Video: Glenn Beck goes off on Anita Dunn for 17 minutes

posted at 7:37 pm on October 19, 2009 by Allahpundit

No, just kidding: It’s more like 12 minutes of replying to her lame spin on Friday that she was joking about Mao with another five about health care and guns tacked on to the end. Frankly, if I were her, I would have used that red phone — which is now being monitored by a guy in a Mao outfit, please note — to call and set him straight about what she really meant in that clip where she talked about controlling the media. (The same sort of control that Palin, wisely, is now trying to exert.) Beck seizes on the part where she says the campaign wanted reporters to cover what Obama said instead of “why” he said it, but in context I think all she means is that the press was forever obsessing about campaign tactics and strategy to the detriment of its coverage of policy. In other words, instead of reporting on the substance of his health-care plan, they’d focus on horse-race minutiae — e.g., “Why did Obama attack Hillary this way today?” That was a common complaint during the campaign, frankly; we made it here at HA too, even before the primaries had begun. I think she’s getting a bad rap on what she said/meant there.

As for him wondering why no one in the White House ever seems to praise a founding father, The One’s been known to mention Lincoln now and again, hasn’t he? Not strictly a founding father, granted, but the guy’s on the currency. Close enough.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

The goal of Fox News is not to promote “Conservatism” nor help the GOP win elections. It is to make money. They make a lot more money when the GOP is out of office.

How do you explain their ratings killing both MSNBC and CNN when Bush was in office?

So in order to make money they want the GOP to stay out of power? Then why doesn’t MSNBC and CNN rail against Obama so that the GOP comes back into power? By your logic that would boost their rating making them more money.

The Notorious G.O.P on October 20, 2009 at 4:02 PM

I think she’s getting a bad rap on what she said/meant there.

Ya think? She’s getting a bad rap from ONE GUY. Compared to what EVERY OTHER NETWORK and ALL NEWSPAPERS did to Sarah Palin this woman is getting a free flippin’ ride.

In fact Sarah Palin did not win and CONTINUES to get trashed at least weekly by the above named culprits.

Anita Dunn has a free pass, not a bad rap. When you win the brass ring don’t complain about it being attached to the business end of brass knuckles.

As for him wondering why no one in the White House ever seems to praise a founding father, The One’s been known to mention Lincoln now and again, hasn’t he? Not strictly a founding father, granted, but the guy’s on the currency. Close enough.

No, Allah, it ain’t. Lincoln’s contributions to this nation’s history have nothing to do with liberty and everything to do with forcing federal government upon the private citizen. “He freed the slaves” is inaccurate at best. Congress did that after Lincoln was firmly planted. The Emancipation Proclamation did not free one slave in land then held by any area of the Union. It was the moral equivalent of proclaiming tax rebates for all Canadians.

Just having your face on money or on Mt. Rushmore doesn’t grant you entry into “Founding Father” status, otherwise you’d have to include U.S. Grant whose face is on the $100. Get used to that face because you’ll seen a pocket full of those to pay your grocery bill, thanks to Obama and the Dems.

Hyunchback on October 20, 2009 at 4:30 PM

Sorry, make that U.S. Grant on the $50. You’ll still need a pocketfull of Benjamins but he WAS a Founding Father. One of those guys not quoted by Obama.

Hyunchback on October 20, 2009 at 4:36 PM

If Lincoln wasn’t from Illinois, you would never hear of him from this WH.

eaglewingz08 on October 20, 2009 at 5:23 PM

I think all she means is that the press was forever obsessing about campaign tactics and strategy to the detriment of its coverage of policy. In other words, instead of reporting on the substance of his health-care plan, they’d focus on horse-race minutiae — e.g.,

It could be because they never gave us any real information about policy, such as healthcare, and to a certain extent still don’t. With nothing substantial about policy all that’s left to debate or discuss is tactics and strategy.

Deanna on October 20, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Beck is sure no Tapper.

AnninCA on October 20, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Lincoln was a federalist. Not a founding father. Lincoln kept the Union together the Union of the STATES. The civil war was very much about STATE RIGHTS. So Obama admires a Federalist. Lincoln who didn’t have anything to do with writing the founding documents, including the Constitution. Which Obama has admitted he has problems with. So no Lincoln on a penny or a fiver, isn’t close enough by a long shot, to the people who wrote the LAWS for the Republic we live by.

Dr Evil on October 20, 2009 at 9:37 PM

AP …. are you taking lessons from Charlie Johnson?

Ghostbuster on October 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM

Beck is sure no Tapper.

AnninCA on October 20, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Tapper is sure no Beck.

FIFY

Ghostbuster on October 20, 2009 at 10:11 PM

How do you explain their ratings killing both MSNBC and CNN when Bush was in office?

So in order to make money they want the GOP to stay out of power? Then why doesn’t MSNBC and CNN rail against Obama so that the GOP comes back into power? By your logic that would boost their rating making them more money.

The Notorious G.O.P on October 20, 2009 at 4:02 PM

The political pornography on Fox News will always draw great ratings. Jerry Springer has better ratings than Charlie Rose. Howard Stern has better ratings than a typical morning Zoo.

Fox News is the political equivalent to The Jerry Springer show. They will always get great ratings however it is in their best interest to have a popular Democratic President in office versus spending their time defending a Republican administration. The same is true of talk radio. Rush Limbaugh is a lot more interesting ridiculing Obama than he was defending Bush.

Decider on October 21, 2009 at 10:38 AM

So in order to make money they want the GOP to stay out of power? Then why doesn’t MSNBC and CNN rail against Obama so that the GOP comes back into power? By your logic that would boost their rating making them more money.

The Notorious G.O.P on October 20, 2009 at 4:02 PM

I forgot to address this question specifically. First of all CNN is a generic news channel not a idealogical outlet like MSNBC and Fox News.

Liberalism does not have the same type of audience as Conservatism. Conservatives are typically older, White, and Male. Ridicule is a great tool for ratings for this demographic. Liberals typically are younger, more technically in tune and do not fall for ridicule as much as their Conservative counterparts.

Trust me when I say that if Liberalism was a lucrative as Conservatism, that Beck and Limbaugh would make Code Pink look Conservative.

Decider on October 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM

I forgot to address this question specifically. First of all CNN is a generic news channel not a idealogical outlet like MSNBC and Fox News.

Liberalism does not have the same type of audience as Conservatism. Conservatives are typically older, White, and Male. Ridicule is a great tool for ratings for this demographic. Liberals typically are younger, more technically in tune and do not fall for ridicule as much as their Conservative counterparts.

Trust me when I say that if Liberalism was a lucrative as Conservatism, that Beck and Limbaugh would make Code Pink look Conservative.

Decider on October 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM

Hey kid, were you even alive when CNN ran the great show called “Both Sides with Jessie Jackson”. I doubt it. In fact I bet if it were not for the internet you would not even know Limbaugh’s name. Sit down amateur…you are way out of your league.

I don’t trust the opinion of no-experience children.

ClassicCon on October 21, 2009 at 11:54 AM

Decider

You really drink way too much Kool Aid.

If you think that there is not a political leaning in the MSM, you are not credible.

First, the demographics of Fox are a varied mix acros most major groups. Second, Fox’s commentators are very conservative (but notwithstanding the Alinskyte tactics of the DNSC and the MSM are in, if not the mainstream); however, its news reporting, especially the evening news is what the media critic claim to want – detail and balance. You do not get that from the MSM (as a general rule). Third, given that Alinskyte socialism has debased the MSM, the entertainment media, the academy and in large part churches, it is not surprizing that the few outposts of (a) real reporting or (b) conservative views are vilified.

Most liberals by and large are psuedo-educated sheep that are some profoundly adversely affected by the large of real vicarious analytic skills (as Orwell predicted in 1984 (which was a critique of a “socialist utopia” complete with Alinskyte “two minutes of hate”) that they are seemingly unable to perform rudimentary, and certainly not complex, critical analysis that they have been the source of much of the evil and bad policy of the last 150 years. It is no surprize that the same people who worried about “global cooling” in the 1970′s are now worried about “global warming” – with a core belief in power and control, they will believe anything and like Neville Chavez Obama’s Press Director believe that Mao is a genuine “political philosopher.”

Modern Publicus on October 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4