vangough Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Glenn beck is back on dish ch 212 blaze tv welcome back glenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KINGnoob Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Glenn Beck is the man. He could actually be a genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bezerker101 Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epilogue1406051983 Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALEXMMA Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 haha he's a mentality unstable moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmafan73 Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 i dnt agree with all he says, but hes on point with most of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KINGnoob Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 haha he's a mentality unstable moron. That sentence sucks. But anyway, Nah he's pretty brilliant. You may not agree with his views but he's a pretty smart guy. He's a tad conspiritorial for my taste, but I enjoy him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyFeet Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Glenn Beck has always been correct. lol And people still call us conspiracy theorists. Even though NDAA gets passed, Obama lets rabid terrorists overrun our embassy in Libya, and the moron is planning to stall the elections. When are people gonna wake up? When fully armed HSA officers come banging on your doors to invade your privacy and search you down for weapons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 i dnt agree with all he says' date=' but hes on point with most of it[/quote'] I had heard alot about him and never bothered to really pay much attention to him until he got his show on Fox News. I was always under the impression he was a blathering, emotional idiot - largely based on what others had to say - then I listened for myself and realized how on the money he was. He backs up pretty much everything he says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chanman20 Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Glenn Beck has always been correct. lol And people still call us conspiracy theorists. Even though NDAA gets passed' date=' Obama lets rabid terrorists overrun our embassy in Libya, and the moron is planning to stall the elections. When are people gonna wake up? When fully armed HSA officers come banging on your doors to invade your privacy and search you down for weapons?[/quote'] the thing that really makes me mad about Obama is how he claims to respect our troops so much yet hes trying to get a law passed so they can't vote... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyFeet Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 the thing that really makes me mad about Obama is how he claims to respect our troops so much yet hes trying to get a law passed so they can't vote... He lost every shred of credit when he let a bunch of terrorists slaughter our men in Libya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 the thing that really makes me mad about Obama is how he claims to respect our troops so much yet hes trying to get a law passed so they can't vote... or better yet, how he & his people claim a silly video mocking islam is inciting violence & protests, yet somehow everytime they remind the whole world "they killed OBL", thats not supposed to matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoZZez Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Beck is an idiot and a liar. Watching him twist half truths to make it look like something else and then the fools follow him like mindless zombies is funny as hell. He has been exposed multiple times for his bs and lies and he just turns around and blames it on the people who cut the piece together. What a waste of brain cells, as proven in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Beck is an idiot and a liar. Watching him twist half truths to make it look like something else and then the fools follow him like mindless zombies is funny as hell. He has been exposed multiple times for his bs and lies and he just turns around and blames it on the people who cut the piece together. What a waste of brain cells' date=' as proven in this thread.[/quote'] Not sure how you can make either claim with any measure of objective honesty. He backs up everything he says and hes by no means an idiot - as he makes coherent, substantive arguments. But then again, your a lefty, so its not like your actually capable of being objective, right? At worst you can maybe make a claim hes hyperbolic, but hey,thats the name of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbo_Jones Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Not sure how you can make either claim with any measure of objective honesty. He backs up everything he says and hes by no means an idiot - as he makes coherent' date=' substantive arguments. But then again, your a lefty, so its not like your actually capable of being objective, right? At worst you can maybe make a claim hes hyperbolic, but hey,thats the name of the game.[/quote'] Lmao, yeah because the right is known for being objective... You partisan nitwits remind me of my children when they argue about nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aletheia Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Glenn Beck has always been correct. lol And people still call us conspiracy theorists. Even though NDAA gets passed' date=' Obama lets rabid terrorists overrun our embassy in Libya, and the moron is planning to stall the elections. When are people gonna wake up? When fully armed HSA officers come banging on your doors to invade your privacy and search you down for weapons?[/quote'] Meh, not so much. He claimed obama was the only president to not swear in on a bible.. john quincy adams used a law book, franklin pierce didn't swear in at all (he affirmed), roosevelt didn't use a bible- & several others kissed the bible but didn't swear in on it. He claimed 1.4 million of stimulus money was used to repair a door at an air force base. It was 246k out of 1.4 million in repairs funding. He said the US is the only country with a natural birthright provision- not true. There are many other examples, but there are a few. All I would say in regards to him (& people like him) is that if something sounds pretty sensational, double check the claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_Wesley_of_Wells Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Even if you think hes a total ******, you gotta admit hes at least no worse than Al Sharpton or Ed Schultz...both of those guys are just sad & ridiculous - anyone of you lefties here could easily make for a better pundit than those two hacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbo_Jones Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Even if you think hes a total ******' date=' you gotta admit hes at least no worse than Al Sharpton or Ed Schultz...both of those guys are just sad & ridiculous - anyone of you lefties here could easily make for a better pundit than those two hacks.[/quote'] I'm not a lefty, as you put it but I agree that all 3 of them tell 1/2 truths that support their stances. Some worse than others(Sharpton is an absolute tool). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 I'm not a lefty' date=' as you put it but I agree that all 3 of them tell 1/2 truths that support their stances. Some worse than others(Sharpton is an absolute tool).[/quote'] I cant imagine why they picked him up for a show seeing as how his lack of talent is just glaring. You think a bit of affirmative action had any role? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbo_Jones Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 I cant imagine why they picked him up for a show seeing as how his lack of talent is just glaring. You think a bit of affirmative action had any role? Nah, stupid is as stupid does. He got a show for the same reason "Here comes Honey Boo Boo" is popular. The retarded audience who tunes in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Glenn beck is back on dish ch 212 blaze tv welcome back glenn Oh good, I'll make sure to skip over that channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Glenn Beck is the man. He could actually be a genius. :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KINGnoob Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 :eek: you disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbo_Jones Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 you disagree? /popcorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 you disagree? yea I don't think of Beck as a GENIUS...perhaps if you feel like it, you can tell me why you think he is a genius and maybe I will change my mind based on the facts you provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KINGnoob Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 yea I don't think of Beck as a GENIUS...perhaps if you feel like it' date=' you can tell me why you think he is a genius and maybe I will change my mind based on the facts you provide.[/quote'] I guess if we define genius first that could help. IQ level? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 I guess if we define genius first that could help. IQ level? maybe IQ (160+), but I like Kant's thoughts on what constitutes a genius: the ability to independently arrive at and understand concepts that would normally have to be taught by another person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbo_Jones Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 maybe IQ (160+)' date=' but I like Kant's thoughts on what constitutes a genius: the ability to independently arrive at and understand concepts that would normally have to be taught by another person.[/quote'] Good reasoning IMHO. IQ, while a legitimate test for intelligence, is based more on problem solving(mathematically and pattern recognition) and cognitive abilities. Which only encompass certain aspects of what most consider "intelligence." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KINGnoob Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 maybe IQ (160+)' date=' but I like Kant's thoughts on what constitutes a genius: the ability to independently arrive at and understand concepts that would normally have to be taught by another person.[/quote'] hm I like that definition. I would have to have enough of Becks videos at my disposal to really formulate an argument. And I dont have them. So, take it from me I guess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 hm I like that definition. I would have to have enough of Becks videos at my disposal to really formulate an argument. And I dont have them. So' date=' take it from me I guess?[/quote'] Ok guess he's a genius then But, one thing he is not, is a libertarian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KINGnoob Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Ok guess he's a genius then But' date=' one thing he is not, is a libertarian [/quote'] Oh I agree on that. He likes a lot of libertarian ideas. But hes def a religious belt, war type guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Ok guess he's a genius then But' date=' one thing he is not, is a libertarian [/quote'] lol is anyone truly a libertarian, conservative, progressive...ect?? Dont we all at some point have some manner of a conflicting view or position with our own professed ideology? I think most of us who are honest recognize that no man made doctrine is adequate enough to truly encapsulate all of our ideals perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Oh I agree on that. He likes a lot of libertarian ideas. But hes def a religious belt' date='[b'] war type guy[/b]. what does that mean exactly? Is he pro killing brown people or some kind of greedy war profiteer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Oh I agree on that. He likes a lot of libertarian ideas. But hes def a religious belt' date=' war type guy.[/quote'] yea I was just saying that since everyone gives you crap about whether or not you are a libertarian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 lol is anyone truly a libertarian' date=' conservative, progressive...ect?? Dont we all at some point have some manner of a conflicting view or position with our own professed ideology? I think most of us who are honest recognize that no man made doctrine is adequate enough to truly encapsulate all of our ideals perfectly.[/quote'] yea definitely, but beck's a conservative with libertarian leanings (at least that's what i've heard him say)....so his basic principles are conservative in nature, not libertarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 yea definitely' date=' but beck's a conservative with libertarian leanings (at least that's what i've heard him say)....so his basic principles are conservative in nature, not libertarian.[/quote'] Whats the qualifying distinction? I guess my larger point is you have people who gravitate towards one ideal (ltd govt/personal liberty), and those that gravitate towards the other side of expansive govt. Its all relative in one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Whats the qualifying distinction? are you asking for me to name the major tenets of libertarianism that beck does not support? I guess my larger point is you have people who gravitate towards one ideal (ltd govt/personal liberty)' date=' and those that gravitate towards the other side of expansive govt. Its all relative in one way or another.[/quote'] While I might agree that there are generally the following two groups of people: "you have people who gravitate towards one ideal (ltd govt/personal liberty), and those that gravitate towards the other side of expansive govt"....the "conservatives" over the last few decades have not gravitated towards "ltd govt/personal liberty" but instead have implemented "expansive govt"......I'm not sure what you meant by "it's all relative in one way or another". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 are you asking for me to name the major tenets of libertarianism that beck does not support? While I might agree that there are generally the following two groups of people: "you have people who gravitate towards one ideal (ltd govt/personal liberty)' date=' and those that gravitate towards the other side of expansive govt[/i']"....the "conservatives" over the last few decades have not gravitated towards "ltd govt/personal liberty" but instead have implemented "expansive govt"......I'm not sure what you meant by "it's all relative in one way or another". No, what I am asking is, is there a distinctive threshold that qualifies someone as libertarian vs being conservative? Or is it perhaps more or less a sliding scale, as is the difference between statism and minarchism? Indeed there are many conservatives who have evolved into RINO's, no doubt. But, that doesnt negate that ideology is not absolute, though certain aspect could be.I know of many progs who also accept some measure of a need for fiscal sanity and respect for personal liberties. My question is more or less - at least in the context of this discussion - is it really prudent or even meaningful to box people in without good cause, or at least without qualifying reasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 No' date=' what I am asking is, is there a distinctive threshold that qualifies someone as libertarian vs being conservative? Or is it perhaps more or less a sliding scale, as is the difference between statism and minarchism?[/quote'] Yes I think there is a distinctive threshold b/t conservative and libertarian....and it can most easily be seen in foreign policy and the firm belief in the principle of non-aggression. My question is more or less - at least in the context of this discussion - is it really prudent or even meaningful to box people in without good cause' date=' or at least without qualifying reasons[/i']? no, you should have good cause and reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Yes I think there is a distinctive threshold b/t conservative and libertarian....and it can most easily be seen in foreign policy and the firm belief in the principle of non-aggression. where is it written that libertarianism is anchored by this, and that without strict adherence to it, one cannot be considered a libertarian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 where is it written that libertarianism is anchored by this' date=' and that without strict adherence to it, one cannot be considered a libertarian?[/quote'] idk if it says that anywhere...but from things I've read (articles, interviews, books, etc) it's a must position to hold.....but it's not like there's some sign libertarianism decree on this (that i know of)...not that it's necessary either though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 idk if it says that anywhere...but from things I've read (articles' date=' interviews, books, etc) it's a must position to hold.....but it's not like there's some sign libertarianism decree on this (that i know of)...not that it's necessary either though.[/quote'] mmmmhmm........and hence my point why I asked taking a hardline in dictating what qualifies someone as something or another is seldom ever fair or useful, IMHO. That said - what peeves me most is that liberty minded folsk should strive to be more inclusive and educate people about the details so as to inform people and spread the word. we should avoid taking the statist approach in treating people as sheeple and trying to win by a divide & conquer approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 taking a hardline in dictating what qualifies someone as something or another is seldom ever fair or useful' date=' IMHO.[/quote'] ok, I agree to disagree That said - what peeves me most is that liberty minded folsk should strive to be more inclusive and educate people about the details so as to inform people and spread the word. yes that would be a best practice for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 ok' date=' I agree to disagree yes that would be a best practice for sure[/quote'] really, can you explain the usefulness in doing otherwise? So do you agree that many paulbots end up working against their own agenda by alienating mainstream conservatives by calling them names and ridiculing them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVTContour98 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 really' date=' can you explain the usefulness in doing otherwise?[/quote'] You stated: "taking a hardline in dictating what qualifies someone as something or another is seldom ever fair or useful, IMHO." I think it's fair and useful on my part (as a libertarian who wants to perhaps try to open the eyes of some people to libertarian policies), to label anyone as a non-libertarian who does not match up with what I know to be libertarian principles. So do you agree that many paulbots end up working against their own agenda by alienating mainstream conservatives by calling them names and ridiculing them? yes absolutely, exactly like you just did by using the name "paulbot" which carries with it a negative connotation, and is likely to alienate libertarians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 You stated: "taking a hardline in dictating what qualifies someone as something or another is seldom ever fair or useful' date=' IMHO." I think it's fair and useful on my part (as a libertarian who wants to perhaps try to open the eyes of some people to libertarian policies), to label anyone as a non-libertarian who does not match up with what I know to be libertarian principles. yes absolutely, exactly like you just did by using the name "paulbot" which carries with it a negative connotation, and is likely to alienate libertarians.[/quote'] I'm not talking about making contrasts that demonstrate distinctions, I'm talking about putting up artificial boundaries that serve no other purpose than to disqualify someone, as opposed to simply rolling out the red carpet and asking them to consider joining you based on mutual interests. Using the term "paulbot" in a general discussion is no different than talking about neocons or liberals. So long as the term isnt being unjustly applied to someone against their choosing, its merely a descriptor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skullbone Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Meh' date=' not so much. He claimed obama was the only president to not swear in on a bible.. john quincy adams used a law book, franklin pierce didn't swear in at all (he affirmed), roosevelt didn't use a bible- & several others kissed the bible but didn't swear in on it. He claimed 1.4 million of stimulus money was used to repair a door at an air force base. It was 246k out of 1.4 million in repairs funding. He said the US is the only country with a natural birthright provision- not true. There are many other examples, but there are a few. All I would say in regards to him (& people like him) is that if something sounds pretty sensational, double check the claim.[/quote'] I listen to the radio show every day and I've never heard any of those claims. One thing I did hear somebody say: "Today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office." Barry Hussein Obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skullbone Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 The libertarians who aren't 100% neoconfederate isolationists that want dissolve the U.S.A. need to buck up and pick a side: be a communist or be a neocon. If you want another choice, tough *****. Run the communist party out, I mean Democrat Party, and then maybe you guys can take on the the cons in the future without sacrificing the fate of the free world at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL4TRU_STRENGTH Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 The libertarians who aren't 100% neoconfederate isolationists that want dissolve the U.S.A. need to buck up and pick a side: be a communist or be a neocon. If you want another choice' date=' tough *****. Run the communist party out, I mean Democrat Party, and then maybe you guys can take on the the cons in the future without sacrificing the fate of the free world at the same time.[/quote'] huh? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.