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 5 6

ANNNNNNNND……Beck was quite effective when he apologized to Michelle after the segment.

Face it, nerves are a bit frayed on both sides of the aisle as so much is at stake.

NOTE TO LEVIN……Beck has a place, and so do you. We don’t all have to walk lockstep to be critical of the Marxist in the White House.

Let’s focus on stopping Obama…….putting ROADBLOCKS in the Caliphs’s way (by the way has he found a church yet?)!!!!

PappyD61 on March 9, 2010 at 1:34 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.

And if he is revealed to be a nut, we can properly ask the Democrat House leadership why they didn’t do something about him sooner.

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 1:35 PM

I am of two thoughts on this.

1. I think giving Massa an outlet to smear Dems is a wonderful thing. This may turn out to be total validation for what people have been talking about for quite some time about corruption in DC.

2. If Massa tries to turn it into a platform to issue false allegations and only recites Dem talking points then I do believe that Beck is smart enough and ballsey enough to call him on it and throw him off the show.

I am looking forward to watching it. It should, if nothing else, prove to be very interesting.

milwife88 on March 9, 2010 at 1:36 PM

I don’t understand the comment…

“you people”

I can see Michelle recoiling at that comment… and so did I. If you take it for what it was, then this is serious. It seems to show that Beck thinks he is somehow different… not with “the people associated with Michelle”… how else could you take it.

Does this mean that even though Beck may have some connection with the Tea Party people, the conservatives out there, etc. that part of his persona is part of the entertainment value? i.e. he is going along to get along… i.e. money in the pocket? I know I have heard his buddy O’Reilly say, many times, that Beck plays that angle really well.
This comment gives me pause… enough of a pause to realize that internally Beck feels he is different somehow… and I don’t like the implications of that.

If this Massa guy turns out to be a closet gay or just a sexual wacko, then no matter what he has to say will have any validity because it will be lost in the noise. So, what Beck has to gain from this other than to get the guy to confess to sexually weird acts and ask for forgiveness, I just don’t understand one whole hour. 10 minutes maybe, and then riff off of that.

I agree totally with Michelle. Why give this useless liberal any oxygen at all? Do we really need him to prove anything? NO

PhilipJames on March 9, 2010 at 1:36 PM

At the risk of annoying those who are devoted to Mr. Beck, he doesn’t handle descent very well. I like him and find him informative but he has given me some uncomfortable moments. It’s probably just growing pains by someone who’s not use to every syllable suddenly being scrutinized.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Not too many people do. And I dare say Talk Radio and pundits on BOTH SIDES are a bit condescending to the other side.

I wish we could have a normal conversation about politics but when people feel shut out or that they are not being heard they mock the other side. I do it too.

Tense times in Obamerika!!

PappyD61 on March 9, 2010 at 1:37 PM

So whats coming?

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

He’ll be proven a liar and a pervert and the right will look foolish for being so desperate for ANYTHING to be true.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:38 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 sad that I’m actually not listening to Rush as much as I used to.

I quite listening to Hannity in August of 2008 and I’ve continued to listen to Rush, but the last week or so I just tune him out or don’t even put my headphones on when he’s on anymore.

It’s sad because it’s pretty much all the same stuff and it’s not getting us anywhere. I mean if it was, Obama wouldn’t have even made the Democrat nomination, let alone be in the position to destroy the United States in a matter of 4 years.

MobileVideoEngineer on March 9, 2010 at 1:38 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

So Beck is above criticism? Beck is a shill for a popular talk show, just a talk show. Academically, he doesn’t belong in the same room as Michelle, I suggest he comes down off of his pedestal, and listen to someone with more intelligence and more experience.
It isn’t a matter of “who is boss”, odd that you think only a boss can give advice, it’s who is right, who is smarter, who is more analytical, and it’s Michelle.
BTW, Michelle isn’t on O’R because O’R wouldn’t back her up when attacked by a fellow Fox news host…which tells alot about O’R's lack of honor.
These guys care more about ratings, then being on the right side of things.

right2bright on March 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM

PappyD61 on March 9, 2010 at 1:34 PM

I agree with that, most of the Right wing pundits have areas of strength.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 1:40 PM

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.

@ 2:50 Michelle makes the claim that she thinks Beck is helping to make Massa a hero against Obama.

#1 I don’t agree

#2 If we have the opportunity to use this guy against Obama, in any way, shouldn’t we take advantage of it?

#3 The whole “some pieces of the puzzle are more important than others” is a weak analogy. Whether this guy is a piece of sand that irritates the oyster or a thorn in the side, or paw…I trust Beck to sift him out like wheat.

elraphbo on March 9, 2010 at 1:40 PM

They both have points but Beck’s are more persuasive. The issue really boils down to free speech.

“Some pieces are more important than others,” Malkin says. Fine, but let’s decide after we hear and see them all.

Let Massa talk — then comment.

rrpjr on March 9, 2010 at 1:41 PM

He’ll be proven a liar and a pervert and the right will look foolish for being so desperate for ANYTHING to be true.

And the Democrats will look bad for not creating a work environment where junior staffers feel comfortable bringing forward complaints about their boss’ behavior or for sitting on this scandal until it became politically expedient to do something about it.

Seems pretty win-win to me.

Personally, just for the entertainment value, I hope this devolves into Massa having to describe Rahm’s johnson just to prove that Rahm did in fact accost him in the locker room. Comedy gold!

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 1:41 PM

The whole internecine ‘crisis’ is ridiculous. As is the drive to groupthink, turning on any who don’t accede, or the impetus to go ‘all in’ on any event.
Why is it not enough to simply give Massa free rein to attack the Obamunists? It should neither imply or demand that ANYONE on the right support Massa.

This backbiting horsecrap over tactics needs to stop.

/And Levin needs to wrap that big brain around the idea that Beck does better with his (Levin’s) schtick than he does and GET OVER IT.

rayra on March 9, 2010 at 1:42 PM

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.

I’m with you on most of your post, but if it weren’t for the pudits fighting the administration, the GOP would spend all of its time on phone with Brooks asking to borrow his knee-pads.

Laura in Maryland on March 9, 2010 at 1:44 PM

He’ll be proven a liar and a pervert and the right will look foolish for being so desperate for ANYTHING to be true.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Good grief–save the hysterics for something more important–and stop wringing your hands, for heavens sake!

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:44 PM

ANNNNNNNND……Beck was quite effective when he apologized to Michelle after the segment.

Face it, nerves are a bit frayed on both sides of the aisle as so much is at stake.

NOTE TO LEVIN……Beck has a place, and so do you. We don’t all have to walk lockstep to be critical of the Marxist in the White House.

Let’s focus on stopping Obama…….putting ROADBLOCKS in the Caliphs’s way (by the way has he found a church yet?)!!!!

PappyD61 on March 9, 2010 at 1:34 PM

This is the right attitude to have. People like McCain need to learn this.

Bizarro No. 1 on March 9, 2010 at 1:44 PM

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

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Um, her opinion had been offered then he invited her on to discuss it with her person to person. She wasn’t invited and then shared her thoughts on the wisdom of his plan to have Massa on his show today.

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 PM

neurosculptor on March 9, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Concur on all counts. Sadly. And to a couple of points:

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 just doesn’t believe Islam is what it is, even when the right people point this out. From my own experience I know that sometimes, it takes establishing a trivial-seeming fact or two for the utter hopelessness of the Islamic ethos to finally sink in.

For me, it was a Hoover Institution article about the differences between Islamic and Judeo-Christian conceptions of how peoples’ actions are judged that made it clear. Before then I had never realized the implications of my own Judeo-Christian thinking on how I viewed Islam, and what might (or might not) be possible within Islam.

This was all before learning about the life of their prophet, or the Koran being the literal, eternal word of Allah.

Also agree that in the grand scheme of things Fitna was more like troll-bait than a knockout punch… and the ‘outrage’ was disproportionate to the injury (and very telling).

RD on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 PM

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

Rush has been compromised for quite some time. He’s practically become the political establishment, given his various photo ops with a host of scoundrels over the years. Rush forgot about principles, and goes along to get along. He’s weak.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 PM

I agree with Michelle on every point except that I don’t see any harm in devoting the entire show to the interview as long as Michelle’s cautions are heeded and Beck doesn’t lose sight of context. (Also, he should be prepared to knock off the interview in case Massa is uncooperative.)

On the other hand, I usually turn off Beck’s show when he dedicates an entire hour to a single guest.

FloatingRock on March 9, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Personally, just for the entertainment value, I hope this devolves into Massa having to describe Rahm’s johnson just to prove that Rahm did in fact accost him in the locker room. Comedy gold!

See, this is this kind of circus-ness I’m hoping for with this – AND ITS ALL BECAUSE OF THIS DEMOCRAT LUNATIC.

The question then becomes: what else is going on in the political Party of Massa, Spitzer, Rangel, Jefferson, Hoyer, Clinton, Barney Frank, etc., that we’re not being told about by the press?

Because they’re only one letter on the culture of corruption this year: D.

D E M O C R A T.

You want an albatross to hang around Democrats’ heads in addition to Durr Leader in Nov.? You got one.

Is this newsworthy? You bet.

He didn’t switch parties. He’s still a DEMOCRAT.

Chill out and watch the fun, people.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:47 PM

JamesLee on March 9, 2010 at 1:19 PM

In the same vein, Beck refused to let Michelle hector him out of his decision to have Massa on his show.

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:47 PM

He’ll be proven a liar and a pervert and the right will look foolish for being so desperate for ANYTHING to be true.

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:38 PM

The left side of the aisle is totally made up of liars and perverts yet none of that seems to matter as long as they go along with Obama on healthcare.

Mmmm…smells like selective moral outrage to me. I mean Rahm has such a stellar reputation to beging with that these stories could in no way be true.

If there is one thing this administration is innocent of, it is thug, strong arm tactics. Just ask the SEIU and bank CEO’s.

ClassicCon on March 9, 2010 at 1:48 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

And you’re both being insulting to Beck, assuming he was planning on “glorifying” Massa.

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:49 PM

I have so much respect for MM that if she were to give me advice you can be pretty assured I would take it. Glenn be careful..

Herb on March 9, 2010 at 1:49 PM

He’s weak.

LOL

Newsflash: Rush Limbaugh, whatever his role, is not a “weak” figure in the conservative movement.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:49 PM

The part at the end when he’s lamenting that no one knows how he is going to present the program, etc… is interesting. I was listening to him yesterday morning when he apparently first heard of Massa and was playing the audio of Massa going off. Glenn was getting ecstatic over it, and at the same time made it clear he knew nothing about Massa. He didn’t know where he was from, nothing about the alleged scandals, etc… I wanted to call in and tell him to slow the train down.

Now I admire a lot of what GB has done, and like to think he did his homework before he airs this, but the way he was so excited and eager to get Massa on, without knowing anything other than the soundbites he was getting left me concerned. It felt like he was so desperate for hope that he was looking for it in the wrong places.

I hope GB gets some good information on the current admin corruption, but that Massa doesn’t get to portray himself as some innocent victim of it. Beck’s comparison of mafia informants testifying gives me a little comfort that he knows what he’s doing. He’s done so many good things, I have to give him the benefit of the doubt, so I’ll wait and see.

And I just love Michelle Malkin. She handles everything with such grace and class, but still stands tough.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Is that what happened? I’ve wondered for so long. Loved her when she did his show. Her smackdown of Malik Shabbazz was possibly the best TV moment I’ve ever witnessed.

pannw on March 9, 2010 at 1:50 PM

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

Where did she get the idea that Beck was going to “glorify” him?

I thought Beck was going to get out of the way and let this guy dish on what goes on in the Democrat underbelly.

Her point is well-taken. Now let the Democrat scoundrel speak and settle scores.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:50 PM

LOL

Newsflash: Rush Limbaugh, whatever his role, is not a “weak” figure in the conservative movement.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:49 PM

He’s “weak” because in his heart of hearts, he knows better.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:51 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

I’m the opposite. I prefer is radio show to the tv one but needeless to say, I’ll be watching the latter today.

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:51 PM

Honey, if you have a story idea you send it to TIPS@HOTAIR.COM
DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:18 PM

Do you actually not see the difference, or are you pretending not to?

RD on March 9, 2010 at 1:52 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

So Beck is above criticism?

right2bright on March 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Fascinating train of thought going there, right2.

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 1:52 PM

So Beck is above criticism? Beck is a shill for a popular talk show, just a talk show. Academically, he doesn’t belong in the same room as Michelle…
These guys care more about ratings, then being on the right side of things.

right2bright on March 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Man, does this smack of elitism…just as Michelle’s remarks could be taken that way also. Was she implying that Beck is stupid? He’s not, and he knows the background of Massa…he will let Massa hang on his own words…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Sorry, Boss Emeritus, but–& I’m not a big Beck fan–he’s right on this.
Who else would’ve given the scoop about the naked chest jab? Maybe Massa’s got even more fun dirt to expose.

jgapinoy on March 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM

Rush forgot about principles, and goes along to get along. He’s weak.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 PM

And so is your argument…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:55 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

It doesn’t matter what Beck’s motives are.

Is Massa the principle party involved in these allegations or not? As long as he is central to the news story – and this is a valid news story because of the timing of his resignation relative to Obamacare – then only a moron would not book him for his or her television show.

MM finds it distasteful or foolish or risky or whatever. Fine. DON’T INTERVIEW HIM.

I can’t understand the risk to conservatives or the conservative movement or the GOP. Beck is not a spokesperson. (I don’t even like him, frankly.) He is a guy with a news-based opinion show. That’s it.

The only risk comes from the follow up. If guys like Steele or Boehner or McConnell go out on a limb making accusations to the Dems based on what Massa says, they could look bad or “desperate” or whatever. Otherwise, what’s the problem?

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM

I listen to GB almost every day. He is fun and informative. But he is also bat shit crazy. When guests like Sarah Palin, MM, or any of those he castigated at CPAC refuse to follow him into the tall weeds they get ridiculed by Beck as “part of the problem.”

He has a weird Messiah complex where he is always telling listeners that he sees what others don’t see, he knows what others don’t know, and people who tell you otherwis are apparently in on the conspiracy. Sort of like his prediction “President Tom” of Iran was planning a nuclear attack on either Israel or American interests two years ago.

That’s nutty.

Any movement to take our country back can’t have somebody like that at the forefront of it. We will get burned in the end. For a lot of people, when Beck said at CPAC that the GOP was no better than any of the other Progressives, that was a bridge too far, because it is undoubtedly untrue. But in his mind, they’re the ones (the “you people” he was talking about) who have got it wrong.

SO don’t be surprised if people begin to distance themselves somewhat from his nuttier notions.

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM

Wow!!!! Beck you luck dog….you got a Air “Kiss” from Michelle!!!

Love the debate…..the make up at the ending was better. :)

dec5 on March 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM

I thought Beck was going to get out of the way and let this guy dish on what goes on in the Democrat underbelly.

Her point is well-taken. Now let the Democrat scoundrel speak and settle scores.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:50 PM

+ 1

jgapinoy on March 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM

I don’t understand the comment…

“you people”

I can see Michelle recoiling at that comment… and so did I. If you take it for what it was, then this is serious.

PhilipJames on March 9, 2010 at 1:36 PM

It wasn’t that serious, IMO. Beck has been on the receiving end of a lot of unjustified criticism from people claiming to be on the Right and I think that was the source of the “you people” comment, but then he later apologized because he was himself unjustified in lumping Michelle into that group.

FloatingRock on March 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM

The left side of the aisle is totally made up of liars and perverts yet none of that seems to matter as long as they go along with Obama on healthcare.

Mmmm…smells like selective moral outrage to me. I mean Rahm has such a stellar reputation to beging with that these stories could in no way be true.

If there is one thing this administration is innocent of, it is thug, strong arm tactics. Just ask the SEIU and bank CEO’s.

ClassicCon on March 9, 2010 at 1:48 PM

Yeah! After all, democrats are the only ones who have been busted for perving on staffers, interns etc. ;)

Good grief, the stupid burns.

I cannot wait for Michelle’s “I told you so”

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Beck’s comparison of mafia informants testifying gives me a little comfort that he knows what he’s doing.

Um…mafia informants aren’t innocent of crimes.

They’re part of the mafia. They’re often real scumbags and criminals. All they’re doing is cutting a deal with the feds when they’re caught and have nothing left to lose.

Somebody offers them a lenient sentence. They in exchange give important information.

Same thing here. Massa was a member of the Democrat mafia – and of all of the scummy, back-handed nonsense that happens in that party. He’s now gonna sing because he’s been smeared and will continue to be smeared (rightly or wrongly) by the media and his enemies who are rushing to circle the wagons around their party, and he’s (it appears) looking for some payback – however minor.

GB’s show is a large microphone in which he’ll be able to launch some broadsides against political enemies in his party who may have ‘wronged’ him (maybe even some in the GOP as well, which would also be fun just to see the media’s reaction to THOSE allegations).

Beck hasn’t endorsed him at all. Beck just said, “Here. Come and talk into this microphone.”

What’s the problem?

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Beck is a shill for a popular talk show
right2bright

Sorry, but that doesn’t wash. You see, that line of dismissal attack is constantly used against all conservatives, including Malkin - “she will say anything because she just wants to sell her books”. I would expect most of us have heard or read something along those lines about every conserbative pundit, writer or host.

whatcat on March 9, 2010 at 1:58 PM

He’s “weak” because in his heart of hearts, he knows better.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 1:51 PM

Sounds like alpha male envy by a beta male…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:59 PM

When guests like Sarah Palin, MM, or any of those he [Beck] castigated at CPAC refuse to follow him into the tall weeds they get ridiculed by Beck as “part of the problem.”

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM

Huh? I watched that speech. Beck never castigated Palin or MM.

FloatingRock on March 9, 2010 at 2:00 PM

He is fun and informative. But he is also…crazy.

I agree to a certain extent.

He has a weird Messiah complex where he is always telling listeners that he sees what others don’t see, he knows what others don’t know, and people who tell you otherwis are apparently in on the conspiracy.

You may be on to something there.
But Beck is still right this time.
Michelle should’ve waited to see how Beck handles the interview.
Don’t cops interview criminals?
Doesn’t the CIA interview terrorists?

jgapinoy on March 9, 2010 at 2:00 PM

So Beck is above criticism? Beck is a shill for a popular talk show, just a talk show. Academically, he doesn’t belong in the same room as Michelle, I suggest he comes down off of his pedestal, and listen to someone with more intelligence and more experience.
It isn’t a matter of “who is boss”, odd that you think only a boss can give advice, it’s who is right, who is smarter, who is more analytical, and it’s Michelle.

BTW, Michelle isn’t on O’R because O’R wouldn’t back her up when attacked by a fellow Fox news host…which tells alot about O’R’s lack of honor.
These guys care more about ratings, then being on the right side of things.

right2bright on March 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM

This is an asinine appeal to authority.
I prefer MM overall to GB, but MM isn’t God, and she isn’t always right. She’s acting out of fear here. Plus, one of her biggest problems is that she is waaaaay too serious, unlike Glenn. Advantage, Beck

Bizarro No. 1 on March 9, 2010 at 2:01 PM

I listen to GB almost every day. He is fun and informative. But he is also bat shit crazy. When guests like Sarah Palin, MM, or any of those he castigated at CPAC refuse to follow him into the tall weeds they get ridiculed by Beck as “part of the problem.”

He has a weird Messiah complex where he is always telling listeners that he sees what others don’t see, he knows what others don’t know, and people who tell you otherwis are apparently in on the conspiracy. Sort of like his prediction “President Tom” of Iran was planning a nuclear attack on either Israel or American interests two years ago.

That’s nutty.

Any movement to take our country back can’t have somebody like that at the forefront of it. We will get burned in the end. For a lot of people, when Beck said at CPAC that the GOP was no better than any of the other Progressives, that was a bridge too far, because it is undoubtedly untrue. But in his mind, they’re the ones (the “you people” he was talking about) who have got it wrong.

SO don’t be surprised if people begin to distance themselves somewhat from his nuttier notions.

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM

You don’t seem understand that we’re “at war” so to speak? There is no room for the meek or un principled. These Fabiam socialists have steadily eroded and infiltrated our institutions like termites, and it’s not time to engage in pleasantries. I respect Beck because he’s not afraid to shine the light on the Fabians in both parties. As if they didn’t know that we’re onto they’re ruse? Really? Does Lyndsey Graham really think that we consider him one of us?

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Okay now that we have beaten to death whether giving Mr. Massa a full hour on Mr. Becks show is a good idea, I have another question. What do you think fellow Democrats think about what is going on with him? Why the disparity on how ethics complaints are being handled within their party and the leaks of the what the report might have said after Mr. Massa decided to resign? Is this making other Dems nervous?

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 2:02 PM

Massa resigned because if he didn’t, the ethics committee is going to reveal what a louse he really is. All Massa really wants to do is get in a couple parting shots on his way out the door. Any other story he concocts to make himself look better needs to be viewed in that context.

The fact that Beck is willing to allow himself to be used for that purpose is a problem. The Administration can deflect it easily, and Beck is the one who looks like he’s trying to use this douchebag in an effort to get at Obama.

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 2:03 PM

“You people” indicates an Us vs. Them train of thought.

Doesn’t make any sense unless Beck is more thin-skinned than he lets on to be.

John the Libertarian on March 9, 2010 at 2:03 PM

re:

backstabbing, as Beck seems to imply

@4:38 Michelle seems to imply Beck has respect for Massa

Beck made it clear ASAP that MM was not in the same group of backstabing, talkers, pundints, et al who have.

But twice on this call MM was those people.
imho

elraphbo on March 9, 2010 at 2:03 PM

Sounds like alpha male envy by a beta male…

lovingmyUSA on March 9, 2010 at 1:59 PM

Fortunately, I never sold out my country for the adulation of the GOP. big difference. Rush had the power to mitigate the mistakes of the Bush years while they were transpiring, but cowered behind his Golden EIB microphone. The man is a mouse, and too friendly with the establishment.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:04 PM

Is this making other Dems nervous?

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 2:02 PM

Let’s ask Vince Foster ;)

Laura in Maryland on March 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM

Having Massa on Beck isn’t going to turn this guy into some honorable politician. And, if Massa is re-elected again in the future, it’s the fault of the people not because Beck had him on his show and gave him credibility.

Have the guy on the show and let us all see and judge for ourselves what kind of a politician he is.

moonsbreath on March 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM

Where is Art Bell when you really need him?

Emperor Norton on March 9, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Just because Massa is a self-serving jackass doesn’t mean we can’t wring some behind-the-scenes reality out of him on his way down.

He may not be the final vote against health reform, but he sure isn’t getting the ethics panel slow-walk that Rangel is getting. Massa got the fast track. Now he’s pissed and out for revenge. I say give him air time, sit back calmly and see what sticks.

John on March 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM

You don’t seem understand that we’re “at war” so to speak? There is no room for the meek or un principled. These Fabiam socialists have steadily eroded and infiltrated our institutions like termites, and it’s not time to engage in pleasantries. I respect Beck because he’s not afraid to shine the light on the Fabians in both parties. As if they didn’t know that we’re onto they’re ruse? Really? Does Lyndsey Graham really think that we consider him one of us?

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Sadly, there are still people who follow the likes of Graham and Crist. How anyone in their right mind could think they have the country’s best interest at heart is beyond me.

It pains me to say it, but the way things are going now, I don’t see this country bouncing back. Too many people are still too willing to compromise.

MobileVideoEngineer on March 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM

Is anyone not going to watch this interview? Really?

Pablo on March 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM

All I know is that Beck & Co. made me spew coffee this morning when they were imitating Jesse Ventura. Funny stuff! Beck is good at shining light on truth through twisted humor, so I’ll watch his show and see what happens.

redwhiteblue on March 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM

Have the guy on the show and let us all see and judge for ourselves what kind of a politician he is.

But we already know this (Michelle’s point).

What I’m interested in is what’s going on in the Democrat party re: the health care corruption, other corruption, bullying by the WH, etc.

THAT’S what we’re looking for here. Massa is a jackass. But he’s a jackass looking for some payback in his own ranks, and that’s nothing but good news for the GOP.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 2:08 PM

He may not be the final vote against health reform, but he sure isn’t getting the ethics panel slow-walk that Rangel is getting. Massa got the fast track. Now he’s pissed and out for revenge. I say give him air time, sit back calmly and see what sticks.

John on March 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM

Right. Which you can do without being his BFF.

Pablo on March 9, 2010 at 2:08 PM

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Um, her opinion had been offered then he invited her on to discuss it with her person to person. She wasn’t invited and then shared her thoughts on the wisdom of his plan to have Massa on his show today.

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 PM

And you know this how, exactly?

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 2:08 PM

John on March 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM

Exactly.

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Huh? I watched that speech. Beck never castigated Palin or MM.

FloatingRock on March 9, 2010 at 2:00 PM

Not in the speech, but in his sitdown interview with Palin I saw on Fox one weekend. Numerous times he asked her leading questions and she failed to go down his road. She’s way smarter about the political consequence of her words than he is.

And that’s all I am saying. The movement to take back the country can’t rely heavily on somebody who is willing to shoot from the hip as much as he does. Because he doesn’t risk just his own credibility if he blows it, but the whole movement.

I think that’s why a lot of conservatives have begun to distance themselves from him when he crawls out on a limb.

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Put me some knowledge. Was MM this critical of conservative pundits or journalists who interviewed Blago?

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Massa resigned because if he didn’t, the ethics committee is going to reveal what a louse he really is. All Massa really wants to do is get in a couple parting shots on his way out the door. Any other story he concocts to make himself look better needs to be viewed in that context.

The fact that Beck is willing to allow himself to be used for that purpose is a problem. The Administration can deflect it easily, and Beck is the one who looks like he’s trying to use this douchebag in an effort to get at Obama.

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 2:03 PM

You said it better than I could. Give him an hour show and he’s all theirs. *shrug*

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 2:10 PM

Another way to look at it….Michelle often says “sunshine is the best disinfectant.” The best way to disinfect what is wrong with Washington is to listen to what the other side says and shine the light on it. I believe Beck is doing that.

moonsbreath on March 9, 2010 at 2:10 PM

Yeah! After all, democrats are the only ones who have been busted for perving on staffers, interns etc. ;)

Good grief, the stupid burns.

I cannot wait for Michelle’s “I told you so”

fastestslug on March 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM

And what happened to those Republicans, slug? See the difference child? I know you little political neophytes don’t have long memories, but try to keep up kid.

ClassicCon on March 9, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:04 PM

Try taking the cotton out of your ears when you listen to Rush next. You sound like someone who doesn’t listen very often, if at all.

Sporty1946 on March 9, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Anyone remember when Beck interviewed Scott Levinson? I think he’ll be fine.

Pablo on March 9, 2010 at 2:11 PM

In light of recent developments, I think we should all pause and ask ourselves WWTNED (what would the National Enquirer do)?

Y-not on March 9, 2010 at 2:12 PM

“Sunlight is the best disinfectant”

Let ‘er rip Glenn and let the chips fall where they may.

I think Beck will do just fine. Massa (the Dims and BHO) will lose either way.

vietvet on March 9, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Is this making other Dems nervous?

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2010 at 2:02 PM

Judging by the speed at which they are going for the throat rather that sweeping it under the rug as usual, I suspect they’re very nervous.

FloatingRock on March 9, 2010 at 2:13 PM

Beck has been hanging around with O’reilly too much, that “you people” line really ticks me off. I like Beck, I like his show, and I felt the “you people” remark was more about his critics, not singling out Conservatives, but he needs to grow a set of thicker skin.

Michelle is right, Beck could damage the whole mission to exploit the culture of corruption by putting this Massa guy on a pedestal. We don’t even know if what he is saying is true, he could take Beck for a complete ride. he’s given multiple reasons for resigning, what happened to terminal cancer, did that go away? How is a sex joke at a wedding enough to make you retire? Beck could damage the whole mission by shining the spotlight on a fraud.

Daemonocracy on March 9, 2010 at 2:14 PM

KittyLowrey on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 PM

BTW, I happen to agree with Beck. I was responding to someone else who implied that because Michelle had given up Hot Air and guest-hosting on O’Reilly that she should shut up. The implication was nonsensical.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Beck has gone off the deep end. He and Olbermann are about to meet in Beck’s circle of extremists.

lonestar1 on March 9, 2010 at 2:15 PM

Malkin versus Beck? Didn’t Jefferson debate Adams with as much passion? It’s healthy for us, quite normal.

The Dems are committing suicide.

PA Guy on March 9, 2010 at 2:16 PM

exploit = expose. strange typo, I usually associate the word exploit with corruption so I ended up typing it instead.

Daemonocracy on March 9, 2010 at 2:16 PM

Try taking the cotton out of your ears when you listen to Rush next. You sound like someone who doesn’t listen very often, if at all.

Sporty1946 on March 9, 2010 at 2:11 PM

I have listened since 1988, you? I have his autograph on an old Conservative Chronicle, you? He has a point, but you 9/11 conservatives have not been around long enough to establish any sort of context to realize it.

I appreciate the guy, but it was made clear to me long ago that his career means more than ideology so he doesn’t inspire the cult like following from me anymore. This is was the same Rush that fawned over his hollywood pals that produced that intellectual masterpiece “24″, and how did that work out.

If he was sincere, he would be our Soros and fund all sorts of Conservative groups.

ClassicCon on March 9, 2010 at 2:16 PM

Late entry but . . .

The “You People” is probably (as noted in earlier comments) Beck feeling a bit “bullied” by the CPAC darlings of yesteryear — Rush, Levin, Hannity and MM herself (was she ever at CPAC? . . nevermind).

Try as they might (and add Medved into this one) Beck is on to something with the “there is no difference between the parties.” Yeah that scares those of us who remember Ross Perot (shudder) but so what? If we get the dems out (progressives and leftist-statists) and we get RINOS in (progressive light) we still get to h*ll in a handbasket with a different animal on it!

Okay, you don’t like Beck ‘cuz he don’t like “progressive light” — get over it Rush — I ain’t carryin’ yo wata’ no mo’! Repubics (Levin’s word) need to be exposed and they need to go! Or we go to the libertarians!

rebuzz on March 9, 2010 at 2:17 PM

If Beck will have Massa on followed by people willing to corroborate his story publicly, I think it can stick. There’s gong to need to be a long thread of people willing to go on the record about these types of extorsion attempts for it to fly. It could be really devastating. But if it’s just Massa, the ethics committee rolls out his rap sheet and says, “Look who Beck is relying on for his information.” And from the way it sounds, unless Beck has something comprehensive up his sleeve, all he’s got is Massa. I don’t think it is a good strategy.

Beck can come out of this looking really bad, and I’d hate to see that.

Caustic Conservative on March 9, 2010 at 2:17 PM

“You people” indicates an Us vs. Them train of thought.

John the Libertarian on March 9, 2010 at 2:03 PM

And considering that there actually is, in reality, a group of “them[s]“, (mostly progressive R’s and their familiars), that take advantage of every opportunity to attack Beck on the flimsiest of pretexts, I’d say he’s justified in feeling that way.

The only problem is that he was wrong to lump Michelle in with “them”, (and apologized for doing so).

FloatingRock on March 9, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Fortunately, I never sold out my country for the adulation of the GOP. big difference. Rush had the power to mitigate the mistakes of the Bush years while they were transpiring, but cowered behind his Golden EIB microphone. The man is a mouse, and too friendly with the establishment.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:04 PM

Glenn Beck was also much further up Bush’s behind than anyone before 2008. He seems to have been somewhat (not entirely) influenced by great men like “The Judge” Napolitano and even Ron Paul since then though.

The Dean on March 9, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Sorry, but I am with Beck on this one.

Norwegian on March 9, 2010 at 2:19 PM

Beck has a few sleepers in the beltway. He must have conversed with them before letting Massa stroll onto his show. Beck is a sharp cookie.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:20 PM

I’m sure others have noted this, but Beck’s exploitation of Massa is just the right-side version of what Allah always calls “This Strange New Respect” game that the left always plays.

Perfect example is AP’s video of Judge Ken Starr on Olberdouche’s show, where conservatives have rarely trod. Why would an effing nitwit like Olbermann bring Starr on his show? Why…because Starr has something bad to say about Liz Cheney, of course.

I agree with MM completely — you do this crap at your own risk. Someone with a functioning brain will soon point out that you’re patting this guy on the back and the only reason he hates this healthcare bill is because it’s not socialist enough for him. So now who looks like a chump?

Jaibones on March 9, 2010 at 2:20 PM

I was responding to someone else who implied that because Michelle had given up Hot Air and guest-hosting on O’Reilly that she should shut up. The implication was nonsensical.

baldilocks on March 9, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Assuming that was moi … here is what I wrote:

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

Did I say anything about shutting up? All I said was that if she wants to tell other people how to run their venues, maybe she should have kept her own.

You know, baldi, I have tried in the past few years to respect you because i know know you are ex-military, but you are an a-hole.

DaydreamBeliever on March 9, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Glenn Beck was also much further up Bush’s behind than anyone before 2008. He seems to have been somewhat (not entirely) influenced by great men like “The Judge” Napolitano and even Ron Paul since then though.

The Dean on March 9, 2010 at 2:18 PM

And that is why I consider Jason Lewis to be the only adult and consistent talk show host on the right. Even Rush booted him from guest host status for refusing to be just another RNC waterboy.

ClassicCon on March 9, 2010 at 2:21 PM

Sorry, but I am with Beck on this one.

Norwegian on March 9, 2010 at 2:19 PM

Just for fun — why?

Jaibones on March 9, 2010 at 2:21 PM

This is why I enjoy reading Hillbuzz. We alpha gays know how to play the game.

Ever since June of 2008 when we started working with Republicans for the first time, and we met our very first Republican friends by becoming Democrats for McCain, and then Democrats for Palin, we’ve been startled at times by how different, culturally and behaviorally, we are from our GOP counterparts. It’s not political policy differences we’re talking about: it’s how we all approach confrontation.

Republicans let people get away with far more than Democrats do. Some of you out there chalk that up to a mythical “I’m going to take the high road”, when there’s really no clear set of two separate roads, high or low, visible. Republicans typically lose elections because they’re trying to construct these nonexistent “high roads”, while Democrats focus on completely and utterly decimating their opponents. Ironically enough, the Clintons lost in 2008 because they “took the high road” with Dr. Utopia, never hit him on his drug abuse, his shady trip to Pakistan in 1981, and all of his lifelong connections to radicals…whereas Utopia’s hopey-change campaign made up everything it could about Hillary Clinton, including calling the woman and her husband RAAAACISTS over and over again. You know where the “high road” leads: to ruination.

SouthernGent on March 9, 2010 at 2:22 PM

Glenn Beck was also much further up Bush’s behind than anyone before 2008. He seems to have been somewhat (not entirely) influenced by great men like “The Judge” Napolitano and even Ron Paul since then though.

The Dean on March 9, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Glenn wanted Bush impeached before 2008 for his dereliction of duty in regrad to the border! He ridiculed Bush relentlessly for pushing LNCB and the 8.1 trillion dollar Medicare Part D boondoggle.

Pitchforker on March 9, 2010 at 2:22 PM

And his hit job on Geert Wilders for his Saudi paymasters was even worse. For an enlightened response seek out Diana Wests interview on Russian TV, with an interviewer who is at the same level as Beck on this issue.

TrueBrit on March 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM

? I’m not sure if you were disputing my statement or agreeing with it. O.o *massive sinus headache*

From what you wrote here, I think we are in agreement. My point was that Beck views him similarly to a smaller mafia fish ratting out bigger ones. They are all scum, but at least the filth is exposed. Right?

pannw on March 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Glenn Beck was also much further up Bush’s behind than anyone before 2008.
The Dean on March 9, 2010 at 2:18 PM

I see you’re not the least bit familiar with Beck. That is the most idiotic, fact deficient thing I’ve heard said about him in some time, and that’s quite a bar to get over.

Pablo on March 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM

This is was the same Rush that fawned over his hollywood pals that produced that intellectual masterpiece “24″, and how did that work out.

Got news for ya.

Hollywood has a lit of conservatives working in it, too.

And if you want to have any lasting impact on the youth and the culture of the country from here on out, you have to start accepting that Hollywood needs to be part of the fight as well.

At the time, 24 was the ONLY major show on TV criticizing Muslim terrorism and putting an unabashed American counter-terror agent and his anything-goes-to-protect-US approach to fighting it as “the good guy” on TV. It’s certainly waned in recent years, but that was the time and the context in which Rush made those remarks. What was your problem there?

If he was sincere, he would be our Soros and fund all sorts of Conservative groups.

Um, he’s under no moral obligation to “fund” conservative groups. He donates a lot of money to military charities, law enforcement charities and leukemia research, however. Because he’s not sincere.

Yes?

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 2:24 PM

From what you wrote here, I think we are in agreement. My point was that Beck views him similarly to a smaller mafia fish ratting out bigger ones. They are all scum, but at least the filth is exposed. Right?

Yes.

Sorry if the ‘tone’ was harsh haha

We are in complete agreement. I’m just restating that Michelle seems to be saying that this guy is scum and we shouldn’t be ‘glorifying’ or praising.

I don’t think anyone is. I think we’re giddy with excitement at more stories about Barack Obama’s WH Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel naked and threatening at people in the Congressional bathrooms.

:-)

Good Lt on March 9, 2010 at 2:26 PM

Glenn Beck was also much further up Bush’s behind than anyone before 2008. He seems to have been somewhat (not entirely) influenced by great men like “The Judge” Napolitano and even Ron Paul since then though.

The Dean on March 9, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Someone likes to MSU and not pay attention.

thomasaur on March 9, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6