Come to think of it, Beck doesn’t respond to any questions that might require a ‘straight answer” ever, unless it’s a softball interview from a FOX host or an MSM interview that is pre-scripted, over which he has control over the final cut.
But that’s what cowards do.

As it was, I did not watch, having already figured out that Beck was a total nut. Fixed it for ya….

And the truth is they have so much time to waste, many of them spend their entire day trolling on TVNewser!

Don’t you do that?

There is a difference between pointing out some basic facts and a smear. The “smear” is something perfected by the likes of Beck and Limbaugh. They are the example.

same2u – I think you are correct; badgering is the more accurate term.

You and Rush were all excited about giving a platform to someone who could potentially embarrass your political opponents, but the only thing exposed were your bottom feeding tactics and disdain for your audience’s intelligence.

Rather than smearing Democrats by association, as you hoped, you only exposed your own vapidity and desperation tactics in your quest to divert America’s attention from monumental Republican failures.

Keep trying, Glenn, et al., there’s plenty out there to distract your listeners from the conservative tsunami of incompetence and selfishness that you so ably exemplify.

Tea bagging S U C K E R S !

Re: “America I have wasted your time”

Glenn Beck,

the people who watch your program have nothing but time to waste. And the truth is they have so much time to waste, many of them spend their entire day trolling on TVNewser!

Aren’t you the “same” (pun) guy who just the other day told me you’re content to personally attack any and everyone, even if it violates site rules… that is, you’re content to do it until you get caught?

And now you’re saying something about my “style,” and expect anyone to take you seriously? Really?

ImNotBlue confuses debating with badgering.

I was responding to the point where you said why did Dems elect Massa in the first place.

Hmm… in that context, that’s not a bad point. However, Blue Dog or not, he’s still a Democrat, so –and this is my bottom line– all this talk from the band of regular around here who seem to forget that this is “their” party’s problem, is nonsense. Apparently, as has already been shown, if it’s a scandal, some are all too happy to say “it’s the Republican’s fault,” even when it’s a Democrat who has been caught.

Scandals like this happen to both parties.

Couldn’t agree more. That’s why it’s so ridiculous when someone… ON EITHER SIDE… says this is “typical” of one or the other. It’s all about power… not politics.

The tea party has been saying that Bush was much more of a democrat than a republican.

Eh… I think they’re argument is more along the lines of, “We didn’t like what he was doing either,” than about political parties. They’re more on the “traditional” side of the political spectrum… so Bush disagrees with their philosophy as well as Obama. I’m not sure they’re trying to make Bush a Democrat, just suggest that Republicans aren’t going to get a free pass in their group.

INB, did you just figure that out?

INB – since when do you debate?

Ted, since when do you debate? What you do is called drive-by smearing, usually without any facts to speak of.

I never pretended he was not a democrat; but that doesn’t mean I would have voted for him. I’m not a fan of blue-dog dems as I think they are just trying to do whatever is politically convenient to stay elected to office. I was responding to the point where you said why did Dems elect Massa in the first place. Its clear that in that district, no single party has the majority of the population and the districts goes back and forth between parties. He pulled more independents than the republican did.

Scandals like this happen to both parties. I really could care less about his sexuality, or anyone else. What I do dislike is when elected officials are hypocrites and lie to their constituents. I also am not a big fan of sexual harassment which in this case seems pretty clear that something happened. This isn’t the first time scandal has happened in politics and its not the last.

As for passing him off to the other party, I don’t think I am. However, if people are–well that’s convenient for them to do. It would not be the first time partisans did this though. The tea party has been saying that Bush was much more of a democrat than a republican. Its stupid I know, but when people are blinded by partisanship then they will find any reason to justify passing a dishonored guy off as an outsider.

Come on, Marcus… you’re better than that. The guy was a Democrat, and part of the Democratic majority. Besides, I thought the Democrats were the “big tent” folks, so it shouldn’t matter if he was “moderate” or “far-left.” He had a “D” after his name… he is, was, and will be remembered as having served as a Democrat.

Just because he’s involved in a scandal, doesn’t mean you can pass him off to the other party.

So, even though he’s an elected DEMOCRAT… according to you, this is a Republican problem? Wow!

Debating with Ted is like flipping a coin with Ted… heads he wins, tales I lose.