Way to ignore both the question and the substance of the post. I can’t tell you how surprised I am.
See, “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?!”
Oh, so you think Glenn Beck was trying to incite people to Glenn Beck?
And you still have not answered the question. Please reread and respond to what I asked.
See my post then.
I did. My point was that if he’s calling for anyone to be shot he himself is to be included. And while you might think he’s crazy, surely you don’t think he’s THAT crazy.
Translation: “Be afraid that the other side will do the same things that we will do in support of our cause when they support their cause.”
Problem: Not everyone thinks or acts like you do.
I have to believe you guys are being willfully obtuse. Not only are you doing flips and twists to try to spin Piven’s comments as anything but violent, when every example she brought up was an example of violent revolution, and she clearly says that she’s hoping something like this happens again, but now you’re trying to spin Beck’s words as anything but what they really are.
Let me turn it around and show you what Beck said, if he said it from a left-wing perspective:
“The right thinks that they can convince us to give up our quest for equality, for a women’s right to choose, and for a fair economic system. But they won’t be able to do that. The only way they are going to get me to give up on the rights of the working class and the right of women to choose is to shoot me in the head.”
Is there anything in that which can reasonably be construed as a call to violence?
So, it appear that you, too, think he is calling for himself to be shot. Is that right?
I agree, that is a problem. 
Here’s what Beck is not so subtely getting at … he tells his audience – the people who all agree with anything that comes out of his mouth – that, gosh, he has beliefs that are so strong, golly, you’d have to shoot him before he changed his mind. That’s how strongly he … and all of you fine people in TeeVee Land … feel about our beliefs. And you know what else? All those people you disagree with? The ones you know are bad for our great country? Like Pelosi? Who’s a communist by the way? They hold their cockamamie beliefs as strongly as that too. So … I’m not saying anything here … but, remember … you’d have to shoot me in the head. Just sayin’.
Hey, Jackass, did you even watch the clip? He’s not implying anyone might have to shoot Pelosi, he’s talking to TO Pelosi and team, warning them of how deeply entrenched the ideology of her detractors from the left.
You really should try harder.
No he isn’t. He’s talking to a strawman with Pelosi’s face on it, for the benefit of viewers who believe that the strawman is a real person.
His invitation for someone to shoot him is false bravado combined with alarmism -saying “You’ll have to shoot me to shut me up!” only means something if listeners actually believe that someone is likely to do it. He’s proposing a conspiracy theory and implying that the conspirators are capable of murder to silence opposition.
If he were claiming that 9/11 was a government cover-up and that “they” didn’t want him to speak out but HE WILL NOT BE SILENCED he’d be just as worthy of derision. But he’s going farther by suggesting that those who control the government and the media (apart from Radio Free FoxNews, I guess) are coming for everyone’s liberties, and that’s how the crazy spreads.
What you asked is bullshit. Beck does not need to “instruct” anyone to shoot anyone in order to bear responsibility when one of his listeners does so. It is quite bad enough that he eggs them on to exhort each other, which is what his blog facilitates.
You STILL refuse to answer? Amazing. Oh wait, it’s you!. Never mind.
You forgot to thank him for making your point for you.