Monday, May 18, 2009

Dear Mr. Glenn Beck....

Mr Beck,

I used to be a huge fan. Your radio show included a lot of comedy, and I like listening to a guy who can laugh at himself as well as others. Your show combined current events, humor and politics in a most enticing way. I think even liberals enjoyed your show at times. You had it right!

For Christmas a few years back, my wife purchased me a gift subscription to your magazine, along with a T-Shirt for "The Frog 109.9". I still think it's a cool shirt!

I've turned my mother, in-laws and numerous other friends and family members on to you, and may of whom are still loyal listeners.

The thing is though, that you've stopped being funny. I haven't listened to your show regularly for well over a year now, and after subscribing to satellite primarily so I could watch you on CNN, I would now much rather use it to watch the Discovery Channel.

I think what initially turned me off you was hearing you put down Mr. Ron Paul as a presidential candidate, even though I think the two of you are likely 99% in agreement. Then when your party (And don't go claiming you're independent anymore) chose the dingbat from Arizona you acted all surprised - You could have made a difference Glenn, but you blew it.

Or perhaps how you were so against Mitt Romney, but then fell in love with him after he invited you to his little "I'm a Mormon" speech. And prior to that you were all "I'm not going to support him just because we're part of the same religion", "he's too liberal for my liking" blah blah blah.

Actually what was even more surprising was how you jumped all over the Tea Party idea earlier this year, like a horny teenage boy on a copy of Playboy, even though it appeared to have been the brain child of Mr Paul's Campaign for Liberty.

Talk about flip flopping Glenn!!

As I said, you're not funny anymore, nor do you even try to be objective. You've become nothing other than a Mormon version of Rush Limbaugh, just without the weight and tobacco habit. You're a peddler of fear and mis-truths for you own personal gain, failing to see the problems in your own party, but more than willing to point them out in the other party, no matter how ridiculous they may be. For the record, I think both parties are filled with self-serving scumbags, and that we need to clean house in Washington. But the party that claims moral superiority, really should try actually exercising some morals too!

I unsubscribed from your email newsletter last year, because I just couldn't take the fear you were disseminating with it. I got sick of hearing how incompetent the liberals were, when it was the so-called conservatives that got us stuck in this economic hell hole.

Speaking of incompetence, somehow, as of last week, I'm back on your email list. I unsubscribed again, but today I received another.

Perhaps you are like so many other conservatives who believe that freedom is important, only as it applies you and that it is not something that others can be trusted with... Since I don't see things your way, therefore I can't be expected to choose for myself - is that how it works?

I'm sorry Glenn <sniff> but I just love my personal freedom <sniff>. I love <sniff> <weep> not having to have fear <sniff> rammed down my throat <sniff> by a man who doesn't want to see his tax rates raised, simply because he's been able to rake the cash in, courtesy of the American People.<sniff>

Please kindly unsubscribe me from your newsletter - AGAIN!!!


Mr. Koda


  1. Koda, though I agree that Beck isn't near as funny as he used to be, and you are correct on several points here, I'm going to have to take you to task on a few of these issues.

    1. Beck is indeed a peddler of fear, but please tell me where he's wrong. What exactly are the mistruths? Believe me, listening to Beck these days makes me want to slit my wrists. I so bad want him to be wrong on everything from Obama to the economy. For the last few months I've tried ardently to prove him wrong, if even in my own brain, for my own sanity. If he's wrong, please indicate where. Seriously, I'd appreciate it. If he's lying, please tell me what he's lying about. If you are willing to make the accusation, please back it up.

    2. Failing to see the problems in his own party? Beck has skewered Republicans. He's constantly talking about how both parties are taking us in the same direction. If anything, he's showing some regret for the Ron Paul hate and has talked about the rise of the third party candidate. I'll let you borrow my Insider account password if you'd like so you can read archived transcripts of his show. He has no loyalty for the Republican party whatsoever. Just because he thinks its the least riduculous of the two parties, doesn't make him a Republican hack.

    3. Republicans may have started digging this hole we're in, but the current, completely Democrat run government is digging even faster. I can't believe people can look at what's going on and pin the blame on Bush. Please don't tell me you've bought Obama's tired "I inherited this" excuse. Look at the numbers. Nothing Bush did holds a candle to what the unhindered Dem government has done. Bush bailed out banks, but it is Obama who is almost single-handedly making us a socialist nation.

    Believe me, I'd love Glenn to rediscover his sense of humor and I'd love him to be dead wrong in his analysis. But if you're gong to call B.S. on him, please back up your accusations.

  2. Good to have you back Mr. Sirmize...

    Admittedly, I don't listen to Glenn much any more, but a couple of examples.

    Extended family members of mine, are convinced, courtesy of Mr. Beck that within a year or two, the government will control everything and they will be forced to defend their homes from hordes of liberal rioters. Now granted these are the same people that subscribed to the idea that he thought Obama was the anti-christ, and while I didn't specifically hear Mr. Beck say these things, never-the-less, these thing are believed by some of his listeners and attributed to him, and I think he bears some responsibility for that.

    While it didn't come through (and I should probably fix it), my comments about loving my country were supposed to be a sarcastic jab at his "We surround them" speech. I'll admit that I think Glenn points out many potential problems, and some of the things he brings up are valid, but I think that rather than identifying problems and using his influence to try and resolve them, he uses fear to bring his audience in, and create a dependency on him. Glenn is the drug-pusher and fear is the drug.

    I have heard Glenn take the Republicans to task on a few things, but I think he takes a similar line to Rush, Hannity and the rest of the right wing media celebrities. They'll jump all over Bush and the previous administration for screwing things up (and in reality I think they're just upset that they lost). But yet, their proposed policies seem to be very much in line with the Bush Administration.

    On the subject of the economy... During the Clinton Administration, government spending actually started to trend towards not increasing. Under Bush with a Republican Congress and Senate, it started heading straight back up again.

    I don't like that the current administration is continuing to spend money we don't have. But personally, I like the end game plan being used to justify the spending. Creating jobs, decreasing oil dependence, improving infrastructure and improving education are all noble endeavors that I think will improve the standard of living for all. Contrast this with the previous administration's spending of money on a war we shouldn't have been fighting, which allowed defense contractors to cash in, wasted billions and billions of dollars and got thousands of good and noble young men killed, not to mention the casualties on the opposing side, and damage to the Iraqi infrastructure.

    Personally I haven't heard Obama use the "I inherited this" excuse, although in reality, he did take control under pretty poor conditions and I think would be completely justified in using it. I've heard calls for a country to come together, to serve one another and that we need to work to overcome this challenges.

    I think what bugs me most about Mr. Beck is statements like the following... (From today's newsletter, which I am still subscribed to - which was my whole beef in the first place)What better way to help the ailing auto industry than to increase the CAFE standards that are already crippling automakers everywhere? Obama wants the CAFE standard to be 42 miles per gallon by the year 2016 -- translation: tinfoil cars that run on hamster power! If Obama keeps tightening the leash, it won't be long before all of the big auto companies go under and are eaten up by the government -- oh, wait -- that's probably the plan.Why are American auto makers struggling? Because they have failed to innovate, they've used their political influence to try and keep themselves ahead of the pack, people like Glenn and Rush talk them up, as though buying an inefficient car is the most patriotic thing you can do, and a sense of entitlement means that people get paid $75+ an hour to perform unskilled labor on assembly lines.

    The problem with the automakers isn't an overburdened set of Government regulations, it's bad management and immunity from consequences courtesy of political influence.

    Setting a goal for cars to have a certain level of efficiency by a point in the future isn't a bad thing. I would rather it not be government mandated, but I think it's a noble goal.

    Compare this to Kennedy challenging the nation to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. It inspired a nation, it got us innovating, trying new things and achieving what was previously impossible.

    The tragedy is that Glenn could be a part of the solution, he doesn't have to agree with the mandatory application of standards, but he could get behind trying to make the US a leader in industry again - he does love his country right?!? Sniff sniff

    Instead he chooses to tear down everything he can. You don't have to believe in man-made global warming to want to be conscious of your environment, but on a day when those who do support it encourage others to consider it, Glenn encourages his listeners to turn on every light they can, and leaves a car running in the street outside his studio (I believe this happened, but can't verify). It seems to me that he's more intent on getting his point across by throwing a tantrum and encouraging everyone to throw their toys out of the crib, that trying to help find a solution to the problem.

    Not sure if I actually cited many examples there, and I don't know if that covered what you asked, but that's my current feelings about the man... Wasted talent!

  3. Koda, I understand your feelings toward the Rush Limbaughs on the Right, but admitting that you don't listen to Glenn Beck much sort of undercuts your arguments against him.

    Instead of basing your perspective in documented fact and contextual spoken word, you base it on what your crazy relatives think and say maybe due to having listened to Beck. That's weak.

    I suppose I could base all of my criticism of people like Keith Olbermann on the nutjobs who love his show, but that would be weak as well.

    Your extended family members may be inordinately afraid of certain things, but they are not mistaken when they think the government will control everything within a year or two.

    Think about it- a year ago would you have ever thought it possible that a sitting president would be firing private sector CEO's dictating corporate budjets, and backing car warranties? This has all happened in 3 months.

    Like it or not, we are a de facto socialist nation. The government now has more influence in the private sector than it ever has in ths country's history. They control the banks and entire industries. This screams Marxism, Leninism, and yes, even fascism (look it up if you think I'm overstating it).

    What scares the crap out of me is that normally sensible people like yourself are saying that the ends justify the means. I don't like that government is now borrowing 50 cents for every dollar it spends, or that we've racked up exponentially more debt this year than in the history of the nation. But hey, Obama's goals are noble. The end justifies the means. Yeah, I can think of plenty of historical leaders who have banked on that same premise.

    You don't listen to Glenn regularly, yet you've heard him take a similar line to Rush and Hannity, both of whom I'm assuming you listen to less than you do Beck? Can you see the problem I'm having with your reasoning here?

    Sure, Bush started a spending trend. But compared to what Obama and the Dems are doing now? You gotta be kidding me.

    How is Obama's spending going to create jobs? And what happens when funding for those jobs dries up?

    How does Obama's plan reduce our dependency on foreign oil? Are we just going to go cold turkey here? Are we going to wean ourselves off of it by drilling more here? No, we're not. Are we expanding the nuclear industry to replace some of that? Nope. Are we going to refine more of our own oil? Nope.

    Really, what is it about Obama's plan that's so appealing to you that you're ok with him decimating our economy?

    Look, I don't want you to think I'm antagonizing you or picking a fight. I just think it you're going to make an argument, you need to back it up. You know this type of thing drives me crazy.

    I'm not a huge Beck fan, but I am a radio fan and a political junkyt, and frankly media is something I know a heck of a lot about. I'm not being defensive because you're attacking my "voice of reason." I just try to limit my debate to stuff I know and can back up. I find it sad that you are 1) so apt to take offense at what you perceive the man to believe and 2) express that hostility here with accusations you can't or won't back up.

    Oh, and about the "I inherited this mess" stuff, Obama has said it more than a few times, both personally and via spokespeople, and I'll be happy to provide references for those occasions. One that comes to mind right now occurred in March with the White House budget director, Peter Orszag. Here's a Washington Post article about Obama's incessant claim that it was all Bush's fault:

  4. My main argument against Mr. Beck was that despite his pointing out of everyone elses incompetence, and outrage at loss of freedom, he has twice ignored my request for him to cancel my subscription to his newsletter.

    My relatives are scared sh*tless about what Obama is going to do to this country. Yes, they're likely crazy, but it's a crazy fire which Glenn is providing the fuel for.

    As for whether or not the US is socialist. It kind of reminds me of the story of Winston Churchhill - don't know if it's true, but it illustrates the point...

    According to the story, he ask a lady if she would sleep with him for a sizable amount of money, to which she responded in the affirmative. Next he asked if she would sleep with him for $10, to which she looked outraged and exclaimed, "I'm not a whore!".

    "No", he said "I think we've already established that you are, now we're just haggling over the price."

    The thing is, the US is a socialist nation, whether or not we admit it. Social Security, free education, government bail-outs. Socialism just seems to have become a word with bad connotations, and only gets used to try and belittle something the other side are doing. Actually I think we kind of have a hybrid of Socialism and Captitalism going. When those with political ties can make money, whether ethically, or through their connections, it's capitalism and the free market. When regular people like you and me fail, capitalism means we get to lump it and try again. When the people with political ties fail however, then we get socialism as they get bailed out, courtesy of those of us, who've managed to be successful in the pseudo free market. I think both Capitalism and Socialism work equally well when practiced as intended. The problem comes when greed sets in, and the responsibility to our fellow man is forgotten. In the US, greed has set in, and the idea of looking out for the other man has been largely lost.

    So we're a hybrid socio-capitalist nation, for better or worse. Likely worse.

    I wouldn't have expected to have a president firing a private sector CEO, but then I also wouldn't have expected the private CEO to run his company into the ground and then expect the people he's screwed for years to bail him out. Nor woulf I have expected to have a sitting president authorizing torture of foreign combatants, or initiating a warrantless wire-tap program. Not a fan of either of those things, but at least Obama did his little deeds out in the open.

    As for the ends justifying the means... I don't like the means. I don't think the ends justify the means, but if its a choice between 1 administration having war and facist rule as their ends and another having socialized medicine as theirs, I'm leaning towards the less violent one of the two.

    Continuing with that thought... Bush spent money of war and financial bail outs to financial institutions without accountability, Obama is spending it on financial bailouts with some accountability, and on projects create jobs - Highway construction and weatherization projects. It keeps the money in the United States and doesn't spend it dropping bombs and firing missiles on foreign soil. There's also the whole international relations thing too, and while I don't believe we should compromise out values to fit into the international scene, there is still the need to be good neighbors and not be the school yard bully, which we have been in years past.

  5. As for the dependence on foreign oil. In addition to requiring the auto makers to reduce fuel consumption - and like I said the idea was good, but I would rather it not be mandated, rather just an inspiring goal to work towards. He has also encouraged research into alternative sources of energy. Yes, ethanol was a joke and didn't work well at all, but we've had minimal advancements in energy in recent years, and I think we can do better. I heard a navy commander say once that he would never punish his squad for making mistake, because mistakes meant they were trying to push the limits. He only chewed his guys out when they made the same mistake twice.

    I know you're not trying to pick fights - like I've said in the past, I like how you help me refine my thinking, change my point of view and that kind of thing.

    My arguments against Glenn Beck are weak - I fully admit that. And not listening to him much, I'm limited to my opinion on him to snippets on the news, and what I read on-line. I think he promotes fear and is profiting from it - I think we agree there, the arument is probably just how justified that fear is. I'm not so sure that we're going to see the government controlling everything within this adminstration, although I do think we'll have increasing government control regardless of who is in power, the only difference between left and right is, in what areas that control will be.

    Again my main argument wasn't the fearmongering or anything like that... It was because the man (or whoever he has overseeing his newsletter) won't take me off his freakin' email list!!

  6. I appreciate the newsletter sometimes, like when there's an interview I missed or a comedy bit. It's nice to be able to click on the links and listen. Other than that, it's usually pretty useless. Mostly just a trojan horse for ads. I'd be annoyed too if I were you!

    I think what it comes down to is that while you seem pretty optimistic (or at least less afraid) about this country's future, I believe we've turned a corner in the last 6 or so months that we won't be able to backtrack.

    This country's golden years are now behind us. And Obama and his minions seem completely indifferent to it. We've sold our soul for the empty promises of hope, change, and political correctness. Oh, I think we'll eventually wake up to that fact, but I think by that point it will be too late.

    And that ain't Glenn Beck talking. That's me, my poli sci degree, and my gut.

  7. I can respect that, and I can totally see where you're coming from.

    Now you've got me thinking...

    Am I less afraid or more optimistic...

    While I ponder that, I have a question for you.

    America's Golden Years - when do you think we were there, and what key aspects do you think defined them?

  8. Good question. I'll try to come up with a coherent answer for you tonight or tomorrow.

  9. Hmm.

    While I'm not particularly thrilled at where we are regarding President Obama's position with companies and banks, I still refuse to believe such measures would have never been taken without Bush.

    Have we forgotten Bush began the nationalizing process?

    My father is a faithful attendee of a Assembly of God church. This church runs on fear. It scares its youth and adults into following God. Indeed my father once told me he believes it is the best motivator.

    I strongly disagree, and I think it applies here.

    Inciting fear incites irrationality.

    I'm a grown up. Tell me the facts and then offer me a solution. Tea parties are no solution.

    Give me something I can do. If there is a reason to be concerned, tell me--but stop telling me the sky is falling. Things aren't that bad.

    We've been here before...numerous times. Has Obama taken unprecedented measures? Yes. So have other presidents in the past. I can only hope that it'll rectify itself in time.

    I see far too much criticism of Obama and fear inciting of our freedoms being taken away from the same people who egged Bush--Patriot Act, wiretapping, Guantanamo, torturing, war happy Bush--on.

    I'm not 100% happy with Obama, but I'll soooo take him over McCain. I do wish candidates like Ron Paul would get more serious face time. We need more people who think out of the box.

    I think Koda makes some fantastic points and Sirmize some fantastic retorts. Good debate. I need to show up here more often.