Beck: Gay Marriage Is About Freedom And "The Principle Of It Is Right"

[Golem]

Glenn Beck says that proponents of marriage equality have won because they made the issue about freedom "and the principle of it is right."

[youtube=853,480]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mn8Mo9dOoo[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mn8Mo9dOoo

[txradioguy]

He's full of shit.

[Eupher]

Anything to make a buck, right Glenn?

[Ptarmigan]

Glenn Beck can be really dramatic at times.

[pissant]

He hopes it will then lead to polygamy.  He desperately wants to be one of Mitt's wives.

[Dori]

Come on guys.  This was a sound bite, put out by

Right Wing Watch

A project of People For the American Way dedicated to monitoring and exposing the activities of the right-wing movement

How about we listen to his WHOLE statement before coming to a conclusion?

[rich_t]

Come on guys.  This was a sound bite, put out by

Right Wing Watch
How about we listen to his WHOLE statement before coming to a conclusion?

If it was the segment I heard on the radio the other day, this sound bite was taken entirely out of context IMO.

[Eupher]

Come on guys.  This was a sound bite, put out by

Right Wing Watch
How about we listen to his WHOLE statement before coming to a conclusion?

Fair enough.

When did he say these words? And how exactly are his words taken out of context? IOW, how does his basic premise differ markedly from what he said in the clip?

Beck says a lot of stuff, most of which is intended to alarm and otherwise convince people that the Zombie Apocalypse is upon us. He makes money that way. So where, in his one-hour broadcast, does this rather "poignant" and "reflective" sound bite occur?

[DumbAss Tanker]

I seriously don't care what Glen Beck says about anything, except to the extent it irritates the shit out of Leftists.

[Big Dog]

Fair enough.

When did he say these words? And how exactly are his words taken out of context? IOW, how does his basic premise differ markedly from what he said in the clip?

Beck says a lot of stuff, most of which is intended to alarm and otherwise convince people that the Zombie Apocalypse is upon us. He makes money that way. So where, in his one-hour broadcast, does this rather "poignant" and "reflective" sound bite occur?

I listened to the clip. Here's what it sounded like to me:

Supporters of same-sex marriage successfully "framed" (to use the language of the left) the argument in terms of "freedom". The low-information voter responds viscerally to the word "freedom", supporting anything which calls itself "X Freedom". The term "freedom to marry" was a piece of successful marketing, which Beck predicts will prevail.

 

[Eupher]

I listened to the clip. Here's what it sounded like to me:

Supporters of same-sex marriage successfully "framed" (to use the language of the left) the argument in terms of "freedom". The low-information voter responds viscerally to the word "freedom", supporting anything which calls itself "X Freedom". The term "freedom to marry" was a piece of successful marketing, which Beck predicts will prevail.

 

Okay, so if I understand you correctly, Beck was speaking retrospectively about the success that faggots and their supporters have had -- namely, that they have been able to convince others through elections that same-sex marriage is a wonderful thing.

He was reflecting on the success that they'd had -- not necessarily that he was trumpeting their cause.

Is that about right?

[J P Sousa]

I listened to the clip. Here's what it sounded like to me:

Supporters of same-sex marriage successfully "framed" (to use the language of the left) the argument in terms of "freedom". The low-information voter responds viscerally to the word "freedom", supporting anything which calls itself "X Freedom". The term "freedom to marry" was a piece of successful marketing, which Beck predicts will prevail.

 

And since the media is all too on-board with this, it is tough to fight without spending a ton of money.



It's a lot like what CNN is doing with gun control;

  CNN Anchor Jake Tapper had some advice for gun control advocates:  ‘It Might Help Gun Control Advocates If They Seemed More Familiar With What Exactly They're Trying to Ban’ 

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cnn-anchor-it-might-help-gun-control-advocates-if-they-seemed-more-familiar-what

AND;

  Amidst CNN's Gun Control Advocacy, Joe Manchin Thanks CNN for Its 'Support' 

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2013/04/11/amidst-cnns-gun-control-advocacy-joe-manchin-thanks-cnn-its-support

.

[Dori]

Fair enough.

When did he say these words? And how exactly are his words taken out of context? IOW, how does his basic premise differ markedly from what he said in the clip?

I don't know what he said, I don't listen to Beck.  I was only commenting on the fact that the clip in the OP is only about a minute long, and that there had to be more to what he said.  It was also put out there by a left wing "gotcha" group.  The media is notorious for taking a sound bite and blowing it up to be something it's not.  That's all I was talking about.

I see Beck as a libertarian.  This is what I could find on his attitude regarding gay marriage;

http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/01/06/glenns-take-on-gay-marriage/

[Big Dog]

Okay, so if I understand you correctly, Beck was speaking retrospectively about the success that faggots and their supporters have had -- namely, that they have been able to convince others through elections that same-sex marriage is a wonderful thing.

He was reflecting on the success that they'd had -- not necessarily that he was trumpeting their cause.

Is that about right?

All I heard was the clip. I don't know if he said any more, pro or con. But I understand what I heard to be as you described- except not "through elections". I understand it to be "through controlling the message". The pro- side successfully sold it as being "about freedom".

[Big Dog]

I don't know what he said, I don't listen to Beck.  I was only commenting on the fact that the clip in the OP is only about a minute long, and that there had to be more to what he said.  It was also put out there by a left wing "gotcha" group.  The media is notorious for taking a sound bite and blowing it up to be something it's not.  That's all I was talking about.

I see Beck as a libertarian.  This is what I could find on his attitude regarding gay marriage;

http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/01/06/glenns-take-on-gay-marriage/

Glenn Beck is new to libertarian thought, by his own admission. He's quick to call himself one, but his libertarianism is a mile wide and an inch deep, based on what I've heard from him. It's funny to hear his hero worship of Penn Gillette; he reminds me of the Loony Tunes cartoon with the big dog and the little dog- "are we gonna chase the cat, Spike? Are we, Spike? Are we?"

So far, I haven't heard anything from him that shows me he has dug any deeper than playdates with Penn Gillette. I'm waiting to hear something from him showing he has learned something from classical liberals such as John Locke, Friedrich A. Hayek, or Ludwig von Mises; modern libertarians like Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Thomas Sowell, or Andrew Napolitano; or even the objectivist Ayn Rand, whose philosophy parallels libertarianism in many ways.

Disclosure: I base my opinion of Glenn Beck on his radio show alone. I haven't read any of his books. He may be a libertarian writer of great depth, and I'm missing it.

[Eupher]

All I heard was the clip. I don't know if he said any more, pro or con. But I understand what I heard to be as you described- except not "through elections". I understand it to be "through controlling the message". The pro- side successfully sold it as being "about freedom".

My take on the clip (and I recognized that it was a sound bite, Dori, and not the entire message) was exactly what I heard - no more, no less. Beck babbles a lot about inane shit, the little I've heard of him, and it's not surprising that there'd be more to the message, BUT it sounded to me like he congratulated the queers and their marriage aficionados because, as he said in the clip, "The reason they [the queers] have won is because they've made it about 'freedom'..."

"That's why they've won...who are you to say?"

It sounds to me like he's thrown in the towel -- but then, maybe he never came to the fight to begin with.

My reference to elections has to do with the fact that about 10 states (some states, like Commiefornia are conditional) and DC recognize queer marriage now. In statewide elections, queer marriage initiatives passed in four states. Not too long ago, those initiatives had failed each time. The propensity toward acceptance of the gay lifestyle and the cultural shift in the population in that direction is disturbing to me, but I suppose that's another thread altogether.

[Dori]

My reference to elections has to do with the fact that about 10 states (some states, like Commiefornia are conditional) and DC recognize queer marriage now. In statewide elections, queer marriage initiatives passed in four states. Not too long ago, those initiatives had failed each time. The propensity toward acceptance of the gay lifestyle and the cultural shift in the population in that direction is disturbing to me, but I suppose that's another thread altogether.

This is the tactic.  Beat it to death until you wear everyone down.  Commiefornians have actually voted three times against the gay marriage issue.  Only each time getting shut down or thrown out by the courts.  It's quite discouraging as a voter to see this happen time and time again.

Unfortunately, when people vote on judges (and many are appointed) they don't know who in the hell they are.  I use a conservative website that grades judges on the ballots, but that's still not guarantee of what your going to get.

But this all goes back to our liberal education system.  When the majority of professors (97%) are liberals, and conservatives are shut out of the system, it is no wonder we get what we have.

That's why it is so important for the right to start standing up against the way our kids get educated and stop ignoring it. Like I've said a dozen times now, the teachers and professors today were also taught in liberal controlled system. You may think as a parent you can overcome what's out there in the media, in society at large and in the schools, but they will be far more influenced by what is outside your control than you realize.

[Eupher]

This is the tactic.  Beat it to death until you wear everyone down.  Commiefornians have actually voted three times against the gay marriage issue.  Only each time getting shut down or thrown out by the courts.  It's quite discouraging as a voter to see this happen time and time again.

Unfortunately, when people vote on judges (and many are appointed) they don't know who in the hell they are.  I use a conservative website that grades judges on the ballots, but that's still not guarantee of what your going to get.

But this all goes back to our liberal education system.  When the majority of professors (97%) are liberals, and conservatives are shut out of the system, it is no wonder we get what we have.

That's why it is so important for the right to start standing up against the way our kids get educated and stop ignoring it. Like I've said a dozen times now, the teachers and professors today were also taught in liberal controlled system. You may think as a parent you can overcome what's out there in the media, in society at large and in the schools, but they will be far more influenced by what is outside your control than you realize.

Agreed. The liberals have a huge head start on jury-rigging the system. It began in the Fifties, I think, and got progressively [Gawd, I hate that word] worse to the point that the liberal mindset is a precondition for studying pretty much anywhere -- certainly most state universities.

My stepson started out a rational, thinking, somewhat-but-not-quite-conservative, but due to his "education" at UT-Austin and living in that liberal hellhole, he's become a full-blown unmitigated moonbat. And his mother couldn't be prouder.  

[Dori]

Agreed. The liberals have a huge head start on jury-rigging the system. It began in the Fifties, I think, and got progressively [Gawd, I hate that word] worse to the point that the liberal mindset is a precondition for studying pretty much anywhere -- certainly most state universities.

I just read an article by a man who graduated from Columbia the same time Obama did and took the same course study. He said that the majority of them were Marxists and had a plan to infiltrate not just academia, but the government, to bring down the capitalist system.  Does  that not surprise anyone?  

Just like this "Common Core Standards" that has been adopted in 45 states.  A handfull of unelected people in the federal government put this together and pushed it through without any congressional input or the public at large having very little knowledge of it.  Currently I think they only have the math and english parts established.  But, this a federal, top down system.  From what I can figure out so far, there is very little leeway for the states or even your local school districts to add to it. (no more than 15%)  Even Homeschoolers will be affected by it, as state and national tests, including the SAT tests will be affected.  

This wouldn't have alarmed me in the past, but seeing what I've seen over the past decade since my own kids have gone through the educational system, and not trusting what is coming out of government these days, I can see the dangers in the one-size-fits all education system being mandated by the federal government.

 Kids aren't even going to be exposed to the classics as in reading anymore.  The new system will be using and testing to their own new stories and books. (At least according to one mom/teacher who has been studying this)

[jctejas]

We  have way too many communists in this country to argue over who is more "right".  Troll type stuff.

jctejas