Glenn Beck Finds Inventive Ways to Butcher History

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Bill Hedges of MO:
I have read so many of your comments, and you grow so angry, and like all of us who get angry, we no longer are successfully able to make our point. Please understand that JUST because you found a blog on the Internet that you think fits into the subject of your comment, this DOES NO’T MAKE THE BLOG true. When you reply with a quote from a blog, you seem to have no idea that it may have been written by a person who is paid to lie. There are thousands of writers who earn their living by lying. The information may also be true, but you do not really know that for sure. You have not sought the original documentation or a truly credible source to prove your point.
Your reply, in order to be credible, must be taken from a RELIABLE source. Admittedly, you, Bill choose Conservative/Republican/Corporate-Financed Blogs, and those sites and links are what you believe is true; however, how did you determine the information IS true? A Conservative/Republican/Corporative-Financed Blog does not guarantee truth, especially when that topic of the blog may, eventually, just put more money in the corporation coffers, and be of no help to you (or me) at all. In the same way, a Progressive/Left Wing/Democrat blog does not guarantee truth either. So what to do? It is HUGELY important to seek the truth in media so that you will learn the details of the issues, and know the character of our political candidates, in order to choose the most reliable and ethical candidates.
(continued in next comment section)

ann keenan of MI 12:46AM June 19, 2011

Bill Hedges of MO:
I have read so many of your comments, and you grow so angry, and like all of us who get angry, we no longer are successfully able to make our point. Please understand that JUST because you found a blog on the Internet that you think fits into the subject of your comment, this DOES NO’T MAKE THE BLOG true. When you reply with a quote from a blog, you seem to have no idea that it may have been written by a person who is paid to lie. There are thousands of writers who earn their living by lying. The information may also be true, but you do not really know that for sure. You have not sought the original documentation or a truly credible source to prove your point.
Your reply, in order to be credible, must be taken from a RELIABLE source. Admittedly, you, Bill choose Conservative/Republican/Corporate-Financed Blogs, and those sites and links are what you believe is true; however, how did you determine the information IS true? A Conservative/Republican/Corporative-Financed Blog does not guarantee truth, especially when that topic of the blog may, eventually, just put more money in the corporation coffers, and be of no help to you (or me) at all. In the same way, a Progressive/Left Wing/Democrat blog does not guarantee truth either. So what to do? It is HUGELY important to seek the truth in media so that you will learn the details of the issues, and know the character of our political candidates, in order to choose the most reliable and ethical candidates.
(continued in next comment section)

ann keenan of MI 12:45AM June 19, 2011

Wikipedia is certainly NOT a place to look to determine the present state of politics because we are allowed to lie in the media (that includes Wikipedia and the Internet), and many political writers are biased—or paid to write biased material against the opposite political party. So, since just about any “Tom, Dick, and Harry” can contribute to Wikipedia, no one should regard Wikipedia as a primary source where “everyman” has vowed to tell the truth. A quote from Jorge Cauz, President of Encyclopedia Britannica, explains what happens when there are so many contributors to an encyclopedia: "The problem with an effort like that is that, at other times, it may reflect just the wisdom -- or lack of wisdom -- of the last contributor."
Having said that, there are many links on Wikipedia that we can say ARE true because they are facts and do not require the reader to have a particular point of view. These facts are determined to be true because they have suffered through a test of time, peer review, scientific experimentation, critiques to eliminate prejudicial historical points of view, etc., etc., etc. For instance: Abraham Lincoln was President of the U.S. during the American Civil War. There is just no way of denying the certainty of that statement. If Lincoln was the best President of the U.S., however, requires our own point of view, and credible, documented information provided by historical scholars. (Sorry, David Barton is NOT on the list); therefore, without listing Lincoln’s accomplishments, compared to all other Presidents of the U.S., we are faced with dwelling on our own fuzzy, and uninformed points of view.
We can learn much of fact from Wikipedia, but it is only true information when the article evolves, eventually into a level, so factual, and so credible, Wikipedia’s article can be stamped with an the "highest editorial standard,” approval. If it MAY not be true, it is useless to repeat it--unless, you actually wish to just pass on propaganda.
Please consider checking all of the links on Wikipedia that give advice on determining the TRUTHFULNESS of information, especially political information that you and all of us need to know to continue the democratic process in America. There are also State Education Content Standards that identify how to determine truth in information. College and University Websites will also provide information on media reliability.
Identifying Reliable Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources
Verifiability:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
Neutral Point of View:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
Wikipedia will also refer you to many other links to assist you in finding credible sources

ann keenan of MI 12:44AM June 19, 2011

Bill Hedges of MO:
I have read so many of your comments, and you grow so angry, and like all of us who get angry, we no longer are successfully able to make our point. Please understand that JUST because you found a blog on the Internet that you think fits into the subject of your comment, this DOES NO’T MAKE THE BLOG true. When you reply with a quote from a blog, you seem to have no idea that it may have been written by a person who is paid to lie. There are thousands of writers who earn their living by lying. The information may also be true, but you do not really know that for sure. You have not sought the original documentation or a truly credible source to prove your point.
Your reply, in order to be credible, must be taken from a RELIABLE source. Admittedly, you, Bill choose Conservative/Republican/Corporate-Financed Blogs, and those sites and links are what you believe is true; however, how did you determine the information IS true? A Conservative/Republican/Corporative-Financed Blog does not guarantee truth, especially when that topic of the blog may, eventually, just put more money in the corporation coffers, and be of no help to you (or me) at all. In the same way, a Progressive/Left Wing/Democrat blog does not guarantee truth either. So what to do? It is HUGELY important to seek the truth in media so that you will learn the details of the issues, and know the character of our political candidates, in order to choose the most reliable and ethical candidates.
(continued in next comment section)

ann keenan of MI 12:41AM June 19, 2011

Correction about the date of the Supreme Court decision to render corporations as U.S. citizens. It was in January, 2010, NOT 2011. Sorry for my typo below.

ann keenan of MI 12:24AM June 18, 2011

Bill Hedges of MO:
No one really wants to write all lies by Glenn Beck, because the list is too long (although not any longer than Hannity's and Limbaugh's lists). Just for starters, though:
http://www.politifact.com/search/?q=Glenn+Beck

ann keenan of MI 5:03PM June 16, 2011

Hal of NC:
Actually, Hal, Oblermann was telling the truth. I do not watch Olbermann, but if you read all the details of Wilhelm's final days as Kaiser, you will see that Hitler gained much by the Kaiser's flight to the Netherlands. The Kaiser was asked to abdicate his throne. The Kaiser went to the Netherlands because of the major unrest by the Germans after German's disastrous loss of World War I.
Had Wilhelm stayed in Germany, the Allies wanted to punish Wilhelm as a war criminal, but Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands (1880-1962) refused to extradite him. Hitler's rise to power in Germany began after Wilhelm left Germany, never to return, and Hitler filled the void. Hitler was particularly effective with his effective propaganda of Germans as the "master race." Actually, Wilhelm's second wife wrote to Hitler and requested that Hitler replace Wilhelm. Sorry, I do NOT know whether her letter influenced Hitler or whether Hitler had his Third Reich plans already made.

ann keenan of MI 4:54PM June 16, 2011

Bill Hedges:
Gosh, Billy, sorry I didn't send a reply to your comment, but I often forget on what link I have placed a comment, and never return to it. Here it is, June already, and I happened on this comment page, again. It is actually far too easy to prove Glenn Beck wrong, and I really don't care to waste time on Beck for a topic, but here goes just two of hundreds of "Unfortunate Beckisms":
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/29/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-claims-science-czar-john-holdren-propos/
http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/dec/03/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-paints-beleaguered-wilmington-ohio-real/
By the way, to ask comment-writers to provide "links" to prove their answers is a useless request. "Blogs" on the Internet are mostly people's opinions, not facts. It MUST be proven to be FACT in order to prove that it is true. This is NOT an easy assignment; that is why so many citizens rely on email blogs for news. Finding primary information is highly time-consuming. It is so unfortunate that all do not vow to learn the truth, and the truth is so very hard to find!
For instance, Billy, what do you know about the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)? This is a group of Political leaders and corporate heads who are presently creating legislation without any input from we, the HUMAN citizen-voters of the U.S. You do know, don't you, that corporations are now citizens of the U.S. (as of January, 2011)?
In fact, ALEC members have already put through hundreds of Bills, but still want to keep their members' names a secret. Can you believe it, Billy, a secret "Council" that does not want us to know who they are and what their intentions may be for this, our very own Country? Try researching names from this organization--two thousand members strong, and why won't any one of them admit they are members of this secret organization? This secretive organization is a a direct assault on the democratic process!

ann keenan of MI 7:48PM June 12, 2011

It is tough being lonely. So especially baby boomer types can get comraderie and feel better. Just buddy up to sexist,racist propaganda with such a jazzy fictional feel. Alas, don't then wonder why you can never get a date.
Of course, if you are deep down closeted gay then it doesn't really matter to you. Although then bashing gays does seem what? When does listening to hatemongering = hatemonger?

reader of FL 2:10AM February 20, 2011