Skip to content

Why Education is Important

Because if you have no college degree, there’s a good chance you’ll end up on Fox News.


  1. dave wrote:

    Epic fail.

    I wonder what would happen to the Glenn Beck’s of the world if they were exposed to an actual Leftist.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:04 am | Permalink
  2. Zack Allen wrote:


    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:31 am | Permalink
  3. Andy Alexis-Baker wrote:

    You mean like Karl Rove? Educated is he not? Not sure education is the key here…

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:36 am | Permalink
  4. Halden wrote:

    Well, education certainly doesn’t guarantee anything. But people like Beck and Hannity who barely squeaked through high school….they shouldn’t be allowed to masquerade as journalists.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:40 am | Permalink
  5. Andy Alexis-Baker wrote:

    But if they had an education, it would just give them more credibility. After all, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton have produced some of the worst psychos and mass killers in history: they call them statesmen. Not to mention Stanford where Rice is at now.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:46 am | Permalink
  6. Halden wrote:

    Sure. I’m not saying I wish they were educated. Just that they’re uneducated, stupid morons and their words show it.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:49 am | Permalink
  7. Andy Alexis-Baker wrote:

    I regularly meet folks who have no education beyond high school, some of whom barely made it through, who have there head on right. In fact, a couple weeks ago I was at a conference in Memphis where at least some portion of the people who attended fit the bill of being uneducated. Drop-outs and misfits of the highest order, some of them. Those who were in college, some might drop out I suspect.

    High school and colleges are there to make us conform to the industrial capitalist system. That is historically what they were created for. Make us conform to rules, clocks, and systems. So I respect anybody who tells it all to go to hell. That is not my way, but I do respect it. So “uneducated” is a relative term. Beck could have a Harvard degree and I wouldn’t care. Put him up against Peter Maurin, who had no formal education that I know of, and I know who would win the debate! In fact, put him up against Malcolm X, who had no education either, in an intellectual debate and he’d be begging for mercy.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:58 am | Permalink
  8. Andy Alexis-Baker wrote:

    For the record, I agree, Beck is a moron. Oligarh, was missing one letter: y for oligarhy. My goodness. Who does he think he is making up words, John Milbank!

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:15 am | Permalink
  9. Wasn’t Agustine an oligarh?

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:32 am | Permalink
  10. Bobby Grow wrote:

    That’s what I was wondering James ;-).

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:33 am | Permalink
  11. Andrew wrote:

    I agree Andy, and not only for our nominal similarities. College is not for everyone. Hell, it’s not even for most people. Lagging academic standards have created a lot of well-educated idiots and encouraged the collegiate system to become a fantastic debt making machine.

    I don’t think his problem is education; he is so gripped with absurdist rage and unthinking criticism that he has broken his brain.

    I feel as if Beck and this Ol’ Gary fellow he was talking about climbed out of the screen and grammatically molested me. I feel so dirty.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:41 am | Permalink
  12. Halden wrote:

    I guess that would make Beck a Donatit.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:56 am | Permalink
  13. Brad A. wrote:

    Thats to funy.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:59 am | Permalink
  14. Andrew wrote:

    That’s too funny, Brad.

    Remember, two wrongs don’t make a right. When you respond to their errors in like manner, the idiots win.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 12:21 pm | Permalink
  15. Brad A. wrote:

    Then there’s hope for me yet!

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 1:04 pm | Permalink
  16. Brad A. wrote:

    Actually, I just realized my original comment was somehow responding to your comment, Andrew, when I meant to just respond to the video. Sorry about the confusion there.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
  17. Deve wrote:

    I agree Andrew, College isn’t for everyone. Thats why I failed out. I like to think of it as taking the high road…

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 1:34 pm | Permalink
  18. Nathan Smith wrote:

    What we should be laughing about is the fact that the guy who is complaining about the coming oligarchy lends support to a party whose previous two presidents were blood relatives of one another.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 2:49 pm | Permalink
  19. Bobby Grow wrote:

    I really don’t see much difference between Glen Beck and Jon Stewart, except that one is a “conservative” and one “liberal;” one a polytheist, one a hedonist; one a sensationalist, one a satirist . . . both deifying culture as their idyllic utopia.

    I just think its interesting how Beck is singled out, of course I suppose Stewart is from the “other side.” But again, just two different “sides” of the same coin . . . just my two cents.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:06 pm | Permalink
  20. Andrew wrote:

    You forgot to add that one is legitimately entertaining while the other is only accidentally entertaining. Also that one has always claimed to only be an entertainment show while the other claims to be the legitimate news.

    The difference lies in the intent. At least Jon Stewart is honest that his goals are to entertain and make money.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
  21. Bobby Grow wrote:

    That’s true.

    I don’t think Beck has ever said it’s ‘legitimate news/journalism’ that he’s doing; I think he has always said that his is an “opinion” show. Although it is on “Fox News.”

    Intent doesn’t have much purchase around here, Andrew.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:48 pm | Permalink
  22. Halden wrote:

    Bobby, Jon Stewart is certainly a liberal. But (even though he’s really just a comedian) he regularly hosts conservatives on his show and engages them in extremely civil dialogue that is often quite constructive. Comparing him to Glenn Beck is a category mistake.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:49 pm | Permalink
  23. Andrew wrote:

    At this point I believe we are trapped in an inescapable semantic vortex which will allow ephemeral ideas such as grammar to take on the form of Oprah with snakes for feet, tongues for arms, hair made of fire and skin made of fruit roll-ups. She will crush reality as she transforms into FDR’s wheelchair in order to end all dangling participles. Our only hope is to invent new and exciting illogical punctuation marks for which she must attempt to create logical rules. While she is busy with that, we will escape into the night. The mighty semicolonostrophe will be my salvation. I will live out my days roaming Brazil, as Portuguese and grammar may not exist in the same place.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:49 pm | Permalink
  24. Bobby Grow wrote:

    Glenn does the same with liberals. In fact, this last week he’s been hosting Jimmy Carter’s former adviser (forget his name) . . . an outspoken Demo (and self-proclaimed liberal).

    I don’t honestly see the difference, except for semantics . . .

    Anyway, my point was that their worldviews are the same (which makes this less than a category mistake) — much like “Liberal Christianity” and “Fundamentalist Christianity.”

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 4:06 pm | Permalink
  25. Halden wrote:

    Look at this and tell me if you can imagine Jon Stewart ever doing something analogous.

    Category mistake.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 4:30 pm | Permalink
  26. Bobby Grow wrote:

    Yeah, I saw that whole thing, Halden (that was kind’ve scary).

    But given my point, this is still less than a category mistake.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 4:41 pm | Permalink
  27. roger flyer wrote:

    Except Beck is not funny and Jon Stewart is a comedic genius.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
  28. roger flyer wrote:

    Haledn doesn’t have a TV show and an editor!

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 6:07 pm | Permalink
  29. Halden wrote:

    Ok, in an absolutely narrow logical sense, I’ll give that its not a category mistake.

    But the point is that Jon Stewart never goes into utterly furious rants or screams at people. That’s the difference.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 6:07 pm | Permalink
  30. Bobby Grow wrote:

    I see the difference, and don’t disagree with that, Halden; but all I’m saying . . . and I don’t want to get silly arguing about this, this just wasn’t the gist of what I was originally highlighting.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 6:50 pm | Permalink
  31. Cortney wrote:

    This is what John Stewart is like. Freaking brilliant. Check it out. or a bit longer and funnier clip.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 7:30 pm | Permalink
  32. Bobby Grow wrote:

    That’s fine, Cortney.

    My point wasn’t whether or not Stewart was smarter or not smarter than Beck (or vice versa); more rhetorically able or not; etc.; etc.

    I really don’t care who’s more brilliant — I was underscoring anything like that — like I said to, Halden, my point was on their shared starting point (like Pietism for Liberal theology and Fundamentalist = anthropology).

    Remember all of Halden’s posts and critiques of Messianic Politics; I’m assuming the same basic premise.

    That’s great that you appreciate, Stewart . . . whether you like it or not though, Beck does the same thing — just from the “conservative” side — and he actually uses sarcasm and satire as much as Stewart does (albeit framed by a different genre).

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 7:54 pm | Permalink
  33. Bobby Grow wrote:

    I meant, “wasn’t underscoring anything like that . . . “

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 7:55 pm | Permalink
  34. Chris Donato wrote:

    As long as he’s not a Donato…

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 9:21 pm | Permalink
  35. Chris Donato wrote:

    Keep in mind too that satire is nearly proof positve that a god exists.

    Journalism is simply the basest form of communication among primates.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 9:26 pm | Permalink
  36. Bobby Grow wrote:

    True, but in a way, they’re both satirists . . . sometimes they end up satirizing themselves, and other times, not.

    I wouldn’t really consider Glenn Beck a “journalist.” All journalism illustrates is that Kant was onto something.

    Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 1:26 am | Permalink
  37. David wrote:

    I think that this clip also shows why it is important not to let people near to having a nervous breakdown run their own TV show. I first saw this man on Charlie Brooker’s Newswipe, which is well worth watching:

    Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 2:14 am | Permalink
  38. Dan wrote:

    I sometimes wonder if it will be revealed one day that Glenn Beck is a Democratic Party operative sent in to discredit the GOP. But then they keep applauding him.

    Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 6:49 am | Permalink
  39. Adrian wrote:

    By the way, while we’re on the topic of nutcases, the pastor who said that the bible is God, addressed in a previous post here, has also just said in a sermon that he prays that obama dies and goes to hell.

    Saturday, September 5, 2009 at 5:40 am | Permalink

Switch to our mobile site