…should you actually come to The Review and read.
Glenn Beck, you more than anyone else in the world, needs to read The Glenn Beck Review. You often lie, and we can prove this easily. In fact, none of your supporters are disputing this!
Stop lying to your audience! It threatens your credibility.
You claimed on June 1st that your wife took you to task for being a hypocrite, for bringing the President’s family into your routine the day and the day after you proclaimed that to be off-limits. Good for her! It’s nice to know that she matters to you or else you’d be potentially narcissistic.
Stop your hypocrisy! It threatens your credibility.
That still leaves your lack of education and average intelligence. “Beck is superficial in certain respects.” (See Who is Glenn Beck Promoting Now?) You are a charlatan exploiting your ultra conservative audience’s fear during this Democratic regime that promised change.
You can do little about that except own up to your weakness. The Review admires your strength and has posted that. Alex Jones calls it “your gift.” You’re a stunning propagandist; and if you were honest and honorable, if you had too much integrity to even think about saying something hypocritical, you’d be a formidable opponent.
As it is you’re just a rodeo clown (your phrase).
Comments on this page should be from Beck only.
His defenders have many other posts to comment on.
Mr. Beck: Don’t even think about it.
From the First Amendment Project:
What are SLAPPs?
Generally, a “SLAPP” is a (1) civil complaint or counterclaim; (2) filed against individuals or organizations; (3) arising from their communications to government or speech on an issue of public interest or concern. SLAPPs are often brought by corporations, real estate developers, government officials and others against individuals and community groups who oppose them on issues of public concern.
No facts here...? Just opinions.
Let me know when your reading comprehension reaches high school lever, Anonymous. I wrote, "Comments on this page should be from Beck only.
His defenders have many other posts to comment on."
This is a warning to Glenn Beck; of course there are no facts on this post!
Have to agree with Anon.
This is an opinion site, much like Beck is a provider of OPINION... but please, keep being pissy that his opinion is favored... apparently even on this waste of a site.
I'm still waiting for the facts? where is your proof? LOL
Oh by the way, it's high school level, not high school lever.
Didn't they teach you, in high school to check your work before handing it in? LOL Idiot
Anonymous, try being a tab curious enough to use the contents link above and scroll down to the long list of Beck's false claims.
As to my typo, didn't you learn at some point in your life that no one is perfect? Yes, I make typos. If it had been a misspelled word, my Chrome browser would have alerted me.
I love the name calling from Beckerheads. It paints a nice clear picture of what kind of people follow this deceitful, hypocritical charlatan.
NOTE: Comments on this page should be from Beck only. His defenders have many other posts to comment on.
The other anonymous, there is opinions expressed here, but the focus is on proving Beck's deceit, hypocrisy and ignorance. You refuse or are unable to see these because of your selective perception. You select to not see his lies, or you're too ignorant of the facts to detect when he's making facts up.
Tell me how your view, that this is a waste of a site, anything butt your opinion. (Butt is used intentionally; try reading instructions above about commenting on this post.)
You love the name calling from "Beckerheads"? LOL OK, if Beck is a hypocrite then maybe it truly does "take one to know one"?
It's hard to take you seriously. You demote Beck for hypocrisy and then commit to it yourself.
You became defensive over someone calling you names, and then proceeded to call them names as well. You also have insulted everyone else; though it may not be calling them names explicitly, it certainly has the same implications as "idiot" and other demeaning terms.
Conrad, first this page is not for Beck's supporters; it's for Beck should he actually read this Review.
Next, you want to point your finger at me without any explicit example. What name? Did I make a statement of fact (tagging someone as a reactionary) use slang (wing-nut) or what?
More interesting is you somehow believe that if I'm a hypocrite as you suggest, that it somehow renders Beck's many hypocrisies moot. I does NOT. I'm not leading a religulous revival, Beck is. YOU are following a liar and a hypocrite, so it's hard to take your ad hominem attack on me seriously.
So far as my lack of respect for people who follow Mr. Beck: guilty as charged. Ignorant is a word I'd be more inclined to use rather than "idiot" since I don't know the IQ of Beck's followers. Those reporting on Beck's movement (The Backlash) document the ignorance of Beck's followers.
Based on the utter nonsense and absurdity of many of Beck claims, I'd add the word gullible to describe people who actually would follow a rodeo clown who gives himself a promotion to messenger of God.
you idiot! ( i mean that in a friendly way)
all the comments, except mine of course, are probably beck himself!!!
lol! either him, or shills who support and know him.
he's a propagandist, and those kinds of people know how to utilize subversive tactics to discredit and derail.
dont argue with people anymore, just find more lies, put together videos or podcasts, link real facts and do some more editing.
the guys already makes a food of himself. you can even just post links of olberman ripping beck to shreds.
Xcentric, when I write, "Stop lying to your audience! It threatens your credibility" above, that's idiotic. It assumes that Beck has any credibility.
Thanks for you comment.
@Xcentric News, I couldn't help it, I had to comment on BecKKK making 'a food of himself'.
NOTE: Comments on this page should be from Beck only. His defenders have many other posts to comment on.
Don't worry. The Glenn Beck Review is fine.
And over the years, you'll have plenty to write about.
Above all, list the conspiracy theories.
The chief wound on Beck's credibility is the CT thinking.
Goethechosemercy, I have the bogus Crime Inc conspiracy theory reviewed, and now he's on a Muslim Brotherhood/Western radicals conspiracy which is also bogus.
I don't know as I agree with you about the chief wound on Beck's credibility. I don't think people will follow a liar and a hypocrite. The difficulty is getting through to those how have been brainwashed by Beck's masterful deployment of fulfilling Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
Really, have you read the 2008 Senate report on homeland security, regarging the Muslim Brotherhood? It is an 18 page findings & history of the Muslim Brotherhoods doings in the world & in this country in particular. It found them to be everything & more that Glenn Beck has spoke about. It concluded that this organization in it's current configuration, IS moving in the direction of bringing Shria law to the west & finds the Muslin Brotherhood (they also included the groups that down play there real motives)to be a "threat" to our national security. Go on line & read it for yourself, Putz!!!
Steve, have you bother reading this page? I wrote, "Comments on this page should be from Beck only. His defenders have many other posts to comment on."
I would read the false propaganda you ask me to if you'd leave a URL...putz!
Beck has you fooled too. All he's doing is creating controversy to get his ratings up. If he believes the horse shit he's feeding you, then he's far more stupid than I think.
Better yet, go to this sight & see what an FBI insider says about the Muslin Brotherhood. Putz!!
Steve, it looks to me like John Guandolo is a Christian zealot who is fear mongering. I've read other posts that are not nearly as alarming. The "FBI insider" is a has been. "Former" FBI agent. YOu miss that? Beck's major influence was also a former FBI agent, and he was roundly recognized as a crank.
There will be no sharia law imposed in the U.S. Ever. Beck is fear mongering based on other zealots. That's why even conservatives are criticizing him at this point.
Beck is profoundly ignorant on this subject. Everyone with an expertise on the Middle East points that out.
You're getting caught in Beck's trick. His ratings are in a big slide, so Beck is resorting to Beck's true and tried method of getting new viewers: create controversy. Only fools get caught up in or believe anything that an ignorant liar claims.
Someday you'll learn to follow simple instructions. Hundreds of posts you can comment on; this one is for Mr. Beck, not you. That's why I called you a putz: you earned it.
What the heck does a 2008 Senate report, on Homeland Securities findings about the Muslim Brotherhood, have to do with Glenn Beck?? I found that link on an "associated press" link. Brother, is anything you don't believe or agree with, "false propaganda"? Not everything is about Glenn 'friggen' Beck!!! Wow, you need to find a hobby or somthing...
I never said shiria law will come to the US. That is what OUR 2008 liberal SENATE concluded in THEIR report..... A report from the US government!!! NOT GLENN BECK!!!!!!!
Steve, I'm pointing out that one former FBI agent's opinion does not make something a fact, especially when I've read and heard contrary views on the Muslim Brotherhood.
Uhhhh, Steve, this IS my hobby.
You are making claims and not backing them up. If you want to claim that the Senate has reported that shiria law will come to the US, provide a link; so I can read the report. I suspect that you're reading more into it that it actually reports, just like you did with the FORMER FBI agent who may be just an extremist zealot.
I took the suggestion and looked over the content and "facts" that you keep referring to. The charges made against Beck are stunning to say the least. Not because I became enlightened by anything offered here. The information is slanted and outright dishonest. I was particularly fascinated in the number of clips that are taken out of context. Yes, I know this because I bothered to look up the videos and not because of any sliver of transparency or honesty of this website. But let's assume for a moment that your motives were pure and the information you put out correct. Do you not understand that your own hateful rhetoric is just as likely to incite violence as anything that Beck might say? Or do you think that as long as the violence is against someone you dislike and disagree with that makes it somehow alright?
mojo, what part of "Comments on this page should be from Beck only" do you not understand?
Read "about the blogger." Beck hasn't killed or raped anyone I know. I have no reason to hate him, and I do not. I am alarmed at his violent and deceitful nonsense, but I don't "hate" Beck. He got my off the couch and gave me a fun and interesting hobby: Beckology.
If you think that what I'm doing here might incite violence, then you don't know the left very well and you have NOT read my piece, "What is the truth about Glenn Beck." When you get to the word "Amen," you'll understand that we are opposed to violence as the answer to Beck's irresponsible and outrageous propaganda.
Next time you make an ignorant claim like the ones you did here, I'm going to demonstrate just how aggressive and combative I can be.
Tell me what is taken out of context. Until you're specific, I can't address your bogus claims. Until you're specific, you're just engaged in cheap-shot, ad hominem attacks like so many other failures before you. You think I'm "dishonest," be specific. What do you think we have wrong? What videos are taken out of context, which BTW, is Beck's technique of deception.
WHEN WILL YOU ADDRESS BECK'S VIDEO EDITING AND UTTERLY DECEITFUL ANALYSIS?
Wow, Mr. Glenn Beck Review. You certainly are angry. For someone who says that they are having fun and don't hate anyone, you don't sound like you are having fun at all. If this isn't the hateful side of you, I'd be afraid to see what was.
Calm down and take a deep breath. What is your obsession with Glenn Beck anyway?
mojo, wow, you certainly are a freaking dunce! 238 posts on this blog, and you insist on commenting on the one reserved for Mr. Beck. But wait, there's more proof:
I'm not angry at Beck. When I see him tell lies and manipulate his gullible audience, I get angry that people are so stupid as to not know, for example, Obama's campaign positions. Beck says whatever he wants, and you morons believe him because you don't think to bother actually checking on what Obama ran on war wise. You're so sucked into his Big Lie and false narrative, you can't bother checking the facts of his many claims.
I get perturbed at morons, who are too freaking lazy to do a little research, or watch a real news station instead of the propaganda outlet that is so bad even stanch conservative Sen. Colburn had to tell his constituents to watch something besides Fox. If you watch real news, then you'd know WHY OJ might become a luxury item. You'd know that by mentioning that, Beck was just manipulating your needs. By not telling you the reason OJ prices are going up, he lied by omission of a fact.
But no, instead -- with exceptions that you might look into -- millions of gullible, ignorant citizens are taken in by Beck's absurd and ignorant (not crazy) assertions. You would come a long way reading this blog. I read Beck's site and listen to his show; why don't you find out about a smart, former supporter who realized that Beck plays loose and fast with the facts. You're the commenter who is embarrassing yourself to the world with your idiotic and childish ad hominem attacks on ME instead of any factual defense of the indefensible Mr. Beck!
Mr. Glenn Beck Review, you are a puzzle. I am simply trying to figure out why a man would spend hours putting together “damning” information and create an entire blog in order to destroy another person who I doubt you have even met. You indicate that you watch his show, read his blog, etc. all of the time, but why? You evidently see yourself as being charged with enlightening the poor ignorant masses who you obviously dislike enormously. It just seems more like an obsession or a vendetta on your part than a healthy debate or an attempt to offer information.
If you will notice, I never said that I agreed with Mr. Beck nor did I defend him. I merely pointed out the irony of your pointing fingers at him while doing the same things. However, I’ve noticed that whenever someone disagrees with you, you attack, call them ignorant, childish, idiotic, and write them off as some crazed Glenn Beck Looney. That doesn’t sound like someone who is confident in either their position or self.
You asked me to point out where you misrepresented material here on your site. If someone wants to honestly present another’s words, they will present them in context. That means at minimum the entire paragraph and if they really want to be fair, they will offer the paragraph before and after. Similarly, when you have a video to show, show the whole segment. You can just as easily show a segment as you can a single line or a very short blurb. When I read the information you presented, I got one impression. But when I looked up the information and read it or heard it in context, I got a very different one. You were quick to point a finger at Beck for taking things out of context. But if it is wrong for Beck to do it, it is wrong for you too.
I know that I am wasting my breath because you are on a crusade. And that is fine. It is your blog and I am sure it is more fun to have posts from people who are ready to jump on your bandwagon. I'm not looking to jump on your bandwagon or Beck's. I’m sorry I posted in the wrong blog, but I seriously thought you were kidding. It didn’t occur to me that you really thought Beck might post a response to you.
Have a great life and lighten up a little bit!
mo jo, you're still engaged in childish ad hominem attacks on me. Why would you do this if you're not a defender or supporter of Beck?
If you think I'm doing the same things as Beck, you're just not very bright.
If you think I have evidence out of context, point to the actual blog post and cite the larger context. I'm willing to consider where I might have something wrong.
I'm not willing to put up with your deceitful nonsense claiming that you're not defending Beck. WTF are you commenting here for if you're not defending Beck?
You're coming across as a troll. You want to claim I have something wrong, be specific. Otherwise you're just wasting my time.
You are right about one thing: I'm on a mission. I don't think Beck will respond to me, but this one post is reserved for his comments should he come here. Your continued commenting here conveys that you're not serious about anything but tweaking me, and that is the trademark of a troll.
You want to comment again, do so on another post.
I have a great life, but I will NOT lighten up until Beck is gone. "Lighten up Mr. President; it't just an oil well spewing millions of gallons of oil into the ocean." That is how I interpret Beck's toxic and damaging rhetoric poisoning the political discourse in this country.
You want to see whole shows analyzed, look at the most recent post:
You are forbidden from commenting here, on this post again. Show that you have a hint of decency and go to the post you want to bitch about and comment. Otherwise, just admit that you're a troll trying to stir up emotions.
Good grief. You state clearly above that "Comments on this page should be from Beck only."
That's fine. It's your version of Beck's "red phone" that never rings. Stop undermining your credibility then by responding to anyone *else* here that posts. You're the administrator of this blog (I'm assuming). Just delete the non-Beck posts and move on.
Instead, you ignore your own stated directions, and engage in a virtual verbal "circle-jerk" with the people who can't color within the lines. Not a great way to bolster your gravitas.
For the record, I'm reading "Broke" right now, and I feel that there's more overall truth to its' premises than you are willing to give it credit for.
Being a conservative, I *did* want to "Trust But Verify" what I'm reading, and this was the first website I found of any notable effort. That said, your arguments' credibility take a major hit when you can't show some simple restraint on a page such as this one, and resist the urge to pontificate and exercise simple editorial control instead.
I will continue to read your website however, to see if you provide any major revelations about the book.
GG-Man, if I deleted the non-Beck posts, I would be undermining my repeated assertions throughout the blog (but not on this post) that all non-spam comments will be published. That is my "editorial control."
HOw I deal with comments is hardly a matter of my gravitas or credibility.
I don't "trust but verify" Beck; I just verify him and expect nothing more from anyone reading this Review.
Post a Comment