Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Beck Talks -- And Talks -- And Talks -- About How He Doesn't Care What the NY Times Says

Reported by Julie - February 20, 2010 -

Busy night on The O'Reilly Factor last night (2/19/10). We had some soft porn in the form of "upskirt/longshot" (H/T to an observant News Hounds reader) of Suzanne Sommers' nearly-nude thighs in some vitamin segment. We had Glenn Beck talking about how we really need to give Tiger Woods a break (more on that later), and then there was the NY Times, that liberal rag. Apparently, the NY Times had a front-page article that linked the tea party to a "bunch of nuts." O'Reilly played a clip of Beck responding (you know, the thing where he pretends like he doesn't really care when his every move shows he really cares). Roll the clip, go. With video.

O'Reilly and Beck shared a few chuckles and giggles and tried to act like neither of them really cared about the NY Times.

O'Reilly complained, "It was such a naked . . . attempt to diminish what I believe is mostly a very sincere movement on the part of people who love their country . . . Should we just ignore this stuff?"

It's a sincere movement, all right -- sincerely disturbed. As Crooks and Liars noted, "The more we learn about the Tea Party movement as it evolves, the more disturbing a portrait emerges: One of a right-wing populist movement animated by cultural resentments and paranoia that previously were the domain of fringe conspiracy theorists and militiamen." You can read more about the not-so-benign elements of the Tea Party Movement here.

Beginning in the video at 1:13 . . . the diatribe begins on how Beck really doesn't care what the NY Times says.

"Oh, I don't care what the NY Times says -- jeez, my newsletter has more subscribers than the NY Times does . . . It doesn't really matter what the NY Times says any more . . . They're so out of touch with the American people that it really doesn't matter any more . . . The Tea Party for the most part are people that have never done any of this stuff before, ever . . . Nancy Pelosi is used to and all of her supporters are used to going out and doing sit-ins . . . conservatives work for a living, we don't go out to these things, so these aren't nuts . . . ."

Oh, so that's the spin, eh? Liberals are all on welfare, apparently, so they have time to go to sit-ins, but conservatives . . . well, they work for a living. Except I didn't see many working-age teabaggers at the teabagging events I attended. And as far as working for a living -- how many people who work for a living have the cash and time to travel the country in an RV to follow a bunch of people brandishing Nazi signs? Just askin' -- sorta takin' a page out of the "Cavuto Mark" handbook.

O'Reilly mentioned that both he and Beck replied to the NY Times article, and wondered out loud if that was a mistake.

Beck, busy talking endlessly about how he doesn't care because the NY Time is just so insignificant (but significant enough that he can't stop talking about it), replied, "They are part of . . . the culture, they're just a diminishing part of the culture, they're out of step . . . I think it's kind of funny to point them out . . . show how ridiculous they are . . . They didn't point to . . . the professor that goes in and shoots people, she was a big huge Obama supporter . . . They tried to make this guy who flies a plane into a building yesterday into some sort of right teaparty-goer . . . He was quoting Communist mantras, for the love of Pete . . . He was just a crazy person . . . ."

Well, here's the thing: A lot of people are highly interested in Barack Obama, because he's our friggin' PRESIDENT. On the other hand, when guys like Richard Poplawski shoot shit up out of fear of being disarmed -- a mantra that Glenn Beck has promoted since the beginning of Obama-time -- it might be time for a little analysis of the type of dope you're peddling.

Beck ended the "I don't care" segment, oh, over a minute and a half later.

For someone who doesn't care what the Times thinks or says or writes or publishes, he spent nearly two minutes on it, said some version of "I don't care" about five times, and managed to deflect the Times article by commenting on the murderous professor, Amy Bishop, who was "a big huge Obama supporter." Well, I too am a "big huge Obama supporter," but unlike Beck fans and followers, I don't keep guns buried beneath the dog house in the back yard guarded by pitbulls . . . just in case President Obama and his militia try to come disarm me. The connection, though likely obvious to Beck fans everywhere, eludes me.

Sometimes I'm really not sure if O'Reilly is kind of oblivious to Beck's nonsense, like an indulgent parent, or if he truly enjoys being an enabler of Beck's emotional neediness, his pathological desire for acceptance, and his transparent wistfulness that he was always the last kid picked for kickball.