Arrington referencing Glenn Beck is definitely cause for concern.
(The "miracle health centre" Beck is pumping in the linked piece reeks of scam. The phrase "Chiropractic Neurology" ought to send you running for the hills.)
A big, scary part of HN is just pain crazy/not high in IQ. Really not sure how to block that out.
They are now taking medical advice from a quote of a quote from Glenn Beck from his doctor.
WTF (What the Fuck) does “TIME COLLAPSE” in science (AKA not magic) even mean?
[Edit] But this line at least was very funny
> Beck said doctors told him it was normal for someone processing as much information as he was, and the phenomenon has been discussed by figures like Winston Churchill.
Doctors are also historians!
Knowing the history of a set of symptoms is exactly what helps doctors figure things out. If it so happens that a famous person once had the disease, well, that's an interesting fact and I'd probably tend to remember that/bring it up too.
I mean, I think he's probably discussing a real thing, and is mostly on-target regarding the cause. But, he could have picked a better example - how was Beck processing a lot of information, unless we're just talking about batshit-insane conspiracy theories and what gibberish to scribble on the blackboard that night?
And comparing himself to Churchill is just more of the self-aggrandizement Beck is famous for (or self-deprecation, I guess, depending on your opinion of Churchill - but Beck certainly intends it as aggrandizement).
All the same thoughts occurred to me too. Then I realized I was being dumb, and fortunately one of the few graces of getting older is that I don't say what I'm thinking as often as I used to.
That wouldn't have happened in my twenties.
I mean, keep in mind, I didn't bring up Glenn Beck. He's a central part of the article, for crying out loud, and Arrington references his book multiple times, compares himself to him (and Churchill by proxy), and on and on. It is not unreasonable that discussion of this article would include Glenn Beck, since he's such an integral part of it, and it is not reasonable to ask that people keep their personal opinions of Beck out of that discussion.
Your comment is seemingly pretty benign, but I will tell you that I take a great deal of offense to it. You are thought-policing - simple as that. I don't know where you think you derive the authority to tell me what topics are and are not off limits - especially when those topics are referenced directly in the article at hand. And, for the record, I often do start to write a comment and then think better of it. This time I didn't. Perhaps you should have.