http://stopbeck.com/

It isn't that I "couldn't" it is just that they are endless and you can look them up just as easily as I can. Try media matters for clips of his comments. In his own words, Beck can be heard making some pretty racist, anti-gay, and anti-women comments. If you don't find them offensive, nothing I can say will convince you anyway. Feel free to send him your next paycheck.

 

Just as I thought, YOU CAN"T. Typical liberal, all talk no action!

 

I could do your homework for you but then again that is how you got to be who you are today. Do your own legwork if you have an issue with what I say. Typical Right winger! Always waiting for someone else to tell them what to think instead of doing their own research. This stuff isn't hard to find with a little effort. I gave you a source....use it or don't but don't attribute you lack of initiative to me.

No wonder Beck appeals to you. I'm sure you believe EVERYTHING he says without any verification. How sad is that!? If you want to go through life willing to take the easier answers from anyone selling snake oil, you get the perspective you deserve as uninformed as it may be. It seems that the greatest influence in your life is the court of public opinion and narrowly selective media outlets. Try picking up a book once in a while. Its funny that you can always spot those who are not well-read in these forums. They usually hail from the Right wing.

 

Moen,

While I agree that Beck is a snake of the 1st order and a ratings *****, this is still the United States and the philosophy of "innocent until proven guilty" applies to more than just our criminal justice system. If you are going to claim he is a racist, the burden to provide proof falls squarely on your shoulders. Your current path in this thread is a professional dodgeball trick employed endlessly by people like TomCorona. Don't stoop to his level, just provide one concrete example of Beck's racism and solidify your point.

 

OMG, why the heck is w h o r e a bad word?

 

Funny, you accuse the poster of not thinking for himself then suggest he read more? Aren't printed items books also the words, thoughts & opinions of another? Perhaps you meant to say the poster was listening to the wrong message in your view? Perhaps he should only be listening to or reading sources that share your opinion?

 

You and I both know that there are countless clips of Beck spewing racist, homophobic, misogynistic comments from both his radio and TV shows on YouTube. I just went and watched several of them. I could post links to them but they are too numerous to even get a flavor for some of his antics by only watching a few. All, I told jth to do is go look them up himself if he doubts me, they certainly exist and all are in his own words. Is that so difficult for him to do or should I spend my morning doing research for him that he won't pay any attention to anyway? Seems like a waste of my time. I make choices with what I do with my time as everyone else does. Wasting my time on a closed mind seems rather stupid in my opinion. It seems to me that if jth was at all curious, he would have gone immediately to the web and did his own search. He simply preferred to be lazy, obstinate, and argumentative. Why would I reward that behavior with further work on my part? I'm not looking to change any minds here, I'd be content just to see people approach issues with a little intellectual curiosity once in a while.

 

In dr moen-speak, this means "I can't believe people just don't agree with me?"

 

Hmmm? In another thread when I suggested a member do the same thing...their own research...I was harangued.

 

"Truth isn't at issue" - I guess that sums up your whole philosophy. In your world, you can say anything and you don't have to prove anything. Go for it, just don't expect me to participate.

 

No, that sums up Beck's entire approach and has nothing to do with me. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not a public media figure. My responsibility is nil. From this response, I'm guessing that you haven't been participating in quite a while nor would I expect you to.

 

In fact, I don't know because I don't watch his show. I can't make it 30 seconds of watching him without changing the channel to Sportscenter. However, I don't doubt what you are saying is true. But that does not absolve you of the responsibility to prove your claims. You can't accuse him of being lazy when all you have to do is provide one link with your supporting evidence. From an outside perspective, it appears that you are the lazy one in this scenario.

 

Is there an acceptable number of links I should be aiming for? I was unaware.

 

I assume that you are smart enough to prove your point with one link so yes, the acceptable number you should aim for is one. As opposed to zero, which is where you stand at present, which makes you look like a lazy dodgeball player.

 

Money laundering? You know that for a fact? Why arent you letting the authorities know about this? I guess you agree with none of what they do. Anti-war? Hows that a bad thing? Anti-free trade? I thought conservatives were against NAFTA as well. And Human rights? Well I see your point. How dare they. And with your comment about ''queer'' something or other; radical gay to you must mean they are allowed to vote. And what was that thing about Ayers brother? what is he guilty of?

 

And yet you just did.

 

Ah! The quintessential brainless post by Craig.

 

You seem surprised.

 

And the usual rudeness from you. Tell me, how is participating in a post considered not participating in a post?

 

Where is the suprise element in his comment? Or are you just chiming in with that sharp witof yours?