Beck's Insult / No More Hunger

I try not to waste too much time on the conservative fruit loops who dot the media landscape like so many road apples, but every now and then, there's one you simply can't ignore.

On his Tuesday broadcast, Beck interviewed Congressman-elect Keith Ellison (D - Minnesota), who is the first Muslim elected to Congress.

"I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies,'" Beck said.

Of course, Beck affirms that he means no offense, he knows Muslims, he likes Muslims, he's even been to a mosque.

"I'm not accusing you of being an enemy, but that's the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way," Beck added.

What proof would you accept, Glenn? What reason do you have for even asking this question? And please do not hide behind a nameless 'lot of Americans'. You asked the question. Of a duly-elected representative of the people.

You don't (well, as least most of us don't ��I can't speak for Beck and his ilk) accuse people of treason without proof. Being Muslim is not proof.

Hungry?

It may be a reflection of your food security index.

The geniuses at the USDA have determined that 'hunger' is too vague a term to be used in its annual report that measures Americans' access to food food security survey, distinguishing between Americans who eat, but not well, and those who, well, don't have food.

The latter state qualifying as very low food security, and the former, well, they aren't really hungry. That is, they're not suffering from, 'multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake.' In other words, if you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you're not actually hungry.

For all the hue and cry about how we're becoming some kind of twisted police/security state, nothing brings it home more than a healthy dose of Orwellian newspeak.

The Ministry has received 0 comment(s) on this topic.