Glenn Beck Admits Lying

[MasterOfMeatPuppets]

'I Thought It Would Be A Little Easier'
Yes, Glenn, sometimes it's easier to lie. Of course, when you're famous, it usually ends up being the easiest way to look like an ass.

After being called on a white lie he told during his Restoring Honor rally, Glenn Beck admitted Thursday that he stretched the truth because he "thought it would be a little easier."

Beck had claimed that he held George Washington's handwritten first Inaugural Address in his hands at the National Archives, but a spokeswoman at the institution said he did no such thing. Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz and others called him out for the fabrication.

Thursday on his radio show, Beck copped to the lie.

"I thought it would be a little easier in the speech," Beck said, than to go into the following elaborate explanation (via Mediaite):

Yesterday I went to the National Archives, and they opened up the vault, and they put on their gloves and then they put it on a tray. They wheeled it over and it's all in this hard plastic and you're sitting down at a table and you can't, because of Sandy Berger, I had a long conversation with him about this, you can't actually touch any of the documents, these are very very rare. So what they do, they have it in this plastic thing and they hold them right in front of you, you can't touch them but then you can say 'can you turn it over,' and then they turn it over for you and then you look at it. I thought it was a little clumsy to explain it that way.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/0 ... 04958.html

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9npSV0cfEps

[Nevermind]

Do you feel better now? Whoopee! Glenn Beck, someone who does not hold office, someone who is an opinion journalist, told a lie about something totally insignificant.
Of course I'm going on the assumption that it actually happened.
I mean, you're posting links to the huffington post, so who knows. I'd look it up myself, but I don't give a shit, and neither will anyone else.

[MasterOfMeatPuppets]

I'm sorry that you cared so little that you wasted the time to respond like a little bitch. It's sad that you care so little for the truth that a journalist can lie to you and it is no cause for concern nor can you even be bothered to ascertain the truth itself. Sad but not surprising.

[bane]

I'm sorry that you cared so little that you wasted the time to respond like a little bitch. It's sad that you care so little for the truth that a journalist can lie to you and it is no cause for concern nor can you even be bothered to ascertain the truth itself. Sad but not surprising.

Since when is Glenn Beck considered a journalist? I guess I missed that memo.

[lerxstcat]

I'm sorry that you cared so little that you wasted the time to respond like a little bitch. It's sad that you care so little for the truth that a journalist can lie to you and it is no cause for concern nor can you even be bothered to ascertain the truth itself. Sad but not surprising.

Since when is Glenn Beck considered a journalist? I guess I missed that memo.

He isn't; he's a right-wing shock jock. an entertainer for righties who want to hear vilification of the left and don't want facts to interfere with that theme. He knows who's buttering his bread and he delivers the hyperbole they want.

[bane]

I'm sorry that you cared so little that you wasted the time to respond like a little bitch. It's sad that you care so little for the truth that a journalist can lie to you and it is no cause for concern nor can you even be bothered to ascertain the truth itself. Sad but not surprising.

Since when is Glenn Beck considered a journalist? I guess I missed that memo.

He isn't; he's a right-wing shock jock. an entertainer for righties who want to hear vilification of the left and don't want facts to interfere with that theme. He knows who's buttering his bread and he delivers the hyperbole they want.

Err, yeah. That was my point.

[lerxstcat]

What, I'm not allowed to agree with you? I thought I should spell it out for those who think he is a legitimate journalist. They don't seem to be that perceptive...

[bane]

[Skate4RnR]

But...but...I thought he was real, I thought he was truth. He tells me how to think.

[SmokeyRamone]

who cares, the guy is a former morning zoo DJ, an admitted alcoholic with a history of mental problems and a mormon who wears 'magic' underwear, believes he will someday be a god, and is apparently cool with the overt racism his church practiced until the later 70's

it's not like he's an elected politician who told numerous lies to get elected. Maybe that's his angle, who knows, but until he actually announces a run for office, he's an entertainer who's paid to give his opinion, much like Sharon Osbourne or Simon Cowell

[SmokeyRamone]

I said he was an entertainer, not a harmless one. He may be a de facto leader of the tea party, but it's not like they're an officially recognized party like the democrats or the republicans. He has a TV and/or a radio show, much like Shawn Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Rielley or even Howard Stern. Just because he has political influence doesn't mean he's a real politician. He's one more blowhard trying to get ratings which in this day and age = money. He may or may not be genuine, but catching him in a lie is different than catching, say GWB or Obama in a lie in my opinion.

[bane]

catching him in a lie is different than catching, say GWB or Obama in a lie in my opinion.

It certainly isn't comparable to lying to congress while under oath.

[lerxstcat]

catching him in a lie is different than catching, say GWB or Obama in a lie in my opinion.

It certainly isn't comparable to lying to congress while under oath.

No it's not, but when he is a leader of a new political movement, and he sees no problem lying about details in a presentation with the theme of telling the truth and restoring honor, that's a little discomforting for future prospects.

He WOULDN'T hesitate to lie to Congress under oath to serve his purposes. I have no doubt of that.

Even worse is that his followers, thinking he might go somewhere, will buy the restoring honor theme while simultaneously dismissing his lie as unimportant. If he'll lie about something unimportant just to make his speech flow better, he wouldn't hesitate to lie about important things to sell his agenda. This is what they won't comprehend, or worse yet, WILL comprehend but disregard. Or even support in the name of power.

THAT is NOT the American ideal.

[bane]

I think it's a huge stretch to call Beck the leader of anything. He's a mouthpiece. He's no more a leader than Jesse Jackson is. Even less. Jackson has run. Beck hasn't and he never will. His job is to stir people up. He's good at it, but you attach far to much importance on him as an individual if you call him a leader. He's still just a shock jock, albeit a very popular one.

[lerxstcat]

I think it's a huge stretch to call Beck the leader of anything. He's a mouthpiece. He's no more a leader than Jesse Jackson is. Even less. Jackson has run. Beck hasn't and he never will. His job is to stir people up. He's good at it, but you attach far to much importance on him as an individual if you call him a leader. He's still just a shock jock, albeit a very popular one.

Note I said A leader, not THE leader. Sarah Palin is more like THE leader of the Tea Party if anyone is. But the disturbing thing is that there's a surprising number of people who WOULD follow him. I have otherwise intelligent friends who actually do think that Glenn Beck is the shit.

How many people in 1930s Germany thought Adolf Hitler was a ridiculous clown and dismissed his chances of rising to power, until it was too late? That dude was obviously cuckoo, but he was a smooth taking dude and he took over. Not that I think Beck could ever do that, but he has enough followers that it disturbs me.

I would never have believed that the guy who played second fiddle to a chimp would become a legendary President either, until Ronald Reagan did it. I still think Bonzo would have done a better job, though Reagqan did have his good points in retrospect. So I do not think it impossible that a goofball like Beck could gain significant political office. Because a lot of the American people are really fucking dumb.

[bane]

That dude doesn't have skeletons, he has an entire graveyard. He won't get elected as dog catcher. Making an issue of what really amounts to semantics reeks of straw grasping. There is plenty of real ammo to use against the tea party. Racism accusations are a far more effective bullet than this thing. The controversy is pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

[lerxstcat]

That dude doesn't have skeletons, he has an entire graveyard. He won't get elected as dog catcher. Making an issue of what really amounts to semantics reeks of straw grasping. There is plenty of real ammo to use against the tea party. Racism accusations are a far more effective bullet than this thing. The controversy is pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

Clinton was impeached for denying getting a blowjob - under oath, but that should be a codicil to the 5th amendment that if you're married you can deny infidelity, because even the act of taking the 5th would tell your wife that you did it.

Beck's skeletons are already out of the closet. It's fear of exposure that is the candidate's biggest enemy. Beck's shit is not hidden.

He might not get elected - but consider if there was an unholy alliance betyween him and Palin. That would surely cost the GOP enough votes to lose in 2012, don't you think?

Not that I see that as bad - the GOP doesn't seem to get the point yet. I don't want 'em back in 2012, I'd rather give Obama more time whether he's succeeded yet or not.

I doubt Palin is dumb enough to take Beck on as a running mate, but they could conceivable cause a split in the Tea Party factions, which would have a similar effect.

I think there a re a lot of voters with 70 IQs that could make this happen.

[bane]

I don't see that happening, but if it does I'd hope the opposition has better ammo than a lie that wasn't much more than an exaggeration, I'm sure Beck has told plenty of lies. Latching on to this one and attempting to make a scandal out of it is pathetic.

[lerxstcat]

I don't see that happening, but if it does I'd hope the opposition has better ammo than a lie that wasn't much more than an exaggeration, I'm sure Beck has told plenty of lies. Latching on to this one and attempting to make a scandal out of it is pathetic.

Well, I think he is TRYING to make it happen, I think that's what this event was for. I don't see it as just an exaggeration, if he wanted to simplify it he could've just said he saw the dopcument at the museum. Saying he held it in his own hands is a total fabrication, not just an exaggeration. He never touched even the plastic that contained it - just asked the person holding it to turn it over.

I don't find it pathetic. Someone who will lie about something that doesn't even matter just to "make it easier" can't be trusted to tell the truth about anything meaningful. He's a pathological liar by doing that.

As for p[athetic, again I find it pathetic that Ronald Reagan was not only elected but is now revered as a great President. He was not nearly the disaster I thought he'd be, but my God if any President was a puppet, it had to be him! Of the military-industrial complex and big business.

[bane]

I'm not sure what Reagan has to do with this, but I know you aren't naive enough to think that any politician short of old Honest Abe hasn't been guilty of stretching the truth like Beck did. I've got no allegiance to Beck. To be honest, I find him an irritating blow hard, but this particular "scandal" is ridiculous.

[lerxstcat]

I'm not sure what Reagan has to do with this, but I know you aren't naive enough to think that any politician short of old Honest Abe hasn't been guilty of stretching the truth like Beck did. I've got no allegiance to Beck. To be honest, I find him an irritating blow hard, but this particular "scandal" is ridiculous.

What Reagan has to do with it is that he represents the American body politic's jumping of the shark. After it elected THAT clown, I have no faith that it might not also elect a clown like Beck. I wouldn't be surprised if it changed the Constitution so it could have Ahnold as President.

Never overestimate the intelligence of the American voter...

[bane]

Reagan served what, two terms as governor? He was as qualified as anyone else. How you feel about his presidency is beside the point. If you're drawing parallels to a potential Beck candidacy, Beck has absolutely zero experience. They aren't comparable.

[lerxstcat]

Reagan served what, two terms as governor? He was as qualified as anyone else. How you feel about his presidency is beside the point. If you're drawing parallels to a potential Beck candidacy, Beck has absolutely zero experience. They aren't comparable.

As a governor and as a President, Reagan was a clown speaking for his puppet masters. If Beck got anywhere in p[olitics, it would also be as a clown speaking for puppet masters. In both cases the voters were insane or would be insane to vote for them. We are kind of lucky it wasn't a total disaster with Reagan, though he created the modern homeless problem in its scope with his budget cuts, in order to outspend the Soviets militarily. We are just lucky that they didn't decide to invoke Armageddon rather than having their political and economic collapse. Dumb luck for Reagan, now seen as brilliant statesmanship.

If we could vote for THAT clown, and actually see him as a great statesman today, then our body politic is indeed stupis enough to vote for a chump like Beck too.

[MickeyG]

I wouldn't be surprised if it changed the Constitution so it could have Ahnold as President.

And why would that be a bad idea? I don't mean Arnold for President, but a foreign born President could do just as good a job as some of the monkeys that have been in the White House over the last 40 years. Lets see, we have no problem letting foreigners be doctors or nurses in our hospitals, but God Forbid they run the country better than a home grown! They can die for the country in military combat, but not run the nation. For shame!

[lerxstcat]

I wouldn't be surprised if it changed the Constitution so it could have Ahnold as President.

And why would that be a bad idea? I don't mean Arnold for President, but a foreign born President could do just as good a job as some of the monkeys that have been in the White House over the last 40 years. Lets see, we have no problem letting foreigners be doctors or nurses in our hospitals, but God Forbid they run the country better than a home grown! They can die for the country in military combat, but not run the nation. For shame!

It may happen some day, who knows? But for 200+ years the idea has been not to have a foreigner as a ruler because that person might have the interests of a country other than ours at heart. That seems to be a pretty good argument for the concept. No one is saying a foreigner would not be more than capable, it's more like they might sell us down the river and retire home to Merrie Olde England, for example, with the proceeds.

[bane]

Reagan served what, two terms as governor? He was as qualified as anyone else. How you feel about his presidency is beside the point. If you're drawing parallels to a potential Beck candidacy, Beck has absolutely zero experience. They aren't comparable.

As a governor and as a President, Reagan was a clown speaking for his puppet masters. If Beck got anywhere in p[olitics, it would also be as a clown speaking for puppet masters. In both cases the voters were insane or would be insane to vote for them. We are kind of lucky it wasn't a total disaster with Reagan, though he created the modern homeless problem in its scope with his budget cuts, in order to outspend the Soviets militarily. We are just lucky that they didn't decide to invoke Armageddon rather than having their political and economic collapse. Dumb luck for Reagan, now seen as brilliant statesmanship.

If we could vote for THAT clown, and actually see him as a great statesman today, then our body politic is indeed stupis enough to vote for a chump like Beck too.

The same could be said for Obama. It's all about perspective. I don't remember you being such a die hard liberal. When did you turn into Ugmo?

[MickeyG]

It may happen some day, who knows? But for 200+ years the idea has been not to have a foreigner as a ruler because that person might have the interests of a country other than ours at heart. That seems to be a pretty good argument for the concept. No one is saying a foreigner would not be more than capable, it's more like they might sell us down the river and retire home to Merrie Olde England, for example, with the proceeds.

Even with the checks and balances that congress has on the President? And you still have to get elected first, so the candidate would have to "prove" to the voters with their past history that they are loyal to the US. Maybe in the distant past you are right, but I think in modern times laws and rules should be updated accordingly. Just my opinion though.

[bane]

It may happen some day, who knows? But for 200+ years the idea has been not to have a foreigner as a ruler because that person might have the interests of a country other than ours at heart. That seems to be a pretty good argument for the concept. No one is saying a foreigner would not be more than capable, it's more like they might sell us down the river and retire home to Merrie Olde England, for example, with the proceeds.

Even with the checks and balances that congress has on the President? And you still have to get elected first, so the candidate would have to "prove" to the voters with their past history that they are loyal to the US. Maybe in the distant past you are right, but I think in modern times laws and rules should be updated accordingly. Just my opinion though.

How is anything any different today than it was 200 years ago when it pertains to this? I guess back ground screening is probably a lot more thorough now, but otherwise I don't see how things are all that different today.

[lerxstcat]

It may happen some day, who knows? But for 200+ years the idea has been not to have a foreigner as a ruler because that person might have the interests of a country other than ours at heart. That seems to be a pretty good argument for the concept. No one is saying a foreigner would not be more than capable, it's more like they might sell us down the river and retire home to Merrie Olde England, for example, with the proceeds.

Even with the checks and balances that congress has on the President? And you still have to get elected first, so the candidate would have to "prove" to the voters with their past history that they are loyal to the US. Maybe in the distant past you are right, but I think in modern times laws and rules should be updated accordingly. Just my opinion though.

If memory serves, yopu live in the US but are not a natural born US citizen? If I'm wrong I apologize, but most Americans are pretty united on NOT wanting a foreigner as President. In fact it was an issue in the latest campaign, with Republicans pressing the rumor that Obama was really born in Kenya and not Hawaii as his birth certificate says. The Dems in turn tried to say that McCain was ineligible because he was born in Panama, though that didn't matter because both his parents were US citizens, so he could have been born in siberia and he'd be a US citizen.

What I'm saying is that most Americans are united in not wanting to change this, and if you are not an American you might not understand this.

[lerxstcat]

Reagan served what, two terms as governor? He was as qualified as anyone else. How you feel about his presidency is beside the point. If you're drawing parallels to a potential Beck candidacy, Beck has absolutely zero experience. They aren't comparable.

As a governor and as a President, Reagan was a clown speaking for his puppet masters. If Beck got anywhere in p[olitics, it would also be as a clown speaking for puppet masters. In both cases the voters were insane or would be insane to vote for them. We are kind of lucky it wasn't a total disaster with Reagan, though he created the modern homeless problem in its scope with his budget cuts, in order to outspend the Soviets militarily. We are just lucky that they didn't decide to invoke Armageddon rather than having their political and economic collapse. Dumb luck for Reagan, now seen as brilliant statesmanship.

If we could vote for THAT clown, and actually see him as a great statesman today, then our body politic is indeed stupis enough to vote for a chump like Beck too.

The same could be said for Obama. It's all about perspective. I don't remember you being such a die hard liberal. When did you turn into Ugmo?

Finding Reagan to be a clown doesn't make me a die-hard liberal. It makes me a pragmatist and not a conservative sheep who went along with making a god out of Bonzo's and Errol Flynn's sidekick.

You are losing track of my point, which is not Democrat vs. Republican per se. I'm saying that the American people elected a clown like Reagan, they could elect a clown like Beck. We are 30 years further down the road to Idiocracy tham we were in 1980, so might elect even worse of a clown.

To be fair, Al Franken and Jesse Ventura were clowns as well, so the stupidity transcends party lines...