*Menu
Search
Submit
McCook Gazette
*
And Now for Something Completely Different
Michael Hendricks
Recent posts
Archives

Glenn Beck, The Entertainer

Posted Saturday, August 28, 2010, at 5:51 PM

As I had stated on my previous blog I watched Glenn Beck's Honor Rally and the phrase that kept creeping to mind as I watched him was "social justice". Anyone who has ever listened to his radio show or watched his television show knows that he proclaims that he is not a big fan of social justice because it is one step away from socialism. The longer I watched, however, it became very evident that what Glen Beck was talking about was exactly that, social justice.

I am sure that some in the crowd, who have watched and listened to every show of his, were very disappointed in these moments.

I have long been a critic of Glen Beck and during today's speech I finally figured out why. His act* is a fraud. He does not truly believe anything he says. He only says the outrageous things and does the outrageous things he does because of one and only one reason. Ratings. The pivotal moment came towards the end of his speech when he was talking about the "next George Washington". It was at this moment (possibly) that he had promised not a dry eye in the house because he started crying. Well, he started doing something that was supposed to be crying. To me it sounded like he was laughing.

I did not buy any of what he was selling. Personally it sounded like he was trying just a little to hard to sound like the man who still is known for this day, Martin Luther King Jr. Personally, anyone who truly believes that he did not know what today is truly is very gullible. If he truly did not know what today is then he is not quite the astute observer of history that he claims to be.

I could fact check what he said throughout his speech, specifically this historical part, but I will let someone else worry with that. I just want to focus on the speech itself.

This speech, he promised, was supposed to be a miracle. It was supposed to be the moment that would change America. Instead it ended up being a typical church sermon that most people hear on a given Sunday.

Crowd estimates ranged (depending on whether the people were supporters of Glenn Beck's or not) from a few thousand to 100s of thousands. I will wait until the official count comes out, but we all know whatever the number those that love Glen Beck will say that the official number is too low while those who loathe him will claim the official number is too high.

It is really immaterial in the end.

Personally for me I believe that he was in this for himself. He wants to day to be remembered for him, not Martin Luther King Jr. He is not a selfless man he is a selfish man and he has been his entire career. He does and will continue to do things that will bring attention to himself, especially if it means ratings.

Honestly to me it sounded like a decent attempt at a campaign speech. I have a strong feeling that he will make a run at the presidency in 2012 and this was how he was testing the waters.

As I said I did not buy what he was selling. I have a feeling a majority of Americans (despite what his supporters will say) did not buy it as well. It will not be a pivotal moment in American history. In my opinion it will probably be forgotten by the end of the week (for some that's at the end of today, for me it will be tomorrow).

I will not say the man himself is a fraud but he knows his audience and he will tell them whatever they want to hear. In the end he is an entertainer and that is all he is.

I know that some of you (if not most) thought that I would rip him a new one and trash him at everything he said. There is no need for me to do that, he will do it on his own soon enough.

After all he is an entertainer.

*After being notified of my hypocritical stance I realized that I had typed my original thought wrong. While I do not believe that Glenn Beck the man is an actual fraud I do believe that his act is a fraud. My apologies for the confusion.

Addendum:I did end up fact checking one thing from Beck's speech and it happened earlier. He said "Our neighbors in Canada think the Bible is hate speech now, believe it or not." Naturally I did not believe it so I did what everyone should always do when they question a bold statement like that, I researched it. What Beck was referencing was a Canadian law which ads sexual orientation into it's genocide and hate-crimes legislation. Critics say that because of the addition the Bible will now be seen as hate speech. It is a bit far fetched, but it does make for a good sound bit, which is what Glenn Beck is all about. It really goes great with the whole dreamed up "Christianity is under attack" theme. I do not personally believe that adding sexual orientation into a hate-crime bill will make the Bible hate speech, but that is not really the point now is it?

Comments
View 34 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • *

    I always find it interesting what speakers and pundits are able to do by invoking Jesus in whatever they are talking about. Beck is obviously a blithering idiot, but as long as he can write Jesus on his chalk board and rally against Muslims he will have supporters.

    With that in mind I want to share a (well in my opinion) very cool illustration I found the other day.

    http://www.prosebeforehos.com/image-of-the-day/08/24/huxley-vs-orwell-infinite-d...

    -- Posted by Damu on Sat, Aug 28, 2010, at 6:01 PM
  • *

    Great site Damu thanks.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Aug 28, 2010, at 6:06 PM

  • Paragraph 3: "He is a fraud."

    Paragraph 12: "I will not say the man himself is a fraud ...."

    Before calling someone a fraud (or, not, as the case may be), perhaps it would be wise to think your argument through a little better.

    Just sayin'

    -- Posted by TheRainMan on Sun, Aug 29, 2010, at 4:49 AM

  • Christianity has been under attack ever since Jesus was crucified. Fact check what happened to the Apostles. Being a Christian has had its difficult times.

    -- Posted by wallismarsh on Sun, Aug 29, 2010, at 12:41 PM
  • *

    Christianity was not in existence at the time Jesus was crucified. Christianity came about because of the crucifixion. Christianity became the state religion of Rome less than 400 years after Christ's death. It quickly became the major religion in the world.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sun, Aug 29, 2010, at 1:16 PM
  • *

    @MH After the fall of rome the dark ages happened and Christianity was in bed with the Crown.

    During this period of time if you weren't christian or believed in science you tortured then you were killed. Seems like a fairly successful way to spread something.

    -- Posted by Damu on Sun, Aug 29, 2010, at 1:51 PM
  • *

    "Christianity has been under attack ever since Jesus was crucified. Fact check what happened to the Apostles. Being a Christian has had its difficult times." Wallis

    This is true, now Islam is having it's difficult time. You would think that being Christians and having allegedly gone through it for 2000 years you guys would be somewhat sympathetic to there current plight.

    -- Posted by Damu on Sun, Aug 29, 2010, at 1:56 PM

  • Off topic.

    I have been studying markets for 30 years. I bought my first stock when I was in Bonow's 9th grade history class.

    At any rate, My S&P model that measures time, price, volume, etc has given me a bottom call and a buy call. These are independent of each other. The S&P is 1064. My target is 1225-1240. I am buying this morning.

    -- Posted by wallismarsh on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 6:11 AM

  • GI - who are you calling a coward and why?

    -- Posted by wallismarsh on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 10:29 AM
  • *

    My point keeps getting proven over and over again. Keep up the fight reformed and GI I am done with wallis. He continues the lie and then plays ignorant about it.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 11:15 AM
  • *

    You know, I've been mulling this over since Saturday and one question keeps popping up in my head.

    What honor has America lost? More importantly, why does Glenn Beck and by extension his supporters think so badly on America?

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 11:38 AM
  • *

    I never really understood homophobia. I mean really there just taking players out of the "game". End Result is lowering the number of competitors for the hot females. I'm definitely okay with that.

    -- Posted by Damu on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 4:00 PM
  • *

    I do not believe that wallis is homophobic. Then again it is not for me to judge. His issues are exactly that, his issues. My problem, concern, is his constant trolling of the blog trying to find weaknesses in others that he can exploit even if he has to make them up in cases.

    As I said, his problems are his problems and we need to refocus ourselves on the blog at hand.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 9:58 PM
  • *

    Here is the scary truth that some of Beck's followers are sweeping under the rug or just flat out ignoring. Glenn Beck is a Mormon. For the majority of us what he believes is really immaterial.

    For the evangelical followers of Beck his faith is an obvious concern, as some of them see Mormonism as a perversion (oddly enough what Beck was denouncing) of the Christian faith.

    These are truly odd times. Conservatives want us to reduce the deficit but also want to extend the Bush era tax cuts that will increase the deficit.

    Who am I to judge. As long as they can handle their obvious hypocritical stance than God be with them.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 10:03 PM
  • *

    @MH Are you familiar with the Mormon religion? It's leaps and bounds more silly than Christianity. Watch the southpark episode about it. They do an amazing, (And after consulting with some visiting Mormons shortly thereafter)accurate depiction of it. They think Indians were turned red because when Jesus was here (in America) they did some kind of evil.

    This is the best/scariest part about the whole thing. These people rally around Beck without even realizing this. He tells them what they want to hear regardless of how factual it is and they lap it up like dogs at the bowl.

    -- Posted by Damu on Mon, Aug 30, 2010, at 10:23 PM
  • *

    Damu, I am familiar with all religions and with Christianity in particular I try to familiarize myself with the major sects.

    I believe that the major reason that Mitt Romney lost the Republican nomination is because he is Mormon. For many evangelical Christians, Mormonism is a voodoo relgion. That is why it is so surprising to see so many of them look the other way with Beck, just because he is saying something they want to hear.

    I used to have a problem with Beck, but like I said, once you realize he is simply an entertainer he isn't that big a deal. The big deal are the people that take him serious, specifically the ones that take action.,

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Tue, Aug 31, 2010, at 9:35 AM
  • *

    Here's the funny thing Molly. Glenn Beck actually supports gay rights. He just doesn't support gays. Chew on that for awhile. :)

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Tue, Aug 31, 2010, at 10:28 AM

  • I think one could be simply opposed to something, such as being gay, but also recognize that those who are gay deserve equal treatment. I mean, I don't like the thought of two guys making out, but I don't think they should be condemned for it. Just because I have an opinion about something, doesn't mean it should have an impact on the lifestyles and happiness of others. If that makes any sense.

    -- Posted by BisonAlum00 on Tue, Aug 31, 2010, at 6:39 PM
  • *

    I understand where you are coming from Bison, but my issue is that he proclaims that they should have these rights at the same time he publicly condemns what and who they are. I don't want to go as far as saying that it is hypocritical but it is talking out of both sides of your mouth to condemn what they do but also say that they deserve rights.

    It's one of the reasons I believe his act to be nothing more than entertainment value. If you look at simply what he believes (not what he professes to believe but what he actually believes) he is a left-leaning moderate. But that doesn't play well on Fox News so for entertainment purposes he presents himself as a very far right conservative.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Tue, Aug 31, 2010, at 9:43 PM
  • *

    A couple items about this discussion:

    Mike,

    Why did you state that Christianity didn't exist before Jesus' crucifixion? Do you think people needed that history lesson? It seemed to me that you said it in response to Wallis' statement but I don't understand why, it did nothing to counter his claim?

    You also mentioned that Glenn Beck's follower ignore the fact that he is a Mormon. Do you have any proof of this claim? As far as I can tell, Beck is pretty open with his LDS status. I'd have a hard time imagining his followers aren't aware of it as much as people try to smear him and them with it.

    A couple of people made comments about Mormons and Christians, I'm pretty sure Mormons consider themselves Christians. Pretty petty behavior in my mind.

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Wed, Sep 1, 2010, at 7:12 PM
  • *

    wallis' statement was that Christianity has been under attack since Jesus' crucifixion. I stated that Christianity didn't exist until after the crucifixion and was not a big religion until 400 years later. My point was that wallis was inaccurate in his statement.

    Mormons do consider themselves Christians, I never challenged that. What I do challenge is that there are evangelical groups that do not consider Mormons true Christian believers because of some of their stances.

    My point about Beck's followers ignoring that he is Mormon has nothing to do with their actual knowledge of his faith, but their willingness to overlook his faith because he is selling them something that they like.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Wed, Sep 1, 2010, at 8:09 PM
  • *

    Mike,

    Well since Christ was crucified for his teachings and those that follow his teachings are Christians, one could make the argument that "Christianity" (unless one is hung up on labels) was under attack even before the crucifixion so I see nothing wrong in Wallis' statement. He made no claims about any organized church he just said Christianity. Or do you argue that the original followers of Christ were not Christians?

    If some evangelicals do not consider LDS to be Christians, do you have any evidence those persons are among Beck's followers? Even if they disagree with his religious beliefs does that mean they can't agree with his statements? Does this make them hypocritical in some way in your view?

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Wed, Sep 1, 2010, at 9:12 PM
  • *

    Mike,

    Also I want to clarify, I didn't mean to imply you challenged the Christianitiness of Mormons. I thought when I switched from addressing a single person (you) to multiple (some people)I made the switch clear. But I guess I should have made it a separate post, I was trying to direct it to a wider audience.

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Wed, Sep 1, 2010, at 9:17 PM
  • *

    Yes it does make them hypocritical to **** a sect of religion (Mormons) but follow the preachings of one. I never said anyone couldn't agree with Beck (those are your words not mine), my original point is that Glenn Beck is an entertainer who happens to be Mormon. The main group that follows every word he says has issues with the Mormon church, yet they put that aside so they can believe what a man of that faith is telling them what they want to hear.

    I no more believe Beck believes half the crap that he says than I believe that the protests of Park51 are anything but anti-Muslim.

    Considering that Christianity didn't exist until after Jesus died on the cross it is historically factually wrong. Followers of Christ before his death were just that followers of Christ. It did not make them Christians, just as of right now the followers of Beck are not Beckians.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Wed, Sep 1, 2010, at 10:03 PM
  • *

    http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201009010042

    This video is great, since the reeducation hes talking about has to do with the very propaganda toward health care Glen Beck was a part of spreading.

    -- Posted by Damu on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 1:11 AM

  • I have always been taught (for the last 40 years) that a Christian was someone who believed that Jesus was the Son of God. He died on the cross and arose from the dead and ascended into Heaven where he sits on the right hand of God. He shall come again to judge the quick and the dead.

    I believe that my post was an accurate statement of Christians as the Apostles were killed after Jesus died and they were the ones spreading the news.

    I guess that to be absolutely correct Christianity began after Jesus ascended into Heaven. That was within a month of the cross therefore for you to argue so vigorously about when Christianity began is sort of benign.

    I might have been a few days off over a context of 2000 years. I was not attempting pin point accuracy in my statement.

    -- Posted by wallismarsh on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 6:46 AM
  • *

    Mike,

    Do those evangelicals say they agree with Beck's religious views? Is Beck trying to sell himself as a Mormon evangelical or as a political conservative?

    You say they can agree with Beck but then you say to do so is hypocritical? I'm not sure I understand your argument.

    " my original point is that Glenn Beck is an entertainer who happens to be Mormon" Understandable, not a big deal. Why then did you turn this point into one that evangelicals are hypocritical because they agree with Beck politically but not religiously?

    I'm sorry but just how closeminded are you Mike?

    "Considering that Christianity didn't exist until after Jesus died on the cross it is historically factually wrong."

    "Christianity has been under attack ever *SINCE* Jesus was crucified"

    Mike, can you point out what the fundamental difference between those two statements is? It appears to me you are agreeing with Wallis that Christianity has been around since Christ was crucified. If so, why then did you try to challenge him on that point. If you had challenged him on whether it has been under attack you would have some footing, otherwise I think you just look small by refusing to admit you mis-spoke or were wrong.

    *emphasis mine

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 8:46 AM
  • *

    Natso, where did I ever "****" anyone? Can you point to that.

    I have never stated any of what I have stated about Mormons and Evangelicals as fact. You can't point where I did because I didn't. It is my opinion.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 9:55 PM
  • *

    @Fume Face Fume-Vine = awesome.

    -- Posted by Damu on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 10:03 PM
  • *

    "Considering that Christianity didn't exist until after Jesus died on the cross it is historically factually wrong."

    "Christianity has been under attack ever *SINCE* Jesus was crucified"

    Can you not see the marked difference in the statements SW? Christianity didn't exist until AFTER Jesus died. So saying that Christianity has been under attack (which is a huge falsehood to begin with) SINCE Jesus died is not the same as saying Christianity has been under attack since its founding.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 11:04 PM
  • *

    Oh and to answer your question that really has nothing to do with anything just seems personal to me but I am not closed-minded at all. But thanks for asking.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Sep 2, 2010, at 11:06 PM
  • *

    When you say that I am saying something to the effect of and then use quotes it is very misleading. I have never said that conservatives are liars and hypocrites so I really don't understand what you put the words in quotes as if I did. But yes, if I had ever said the words that you directly quote to me, though you know you can't prove that I have ever said that or think that then yes I would be damning those people. Considering that I have never said those words then the point is mute.

    I think if you look back through my blogs and comments you will see that I do say "I believe","in my opinion", and "I think". If you don't believe that I do then that's okay. That's something that you will have to overcome or just refuse to believe that I do.

    It's a pretty bold statement to say that I **** pretty much anybody that doesn't believe the same way I do. I know that's your opinion, but it's one that you can't prove, so again it's okay that you believe that. It doesn't make it true.

    It's interesting though that you spend your entire post trying to expose my none facts and none opinions with nothing more than pure opinion and wild accusations. Good job though.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 3, 2010, at 7:00 AM
  • *

    Glenn Beck helped my argument out about him being nothing more than an entertainer that tells people what they want to hear (whether he actually believes what he says or not) by admitting that he does make up information.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Sep 4, 2010, at 12:43 PM
  • *

    Some background.

    http://www.exmormon.org/tract2.htm

    -- Posted by Damu on Wed, Sep 8, 2010, at 11:09 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: