Thursday, September 24, 2009

... What?

When Glenn Beck Says Frog, You . . . Die?:

I was pretty sure that Glenn Beck did not kill an actual frog. Not because I like Glenn Beck, but because a television show is not a one man stunt--it involves a lot of people, all of whom would have had to be okay with throwing frogs into boiling water, and thus triggering the wrath of PETA, as well as violating the various showbusiness [sic] codes on animal treatment. Not impossible that he somehow managed to do it without anyone quite realizing what he was up to--but very unlikely.
Are there any advertisers left for Beck to lose?
Megan doesn't "like" Glenn Beck, but apparently she watches him, and like the noble gun nuts watching his show Glenn Beck shouldn't be tarred as crazy merely for saying and doing batshit bugfuck insane things. He's a showman, not a mentally ill publicity hound with messianic delusions enabling the worst ideas held by the extreme right.
Also, most of those shows are taped, and if the frog died, why would he have aired the segment? If it wasn't taped, why didn't we get a close up of the dying frog? Presumably, he would have cued a cameraman to do a close up of the frog as it jumped out of the water.
Further, his reaction was too pat--he looked like a B-list actor doing a double-take in a sitcom. Most people who are taken that much by surprise do a lot more standing around and stammering when they don't have to fit the bit into a 24-minute air time.
And finally, I didn't see any frog actually come out of his hands. This led to quite a spirited discussion last night over the possibility of actual frog death.
It appears I was right: it was indeed a fake frog. Now the only question is . . . what the hell? I don't think I understand the point.
Sure you do, Megan, otherwise you would have mentioned how Beck is clinically insane (if you watch the show he can't even stand still for more than half a second. I get motion sickness from the camera constantly moving to keep him in center frame) instead of writing a long post defending him. He didn't kill a frog, so he's ok, just like not having used the LOADED FIREARMS they brought to peaceful public meetings meant the gun nuts were ok. She doesn't get their point, but they're still better than hippies.
Megan? When a crazy man smears what appears to be his own poo on his face on public and yells about how the Masons are coming to get him it does not become ok if it turns out the poo is fake. Glenn Beck is either mentally ill or a trained performer aping mental illness so as to connect with the unquestionably disturbed people who watch him. And you, Megan, seem to be watching, so there's your point. You're talking about him, and defending him. Attention and victimization, the wingnut's favorite cocktail.

3 comments:

Mr. Wonderful said...

Isn't Beck's point that "we" have been plunged into the boiling water of Obama's evil socialist scheme and yet, unlike the frog of the accepted common wisdom, we aren't "jumping out" to save ourselves?

So, to sum up:

1. Megan seems not to have seen that nothing left Beck's hand, and that he threw nothing into the water.
2. There was no proof that there was water, let alone boiling, in the pot.
3. Megan seemed to suggest that her assessment of Beck would depend on whether he did kill a frog or not.
4. She seemed oblivious of the obvious meaning of the stunt.

I can haz economics kolum?

Mr. Wonderful AGAIN said...

Or, that the frog, too, isn't jumping out, which means we're able to jump out EVEN LESS, and are in that much more peril.

NutellaonToast said...

I just want to know what the fuck her title means. Is that like, I say jump you say how high shit?