I decided to something a little bit different. Rather than blog, I made the first of what I hope will be more (occasional) videos to follow. If anyone else want to make these, I can send you the intro, outro and byline template.
[vimeo width="500" height="300"]9399814[/vimeo]
This video is my analysis of Glenn Beck’s controversial interview with Debra Medina where Beck uses the same techniques that DHS and TSA use on Americans and foreigners when entering the US. It casts significant doubts on Becks credibility and also his motivations for interviewing Medina in the first place. I have broken apart the interview and analysed it – revealing some of Beck’s dubious motives and questionable tactics.
You may also be interested in:
Nice video Colin. I’ve never listened to Glenn Beck, so I have no opinion about him. You seem to be drawing a lot of conclusions from just a few questions. Isn’t it normal to ask those kinds of open-ended Get-To-Know-You questions to guests who aren’t well known to the public? I didn’t see that as an interrogation technique so much as a courtesy to a guest who needs exposure and needs to get her name out to the public.
As for the 9/11 Truther question, I guess it seemed fair to me. The only Medina supporter I know is a Truther (or at least has strong sympathies), so maybe I kind of connected her with that movement. I could be wrong about that.
Everyone gets that I have assimilated the dry British humour, and that I do not think that Britain is a land of freedom and liberty, right?
Wait, it isn’t?!?
Yeah, I heard Beck going on and on about her statement. I’m almost a Medina supporter, although I still feel more comfortable with Perry.
Was 9/11 a conspiracy? Heck no. But did our government officials deserve to bear part of the blame? Definitely. That’s just part of their job. I liked Medina’s answer because she’s smart enough to be ready to change her mind if the right evidence was presented. I believe that there is no evidence, but politicians shouldn’t jump to conclusions as quickly as I do.
BTW, I enjoyed the video. Great job!
A few things are starting to come out on this. I think the most interesting is that the interview went out on Perry’s robocalls as early as seven minutes after the interview according to KLIF radio.
Again, I am not interested in saying this was part of some conspiracy, but at the same time, there is some pretty questionable stuff about how this went down.
I hadn’t heard anything about this issue before Colin’s video, and honestly after listening to the recording of the call in the clip from “Constitutional Activist” I think Colin focused on entirely the wrong thing. I see nothing wrong with the question or with Medina’s answer. The “interrogation technique” to ferret out details of someone’s position is, in my opinion, entirely fair. Where Beck goes crazy is after the question, first by trying to interrupt her (which as “Constitutional Activist” is suspicious), then by badly distorting what she said afterward. I have no idea if Medina is a “truther”, but there was definitely nothing in her answer to suggest she is. In fact, I think that her explanation that she isn’t trying to though police her campaign staff is entirely fair.
I don’t know much about Glenn Beck, but what I do know about him seems to indicate he is one of the more disgusting figures in political commentary, making people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton look like conscientious fair minded people. In all three cases, I question how any intellectually honest person could take the speaker seriously. As a spectacle, all three may be entertaining, but this is in the way that Jerry Springer, Howard Stern, or reality television are entertaining. None of them should be take seriously by anyone, and Governor Perry should be shamed for using this interview or associating with Beck in any way.
(For that matter, Medina was naive for agreeing to speak with Beck. I mean, look at his interview with Sarah Palin who he openly LIKES to see what a bad idea it is to talk to a gibbering idiot like Glenn Beck.)
I saw Medina on Saturday. She spoke for over an hour about her views and what she wants to do as governor. She didn’t mention the “Truther” issue at all, but she did say that if the main stream media is going after you, you must be doing something right. I really liked what she had to say, and she will get my vote. I think the idea of eliminating property taxes altogether is not the best idea, but I do think something needs to be done, because there’s just no reason why my family, who have no kids in school AND were all private school educated, should pay for public schools through property taxes. Sometimes you have to shoot for the moon to reach the stars, right?
TANK, I think Medina’s reason for shifting over to property taxes is more philosophical than anything. In other words – private property means that it isn’t directly taxed. An indirect tax on consumption is much more in line with a society that values private property.
I guess I don’t see how that follows. Why would it make more sense for something I made be taxed more than taxing something I own? The logic of property taxes is that of the homeowner’s association. To buy into the neighborhood, you pay a fee for the benefits provided by that neighborhood’s staff. On the other hand, if I bake a cake in my neighborhood, why should I pay a fee to the association for eating it, sharing it, or selling it? It would make sense to charge a “stamp tax” if I want the protection of the court system for contract enforcement, but if I’m willing to take my own chances then the “stamp tax” shouldn’t be mandated either. I know you are categorically skeptical of taxes, but it would seem that head taxes, use taxes, and property taxes would be the most logical way to collect resources for value provided to a resident, service user, or property owner. Income taxes make the least sense (why would I be penalized for creating wealth), and “consumption” taxes seem in the middle.
Atanamis, I’m not saying I agree with it, but I can see the logic. I think the idea is that property ownership is an inherent part of being a free person (as property rights are derived directly from the right to own one’s own body and life). Whereas a consumption tax is a transaction fee paid by the purchaser of a good to support the “officiating” of the market by the government. Private property definitely doesn’t require any kind of administration. A marketplace definitely does (again, not really my position that the govt. needs to do it).