The definitive word on Beckapalooza

… didn’t come from Brother Beck the Mad Monk, it came from NAACP president Ben Jealous:

“They were told not to bring signs. Can you imagine Martin Luther King telling his marchers not to bring signs?”


21 Responses to “The definitive word on Beckapalooza”

  1. 1 Brian Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 11:57 am

    “They“ who were told not to bring signs by whom?

  2. 2 fern hill Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    Beck told attendees not to bring signs.

  3. 3 Bina Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 12:24 pm

    …because it would make them look exactly like what they are: stupid old racist bigots who can’t spell and who like to blame others for their own shortcomings.

    Image is everything, dahlingks.

  4. 4 JJ Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 12:24 pm

    Brian – Yeah, what happened to all Beck’s first amendment free-speechiness?? 😯 Or are the teabaggers thinking about repealing that one along with the 14th?

    And while I’ve got your undivided attention, I buy all my gold from Goldline! You should too! 😆

  5. 5 JJ Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    Bina – Not to worry, they figured out a work-around: the hands-free version! (Complete with misspelling: it’s Mauritania, dumbfuck.)

  6. 6 croghan27 Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    Ben Jealous would have a more ‘creds’ had the gun slinger not been so fast on the draw to condemn Shirley Sherrod.

    He later retracted what he said and apologized – and became just as verial toward Fox and that slug Breitbart. (Something I find proper.)

    I agree that Beck is a poor excuse for a person and worse as a pundit, but Mr. Jealous would do well to refrain from antagonistic comments.

  7. 7 Bleatmop Sunday, August 29, 2010 at 4:53 pm

    JJ – Thanks for the reminder! I have so much scrap gold lying around and I just didn’t know what to do with it. Thanks to Beck and you I now know what Goldline is the company to use!

  8. 8 J. A. Baker Monday, August 30, 2010 at 6:53 am

    Speaking of which, a couple of months ago, I had a prediction for how Beckapalooza would go. It seems my expectations were met, and then some.

  9. 9 Cornelius T. Zen Monday, August 30, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    Good morrow, all!
    Were they also told not to bring their brown shirts, jackboots or their white robes with the cute pointed hoods?
    That’s the sad thing about born agains – they’re much bigger PITA’s the second time around.
    Excuse the rest of us for getting it right the first time – CTZen

  10. 11 Bleatmop Monday, August 30, 2010 at 11:04 pm

    The first, last, and only refuge of Jasper: Complaining about liberals. Or was that intellectual honesty? Or was it the ability to make an argument longer than a line and a link without copy and pasting another person’s tripe off the internet? I dunno, it all gets so confusing sometimes to my addled liberal brain.

    Btw Jasper: Was Beck being a liberal when he started calling Obama a racist? Or was he just not at his last refuge?

  11. 12 JJ Monday, August 30, 2010 at 11:33 pm

    Jasper, don’t be such a gonad.

  12. 14 Brian Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 2:18 pm


    Brian – Yeah, what happened to all Beck’s first amendment free-speechiness??

    Speechiness… That’s kinda fun.

    Well, I had not heard what the deal was, but have heard more since. The goal wasn’t a political rally, but something different. So he was eager that people coming honor/respect that request. That’s not a free speech issue, really. It is more like when you throw a party, you can ask guests to not bring up politics while they are there. You wouldn’t be telling guests that they don’t have freedom of speech, but only requesting that they don’t speak a certain way at the one event.

  13. 15 Brian Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 2:20 pm

    Were they also told not to bring their brown shirts, jackboots or their white robes with the cute pointed hoods?

    CTZen, it’s not like you to be just plain stupid. But this statement achieved that.

    There is nothing linking the Tea Party movement or Glen Beck with the KKK, or the attitudes of the KKK, nor with anti-semitism or genocide.

    I’m pretty disappointed in you for this statement. I have come to expect a higher level of discussion from you, irrespective of whether I have agreed with you or not.

  14. 16 Brian Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 2:32 pm

    Btw Jasper: Was Beck being a liberal when he started calling Obama a racist? Or was he just not at his last refuge?

    The existence of a conservative person asserting that someone else is a racist has no bearing on whether it is a last-ditch refuge of liberals to brand their opponents as racists. The two just aren’t related a priori. If you think they are related, you should spell out the connection…

    It is absolutely true that when conservatives disagree with Obama’s policies or politics, it is embarrassingly common for the first response to be to allege that the disagreement stems from racism, though conservatives have stood against all of these things before when white liberals were saying them. I mean really: that’s supposed to mean anything?

    Let me ask you this. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, just to work through this, that Obama turned out to be a racist. Let’s say he said something like, blacks are superior and I hate whites. He hasn’t, but imagining a situation in which he had.

    If, under that eventuation, a conservative said both that liberals are far, far to quick to try to quash conservatives’ point by alleging racism, and by the way, Obama is a racist. Though this would be like walking through a mine field due to the hair trigger of so many these days, that would not be hypocritical.

    This is what I mean by that the two are not related. It takes more effort to keep things straight in you mind to remember that they’re not related, but it is true nonetheless.

    I am not saying that Obama is a racist.

  15. 17 Brian Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 2:33 pm

    Barklee, what the hell?!?

    At that time of your post, my only contribution had been a request for a clarification.

  16. 18 Cornelius T. Zen Wednesday, September 1, 2010 at 3:47 pm

    Good morrow, all!
    Brian: And a hearty “Sieg Heil!” to you, too!
    The Tea Party is saying that they want “their” country back. Since when is America the exclusive property of white, straight, Protestant males with guns, pickups and property? It was originally the land of the people who greeted the ships of Spanish conquistadors, Puritan refugees and all the downtrodden that had been welcomed by Lady Liberty.
    America, all of it, from Alaska to Tierra Del Fuego, was built by immigrants. Parts of it once belonged to England, Spain, France, Portugal and even Russia. The US took the states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and Texas by force from Mexico. The Native Nations and Latinos of those states have roots deeper than any “white” person living there now.
    Is that your shining legacy? Is that your proud tradition? A land taken at the point of a gun? A heritage of theft and slaughter, of promises made and broken, of word given and so easily taken back? Yeah, there’s your Land of the Free, your Home of the Brave.
    I come from a mixed stock of immigrants myself, Celtic and Slavic. My ancestors understood where the imperial ambitions took Britain and Russia, and how colonized people fared under their benevolent and paternal care.
    Most of us North Americans are the descendants of immigrants, who came here to get away from the very rhetoric that Beck and his ilk are bringing to the table.
    You can call me whatever you like. It is fully within your rights, and I will defend those rights, as Voltaire once told one of his acquaintances.
    The Tea Party talks about Nazis and socialism, and “taking America back.” Maybe when they’ve grown up, and have learned to share, we can take them more seriously.
    I will not hold my breath – CTZen

  17. 19 Brian Friday, September 3, 2010 at 6:23 pm

    The Tea Party is saying that they want “their” country back.

    Yeah, Yeah, I know. Every group not in power does the same thing. The Democrats said the exact same thing from 2000 to 2008, and during the tenure of GHW Bush and R. Reagan. If that’s all you have to make a point with, it kind of is tilting at windmills.


    Since when is America the exclusive property of white, straight, Protestant males with guns, pickups and property?

    What has gotten into you to make you continue to be so petty? For one, there is nothing wrong with driving a pickup truck. People with trucks are permitted to vote and participate in the political process in the US.

    There is nothing wrong with owning or carrying a gun. People with guns are permitted to vote and participate in the political process in the US.

    We have religious freedom in the US. Protestants are permitted to vote and participate in the political process in the US.

    And apparently you are unaware that there are blacks, Asians, women, Catholics, and people who drive Priuses participating in the Tea Party movement. But even if none were, those who did would have the right to do that, and even to say poorly thought out things like “we need to take back the country.” (I don’t do that though, personally.)


    On you tirade of who was where first, perhaps I was wrong, and you really are stupid. I hadn’t thought so, but you are really in some kind of a slump. Canada was created through pushing the people out who were there, too. Between Mexico and the US, there was shooting on both sides, as I recall. You cannot find very many lands with the original occupants (their descendants, that is) still holding the land. The way of the world, until very, very recently was that one group pushes another out, and then gets pushed out by another themselves.

    You seem to enjoy pointing out the clay in the feet of the US. But the world is vastly better off than it would otherwise have been for the presence of the US. The oceans are as safe for commerce as they are because of the US Navy. Canada has been able to have as low of a defense budget as she has because of the strength of the US military so nearby. Europe has enjoyed several decades of abnormally low defense budgets because of the alliances with the US. Wherever there’s a tsunami or an earthquake the US show up post haste to help. The creativeness of US entrepreneurs gave us the rapid advances in automotive technology and computer technology which we all rely on.

    Yeah, we’re not perfect. But we are the greatest nation the earth has ever seen (at least so far), and we have a great deal to be proud of. And the way things are shaping up, in a couple of months we will be back on the road to greater things.


    Most of us North Americans are the descendants of immigrants, who came here to get away from the very rhetoric that Beck and his ilk are bringing to the table.

    I don’t think so. I wasn’t at the rally, but I’ve read some about it, and I used to listen to Glen in the morning for the 35 minutes I was in my car. What he said while I was listening in the mornings, and what I have read about the rally isn’t what the paragraph quoted above alleges.

    Do you think the immigrants came here to get away from praying? At the rally Glen encouraged people to pray.

    You think they came here to get away from religion playing a role in the public square? They had a funny way to show it, as they established state churches (which is 100% permissible under the Constitution, btw), and, in an unbelievably dark spasm, held witch trials.

    As I am certain it does to you, regarding me, it appears to me that you see things historically the way you would have chosen for them to be, and in ways that do not match reality.

  18. 20 hemmingforddogblog Saturday, September 4, 2010 at 2:01 am

    I think this really sums up the Beckapalloza! From here:

    ” Fox News entertainer, former drug addict, and professional weeper Glenn Beck took center stage at the Lincoln Memorial exactly forty-seven years to the day after Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech for a rally dedicated to “restoring honor,” which is tea party code for the otherwise unutterable idea: get that nigger out of the White House! (despite the attendance of a few African-American shills on the scene).
    Beck himself just seems to be following a career arc more than really answering “a call.” The emptiness of his platitudes and the confusion of his ideas shows that he is just flexing his demagogic muscles in a moment when weepy bluster passes for heroism. Ten years ago he was a cringing drunk contemplating suicide. Then he went shopping in America’s Mall of Utopias for something to believe in and found Mormonism, a “religion” dreamed up by an imaginative young man on the agricultural frontier of western New York during an earlier age of ferment which — guess what — coincided with a decade of economic turbulence.

  19. 21 Brian Saturday, September 4, 2010 at 8:53 pm


    Yeah, that sums it up alright. James Howard Kunstler, an anti-conservative, anti-religion writer who brings out the hackneyed “Hitler” accusation against Sarah Palin.

    He says, “Sarah Palin is going to run for president in 2012. In the process she’ll turn the sad remnants of the Republican party into a suicide cult, but she might just get elected and you can kiss the 230-year-long experiment in representative government goodbye for good.” Apparently he has no problem viz representative government that Congress passed the health care bill against strong opposition from the people, and 100% opposition by the Republicans in Congress. And now the administration is saying that if Congress won’t give them what they want, they will simply enact it by regulation instead. Representative government? Not from Obama!

    But let’s look at what you say, rather than shooting Kunstler-fish in the barrel that is their home. I’ll take your quotes of Knustler to be what you yourself have to say.

    “… former drug addict … Glen Beck, [who] ten years ago … was a cringing drunk contemplating suicide.”

    I presume that was supposed to be more than a recitation of history, but was intended to make a point, the point that Glen Beck was “less.” Apparently, for you and for Knustler, anyone who has been an addict in the past can have a job a Goodwill, and are entitled to a “meaningful life,” but they will never again be allowed to play with the big kids.

    You insufferable snob! you clearly think you are a much better person than someone who has ever suffered from addiction. Look: we’ve been in the 21st century now for more than 10 years; perhaps you should think about moving into the end of the 20th century. We have moved out of the historic position the former drunks can never be trusted.


    … exactly forty-seven years to the day after Martin Luther King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech …

    Yeah, we’re really big on 47th anniversaries here in the States… Beck says he was unaware of the fact, and I believe it. We kind of lose track after the 25th anniversary, making a big ramp-up of remembrance on the 50th and the 100th.

    This was the last Sunday before the 3-day weekend as well. I would anticipate that that was the majority of the reasoning behind the scheduling, something like 98 to 99 percent of it.


    dedicated to ‘restoring honor,’ which is tea party code for the otherwise unutterable idea: get that nigger out of the White House!

    This is a truly deplorable assertion on your part, and paints you in a petty, paranoic light.

    First of all, the part that is not despicable, that this is “code for.” You appear to be like the majority of left-wingers, in that you appear to not even have a relationship with any conservatives. (Recall that newsroom in which a worker decried, regarding Reagan’s win, “This can’t be! I don’t know anyone who voted for him!) Most conservatives indeed are sickened by the cesspool that DC has become, and do indeed want to see honor restored to the leadership.

    Most recognize that politics will never be completely honorable. The Founders knew that, too, and so set up a system of checks and balances for just that reason. Having differing agendas, the 3 branches would not allow either of the other two branches to ride problems in on a rail, without opposition. But the loss of honor we currently are witnessing is just too much. That’s not “code” it is a description of a held position. It is paranoic to think that everything is in code.

    But this hateful, despicable, shameful allegation that conservatives oppose Obama because of his skin color, or even that he is thought of by conservatives as a being a particular color above all things (a n—-r first, then a man, or then a president) is nothing but a racist ad hominem argument. Apparently to left-wing shills like you Obama is a black over and above all other considerations. Apparently a white man would be a conservative or a liberal on his own merits (taking no notice of his skin color), but Obama is rather a black man to left wingers like you.

    Therefore, in an act of transference, you just can’t wrap your mind around the possibility that people might oppose Obama because of the content of his character (or, more accurately the content of his actions and words).

    I would want out of the White House anyone who transfers the ownership of a major manufacturer into the ownership of the government — let alone 2. I would want out of the White House anyone who spends money the government doesn’t have as Obama does (the level of deficit spending). I would want out of the White House anyone who vacillates like Obama does, which must be thinking that, if there was ever a time to attack US interest in a military fashion, now’s the time.

    I heard today that a man who has a $2 mil. outstanding debt with a bank that holds $12 mil. of his assets, and who has never missed a payment and has a credit rating over 725 (the person said it was 800) has been told by the bank that they are calling his loan. A representative from the Obama administration told the bank that they had to get that loan “off the books.” This kind of behavior by banks will drive perfectly solvent people into bankruptcy, and is an assault of contracts.

    The current administration and those doing its work (such as this representative talking to the bank) do not understand the first thing about business, economics or finances, and are going to destroy lots and lots of people’s lives thought their ineptitude.

    I don’t care if they are black, white, green or polka-dotted. If they do stuff like this, I want them far from the levers of power.

    Wake up!


    … despite the attendance of a few African-American shills on the scene …

    Apparently, to you, being black is a behavior, not an ancestry. Kind of racist, don’t you think? All real blacks act one certain way? I guess you don’t like it when they don’t keep their place, or at least the place you think they should keep to.


    … professional weeper Glenn Beck … in a moment when weepy bluster …

    Apparently you’re a sexist as well. Men who weep are girly men, to you. Sure women weep, they just can’t help it. But men? Well, that’s a different story.

    Once again, let me invite you into the 21st century wherein we have left deriding displays of emotions behind.


    I do agree with you that Mormonism was dreamed up. Largely it was dreamed up by Joseph Smith, though his invention of it involved a great deal of plagiarism as well.

    But tying it to “a decade of economic turbulence” is co-opting apparent correlation into service as evidence for causation. Joseph Smith, even as young as 8 years old, could spin lengthy fictional stories with many characters, keeping all the details together.

    He also was convicted of fraud. He was an opportunist.

    Mormonism was put together by him when he was 17. Not very many 17 year olds really worry about the “economic turbulence” (or lack thereof).

    Mormonism was founded by Joseph Smith, Jr., in the 1830s.
    7th Day Adventism was was formally established in 1863.
    The Jehovah’s Witnesses got their start in 1876.
    The Church of Christ, Scientist (Christian Scientists) was founded in 1879.

    This span of several decades was marked by a lot of interest in spiritism, and countless new religions were formed, including Mormonism.

    It was not contrained to this time period though. “Christian and Missionary Alliance” (C&MA) which was one of the early progenitors of the “charismatic movement” was founded by Rev. Albert Benjamin Simpson in 1887.

Wait. What?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Mac Security Portal
Rose's Place
Blogging Change


  • 632,277
[Most Recent Quotes from]


%d bloggers like this: