Glenn Beck dishes it out, can't take it

[ishkabibble]

http://www.thresq.com/2009/11/....html

Glenn Beck can't handle his own tactics being used against him, tries to battle the First Amendment, and loses. My hat's off to you, Isaac Eiland-Hall.

[AZhitman]

You would applaud something like that.

I'm finding it hard to comprehend how this is in any way similar to anything Beck has done.

Further, it was a simple ICANN complaint.

A domain name dispute resolution body is hardly qualified to determine what is or is not "strongly protected" under the First Amendment.

Had Beck taken it further, I'm sure he could have brought a legitimate and successful suit against whoever this no-name attention-seeker is.

There's a big difference between protected protest speech and slander.

Then again, I'd expect no less from you, Ish. Welcome back.

[ishkabibble]

You would applaud something like that.

Applaud what?

I'm finding it hard to comprehend how this is in any way similar to anything Beck has done.

Watch Beck's interview with Keith Ellison. Also, his "I'm just asking questions here" stuff is his standard tactic when he is fearmongering.

Further, it was a simple ICANN complaint.

A domain name dispute resolution body is hardly qualified to determine what is or is not "strongly protected" under the First Amendment.

Had Beck taken it further, I'm sure he could have brought a legitimate and successful suit against whoever this no-name attention-seeker is.

There's a big difference between protected protest speech and slander

Actually, Beck probably took it up with ICANN because he knew he would lose in court. No slander occurred, the website owner was "just asking questions".

I'm not really "back", just (s)trolling through.

[themadscientist]

isaaceilandhallmollestschildren.comis available to buy on Godaddy. You in the market Greg?

fair is fair,,,,is fair.

Bad behavior is bad behavior regardless of the presence of other bad behavior. Here is the kids webpage for those that would like to laud or lambaste him.

http://isaac.eiland-hall.com/

I find the whole thing distasteful and my first impression of him would cast a long shadow over anything potentially thoughtful he might say. Grow up kid.

[ishkabibble]

isaaceilandhallmollestschildren.comis available to buy on Godaddy. You in the market Greg?

fair is fair,,,,is fair.

Bad behavior is bad behavior regardless of the presence of other bad behavior. Here is the kids webpage for those that would like to laud or lambaste him. I find the whole thing distasteful and my first impression of him would cast anything potentially thoughtful he might say. Grow up kid.

If you take out that domain name, the joke will be on you.

The kid proved his point and then handed Beck the domain name. He handled it tastefully, IMO. No call for Beck to grow up, just the kid?

[themadscientist]

Again, justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior is a fallacy and childish. I am no fan of Beck or his ilk. This is about what the kid did, not Beck. The absence of critique for Beck does not mean I condone him any more than the kid. Try again ish.

[AZhitman]

Again, big difference.

The website owner was NOT "just asking questions". English 101. His domain name is a statement, a complete sentence, and an unfounded allegation (slander or libel) if it were written or uttered.

But you just dislike him because he's an Independent who leans conservative.

If he was a lefty fearmongerer (and there's plenty), you'd be merrily dangling from his scrote.

[ishkabibble]

Again, justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior is a fallacy and childish. I am no fan of Beck or his ilk. This is about what the kid did, not Beck. The absence of critique for Beck does not mean I condone him any more than the kid. Try again ish.

isaaceilandhallmollestschildren.comis available to buy on Godaddy. You in the market Greg? fair is fair,,,,is fair.

Better?

I'm fine with turning someone's tactics around and using them against them. I fail to see how it is a "fallacy", the kid's argument was quite logical and he proved his point. Perhaps you meant to use a different word.

Beck is likely to continue his practices, the kid has made his point and moved on.

[ishkabibble]

The website owner was NOT "just asking questions". English 101. His domain name is a statement, a complete sentence, and an unfounded allegation (slander or libel) if it were written or uttered.

Domain names are just locations in my perspective. I see what you are getting at, though. Beck is welcome to let the courts decide, he chose not to.

But you just dislike him because he's an Independent who leans conservative.

When I see Beck spending the same amount of time criticizing the neocons as he does liberals, I'll believe that statement.

If he was a lefty fearmongerer (and there's plenty), you'd be merrily dangling from his scrote.

Nah, I'm a pragmatist.

Your assessment of me is like my assessment of you. We both think we are objective, yet think the other is on a far end of the political spectrum. For what it's worth, I live in one of the most leftist cities in the country and I'm considered pretty conservative by the locals. I'm not as left as you believe, I just have a different approach to "pragmatism" than you. Meaning I think the neocon flavor of crap is worse then the Dem flavor of crap.

[themadscientist]

I fail to see how it is a "fallacy",

The kid committed liable in an effort to counter whatever he believes Beck does. I know you can't comprehend why that is wrong so I feel for your genuine confusion.

If you steal from other people, and I steal from you to teach you a lesson, am I justified? I would say "no", perhaps you would say "yes." The law would agree with me as would our social norms.

If you believe a person is doing wrong, you cannot justify retaliatory wrong against him. I believe your logic is off. Rather than attack you with something akin to what you appear to be advocating, thus making myself a hypocrite, I choose to point out the flaw in your argument.

THAT is how he should have engaged Beck. Take the high ground, walk the walk, and shine light on HIS bad behavior, NOT counter with bad behavior of your own.

An eye for an eye leaves us all blind.

[ishkabibble]

Beck is welcome to sue the kid in court for libel. Seems like he has a pretty open and shut case according to the legal experts Greg and TMS, so I'm not sure why doesn't pursue it.

[themadscientist]

That's his choice and not what you and I are discussing. May I interpret your clumsy feint as a concession?

[AZhitman]

Your assessment of me is like my assessment of you. We both think we are objective, yet think the other is on a far end of the political spectrum.

Yep - We established that quite a while back.

I'm not as left as you believe, I just have a different approach to "pragmatism" than you. Meaning I think the neocon flavor of crap is worse then the Dem flavor of crap.

Trust me, I'm not as "right" as you think, and I despise the "neocons" as much as anyone (although that term is so 2006)...

Here's the thing - The "neocons" aren't affecting me or my family. The lefties are. The Dems are in power, and we're seeing their "smash and grab" mentality on display.

They know they've only got 30 seconds in the jewelry store before the cops show up, so they're looting like L.A. rioters on crack.

For what it's worth, I don't discount your POV... As a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, I've stretched about at far left socially as I can, and you're just 3 feet further over...

[ishkabibble]

It is completely relevant to the thread. It began with Greg's statement about ICANN vs. the courts. If Beck takes it to court and the kid gets dinged for libel, I'll concede your point. Until then, I feel the kid accomplished his goal and made his point with no major ill effects.

[AZhitman]

Still terribly inappropriate.

Even if a libby Court found in this chump's favor and categorized it as "protected speech", I'd say natural consequences should be protected as well.

There was a time when, if a man called another man out for being a "stinking horse thief", he'd get KTFO.

Here's a guy calling a guy a pedoph:le, a rapist, and a murderer, JUST because he disagrees with his politics?

Naw, screw that guy. He needs some wild west lessons in manners.

[ishkabibble]

That analogy about the Dems is hilarious.

*shrug* Does the kid do this type of stuff consistently? Unknown. Does Beck? Yes, he makes a living off of it. Telling that you guys choose to criticize the former rather than the latter.

[themadscientist]

It is completely relevant to the thread. It began with Greg's statement about ICANN vs. the courts. If Beck takes it to court and the kid gets dinged for libel, I'll concede your point. Until then, I feel the kid accomplished his goal and made his point with no major ill effects.

You are arguing shades of gray, I am telling you it's black and white. When the kid tried to counter perceived bad behavior with bad behavior of his own he ceded the high ground, turned himself into a hypocrite, and rendered any point he was trying to make moot. Your "sue me" defense ignores the very premise I put to you that what he did was wrong. The response of the victim is completely and totally irrelevant to the act perpetrated against him. Your second dodge, that he caused no "major ill effects" similarly is irrelevant. Stealing a car is wrong, stealing pen is wrong. They have different levels of extremity but the act is the same. If I then choose to take no action when you swipe my pen it does not render your action un-wrong.

[AZhitman]

You (Ish) still don't get it.

Nowhere did he say, "Michelle Obama sucked off a racehorse and wiped her chin with the American flag!"

Had he done so, he'd be as despicable as this kid (who achieved his REAL goal, which was to get attention).

He probably could give a damn about really learning about politics.

[themadscientist]

So if I murder someone, I can use the "I don't do this much" defense? You would make a terrible lawyer.

Telling that you guys choose to criticize the former rather than the latter.

Now you blindly, (perhaps not) steer into the very same behavior you

1. defend in this kid2. complain about with Beckand then3. perpetrate yourself

What's that?

I am no fan of Beck or his ilk.

The absence of critique for Beck does not mean I condone him any more than the kid.

That's proof you are LYING.

I will file you next to the kid and Beck as you all seem to act the same.

[ishkabibble]

I'm glad your world has such clearly defined, absolute rules. We have very different perceptions of morality, so that aspect of the conversation is not going to go anywhere. You live in a black and white world, mine is grayer than a November day in Portland.

In my opinion:Implying Keith Ellison is a terrorlst was "wrong" on Beck's part since it played to the decently sized "OMG Al Qaeda is going to attack Indiana and kill my kids and that politician from MN is the covert leader of the cell!" crowd. Claiming Beck was a rapist and murderer was obviously a joke which nobody took seriously. If the courts see it a libel, I'll change my opinion.

Note to self: Never borrow TMS' pen without asking.

[AZhitman]

Hey Mike - I think Ish just wants to know how big your pen is.



p.s. Ish, will you back me up if the Feds come pounding on my door? Tell 'em I was just joking.

[ishkabibble]

So if I murder someone, I can use the "I don't do this much" defense? You would make a terrible lawyer.

Can you murder someone as punishment for murdering someone else? You didn't address my previous question about it. Yes, it is all about context, intent, and extent. Let's not get personal, k?

That's proof you are LYING.

I will file you next to the kid and Beck as you all seem to act the same.

I could write a response, but would rather not elevate the personal stuff.

[ishkabibble]

Hey Mike - I think Ish just wants to know how big your pen is.

You and the constant homosexual jokes. Something you're not telling us Greg?

p.s. Ish, will you back me up if the Feds come pounding on my door? Tell 'em I was just joking.

Oh no, you committed a "wrong" and need to learn your lesson. PMITA prison for you.

[AZhitman]

Oh no, you committed a "wrong" and need to learn your lesson. PMITA prison for you.

Hypocrite.

I was exercising my First Amendment rights, dammit.

Plus, I saw the pics... That horse was fighting for all it was worth.

[themadscientist]

Can you murder someone as punishment for murdering someone else?

No, YOU can't; neither can any other individual. I am also against the death penalty even when the state employs it. Straw too slippery to grasp, try again.

You didn't address my previous question about it. Yes, it is all about context, intent, and extent. Let's not get personal, k?

I could write a response, but would rather not elevate the personal stuff.

I did answer that, here.

Stealing a car is wrong, stealing pen is wrong. They have different levels of extremity but the act is the same. If I then choose to take no action when you swipe my pen it does not render your action un-wrong.

As far as the personal stuff, let me again point out you were caught in a purposeful untruth. That makes you a liar. The truth cuts, don't blame me, you did it to yourself.

If Beck's alleged creative interpretations offend you then walk the talk and don't try to suggest what I believe in the absence of any proof like you say he does, and in the stark presence of proof to the contrary of your assertion. Unlike you, I accused you of something I could prove. If you don't like being called a liar, don't lie.

[JustinStrife]

I want my click back. Pathetic thread created by the OP, but great responses by Greg and Mike made it at least mildly entertaining.

Kids really are stupid these days...

Someone creates a domain name that is complete slander, and someone else says he is raising questions. Right.

The 1st Amendment was never meant to protect speech like that. Once upon a time, if you called someone else like that(without any evidence to support what you say), it might end up in a fist fight, or a gun duel.

Oh how I wish we could bring those days back. There'd be a lot less liberals running around past their bedtimes.

[ishkabibble]

Straw too slippery to grasp, try again.

Huh?

I did answer that, here.

More like "I am answering that, here." You "did" not.

As far as the personal stuff, let me again point out you were caught in a purposeful untruth. That makes you a liar. The truth cuts, don't blame me, you did it to yourself.

Show me where I am LYING. I stated you did not criticize Beck. Again, reality does not mesh with your perception.

If Beck's alleged creative interpretations offend you then walk the talk and don't try to suggest what I believe in the absence of any proof like you say he does, and in the stark presence of proof to the contrary of your assertion. Unlike you, I accused you of something I could prove. If you don't like being called a liar, don't lie.

Show me where I am LYING. Are you LYING about me LYING?

[themadscientist]

I have already demonstrated where you lied. Stop wasting time moving your pawn back and forth in the corner, realize you are in check and just give up already.

[WDRacing]

The 1st Amendment was never meant to protect speech like that. Once upon a time, if you called someone else like that(without any evidence to support what you say), it might end up in a fist fight, or a gun duel.

Oh how I wish we could bring those days back. There'd be a lot less liberals running around past their bedtimes.

There are just as many Conservatives that need their attitudes adjusted as there are Libbies. I also long for the days that you could assault someone for running his mouth.

[themadscientist]

We could give it a euphemistic non-threatening title like "enhanced umbrage."