Ok. I haven’t seen it described as a fundraiser.
You picked apart my post, and complained about my exclamation points Bricker, but I suppose i can expect nothing more from you.
You’re just as intellectually dishonest, nitpicking, slimy and hypocritical, , but at least i know how much i DON"T know so have fun, and please continue to enjoy thinking you caught me making a mistake
My point is that based on their previous actions , Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are doing shady things to advance their pet causes and make money. Do you deny that? Do you deny that Glenn sells gold and has set up a college for his fans? Do you deny that she happily collects large speaking fees and sells her time for all she can get?
If you have a problem with Bricker, take it to the Pit. Personal attacks are out of line in MPSIMS.
twickster, MPSIMS moderator
Hey stop picking on Beck. He’ll start crying. Again.
Whereas I’d like to see him sing ‘Loser’…
I don’t really understand this hostility. As best I can figure, your position is: because Beck is someone you dispprove of, it’s perfectly OK to level any accusation at all against him. After all, he’s guilty of SOMETHING, so why not heap on?
If indeed that’s what you’re using as a guideline, it seems an odd one.
No, I’m pretty confident I can point to shady things done by each, with those things advancing their pet causes and making money. I’m OK with that statement.
No, I think both of those things are true.
Although I confess I’m at a loss to infer any particular evil associated with his selling gold. A person that bought gold in, say, 2000, would have paid less than $300 per ounce; that same ounce could be sold today for over $1240. I can’t think of too many stocks that could match that steady gain.
So I don’t agree that Beck’s selling of gold is a bad thing, but I certainly agree he sells gold.
No, but I’m not defending her at all.
So now that I’ve happily and honestly answered your questions, perhaps in return you might answer one of mine:
Do you think that it’s okay to make any accusation against Glen Beck at all, true or not, simply because he’s a slime?
Yes I do. I accuse him of being shady and making money in dishonest ways. I accuse her of being a hypocrite and sucking up every dime that isn’t nailed down.
OK, then I guess we’ll simply have to agree to disagree. My only comment is that on a website supposedly devoted to fighting ignorance, the idea of your so strongly defending the concept that it’s ok to say things that are simply not factually true because the target of the accusations is disliked is quite remarkable.
I’ll certainly keep in mind, in reading your future posts, that you don’t regard yourself as constrained by the truth when you’re discussing someone you dislike.
Because he’s slime, I could make up any accusation at all and it would have a 80-90% chance of being true anyway.
This is reminding me of the more rabid anti-Clinton partisans over Whitewater. “I know I haven’t found any evidence yet, but I know he’s guilty of something!!!”
God, I’m defending those two annelids from false accusations. Please, can’t we go back to accusing Beck of having Nazi Tourette’s?
This is actually my favorite piece of Palin puke from that event:
. . . Palin said to cheers from the crowd [of stupid, idiotic, moronic dumbasses who have no idea how absurdly and ridiculously wrong that is].
Read more: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/153116#ixzz0zSAEfcXW
I see.
This, by you, is “fighting ignorance?”
Yes, France’s message to us: “Don’t make the same mistakes we made!!”
:rolleyes:
Palin is mercifully free from the ravages of intelligence.
Sorry I am quoting everything. I am doing this from my phone and it is tricky to edit. You are equating a charity run with a For Profit event in which one of the participants happened to donate his fee to charity. Clearly those are not the same thing.
No they are not. A fact Bricker won’t admit to else his house of cards might come tumbling down. This event was a for-profit “Meet and Greet”.
I do think it is more or less equivalent to Al Gore making money on Climate Change speaking engagements. I see nothing particularly wrong with either. Whats irrational is trying to claim that Beck’s making a profit off of a political stand one way or another is inherently wrong. Don’t get me wrong, Beck’s a douche bag, and politicizing Climate Change with someone like AL Gore may not have been good for the cause ultimately. But if we are going to defend one, I don’t see how we can attack the other.
That’s true. But they share a similarity: both involve a person who gives up time and effort but instead of keeping any money earned, donates that money to a charitable cause.
Here are the complaints about Beck that I object to as factually wrong:
*neither Glenn Beck nor Sarah Palin think there’s anything wrong with making a paycheck off of the deaths of 2977 American deaths.
(after learning Beck donated his fee) Tax write off then. How noble.
His speaking fee. I am sure he gets a piece of every ticket sold though.*
Since one of those statements is yours, I’d like to know if you still stand behind it as factual. Do you believe any of the others are factual? Or, like anya marie, do you think that it’s okay to make any accusation against Glen Beck at all, true or not, simply because you believe him a slime?
Let’s say it was.
Did Beck earn any money doing it?
No it’s not. The exposure will insure ratings which potentially increase his salary. Beck’s income is a direct result of his taking a “political stand”. But in this case I’m pretty sure he’s testing out the Palin/Beck '12 ticket potential. It’s not wrong, but let’s not paint it as some humanitarian gesture either.
We don’t need to say it was, they said it was.
I don’t know and neither do you. Based on his track record I’m not inclined to take his word for it. But suppose he didn’t, you’re still wrong in comparing it to a fundraiser. Glenn Beck didn’t organize it, he just claimed to donate any money he made to charity. That’s quite a different thing altogether from deciding The Special Operations Warrior Foundation needs help and proactively going out and trying to fundraise for them.
OK. I withdraw the comparison. I don’t have time to research it and it’s tangential to the point I started with.
Again, the statements I object to are:
*neither Glenn Beck nor Sarah Palin think there’s anything wrong with making a paycheck off of the deaths of 2977 American deaths.
(after learning Beck donated his fee) Tax write off then. How noble.
His speaking fee. I am sure he gets a piece of every ticket sold though.*
If our standard is:
Then none of these statements should be made. Agreed?
Upon re-reading I see I may have misunderstood WarmNPrickly’s point.