesn't give him or fox news credibility lol. GOP/FOX news talking points brings good humor to the argument.
 

towlie

Well-Known Member
I realize this thread has already mutated into several red herrings but if I can post on the original subject... I actually give Glenn Beck a pass (however patronizing it may be.) While I regard Hannity, Limbaugh, Olbermann, Maddow, etc to be nothing more than pushers of black & white ideology conveniently packaged to fit within special interest & marketing brackets... Glenn Beck brakes the mold. Say what you may, this guy's lost 60% of his advertisers & he's still saying the same stupid shit.

I must also admit I know several people, whom I consider to be incredibly intelligent, and religiously agree with his libertarian ideology... Which boggles my mind, because with in addition to being an obvious racist he's also clearly mentally ill. Let's just ignore the fact that both his mother and brother killed themselves (well his mom's debatable...)

Just consider that this man made the decision in his adult life to be a Mormon. As an adult man he decided to believe in a God named Yahwey. Yahwey lives on the planet Colob. He created the earth & universe 6,000 years ago, permits his prophets to marry & de-flower multiple 14 y.o. girls, was too lazy to write his own temple rituals so he copied them exactly from the Masons. He protects his minions with magic underwear & even though he's God he can't read Egyptian, etc, etc. No sane person would choose this religion.

Please know I would never religion bash, but I was unfortunate enough to be raised Mormon, and all I'm only stating the tenants as fact (i.e. they're easily verifiable.) And that's just the single paragraph version.

Which leads me to the racist part. He also chose to believe in a religion that did not allow African-Americans to hold 'The Priesthood' until 1978 at which time the church was being threatened with loosing it's tax exempt status. The Priesthood (cut & paste from Wikipedia): "In the Latter Day Saint movement, priesthood is considered to be the power and authority of God, including the authority to act as a leader in the church and to perform ordinances, and the power to perform miracles. A body of priesthood holders is referred to as a quorum."

Lastly, he attributes socialist ideology as the motivating force for FDR, Truman, JFK, Johnson, Carter & Clinton's tax redistribution policies. What's Obama's you ask? Reparations of course... Nope nothing racist about that guy.

When I heard him accuse the President of the United States... You know, the black one with the white mother who was raised by his white grandmother... The guy with a Juris Doctorate magna cum laude in constitutional law from the same ivy league school Beck flunked out of after a week & Obama became the first black president of the the law review... Ya' that guy... When he called him a racists everyone got all bent out of shape just because the statement was based in racist Anti-Americanism... But all I could do was pity the stupid mother fucker.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Overwhelming popularity? There are over 300 million people in the United States. On a good night, Beck might draw an audience between 1 and 3 million. In other words, less than 1% of the population is watching him. Elementary, middle, and high school kids understand that, in a school of 100 students - having 1 friend (1%) does not make you "overwhelmingly popular". Why is it that Beck fans can't seem to apply this logic in any meaningful way?
 

CrackerJax

New Member
Most ppl do not watch the news. The ones who do watch the news regularly like to be informed. These ppl probably also have more than two other modes of getting their news. After a while of cross referencing, most realize that FOX is the only news network that is actually NOT glossing over the serious problems we face.

It's not that FOX is louder or glitzier. Ppl feel that they are actually being told more of the real stories going on out there.

The Acorn story reinforced that across the country. No one else touched it except for FOX. Once it became huge, then and only then did the other stations carry it.

The people paying attention, the news watchers, they don't just forget things like that. It adds up in their minds.

The reason why the Wall Street Journal is one of the most respected newspapers in the world, is because of their high achievement of accuracy. It's a business newspaper, and the folks who pay a high rate (myself included) of subscription ALREADY understand economics and business. The clientele reading the paper is very well informed, and the WSJ knows this. Mistakes are glaring to educated and informed ppl.

Much less so with folks who watch CNN, Salon, etc..... much less education watching those stations.... those stations know that too. they can be sloppy and get away with it. No one is taking them as seriously as the readers of the WSJ.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Most ppl do not watch the news. The ones who do watch the news regularly like to be informed. These ppl probably also have more than two other modes of getting their news. After a while of cross referencing, most realize that FOX is the only news network that is actually NOT glossing over the serious problems we face.

It's not that FOX is louder or glitzier. Ppl feel that they are actually being told more of the real stories going on out there.

The Acorn story reinforced that across the country. No one else touched it except for FOX. Once it became huge, then and only then did the other stations carry it.

The people paying attention, the news watchers, they don't just forget things like that. It adds up in their minds.

The reason why the Wall Street Journal is one of the most respected newspapers in the world, is because of their high achievement of accuracy. It's a business newspaper, and the folks who pay a high rate (myself included) of subscription ALREADY understand economics and business. The clientele reading the paper is very well informed, and the WSJ knows this. Mistakes are glaring to educated and informed ppl.

Much less so with folks who watch CNN, Salon, etc..... much less education watching those stations.... those stations know that too. they can be sloppy and get away with it. No one is taking them as seriously as the readers of the WSJ.


We've already established that Fox viewers are much less informed than viewers of other networks. You must have missed it because Fox didn't pick up the story. I think the official result showed that viewers of The Daily Show and Colbert report were much more intelligent, on average, than ANY viewing audience of traditional news media.
 

redivider

Well-Known Member
Most ppl do not watch the news. The ones who do watch the news regularly like to be informed. These ppl probably also have more than two other modes of getting their news. After a while of cross referencing, most realize that FOX is the only news network that is actually NOT glossing over the serious problems we face.

It's not that FOX is louder or glitzier. Ppl feel that they are actually being told more of the real stories going on out there.

The Acorn story reinforced that across the country. No one else touched it except for FOX. Once it became huge, then and only then did the other stations carry it.

The people paying attention, the news watchers, they don't just forget things like that. It adds up in their minds.

The reason why the Wall Street Journal is one of the most respected newspapers in the world, is because of their high achievement of accuracy. It's a business newspaper, and the folks who pay a high rate (myself included) of subscription ALREADY understand economics and business. The clientele reading the paper is very well informed, and the WSJ knows this. Mistakes are glaring to educated and informed ppl.

Much less so with folks who watch CNN, Salon, etc..... much less education watching those stations.... those stations know that too. they can be sloppy and get away with it. No one is taking them as seriously as the readers of the WSJ.
more of the real stories that are going on out there??? you can't be serious... it is already clear fox news spreads lies...

"Drug lords setting up shop in the suburbs" - more like a pot grower growing 20-30 plants, no drug lord, no cartel, yet they go with this bullshit...

"And the DEA agent said: 'This stuff will kill you'"... the LD-50 rating of marijuana has never been determined.

actually, they estimate that if an 154 human smokes 46 pounds of marijuana at once, he will not die.....

they reported these things as facts, they were not, clear mis-information, or in simple terms: LIES.
 

MexicanWarlord420

Active Member
Not sure how this was determined but someone said in another thread that you must smoke double your body weight in 15 minutes to die from pot overdose.....
 

redivider

Well-Known Member
nope.

read this:

Drugs used in medicine are routinely given what is called
an LD-50. The LD-50 rating indicates at what dosage fifty percent of
test animals receiving a drug will die as a result of drug induced
toxicity. A number of researchers have attempted to determine
marijuana's LD-50 rating in test animals, without success. Simply
stated, researchers have been unable to give animals enough marijuana to
induce death.

8. At present it is estimated that marijuana's LD-50 is around
1:20,000 or 1:40,000. In layman terms this means that in order to induce
death a marijuana smoker would have to consume 20,000 to 40,000 times as
much marijuana as is contained in one marijuana cigarette. NIDA-supplied
marijuana cigarettes weigh approximately .9 grams. A smoker would
theoretically have to consume nearly 1,500 pounds of marijuana within
about fifteen minutes to induce a lethal response.

9. In practical terms, marijuana cannot induce a lethal
response as a result of drug-related toxicity.

if you google lethal dose marijuana, ALL sources will say that it has not been determined.

anyone that says otherwise is flat-out lying.

including fox news.

thank you.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Ratings don't lie. On TV, the american ppl turn to FOX.
Ratings ...lol...what a joke and you do know how ratings work...or do you ....I tell you what take a poll here on RIU and see how many people have ever been asked what stations they watched...how many have ever participated in "rating" polls...you say ratings don't lie...I say that numbers don't lie..people do ( as you should know first hand )
 
Top