by 
I’ve listened to Rush Limbaugh off and on since I was a teenager– though I don’t know if I ever actually have listened to an entire 3 hours (except maybe on a trip). Personally, I don’t believe that I always agree with the way that he understands what callers are saying– partially a victim of the format– and there are times when he’s rather crude.
But whether his party is in the majority or the minority, he’s basically saying the same things. He’s consistent, and he tells you what he’s thinking, as well as being entertaining.
Glenn Beck is a different animal.
I read a few months ago that people are more accepting and clamor for the critical, conspiracy positions more when things are going bad. And I believe it.
People are used to the status quo, they like things to be stable. When things happen, people want to know why, and anything that sounds somewhat plausible, presented by a person that has some degree of persuasive ability, people will begin to believe it.
Now, I’m not saying that Beck is out to lunch. I’m also not saying that the government is as harmless as they want you to believe that they are. What I am saying is that, because he taps into the conspiracy audience, every time I hear his program you get the impression that the world is coming to an end.
I don’t believe that’s in the government’s power. I don’t believe that the government will be able to do what God does not want them to do according to His perfect timing and will. So I’d much rather listen to Limbaugh talk about what’s worth fighting for, as he seems to believe that it’s possible to get back, then Beck who talks as if it’s now or never.
It may be now or never, but it reminds me of infomercials that tell me supplies are limited and I have to buy now.
Oh, me too. Limbaugh is intelligent. I like that. No, don’t always agree with him. (I’m sure that would really hurt him.) 🙂 I generally think that he isn’t quite able to see the conservative Christian position – but maybe that’s good. I don’t know!
But Beck – wow.
Exactly. The other thing that is annoying about Beck is the inordinate amount of time he seems to spend talking about something he’s either said or is going to say. I tuned in to his show on Tuesday during his second hour, and for 30 minutes all he said was stuff about getting the monologue from the first hour to as many people as you could and that he’s done research. And it’s like that every time I tune him in– he’s either building up to something or coming off of something.
Rush weaves a tapestry, Beck comes off as a salesman.
I’d have to disagree about Beck. If you tune in to his show over a period of time, a fairly high amount of the information he gives is old. Not months old as I’ve seen on some major networks that bury stories they dislike, but not the first time I’ve heard it. His investigation into ACORN was informative, not “conspiracy mongering”. If you think his show is all doom and gloom… maybe you haven’t noticed that things are getting really bad. Or perhaps you think VD’s blog is simply satire.
Hi Damon. I admit, I haven’t taken in large doses of Beck, but that’s simply because every time I listen to the guy he spends a half hour talking about how I need to go get what he said last hour, or that I have to get ready, because two weeks from now he’s going to have a get together to do something nebulous that’s going to prove everything. He comes off as a salesman, a marketer.
If things were truly as he says, he’d be constantly coming out with information that he’d give for free, instead of performing marketing gimmicks to get you to “tune in next time.”
I don’t doubt that the republic is in danger– but I don’t think that the greatest danger comes from the elites. I believe it comes from a society and a culture that has put into power people that reflect what they want. It’s only recently that people have seen the results of that desire.
So while I don’t have a problem with someone being informational, Beck seems to be riding a wave as a marketer, rather than providing tools to do anything. What needs to happen is a change in who we are, rather than attempting to change the top. That’s a failed strategy that will continue to fail, and only appeals to those in the society that agree with you.
As for VD, I don’t consider him satire. I consider him bright, but sometimes misguided. He’s not always right, but very often he is. I often wonder, while reading him, if one should be happy since I believe the Lord will return soon, or whether one should fight. To some degree, I believe it’s out of our hands.