Video: Beck, Michelle Malkin go toe to toe over Massa interview

posted at 12:10 pm on March 9, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

This starts off as an intellectual discourse on the use of apostates in political arguments, but descends to a pity party on Glenn Beck’s part when he goes after Michelle Malkin for criticizing his decision to give an hour to Eric Massa. It starts downhill at the moment that Beck says, “I don’t understand you people,” which takes the Boss Emeritus aback. The Right Scoop has the video:

Frankly, I don’t even know what set Beck off in the first place. Having Massa on the show for a segment might make some sense, but the decision to devote an hour to Massa is certainly open for criticism. Beck needs to handle criticism over an editorial decision like that among friends better than this. I worked for Michelle for two years and had open disagreements on policy, but it never took this kind of tone, nor did I ever think of it as backstabbing, as Beck seems to imply. In fact, both of us thought it was part of the process and made for better blogging and radio, which is why it had always been stressed that I could write what I want and argue what I believe here at Hot Air.

On the plus side, he makes up with Michelle towards the end of the interview, and he apparently apologized later. It’s not as unpleasant as the reaction on Twitter indicated, but it’s not Beck’s finest moment, either.

Beck says, “I’m not making this about him,” but at the same time he’s claiming that Massa “confirms” what the White House is doing. It only confirms it if Massa has any credibility. Claiming that Democrats are railroading him out of office when he’s resigning on his own makes his credibility very suspect. One can believe that the Obama administration is playing hardball with or without Massa’s testimony on this point, but relying on Massa undermines the argument if it turns out that Massa may be exaggerating or prevaricating for his own purposes — and as Michelle has pointed out, there’s certainly some evidence to bolster that interpretation.

None of us need to rely on Massa’s credibility for our arguments. We can note his statements and consider the context and Massa’s motivations, which is all Michelle asks of Beck in reconsidering his choice to give Massa a big megaphone tonight. It’s not bad advice, and perhaps Beck should give it more consideration, coming from a friend.


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 6

As I said in another thread… Beck stated at the end of his show that his TV show producer is getting worried and told Beck to start considering a second show for tonight, because they’re worried that Massa won’t show.

Enoxo on March 9, 2010 at 12:44 PM

I can’t believe Conservatives can’t take advantage of opportunity to trash the BHO administration without fighting amongst ourselves. This may be a preview of the 2012 elections. I surely hope not.

d1carter on March 9, 2010 at 12:28 PM

This is also my fear, when we talk of the big tent it seems to include all manner of divercity except for some on our side that would rather exclude different approaches to the same end.

fourdeucer on March 9, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Cindy, not meaning to pick on you, but that was a straight line I just couldn’t resist. (The word you wanted was dissent.)

MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Who made Michelle Malkin Beck’s editor? She can pound sand on this one.

I say give Massa the entire week to smear the Dems.

Enough with the “because the do it doesn’t mean we should” crapola.

kevinkristy on March 9, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Who put this tempest in my teapot?

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 9, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Who put this mountain in my molehill?

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Its the “you people” who apparently have the responsibility to keep the decades of progressive damage and visceral hate directed towards the people, the nation and our Constitution, in context.

Speakup on March 9, 2010 at 12:46 PM

I’ve figured out who Massa reminds me of.

Sammy “the bull Gravano.

A scum bag who only breaks down and tells the truth when he’s been stabbed in the back and has nothing left. I don’t trust him, but he could be telling the truth tonight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Gravano

rbj on March 9, 2010 at 12:47 PM

The issue is that Massa opposed the HC plan, and it may very well be that as a result, his ethics report was expedited. That exposes not only corruption in the democratic party, but selective enforcement of the rules.

Vashta.Nerada on March 9, 2010 at 12:16 PM

There’s also the issue of the leadership making the issue public, while it was still being investigated. That is unusual.

MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2010 at 12:48 PM

IMO, I think Glenn is smart enough to see through a scam when he sees or hears it. I am looking forward to the Fox show tonight. I feel Glenn does more good for our Republic than harm giving us information on what is going on in dc.
L

letget on March 9, 2010 at 12:49 PM

Angry Dumbo on March 9, 2010 at 12:43 PM

Do you really think Beck would fall for a demrat trick?

GOOD GRAVY! GB is the guy who boiled a fake frog on air just to watch the demrats go ape$hit!

Wake up people!

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:49 PM

Not to worry, The Won will feel compelled to have a speech about it. Possibly in front of Congress.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:29 PM
Heh. Maybe wearing nothing but a towel!

Weight of Glory on March 9, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Ok, now I need some bleach….and some whiskey…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 12:49 PM

Is Rush saying that he would not interview Massa if given the opportunity? I don’t get this.

d1carter on March 9, 2010 at 12:49 PM

Who put this mountain in my molehill?

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Who spilled my milk?

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2010 at 12:45 PM

I know, thanks, you are the third person to correct it. Stupid me and spell check.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

If conservatives have any problem with Beck, today, it should be about how he shat all over Wilders, yesterday. That is not an editorial decision to argue over, but a point of fact that Beck went out of his way to mischaracterize.

neurosculptor on March 9, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Yeah. Ditto with the pundits on Special Report, including Krauthammer. The ‘Hammer pontificated on Islam and “Islamism” being utterly different phenomena, with the same take-my-word-for-it nonchalance as the “science is settled” crowd, then called Wilders a “demagogue” because apparently Wilders is too daft (or conniving, somehow) to concede the point.

Strip away that self-delusional sense of certainty, and suddenly Wilders doesn’t appear to be half the “demagogue” the panel accused him of being.

RD on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

If Massa wants to sit and talk for an hour about what an evil slimeball Rahm Emanuel is, I say we let him.

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

BINGO! This is why MM and Ed should hold their counsel until AFTER the interview. There is no upside here unless they are trying to set themselves up so they can say to GB “I told you so!”.

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Thread Winner!

A whole lot of jumping the gun around here lately. What happened to the “Adam Gadahn has been captured” story?

***crickets***

Knucklehead on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

So Massa may be trying to deflect light and heat away from his naughty behavior. That does not mean he’s not on the fast track out because of his expected vote against ObamaCare. How long did it take for Rangel’s case to go through the ethics committee process?

Also, if Massa is deflecting and bad things would turn up, shouldn’t he be making a deal to shut-up so all charges would be made to disappear?

ROCnPhilly on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Beck is going way too far out on a very creaky limb here. MM is trying to keep us all from looking like the wackadoodle conspiracy theorists that the left claims us to be.

As Ed points out, there is a huge difference between interviewing Massa and making his claims the centerpiece of our arguments against this so called “health care reform”.

Laura in Maryland on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Michelle is right: Massa has no credibility.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Who made Michelle Malkin Beck’s editor? She can pound sand on this one.
I say give Massa the entire week to smear the Dems.
Enough with the “because the do it doesn’t mean we should” crapola.

kevinkristy on March 9, 2010

While I wouldn’t go quite that far, I would advise MM to rein in her ego a bit. GB doesn’t need her counsel on how to allocate his airtime. Makes me wonder if Michelle and Ed Morrisey bought their high horses from the same stable.

SKYFOX on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Not a Beck fan, but I call apples v. oranges on this:

I worked for Michelle for two years and had open disagreements on policy, but it never took this kind of tone, nor did I ever think of it as backstabbing, as Beck seems to imply.

Operative phrase is that you worked for Michelle Malkin. Beck doesn’t.

She can criticize him all she wants, but he can feel as offended by her criticism all he wants.

Don’t the pundits on the Right have better targets than each other?

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

I don’t understand the fear. The issue is that Massa opposed the HC plan, and it may very well be that as a result, his ethics report was expedited. That exposes not only corruption in the democratic party, but selective enforcement of the rules.

Vashta.Nerada on March 9, 2010 at 12:16 PM

If he opposed the healthcare plan so much, why didn’t he stay and wait for the vote?

LibTired on March 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 12:49 PM

LOL! Just not together.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Michelle’s point is spot on…

… Beck can do what he wants, and suffer the law of ‘unintended consequences’, but her point is spot on.

Seven Percent Solution on March 9, 2010 at 12:53 PM

So let me get this straight. Glenn Beck invites Michelle Malkin on to his show and people here are upset that Michelle gave her honest opinion?

What business does Michelle have in telling Beck she thinks he’s making a mistake (or to be more cautious)? Well he invited her on his show to talk about it. Get a grip people.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 12:54 PM

Well, one thing’s for sure — if Beck gets sandbagged this afternoon by Massa, who offers up answers that are at odds with what he’s said over the past week, or answers which Democrats can later prove are either misleading or outright lies, Glenn can’t say he wasn’t warned beforehand (the interview can still be useful, but he better be ready to treat this as a hostile interview if Massa pivots again, or he better have some follow-up questions to ask the ex-rep to make sure he’s telling the truth or Beck’s the one who is going to pay the price).

jon1979 on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

MM is trying to keep us all from looking like the wackadoodle conspiracy theorists that the left claims us to be.

There is no “we”. There is a diversity of voices on the Right.

Frankly, even if a “we” existed, MM is not the person I would choose to represent “us.”

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

MM is trying to keep us all from looking like the wackadoodle conspiracy theorists that the left claims us to be.
Laura in Maryland on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

MM needs to continue to worry about herself. No one needs to to protect us.

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

ATTENTION NEOCONS AND BECKMESSIAHS!

Debbie Schlussel would like to have a FEW WORDS with you!

BobAnthony on March 9, 2010 at 12:24 PM

I tried giving D.S. a fair hearing, but she is too much of a female Jesse Ventura imo. Kinda nutty.

Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:40 PMKnucklehead on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

I wish the friends had discussed the possibilities off air. But admittedly it is pretty far down on my perfect world wish list.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:56 PM

Who spilled my milk?

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Who knocked over my hill of beans…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 12:56 PM

I hate to agree with Beck, but he’s right on this one.

AnninCA on March 9, 2010 at 12:57 PM

I tried giving D.S. a fair hearing, but she is too much of a female Jesse Ventura imo. Kinda nutty.

Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

I didn’t know just how nutty he is until I watched him on F&F this morning.

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:57 PM

Hey, if Massa wants to use Beck’s show to announce that he’s running away with Barney Frank, and they’re going to retire together on a Massachusetts goat farm, that’ll be interesting too.

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:57 PM

Michelle is right: Massa has no credibility.

So if Beck wanted to put on Red or Pelosi or Zero he shouldn’t?

And if Messa has no credibility, why has the beltway been shaking at 9.9 on the Richter scale since Beck announced he would be on?

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on March 9, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Who knocked over my hill of beans…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 12:56 PM

Who made so much ado about my nothing?

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 12:59 PM

I LOVE it when Beck slaps Neo-Cons around.

David2.0 on March 9, 2010 at 12:59 PM

Wow. That interview was a moment that will decide the course of this nation, possibly.

I look forward to the interview today, which will also be a moment that will decide the course of this nation, possibly.

Proud Rino on March 9, 2010 at 12:42 PM

I imagine that chicken must be feeling pretty good for you right now…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 12:59 PM

I hate to agree with Beck, but he’s right on this one.

AnninCA on March 9, 2010 at 12:57 PM

Not as bad as I hate to agree with you.

fourdeucer on March 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM

Massa sounded very authentic to me in the radio interview. He may have calmed down by now, but that was one angry guy ready to name names and take a few folks along the slide down with him.

AnninCA on March 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM

I actually got to hear this live. Boy, The Boss kinda laid into him, eh?

(I would have said The Boss Made Glenn Beck Cry, but that’s not that high of a bar. JUST KIDDING!)

I’m a little torn here. On principle, I dont’ have that much of an issue with letting the guy speak, to tell his version of the events in question, etc. At the same time, as Michelle reminds us, we have to consider the source.

At least Beck is willing to actually listen to the guy, unlike some TV News types when confronted with someone counter to their own beliefs.

JamesLee on March 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM

If you stopped interviewing Democrat politicians because they have a history of lying, which Democrat politician could you still talk to?

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:42 PM

Impeccable logic.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:01 PM

There’s nothing wrong with putting libs on the defense against Massa, the way they put the right on the defense with every scumbag they can find, and it’s Beck’s show to do with what he wants, but… Michelle’s point is generally correct and sane.

LibTired on March 9, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Seriously, if Michelle Malkin wants to be the boss, she should have kept HotAir. And if she wants to run a TV show, she should have kept her gig subbing for O’Reilly.

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:02 PM

You REALLY ought to post Glenn’s apology if you can, because it’s obvious that Glenn feels really, really bad about taking out his frustrations on Michelle. He acknowledges that she isn’t one who has been giving him undeserved grief.

Let him fight the battle his way: everybody else can do it their way. We’ll all get there in the end.

dicentra63 on March 9, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Thanks. I couldn’t agree more. Takes many kinds of soldiers to win a war.

petefrt on March 9, 2010 at 1:02 PM

I know, thanks, you are the third person to correct it. Stupid me and spell check.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

There’s only two times I comment on spelling errors;

1) when the person is making a point to insult other people’s intelligence, or
2) it creates a straight line too good pass up.

Glass houses and all that.

MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2010 at 1:03 PM

So if Beck wanted to put on Red or Pelosi or Zero he shouldn’t?

And if Messa has no credibility, why has the beltway been shaking at 9.9 on the Richter scale since Beck announced he would be on?

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on March 9, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Should Massa be ignored? No. But everything he says should be given a great deal of skepticism. Why did he quit if he is really being pushed out? What about the original reason he gave for quitting? There may be truths in the things he’s saying but if you hitch too much to his star then risk your own credibility when his lies are brought to light (and lets face it – the media at this point is more concerned with proving his claims false than true). In fact this was a point Michelle made: we already know most of this stuff through completely credible sources.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Yeah. Ditto with the pundits on Special Report, including Krauthammer. The ‘Hammer pontificated on Islam and “Islamism” being utterly different phenomena, with the same take-my-word-for-it nonchalance as the “science is settled” crowd, then called Wilders a “demagogue” because apparently Wilders is too daft (or conniving, somehow) to concede the point.

RD on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Yeah, I was very, very disappointed with all of Fox’s commentators spewing that crap about Geert Wilders. But, I keep trying to warn people, here, that while I like Krauthammer, he still doesn’t truly know what’s going on. He is kind of rough on The Precedent, now, but that was a long time coming and Krauthammer still doesn’t address the true nature of the situation. What Kraut said about islam shows that he is absolutely clueless – or a panderer to G-d knows who.

Between Beck and the Special Report folks, yesterday was one of the worst days for Fox, ever. It was pitiful and pathetic. This misunderstanding of islam, by those ostensibly on the right, is very dangerous stuff. We already have to deal with the left being fully allied with the arab/persian/muslim world and looking to end Western civilization, but to start hearing it from the “right” is really sad.

And Fitna was a truly soft, kind-of lame expose about islam. I’m glad it was made, but it was not some hard-hitting piece. It was cute and nibbled around the edges of the problems emanating from the arab/persian/muslim world.

neurosculptor on March 9, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Beck needs to learn apparently the hard way, never to trust a democrat. Massa is as dirty a slime ball as they come. All that he stated probably did occur, but mud always rubs off on all who get near it.

Kissmygrits on March 9, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Michelle is smart and knows what is coming…. the rest of you carry on with looking like buffoons.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:05 PM

It wasn’t her take to tell him how to run his show through her experiences, just like it wouldn’t be his to tell her how to write a book based on his experiences.

Sultry Beauty on March 9, 2010 at 12:44 PM

I don’t know… he’s had a lot of best sellers just in the past year to 18 months.

MobileVideoEngineer on March 9, 2010 at 1:05 PM

Well, one thing is absolutely correct. I want to hear what Massa has to say, and I don’t care about his politics or even his vices.

That’s beside the point.

When did these news people decide it was their job to decide for the public who is OK or not OK to hear out?

Jeesh*…..

Michelle has lost perspective.

AnninCA on March 9, 2010 at 1:06 PM

wish I could agree more with MM on this, but…

I don’t care if my knife is covered with mud, blood, or any other messy substance — as long as it is sharp and I can use it to cause injury to my enemies…

I say use Masa and if the scumbag benefits then so be it. His testimony could have a snowball effect and really do some damage.

max1 on March 9, 2010 at 1:06 PM

MM is trying to keep us all from looking like the wackadoodle conspiracy theorists that the left claims us to be.
Laura in Maryland on March 9, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Based on what?
Letting a dem nutbag blather on like a nutbag and point fingers (and maybe more) at the other dems is bad …how?
Should be good for a lot of laughs.

The people who are warning that this is a bad idea or a “trap” etc, sound more like the conspiracy nuts to me.

A nut or not, he may have some interesting things to say..he’s part of the enemy camp. :)

Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 1:06 PM

If you stopped interviewing Democrat politicians because they have a history of lying, which Democrat politician could you still talk to?

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:42 PM

These Democrats should be interviewed but one shouldn’t assume that their history of lying is at an end.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM

MM did not simply disagree with GB, she was condescending and probably didn’t notice that she was being so, but Glenn did notice and he reacted accordingly. It’s the same kind of self-righteous pontificating that Ed falls into and then takes offense when he’s told that many of us don’t like being preached at or condescended to.

SKYFOX on March 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Michelle is smart and knows what is coming…. the rest of you carry on with looking like buffoons.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:05 PM

And who looked like the buffoon when Beck boiled a fake frog on air? Beck is not falling for a demrat trick. YOU are turning into CJ at LGF.

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Gotta love the Leftist media—–

“Oh, all of a sudden Massa is a darling of the right wing media!?”

For God’s sake, Meghan McCain is on Larry King so much they enrolled her in CNN’s 401K program and set up a buffet table in the green room.

David2.0 on March 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Not to worry, The Won will feel compelled to have a speech about it. Possibly in front of Congress.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Heh. Maybe wearing nothing but a towel!

Weight of Glory on March 9, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Hey, if Massa wants to use Beck’s show to announce that he’s running away with Barney Frank, and they’re going to retire together on a Massachusetts goat farm, that’ll be interesting too.

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:57 PM

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

I like the idea of Beck baiting Massa to tell his side of the story. Now is the time to be a Massa baiter.

LibTired on March 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

I know, thanks, you are the third person to correct it. Stupid me and spell check.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Poor Cindy. If it makes you feel any better, I always have to spell check “embarrass” and the words “disparate, separate and desperate” always get muddled.

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

Michelle is smart and knows what is coming…. the rest of you carry on with looking like buffoons.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:05 PM

So whats coming?

Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

Shoot hit submit instead of preview!!! Meant this instead….

Not to worry, The Won will feel compelled to have a speech about it. Possibly in front of Congress.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Heh. Maybe wearing nothing but a towel!

Weight of Glory on March 9, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Hey, if Massa wants to use Beck’s show to announce that he’s running away with Barney Frank, and they’re going to retire together on a Massachusetts goat farm, that’ll be interesting too.

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:57 PM

You guys are killing my birthday, ya know…I will have to drink way too much whiskey to handle these images!!!

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Michelle is smart and knows what is coming…. the rest of you carry on with looking like buffoons.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:05 PM

Typing while looking at her poster again, I see…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:11 PM

And who looked like the buffoon when Beck boiled a fake frog on air? Beck is not falling for a demrat trick. YOU are turning into CJ at LGF.

csdeven on March 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Sadly much of this site is. It has really gone down hill since the elections. The only reason I’m even on now is because I’m bored at work. I don’t even get on at home anymore. I used to be on this site almost every waking moment. Not so anymore.

MobileVideoEngineer on March 9, 2010 at 1:11 PM

There is no “we”. There is a diversity of voices on the Right.

Frankly, even if a “we” existed, MM is not the person I would choose to represent “us.”

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

If the right is to be heard and taken seriously, those with high profiles on the right need to stick to cogent arguments and facts.

MM isn’t speaking for “us”, but she sure has made an effort to tamp down the birther rhetoric so focus would remain on winnable issues.

Laura in Maryland on March 9, 2010 at 1:11 PM

Seriously, if Michelle Malkin wants to be the boss, she should have kept HotAir. And if she wants to run a TV show, she should have kept her gig subbing for O’Reilly.

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Um, Glenn did invite her on to get her opinion.

And she stopped subbing for O’Reilly because he would not rebuke Geraldo Rivera when the latter expressed his desire to spit on Michelle.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Ed, you know exactly why he unleashed. He even explained it himself after he apologized. Beck’s been under attack the Limbaugh triumvirate (Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity) for daring to speak out against the socialist GOP. It seems to have made him defensive to some degree and he seemed to initially think that Michelle was going down the same route.

For the triumvirate it is imperative that the GOP win, and tthey think that Beck is threat to their power. It is an unfortunate reality that the triumvirate have gone from being champions of liberty to champions of a corrupt political party.

True_King on March 9, 2010 at 1:14 PM

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM

Comparatively speaking you are a Rhodes Scholar, I am always checking then and than. And that’s when I just don’t leave words out of a comment altogether. I may question my understanding of someone’s comment but if we start keying on grammar and spelling I will have to go away.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 1:14 PM

RD on March 9, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Speaking of which: Ed, can we have a thread (or several) on the Geert Wilders goings-on? Or is that topic permanently banned from the rolodex?

I appreciate the daily deluge of posts on ObamaCare and the political horse race, but not at the expense of what you guys used to cover. What about the global jihad, outside the narrow confines of the GWOT? Creeping sharia in Europe, here and elsewhere? Here’s hoping HotAir recaptures a bit of the old magic.

Maybe it’s time to bring Robert Spencer back once in a while… or something.

RD on March 9, 2010 at 1:16 PM

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Happy Birthday!!!

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 1:16 PM

I’m late to the thread. Since when has the right been against first amendment rights? Suspending free speech rights is a game the left created.

booter on March 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Look at it this way – Stimulus cost Obama any Republicans he had. Healthcare and ACORN cost him the Independents.

All he has left are a group of progressives that will never turn and some independents who have had their fingers in their ears the entire time. They won’t listen to us because we are stained. They will, however, listen to one of their own. That is where this scandal has strength.

If Beck can get this guy on air – a guy who the progressives agree with on various issues – and get him to rail against Obama’s corruption, possibly even denounce the party, then he can do far more damage to Obama then Michelle Malkin’s echo chambers could. Michelle is worried about us ‘tainting’ the movement. When thats not what this is about. Its about moving the ball further down the field. At some point you have to cross into enemy territory to do it.

tflst5 on March 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Ed, you know exactly why he unleashed. He even explained it himself after he apologized. Beck’s been under attack the Limbaugh triumvirate (Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity) for daring to speak out against the socialist GOP. It seems to have made him defensive to some degree and he seemed to initially think that Michelle was going down the same route.

For the triumvirate it is imperative that the GOP win, and tthey think that Beck is threat to their power. It is an unfortunate reality that the triumvirate have gone from being champions of liberty to champions of a corrupt political party.

True_King on March 9, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Rush supports the ‘socialist’ elements in the GOP? Either you’ve never listened to Rush Limbaugh or you are smoking crack. He goes after Republicans who abandon conservative principles but he’s doesn’t live with the delusion that a third party is going to accomplish anything.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 1:18 PM

Speaking of which: Ed, can we have a thread (or several) on the Geert Wilders goings-on? Or is that topic permanently banned from the rolodex?

I appreciate the daily deluge of posts on ObamaCare and the political horse race, but not at the expense of what you guys used to cover. What about the global jihad, outside the narrow confines of the GWOT? Creeping sharia in Europe, here and elsewhere? Here’s hoping HotAir recaptures a bit of the old magic.

Maybe it’s time to bring Robert Spencer back once in a while… or something.

RD on March 9, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Honey, if you have a story idea you send it to TIPS@HOTAIR.COM

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:18 PM

Um, Glenn did invite her on to get her opinion.

And she stopped subbing for O’Reilly because he would not rebuke Geraldo Rivera when the latter expressed his desire to spit on Michelle.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Quite true. There was no excusing Rivera for that outburst. Michelle has probably taken more cr*p than anyone else in today’s media, and most of that being on a personal and hateful level. Just check out her site when she puts up some of the hate emails she gets. But she never lets it deter her, either. We could all learn from that, I think.

JamesLee on March 9, 2010 at 1:19 PM

Since when has the right been against first amendment rights? Suspending free speech rights is a game the left created.

booter on March 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM

What? Neither Glenn nor Michelle are part of the government.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:19 PM

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 1:14 PM

CM: Don’t worry about your spelling, this is not a legal document or thesis. Let it fly, we can decipher what you mean and if some can’t, then they need to hang out in some other place.

d1carter on March 9, 2010 at 1:20 PM

I think that this has the potential to blow up in Glenn’s face. He needs to have a backup plan in case he needs to change the subject.

gstrickler on March 9, 2010 at 1:20 PM

I’m late to the thread. Since when has the right been against first amendment rights? Suspending free speech rights is a game the left created.

booter on March 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Free speech? What the f*ck are you babbling about? Whose free speech rights? The foreigners who attacked America? THe scumbag lawyers who are making no claims of free speech, but resting on the right to counsel to defend their enthusiastic pro-bono work trying to get foreigners Constitutional rights and placed in the civilian system, where they don’t belong?

Go back to sleep, man.

neurosculptor on March 9, 2010 at 1:20 PM

booter on March 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Oops. Big oops. I confused threads. My mistake. What I wrote to you was really, really stupid and had nothing to do with this thread.

I need to go back to sleep. Sorry, booter.

neurosculptor on March 9, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Michelle Malkin speaks for me. She is warning Glenn Beck not to glorify this bum, in an attempt get high ratings.

sinsing on March 9, 2010 at 1:23 PM

…if we start keying on grammar and spelling I will have to go away.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 1:14 PM

In that case, I will have to drink more–I type better the more I drink….

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:23 PM

If the right is to be heard and taken seriously, those with high profiles on the right need to stick to cogent arguments and facts.

How is having someone on your program and giving that person a chance to speak making an argument? Isn’t having one of the principles in these alleged incidents on to speak his piece a valid way to get to the facts?

Beck is just a guy with a TV show. Rush is just a guy with a radio show. Malkin is just a gal with a blog. They are not elected officials, nor are they party leaders. I think more damage is done to the conservative movement by people acting like pundits are anything more than that. We don’t have to apologize for them when they go off the reservation. If they go off the reservation too far or too frequently they lose their standing as meaningful pundits because they lose their audience. Doesn’t MM trust rank-and-file conservatives to judge things for themselves?

By critiquing each other in public all the pundits are doing is giving the impression that they are part of a coordinated GOP effort. Do we really want independents to think that conservatives astroturf and manipulate the media the way we know the progressives do?

MM isn’t speaking for “us”, but she sure has made an effort to tamp down the birther rhetoric so focus would remain on winnable issues.

My point was simply that she is not “our” spokesperson, not that she hasn’t done useful things. Having said that, she lost a lot of face with me when she spent the last days of Bush’s presidency openly criticizing him. Not helpful and not nice.

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 1:23 PM

Haven’t read any of the comments yet, but, I come down on the side of Glenn. Have the guy on for the whole hour and let Glenn get as much as he can out of this guy. Maybe, just maybe, he will spill the beans on some other activities. If not, he wasted just 1 hour. Not a big deal in the whole scheme of things.

Or, maybe it will blow up like it did when he had that guy on from Acorn and told him to get out of there.

Mirimichi on March 9, 2010 at 1:24 PM

She is warning Glenn Beck not to glorify this bum, in an attempt get high ratings.

sinsing on March 9, 2010 at 1:23 PM

Don’t watch.

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 1:24 PM

If Beck can get this guy on air – a guy who the progressives agree with on various issues – and get him to rail against Obama’s corruption, possibly even denounce the party, then he can do far more damage to Obama then Michelle Malkin’s echo chambers could. Michelle is worried about us ‘tainting’ the movement. When thats not what this is about. Its about moving the ball further down the field. At some point you have to cross into enemy territory to do it.

tflst5 on March 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Bingo!!!

Nobody on the left is going to listen to Michelle Malkin no matter how sane she may be. The media and the left (I know one in the same) have done such a job in painting people like Rush, Michelle, and Hannity as such extremists that nobody outside of the Republican party will listen to them or take them seriously.

Glenn speaks with so many people on the right and the left and finds common ground with them that it’s really difficult for the media to paint him as a Republican shill. That’s why they have to call him things like a “conspiracy nut” or a “cry-baby clown” or whatever idiotic names they have for him now.

Glenn has essentially taken away the media and the left’s ammo, now they are reduced to childish name calling to try to discredit him.

MobileVideoEngineer on March 9, 2010 at 1:27 PM

If you stopped interviewing Democrat politicians because they have a history of lying, which Democrat politician could you still talk to?

RBMN on March 9, 2010 at 12:42 PM

FTFY.

nukemhill on March 9, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Well, one thing’s for sure — if Beck gets sandbagged this afternoon by Massa, who offers up answers that are at odds with what he’s said over the past week, or answers which

Democrats can later prove are either misleading or outright lies, Glenn can’t say he wasn’t warned beforehand (the interview can still be useful, but he better be ready to treat this as a hostile interview if Massa pivots again, or he better have some follow-up questions to ask the ex-rep to make sure he’s telling the truth or Beck’s the one who is going to pay the price).

jon1979 on March 9, 2010 at 12:55 PM

Um…erm…he already is.

The assumptions like this that Beck invited Massa on as some kind of ally are why he was rankled.

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Eric Massa could be the left’s version of Jose Canseco. Let him sing.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:28 PM

I think his TV show is pretty good, but it’s hard to listen to Beck on the radio. Just sayin’.

visions on March 9, 2010 at 1:29 PM

If he opposed the healthcare plan so much, why didn’t he stay and wait for the vote?

LibTired on March 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM

I’ve wondered the same.
I’d guess that that will be one of Becks first questions…..unless he is really a dem plant and has been baiting everyone all this time…actually there is no “Glenn Beck”..he’s actually a alien lizard overlord in a rubber suit that looks like “Glenn Beck”.
I would like to add that I, for one, welcome our new alien overlords and hope to be an asset to them in the new world order.

Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 1:30 PM

Why do conservatives become such collectivists when it comes to a controversy? It’s as if people believe we all have to be on the same page, lest we all be discredited.
So what if Massa lies on Beck?
And in the end, so what if Beck believes those lies?

Who does that hurt, besides Beck?

And what if it turns out to be good? Why does everyone want to decide how to behave now, before he talks?
What if Massa says something interesting and true, after so many on the right have worked so hard to get everyone to preemptively ignore him?

It’s just such odd behavior for people who believe in individual responsibility.

MayBee on March 9, 2010 at 1:30 PM

Rush supports the ’socialist’ elements in the GOP? Either you’ve never listened to Rush Limbaugh or you are smoking crack. He goes after Republicans who abandon conservative principles but he’s doesn’t live with the delusion that a third party is going to accomplish anything.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 1:18 PM

Rush Limbaugh may as well have ‘GOP’ stamped on his forehead. He can’t be trusted and even admitted to carrying wwater for certain persons who didn’t deserve it.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:31 PM

It’s just such odd behavior for people who believe in individual responsibility.

MayBee on March 9, 2010 at 1:30 PM

+1

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Based on what?
Letting a dem nutbag blather on like a nutbag and point fingers (and maybe more) at the other dems is bad …how?
Should be good for a lot of laughs.

The people who are warning that this is a bad idea or a “trap” etc, sound more like the conspiracy nuts to me.

A nut or not, he may have some interesting things to say..he’s part of the enemy camp. :)

Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 1:06 PM

I’m with you 100%. Worrying is a waste of time.

I said the same thing about 0bamessiah’s healthcare summit with the Republicans – running away from a potential conversation because you’re afraid it might not go well for you only makes you look weak.

Say NO to Fraidy cats!!! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on March 9, 2010 at 1:33 PM

The entire Beltway is going bonkers over this guy. If he is strictly a nut, that will be revealed on Beck’s show this afternoon. However, if he shines a light on the cockroaches, it will be all worthwhile. By the way, why is everybody jumping on Massa, and not the actions of the little thug Rahm Emmanuel?

kingsjester on March 9, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Rush Limbaugh may as well have ‘GOP’ stamped on his forehead. He can’t be trusted and even admitted to carrying wwater for certain persons who didn’t deserve it.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:31 PM

I see – Rush Limbaugh isn’t conservative or ‘principled’ enough for you. Good luck with that.

gwelf on March 9, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6