Glenn Beck Channels Olbermann…
(watch it all the way to the end)
Uh…the three shot is a nice touch…I guess. All that’s needed now is for Beck to call on Obama to “RESIGN!”…and he’ll have managed to accomplish in a few short months what it took Olbermann years to work his way up to during the Bush Administration. I don’t know what’s scarier, Beck and Olbermann’s success as out of control ideologues, or, the MSM fawning over Beck and Olbermann’s success as out of control ideologues…
April 9, 2009 at 2:47 pm
DAMMIT! No video at work. I really want to see it.
Anyhow, I’d like to see you rail against Beck the way you do Olbermann. We shall see I guess.
April 9, 2009 at 3:12 pm
I don’t rail against Olbermann over ideology. I wouldn’t say I even rail against Olbermann much at all. I rail against MSNBC putting Olbermann on as a news anchor but that’s not the same thing. I occasionally go after Olbermann for doing something bad or wrong. But then I go after O’Reilly just as much. So these things are pretty much a wash in the end. Though not in partisans’ eyes…
April 9, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Schultz does sort of look like he’s in a hostage situation.
April 9, 2009 at 3:40 pm
So… is Beck the ‘rodeo clown’ he claims, cavorting for market share? Or is he seriously deranged? I honestly can’t tell.
April 9, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Whew, just keep this loon away from the newsroom and I’ll ignore him.
The problem again – for the 87,344 time – is that Mr. Olbermann is called a news host and he co-anchors the news desk of MSNBC’s political and campaign coverage.
Keep him away from the news room and he can continue with his lunatic act.
Same with the loon Beck.
April 9, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Beck is entertaining and funny; Olbermann is not.
And poor Bill Schultz! Bad enough Gutman dumps on him every night, now Beck goes after him! I wonder what his official title is at FNC – target, fall guy, etc. But the pay is probably good.
April 9, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Glenn Beck is entertaining and funny, but I can’t handle watching him for more that 20 minutes. Kieth Olbermann would have a better show if he did the voice for a cartoon of himself.
April 9, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Beck’s show is certainly….different. Unusual props, demonstrations, etc.
Certainly better than Olbermann’s phony outrage and ridiculously scripted camera turns.
April 9, 2009 at 6:25 pm
“Beck is entertaining and funny; Olbermann is not.”
You think this way because you’re a right-winger. Anyone who does not watch Fox every hour of the day or listens to reich-wing talk radio (the other 300 million people in America) finds him to be a loon and creepy. If they’ve heard of him at all.
April 9, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Glenn Beck is dangerous and possibly a danger to himself. How did you righties determine that being out of power meant the end of western civilization. You guys are a mixture of embarrassing and scary.
April 9, 2009 at 6:38 pm
arthur – I’d say he’s more “rodeo clown.”
I don’t think he is being disingenuous in regards to his ideology, but theatrics like this is ratings-driven. Just as Olbermann (and to a greater extent, MSNBC) stumbled onto something when he delivered his first Special Comment against the Bush Administration, I have no doubt that Beck and his producers have found something that is working very well.
April 9, 2009 at 6:57 pm
How did you righties determine that being out of power meant the end of western civilization.
Please, Joe. For the past five years all we’ve heard is how Bush is a fascist who destroyed the Constitution and ruined America forever.
Yes, Beck’s views are absurd and ridiculous.
But this ridiculousness and absurdity didn’t start with his act.
April 9, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Before 0bama won the election, alarmists such as Beck, Rush and Hannity told us he’d be a socialist who would try to nationalize our health care, open the borders up to illegals (and give them citizenship), cause our entitlements to grow beyond belief, and cut the defense budget.
Turns out they were right, and then some! How could anyone have foreseen the unbelieable level to which he is trying to take over corporate America, and the amount of money he is willing to spend to gain such control?
So these “alarmists” were right about 0bama, except they didn’t go far enough! It’s only been two months now. God only knows WHAT our country will look like in four years. We’ll probably be part of Europe by then, if 0bama has his way.
April 9, 2009 at 7:44 pm
“We’ll probably be part of Europe by then, if 0bama has his way.”
LOL! And then right-wingers wonder why no one takes them seriously anymore.
ROTFLMAO!
April 9, 2009 at 8:11 pm
the funniest yet saddest aspect of the Beck phenomenon is the way he, apparently without irony, identifies with the Howard Beale character from the movie “Network”. He seems to think Beale was this angry populist character – “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it any more” etc.
I don’t think the movie means what Beck seems to think it means. The character he identifies with is INSANE and the network exploits his insanity for ratings and then SHOOTS him live on the air when his ratings decline.
When Network came out in 1976, it was extremely far-out dark comedy; today, it would, I think, seem kind of humdrum. Oh, we haven’t had producers plotting the on-air murder of any anchors yet, but the rest of it? The Glenn Beck Story.
April 9, 2009 at 8:58 pm
We’ll probably be part of Europe by then, if 0bama has his way.
Got your teabags, Missy? take a stand!
April 10, 2009 at 1:22 am
Because of my work/travel schedule I usually do not watch Beck. He is too much over the top for me however his show is not marketed as news. As Spud & Steve have previously stated, MSNBC markets KO’s show as a “news” show. Allowing him to anchor is just plain wrong.
smh, joe, arthur….how would you feel if Sean Hannity was “anchoring” election coverage for Fox News?
I’m not trying to keep KO off the air just keep him away from the anchor chair & market his show as opinion.
April 10, 2009 at 5:41 am
smh, joe, arthur….how would you feel if Sean Hannity was “anchoring” election coverage for Fox News?
Why do you presuppose this matters to me? FWIW, Fox could go ahead and sign up Ann Coulter to anchor their evening news for all I care – it certainly wouldn’t change my opinion of them as a news organization one iota.
April 10, 2009 at 6:31 am
“listens to REICH-wing talk radio”
Are Nazi references really necessary? We all know you hate Fox, Republicans, anyone who isn’t a lemming & believes everything Olbermann tells.
The Nazi referenes are repulsive and show you lack the intellect for an intelligent discussion.
April 10, 2009 at 6:35 am
“listens to REICH-wing talk radio”
Are Naz* references really necessary? We all know you hate Fox, Republicans, anyone who isn’t a lemming & believes everything Olbermann tells.
The Naz* referenes are repulsive and show you lack the intellect for an intelligent discussion.
April 10, 2009 at 6:41 am
I’ve addressed the anchor thing many times, that’s not my question. My question is, why are Republicans reacting to a Democrat in the WH as if it’s time for an armed revolution. We weren’t happy to lose in 2000, but we gave Bush the benefit of the doubt from election day, through 9/11, to the start of the Iraq War. He was more than halfway through his first term before we started getting alarmed. The stuff didn’t really hit the fan ’til Katrina.
All this “I fear for my country” crap after less than 90 days in office is ridiculous. It’s also bad for the country. Beck, Hannity, Rush, Bachman, et al, are establishing a mindset in Republican voters of violent opposition to anyone who disagrees with them. IMO it’s unpatriotic.
April 10, 2009 at 7:06 am
Beck, Hannity, Rush, Bachman, et al, are establishing a mindset in Republican voters of violent opposition to anyone who disagrees with them. IMO it’s unpatriotic.
It’s also typical, and strategic. Rush LImbaugh spent the entire Clinton Adminstration intoning ‘America Held Hostage, day x’ – held hostage by a duly elected administration, if you please. Apparently only Republicans are allowed to be elected in the US.
Gingrich pioneered the other-izing of your enemy. Google ‘newt gingrich gopac memo’ to find the instructive list of terms he circulated to use when referring to democrats and liberals. Here’s a segment:
# cynicism
# decay
# deeper
# destroy
# destructive
# devour
# disgrace
# endanger
# excuses
# failure (fail)
…
# self-serving
# selfish
# sensationalists
# shallow
# shame
# sick
# spend(ing)
# stagnation
# status quo
# steal
# taxes
# they/them
# threaten
# traitors
April 10, 2009 at 7:24 am
“Hannity, Rush, Bachman, et al, are establishing a mindset in Republican voters of violent opposition to anyone who disagrees with them. IMO it’s unpatriotic.”
That didn’t take long. Didn’t the Bush years, it was PATRIOTIC to speak out against the government, to compare Bush to Hitler, to scream “He betrayed this country”, to repeat over and over “Bush lied, people died”.
Now, it anyone criticizes Obama, it’s “unpatriotic”.
And this b.s. about “violent opposition”, is exactly that…..B.S.
April 10, 2009 at 7:32 am
Didn’t the Bush years, it was PATRIOTIC to speak out against the government, to compare Bush to Hitler, to scream “He betrayed this country”, to repeat over and over “Bush lied, people died”.
Did we live through the same decade? Did you not hear people calling democrats and anyone who challenged the policies of the Bush Regime traitors and terrorist sympathizers?
April 10, 2009 at 7:33 am
And this b.s. about “violent opposition”, is exactly that…..B.S.
Oh, and no one expected OKC either.
April 10, 2009 at 7:49 am
Red, you purposely overlooked my point. Bush was in office for years before the opposition got loud. Conservatives are preemptively doing it to Obama. It’s disgraceful.
April 10, 2009 at 8:14 am
Conservatives are preemptively doing it to Obama. It’s disgraceful.
They did it to Clinton – it’s what they do.
April 10, 2009 at 8:47 am
Joe, I seem to recall idiots throwing eggs & other debris at Bush’s motorcade and being very loud on inauguration day.
The response I’ve seen so far to Obama’s policies are REACTIVE, not PREEMPTIVE…. reactive to a “stimulus package” full of pork, another budget package full of pork, firing the head of a corporation, quadrupling the deficit, and many other moves he’s already made or announced he will make.
I’d love to hear Art’s examples of “preemptively” opposing Clinton.
April 10, 2009 at 8:54 am
The response I’ve seen so far to Obama’s policies are REACTIVE, not PREEMPTIVE…. reactive to a “stimulus package” full of pork, another budget package full of pork, firing the head of a corporation, quadrupling the deficit, and many other moves he’s already made or announced he will make.
If it didn’t have such catastrophic effects to the rest of us, I would rather wish the conservatives could have experienced the joys of a total economic collapse.
April 10, 2009 at 8:55 am
I’m not talking about a couple of egg-throwing idiots. I’m also not talking about reasonable policy disagreement. I just don’t understand the “fear for my country/set us on fire/armed & dangerous” talk. It’s beyond disagreement and bordering on promoting sedition. It’s unpatriotic.
April 10, 2009 at 9:04 am
But it’s ok for Olbermann & other lefties to do it.
April 10, 2009 at 9:10 am
In other news…it only took A FULL WEEK, but finally, the media (CNN) is reporting on Obama bowing down to the Saudi king. (via hotair)
Why is it huge news when Bush holds Abdullah’s hand, but no news when Obama bows to him?
The White House’s spin on it was pathetic.
April 10, 2009 at 9:25 am
the media (CNN) is reporting on Obama bowing down to the Saudi king. (via hotair)
BOWING DOWN? Inclining the head is now “bowing down”?
I shouldn’t be surprised at how paltry the conservative talking points have become, I guess. But I sort of am. Surprised, I mean.
Is this all you’ve GOT??
April 10, 2009 at 9:31 am
He leaned over to shake the guy’s hand. Give me a break. Earth to wingnuts: Barack Obama is tall.
April 10, 2009 at 9:33 am
He leaned over to shake the guy’s hand. Give me a break. Earth to wingnuts: Barack Obama is tall.
Not only that, but in addition to secretly being a muslim, he’s also apparently secretly a jew!
April 10, 2009 at 9:35 am
UNBELIEVABLE attempts to spin. He BOWED. You know damn well that he did.
“Inclining the head”????? Does his head begin at the waistline?
The “he’s taller than Abdullah” b.s. is really, really weak.
The Queen is shorter than Obama, too. Compare the gestures. He didn’t bow to her.
You guys are spinning like a top, and you know it.
April 10, 2009 at 9:37 am
You guys are spinning like a top, and you know it.
You are freaking out at phantasms of your imagination and you DON’T know it.
April 10, 2009 at 9:41 am
It’s amazing how quickly these people work themselves into a frenzy. Some of it seems very unstable.
April 10, 2009 at 9:41 am
Those hardcore conservatives at CNN & the Chicago Sun-Times (Obama’s hometown paper) report that HE BOWED.
Here’s what Barack’s paper says with their “right wing talking points:
” The White House says Obama didn’t bow, that he “grasped (Abdullah’s) hand with two hands and he’s taller than King Abdullah.”
Sorry, but a videotape on YouTube doesn’t quite back that up. Obama clearly bends his body toward the Arabian monarch, and Obama doesn’t grasp both the king’s hands until he’s standing straight up. As for the he’s-taller argument, the 6-foot-1-inch Obama towers over a lot of people, so we’d have seen him bowing during handshakes many times if that were the explanation. Furthermore, the king had his hand extended, so Obama didn’t have to reach down an inordinate amount to grab it.”
April 10, 2009 at 9:43 am
If you guys are ok with your President bowing down before the king of Saudi Arabia, then just say so.
You know damn well you’d be outraged if Bush did it.
Once again, your hypocrisy knows no bounds.
April 10, 2009 at 9:55 am
If you guys are ok with your President bowing down before the king of Saudi Arabia, then just say so.
You know damn well you’d be outraged if Bush did it.
Red, Bush KISSED him on the LIPS and I didn’t say a word about it.
April 10, 2009 at 9:55 am
Red, you need a break. You’re freaking out at EVERYTHING.
April 10, 2009 at 9:58 am
Oops, my mistake – he kissed the crown prince on the lips.
In fact, one of the ONLY things I admired about Bush was his frankly unamerican lack of fear of foreign cultural norms.
April 10, 2009 at 10:30 am
Sorry I haven’t read all of the above discourse, but whatever we’re all talking about, one of our fellow Americans is being held hostage by a bunch of terrorists.
Actually, I don’t know if they’re terrorists; they’re primative little thugs who should have been taken out by now. And why our Navy was not able to capture the man when he escaped the vessel is beyond belief. Were they inept, or just following orders? Hopefully we’ll know soon.
Anyway, this may be the first test of the new administration. So far, it is failing.
April 10, 2009 at 10:39 am
Actually, I don’t know if they’re terrorists; they’re primative little thugs who should have been taken out by now.
They’re exactly what pirates have always been; highway robbers operating at sea.
Anyway, this may be the first test of the new administration. So far, it is failing.
Nice to know you’re giving them a pass on fixing the failed Bush economy, which is of considerable more consequence.
I also admire how supportive you are of our armed forces.
April 10, 2009 at 10:41 am
Failing? A little presumptuous, aren’t we? Go in there all cowboy and get the guy killed, then you can call it a failure. You have NO CLUE what they’re dealing with and neither do I.
April 10, 2009 at 11:30 am
That’s true, and I was much more cautious in my earlier comments elsewhere. But after reading several media accounts stating that the captain FAILED to escape, I am furious, maybe at the media for their wording; maybe at the fact that SO MANY RESOURCES were in the area, yet none in proximity to pull him to safety!
Anyway, HE did not fail; he made the heroic effort to escape, and one would think that if he had gotten out of the vessel and out a little, SOMEONE would have been around to grab him and retrieve him from his captors. Instead, he was recaptured, and the thugs are probably really making life hell for him now.
And the explanation? The Navy was “too far away”.
I don’t know whose fault it is; the fact that he did get out and was recaptured just makes the story all that much worse.
April 10, 2009 at 11:35 am
And the explanation? The Navy was “too far away”.
Missy, do you have the faintest IDEA how big a naval vessel is? Do you expect them to be a few feet away from what is essentially a liferaft? Would you stand a few inches away from a moving train?
April 10, 2009 at 11:43 am
Joe, I’m not freaking out about this. I’m just pointing out the total hypocrisy of the media, who made a huge deal of Bush’s interactions with the Saudis, but when our President bows before them…..NOTHING, except Jeanne Moos at CNN.
So, again, you guys are ok with our President bowing to another head of state, particularly the Saudis???
April 10, 2009 at 11:46 am
So, again, you guys are ok with our President bowing to another head of state, particularly the Saudis???
I’m okay with it as long as you’re okay with Bush smooching ‘em.
April 10, 2009 at 11:48 am
FWIW, I would prefer we were not BFFs with what is essentially a medieval regime of luddite theocrats who export terrorists. it honks me off that we have to risk American lives to prop up this crime family. It particularly offends me that American serviceWOMEN have to defend a country that would not even allow them to drive a car if they were natives.
April 10, 2009 at 11:50 am
Arthur, I would think that they would have sent divers or a smaller vessel closer to the vessel that contained the captain. Isn’t this the kind of thing those Navy Seals are trained to do?
Not a rhetorical question; I am asking.
April 10, 2009 at 12:11 pm
If Obama diffuses the violent Islamic movement by talking and shaking their hands to death, fine by me. We need to get to the point that attacks on America become abhorrent to Muslims. Obama is doing a helluva lot better job of getting us there than the fantasists in the Bush Administration.
April 10, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Yes, bowing down to them will make them not attack us.
That’s a great idea, joe. Forget Hillary for Secretary of State. You should have the job.
April 10, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I would think that they would have sent divers or a smaller vessel closer to the vessel that contained the captain. Isn’t this the kind of thing those Navy Seals are trained to do?
I just had the news on and they said the Navy is several hundred yards from the lifeboat, which is pretty much required to keep from swamping the smaller boat.
You’re thinking of this as a military event and it isn’t – it’s a law enforcement action. These guys are common criminals and it’s being treated exactly as if they were bank robbers holed up in a bank with hostages. Except, of course, for all the water – that’s kind of different.
Hostage negotiations are a very well understood art. IF you want the hostages to live (and I presume we do), you don’t put the hostage takers in a position where they think they no longer have anything to lose.
Suggest you rent and watch Dog Day Afternoon some time. Excellent (and in parts hilarious) movie about bank robbers taking hostages. Al Pacino ROCKED that movie.
April 10, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Yes, bowing down to them will make them not attack us.
You’ve really got that ‘bowing down‘ thing going on, don’t you? Still no answer to my query on how you feel about Bush’s man-on-man kisses? (which, I hasten to point out again, I’m totally cool with.)
April 10, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Red, you aren’t even trying to understand what I say. I’ll simplify it for you. Obama’s approach to the Islamic commiunity makes us safer than Bush’s. Got it?
April 10, 2009 at 3:46 pm
The Islamic community is not our enemy. Both Presidents Bush and Obama treated them with adequate respect. Our enemy, the radical Islamists, have told us that our apparent weakness emboldens them.
My daughter is a photog who recently was on a story in Dearborn, MI which has one of the largest Arab populations outside of the Middle East. Said she found it surprising to see how beloved President Bush remains especially among the Iraqis in that community.
April 10, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Said she found it surprising to see how beloved President Bush remains especially among the Iraqis in that community.
He’s probably more popular in Dearborn Michigan than he is in Iraq. Just saying.
April 10, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Bush arrested a bunch of them and stuck them in a prison without trial for six years. That’s neither adequate respect nor an American value. The fantasist neo-cons created an entire generation of terrorists. Just one more thing Obama has to fix.
April 10, 2009 at 6:27 pm
He may be, art. I don’t really know. I suspect he’s less liked in Iraq than I’d prefer and more liked than you would.
The terrorists were targeting the West long before George W. Bush became president, joe. President Clinton arrested many and sent them off to nations where they were tortured or slaughtered… which may have been a better a better response.
April 10, 2009 at 6:28 pm
we just lost 3 police b/c some ass though that O was going to take away his guns. so he put on a bulletproof vest and killed three officers and wounded 2 others. he shot the dead officers after they were dead. the right wing media is to blame because they over react for ratings. i hope they sell more soap in exchange for their souls. obama is not taking any guns away and i hope the right wing radio entertainment or glenn beck can’t sleep at night when they think of the families in pittsburgh that no longer have fathers. it was a sad week here, and it was only sad because “rodeo-clowns” sell fear.
April 10, 2009 at 6:36 pm
I would think you’d blame the “‘ass’ who shot the cops.
Does anyone know if Glenn Beck has been pushing for people to take arms and go nuts? I’ve only watched once in a while so I don’t know. I haven’t heard any conservative radio hosts saying anything about guns.
April 10, 2009 at 6:49 pm
I am not saying beck….but crazy people like him…
http://www.postgazette.com/pg/09095/960750-53.stm
April 10, 2009 at 6:51 pm
and if you have not heard right wing radio talking about gun control maybe we get different hosts
April 10, 2009 at 6:54 pm
and don’t get me wrong i blame the ass….instead of improving his own life he took others’. But there is a culture of fear being sold and if you read about him, he bought it, along with his aks
April 10, 2009 at 7:00 pm
alex jones…right wing radio host….google him
April 10, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Then blame the ass. Grouping conservatives (or liberals, for that matter) in with that is just dumb hyperbole. There’s always senseless violence – always has been and always will be. Our best defence against it is try to instill a strong sense of respect into our children.
April 10, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Never heard of him, but if what I Googled is accurate, he’s a conspiracy nut, not a conservative. There’s quite a difference.
April 10, 2009 at 7:15 pm
I respectfully disagree. He was into right wing sites and tuned to extremed right wing radio. Glenn Beck says he is a rodeo clown yet says our president is a socialist. put it together, there is a fringe they are reaching that is very dangerous and yet as long as the arbitron or neilson ratings are good, they continue and even get louder. I know KO has done this with the bush co but never with a call of violence. I honestly think blood is on the hands off the likes on Quinn and rose and beck. Fema camps? its proven that almost no one sees the correction.
April 10, 2009 at 7:17 pm
alex jones is both…
April 10, 2009 at 7:19 pm
You can claim that both sides get histrionic all you want, the fact is the Far Right is promoting the concept that Obama is going to take their rights and ruin their country and, Dammit, We’re Not Gonna Let That Happen. It’s a call to violence.
April 10, 2009 at 7:22 pm
” Our best defence against it is try to instill a strong sense of respect into our children.”
I do agree with this. I am not trying to start an argument, liberal, conservative who cares? but beck and hannity selling fear? I have a problem with it personally because when i call 911 there are 5 less officers to respond. And if you don’t think the gun issue was sold in PA and crackpots did not believe it, then there is not much more i can say.
April 10, 2009 at 7:36 pm
I do think President Obama is a socialist based upon his stated agenda. Call it what you want, but he fits the classic definition.
April 10, 2009 at 8:02 pm
so was bush fascist? govt working with corporations? no bid contracts? I am glad you are working with classic definitions.
April 10, 2009 at 8:04 pm
but then again, when were the first bailouts? was bush both socialist and fascist?
April 10, 2009 at 8:08 pm
No, what Bush did during the end of his term is not fascism, and his basic policies over the eight years disqualifies the “socialism” label… so I’d have to say that what he did in putting through the first bailouts meets the classic definition of, well…. “idiot” fits.
April 10, 2009 at 8:18 pm
In all seriousness, even if the original bailout of the banking system was the best thing to do (and that’s a BIG “if”), the plan was put together far too hastily and, I believe, made matters worse. Treasury Secretary O’Neil and then NY Fed President Geithner essentially created an elaborate smokescreen that bailed out some very wealthy and powerful Morgan Stanley and Fannie Mae investors.
April 10, 2009 at 8:28 pm
you can call it idiotic… but what was it? If you do not think what he did before that can be called fascism but the end of his term socialism I think we live in 2 separate worlds. no bid to a co to me=fascism. Bailouts are the only choice because who has been building our humvess or mrats? not detroit. or they would not have lost over 100k jobs when we are in 2 wars. during the great d and wwII our companies at least got the jobs. to be fair i have not hear Obama say that Lordstown should get a contract to build the mrats that are needed for afghanistan.
April 10, 2009 at 8:52 pm
We’ve heard a lot about “No bid” contracts over the past few years, but most (not all) of that was political hyperbole. This has happened under every president for decades and some of it is perfectly legal and logical. There’s always a fair amount of thievery going on and these should be prosecuted. The POTUS, be that Clinton, Bush, or Obama, does not sign the purchase order for logistical services.
During WW2 the women got the jobs. Their men were overseas defeating tyrants. Those were “no bid” contracts in an age before the world economy we know today.
The Detroit automakers have been in decline since the 1970s, and they’re failing because they can’t turn a profit. Their highest profit vehicles are SUVs but they won’t be allowed to sell those anymore. I did my part: I bought an extra SUV this year that I’ll park until the one I’m driving now wears out. Gets much better gas mileage than a big stinky bus.
April 10, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Humvees are made by AM General of South Bend, IN, btw.