Do I even have to point out that this is absolutely in no way, shape or form related to Beck?

What, Ugandan buttsex, the Tea Party or potentially violent people in the Tea Party? I used the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill as comparison because Glenn Beck has never said anything overtly violent that I can recall, but he is very good at fanning the flames because his audience consists of very frightened, very angry people (and many of them have very, very good reason to be, honestly). Similarly, the American preachers that went to Uganda may never have said "kill the gays", but stirred the pot in very irresponsible ways for their own ends (ie exploiting a poor, desperate, AIDS-ravaged people's fears of the poo-poo-eaters).

It's a red herring. Nothing that Glenn Beck said has anything to do with Uganda's anti-homosexuality laws, so why even bring it up?

As for the subject at hand: do you have any shred of evidence that Glenn Beck supporters are more predisposed towards terrorist attacks than an average American?

Nope. No, you're right, nothing freaky about increases in militias, the skyrocketing Secret Service threats and founding father chic, or the TP-endorsed Sharron Angle's vague threat about Reid, and there's absolutely no way to correlate that to the Tea Party. Nothing has happened yet, so it is absurd to have a bad feeling that some TPer is gonna blow up. I should be eating out Pam Geller right now.

I never said violence was imminent or that we should be buying anti-terrorist kits, it's a social observation that raises personal alarm bells.

I see. Nothing related to Glenn Beck, of course, you're just making a connection. And of course no evidence of impeding terrorist attacks.

Hey, just curious, when James Lee took Discovery Channel hostage, did you blame that on PETA?

Has PETA ever used violent rhetoric, even vaguely? Do they have a popular show on a news network led by a charismatic figure that routinely exploits the fears of angry, scared people?

Yes, many times. And, by your own admission, Beck hasn't.


This is relevant to the subject matter how?

Doesn't Ingrid Newkirk have connections to ALF and ELF, who burn down buildings on college campuses, and doesn't she support "direct action" in freeing animals?

Uh, yes, Beck has used violent rhetoric. I never said otherwise. http://mediamatters.org/research/201007270045

For the record, I already hate PETA and was actually not sure if they did, though they don't really drive political narrative much.

Except that you did: Glenn Beck has never said anything overtly violent that I can recall

Where's the smoking gun in the Media Matters link? As far as I can see it's just a collection of out of context things he said and recounts of some acts of violence that aren't even connected to Beck.

Remember, your original thesis was that Beck's supporters are more inclined to terrorism than an average American. Where's the evidence?

You're missing the point again. Are you willing to blame PETA for James Lee's actions?

Overtly violent, no. Implicitly violent, yes. And there are many, many, many videos you can find on there.

Was James Lee a member of PETA? Then sure.

What constitutes being implicitly violent?


It's all out of context bullshit.

Why is being a member important? Can't one be influenced into violent acts by another person's rhetoric?

- No, it's a greater honor for me.
- No, a greater honor for me.
- No, it's a greater honor for me.
- No, a greater honor for ME.
- Well, perhaps you're right. Perhaps it IS a greater honor for you.
- And you must be Don Francisco's sister.
- No, you must be Don Francisco's sister.

What constitutes as violent rhetoric period? His yakking about poisoning people and blood doesn't? Even if he does speak in metaphor, he is a shitstirrer by trade. Beck has even admitted he'll probably inspire some loony. Or stuff like this: http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910230029 where he brandishes a bat in imitation of the fed and rants some bizarre shit about a "killing spree". Yeah, no way shit like this on a news channel would freak out certain people.



Ah, you watched every single one?



If he admired them while not being a member, that counts too. But I don't know the guy personally or whether he liked them or not, and without membership or some additional dirt on him, I don't think we can really know. It's certainly possible, and I would not be surprised. It'd be the same if a Teaper went postal at a federal building. That's not to say PETA or Beck should be held culpable legally for these people, but they certainly are made worse people period. I would also argue Beck is more powerful than PETA and if any violence stemmed from fans of his work, it would have far more political and social repercussions and implications, which makes it even freakier. PETA has always been kooky, but this is our country's media. What the hell?

I find it odd that Krem is defending Beck.