Beck jumps on the “let da’ house burn” bandwagon

Home » Beck jumps on the “let da’ house burn” bandwagon

Beck jumps on the “let da’ house burn” bandwagon

By | 2010-10-06T21:23:15+00:00 October 6th, 2010|Domestic Issues, Party Politics|7 Comments

In my previous post, I was accused of painting the firefighters as conservatives (I don’t know who they were and it doesn’t matter). I did nothing of the sort. Instead, my point was that a conservative mindset has been poisoning this country for years. The mindset is simply – I’m out for myself. I don’t want to help anybody else. I don’t want to pay for anybody else. I want to keep all my money for myself. It is from this mindset that you can get a subscription service for fire protection. Those who don’t have the money simply don’t get protection. I mentioned in my previous post that many conservatives were jumping on this bandwagon. Glenn Beck did not miss the opportunity.

From TP:

Now, yet another major conservative has joined the defense. On his radio show this afternoon, leading right-wing talker Glenn Beck and his producer Pat Gray openly mocked the Cranick family. After playing a news clip explaining the situation, Gray adopted a southern drawl and began to mock Gene Cranick’s explanation of how the county’s firefighters refused to help his family.

Beck then went on to complain that “those who are just on raw feeling are not going to understand” that the county’s actions in refusing to assist the Cranicks were justified. He explained that America will be having the “argument” about the case of the Cranicks and that it will go “nowhere if you go onto ‘compassion, compassion, compassion, compassion’ or well, ‘they should’ve put it out, what is the fire department for?’” Beck then went on to say that the Cranicks would be “spongeing off their neighbors” if the fire department had helped them put out their fire. The radio host concluded his rant by saying “this is the kind of stuff that’s going to have to happen, we are going to have to have these kinds of things”:

GRAY: (mocking Cranick’s accent) Even tho’ I hadn’t paid mah seventy five dollahs I thought dey’d put it out. […] I wanted ‘em to put it out, but dey didn’t put it out.

BECK: Here’s the thing. Those that are just on raw feeling are not going to understand. […]

GRAY: But I thought they was gonna put the fire out anyway, but it burned down. Dat ain’t right! […] What’s the Fire Department for if you don’t put out the fire?! […] I thought they’d put out mah fire even if I didn’t pay seventy five dollars.

BECK: This is the sort of argument that Americans are going to have.

GRAY: It is.

BECK: And it goes nowhere if you go onto “compassion, compassion, compassion, compassion” or well, “they should’ve put it out, what is the fire department for?” […] If you don’t pay the 75 dollars then that hurts the fire department. They can’t use those resources, and you’d be spongeing off your neighbor’s resources. […] It’s important for America to have this debate. This is the kind of stuff that’s going to have to happen, we are going to have to have these kinds of things. (more…)

About the Author:


  1. Joe White October 7, 2010 at 3:56 am

    You are simply making yourself look foolish Dr Thompson when you pretend that you dont understand that a city fire department isnt responsible for the fact that the county didnt have a department of its own to protect non-city residents.

  2. Jeff October 7, 2010 at 3:42 pm

    “Compassion, compassion, compassion, compassion”. Once again Beck has turned one of the best words in the language into something bad. Just amazing.

  3. margaret October 7, 2010 at 3:44 pm

    We have this same possible situation in our county and I know the people that have refused to pay the new fee that was passed this spring are watching what happens. The SL county passed a fee instead of a tax based on the size of your needs . Like a larger business such as a lumberyard would pay a larger fee than a steel warehouse. Wood burns steel doesn't. The apartment complexes that have large amounts of police calls per year pays more than one that doesn't. Needless to say the business have pitched a fit and about 1/3 have not paid and said they hired people and deserved a more universal bill. But the county said that wasn't fair to the homeowners and was inforcing the fee with liens on the property.

    Interesting to see how this turns out. Still of the fireman just didn't respond and their wasn't a house next door. Then would be even be hearing about this?

  4. Janet October 7, 2010 at 9:54 pm

    I really like the way Huffington Post entry was stated.

  5. EC Thompson, MD October 8, 2010 at 1:58 pm

    I never said anything like I didn't understand the difference between city and county fire departments. My comments were clear. They were in the first paragraph of both posts. I clearly stated that I didn't understand the mentality of letting a house burn when you have the fire department standing there.

    It is easy to get lost in the weeds in this case. Everybody feel sorry for anyone who lose their house (unless they burn it down themselves). My point, I thought, was clear. There are some things that we should do in this country as a community good. There are some things that government should do. One of those things is to provide firefighters for its citizens. Now there is a debate over city versus County versus state. That's reasonable. What should not be up for discussion is private versus public. No matter what a group decides firefighters should fight fires. There should be no instance in which a firefighter watches a house burn. (Of course there are exceptions in which firefighters are out of equipment or the fire is simply too big and therefore they need to protect surrounding structures and let that fire burn; these exceptions are understood.)

    As usual, thanks for your comments.

  6. Joe White October 9, 2010 at 4:12 am

    The city that pays the firefighters is responsible for their safety. If the city (through the fire chief) orders firefighters to risk themselves in a situation where they are not supposed to be, and one of them is injured or killed, then the city is liable, as also possibly the fire chief could be personally liable.

    I have no idea what you are talking about 'private vs public'. These firefighters are and always have been public employees of the neighboring city of South Fulton.

  7. Joe White November 12, 2010 at 6:43 pm

    Here we go again. In this case, it’s town residents wanting to sponge off the county.

    Are we actually gonna ask people to PAY for public services? I thought government was free for everyone. lol

    The town of 31,000 people COULD set up police and fire protection of it’s own, but apparently hasnt done so.

Comments are closed.