Total Posts:74|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Glenn Beck

JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2009 9:30:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/11/2009 7:44:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
He is insane.

... and obnoxious. It makes me sad for our country that he is so popular.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2009 9:32:17 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/11/2009 9:30:18 PM, JBlake wrote:
At 9/11/2009 7:44:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
He is insane.


... and obnoxious. It makes me sad for our country that he is so popular.

I feel the same way about Barack Obama.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2009 10:05:36 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/11/2009 9:32:17 PM, Nags wrote:
At 9/11/2009 9:30:18 PM, JBlake wrote:
At 9/11/2009 7:44:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
He is insane.


... and obnoxious. It makes me sad for our country that he is so popular.

I feel the same way about Barack Obama.

hahaha

come on glenn is pretty entertaining and the whole van jones thing was started by him... and is said to be the cause of his resignation

rightly so!
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2009 11:53:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/11/2009 10:05:36 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/11/2009 9:32:17 PM, Nags wrote:
At 9/11/2009 9:30:18 PM, JBlake wrote:
At 9/11/2009 7:44:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
He is insane.


... and obnoxious. It makes me sad for our country that he is so popular.

I feel the same way about Barack Obama.

hahaha

come on glenn is pretty entertaining and the whole van jones thing was started by him... and is said to be the cause of his resignation

rightly so!

Why rightly so? Because he served as an adviser with absolutely no formal powers?
Why was it so important to get rid of him? Because he held different political positions than you?
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 12:23:20 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/11/2009 11:53:13 PM, JBlake wrote:
At 9/11/2009 10:05:36 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/11/2009 9:32:17 PM, Nags wrote:
At 9/11/2009 9:30:18 PM, JBlake wrote:
At 9/11/2009 7:44:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
He is insane.


... and obnoxious. It makes me sad for our country that he is so popular.

I feel the same way about Barack Obama.

hahaha

come on glenn is pretty entertaining and the whole van jones thing was started by him... and is said to be the cause of his resignation

rightly so!

Why rightly so? Because he served as an adviser with absolutely no formal powers?
Why was it so important to get rid of him? Because he held different political positions than you?

Because he held different political positions then our president.
that he was in a position of power yet still believed in communism and that blacks are extremely suppressed... that they need to "rise above"
he was still an adviser that could have influenced people in power.

he was a self proclaimed communist.
he called republicans @$$es wholes. (in other words, a very loose tongue)
he believed 9/11 was a conspiracy that our government just "let happen"

come on... your defending this guy.
your as bad a michelle obama... obama should have done some research and told his wife to go somewhere else with her suggestions
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 12:35:26 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 12:23:20 AM, comoncents wrote:

Because he held different political positions then our president.

And this is a bad trait in an adviser how? Wouldn't it be a good thing for the president to have viewpoints other than his own? This is not a valid reason for getting rid of him.

that he was in a position of power yet still believed in communism and that blacks are extremely suppressed... that they need to "rise above"

Prove that he supported communism. Even if he did or does, he is entitled to his opinion on these matters.

As for blacks being suppressed, I am not entirely certain that they are not, to some degree, suppressed. His view on this matter should not disqualify him from the position.

he was still an adviser that could have influenced people in power.

You have not shown why his influence was such a terrible thing.

he was a self proclaimed communist.
he called republicans @$$es wholes. (in other words, a very loose tongue)
he believed 9/11 was a conspiracy that our government just "let happen"

Prove it.
So what? Partisanship is everywhere in Washington.
Holding such views does not disqualify people from office. He was not the only adviser, by the way.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 9:08:51 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
You'll have to excuse me for opting out of an entire hour of watching Glenn Beck. Please give me the relevant points that he makes.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 9:18:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I dislike Glenn Beck because one of my friends says that he avoids associating with what he calls the "more radical libertarians". So, I will not associate with him.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 9:23:48 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 9:08:51 AM, JBlake wrote:
You'll have to excuse me for opting out of an entire hour of watching Glenn Beck. Please give me the relevant points that he makes.

Van Jones:
- confessed communist/marxist/anarchist.
- black nationalist
- called Republicans a$$holes (1st video)
- called George Bush a crackhead (2nd video)
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 10:15:01 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 9:23:48 AM, Nags wrote:
At 9/12/2009 9:08:51 AM, JBlake wrote:
You'll have to excuse me for opting out of an entire hour of watching Glenn Beck. Please give me the relevant points that he makes.

Van Jones:
- confessed communist/marxist/anarchist.
- black nationalist
- called Republicans a$$holes (1st video)
- called George Bush a crackhead (2nd video)



1. Prove it. Then prove why this disqualifies him from office.
2. Prove it. Then define "black nationalist". Then prove that he fits into your definition.
3. Not relevant to his former job as an adviser. This is just partisanship and happens all the time.
4. Not relevant to his former job as an adviser. This is just partisanship and name calling happens all the time.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 10:19:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 9:23:48 AM, Nags wrote:

Van Jones:
- confessed communist/marxist/anarchist.
- black nationalist
- called Republicans a$$holes (1st video)
- called George Bush a crackhead (2nd video)

I should have watched the videos before responding. That makes it even more ridiculous as a reason for his forced resignation. They were both jokes. The second one he was just making an analogy. He did not call Bush a crackhead, he said that he sounded like a crackhead ("just a little bit more [oil]"). Either way, they aren't relevant to his former employment.
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 10:19:48 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
A very, very, psychotic person who thinks that he can sound smart and/or funny by using relentless, overdone sarcasm, which he uses to imply insanely outlandish claims, without actually expressly making those claims. The poorest, saddest, most pitiful excuse for political commentary that ever existed. An un-thinking machine which spouts hypocrisy, contradictions, factual errors, and ridiculous, surreal statements with no reasoning or rationality. He is a tool for manipulation and ratings.

I do not like Glenn Beck.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:24:00 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 10:15:01 AM, JBlake wrote:
At 9/12/2009 9:23:48 AM, Nags wrote:
At 9/12/2009 9:08:51 AM, JBlake wrote:
You'll have to excuse me for opting out of an entire hour of watching Glenn Beck. Please give me the relevant points that he makes.

Van Jones:
- confessed communist/marxist/anarchist.
- black nationalist

1. Prove it. Then prove why this disqualifies him from office.
2. Prove it. Then define "black nationalist". Then prove that he fits into your definition.

Glenn Beck just proved it the past two weeks for an hour each day. I'm not going to prove it to you in less than 8,000 characters.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:30:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:24:00 PM, Nags wrote:
Glenn Beck just proved it the past two weeks for an hour each day. I'm not going to prove it to you in less than 8,000 characters.

Glenn Beck also tried to provide proof that the Rothschilds were raving communists.

He isn't credible.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:32:53 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:30:43 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/12/2009 4:24:00 PM, Nags wrote:
Glenn Beck just proved it the past two weeks for an hour each day. I'm not going to prove it to you in less than 8,000 characters.

Glenn Beck also tried to provide proof that the Rothschilds were raving communists.

He isn't credible.

He is so uncredible that Van Jones was forced to resign.

He showed a bunch of videos of Van Jones talking about communism and showed a bunch of articles Van Jones authored and other stuff. It was mostly primary sources. He wasn't pulling his ideas out of his a$$.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:36:36 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:32:53 PM, Nags wrote:
He is so uncredible that Van Jones was forced to resign.

He showed a bunch of videos of Van Jones talking about communism and showed a bunch of articles Van Jones authored and other stuff. It was mostly primary sources. He wasn't pulling his ideas out of his a$$.

There is no proof that Glenn Beck caused Van Jones to resign; and just because he talked about communism and etc., doesn't give cause to resign. A major political party leader here used to be apart of the Communist party; does it mean he's a communist now? No; it just means he held views at one time, and wasn't close-minded enough to discount everything that wasn't flying under the banner of an elephant.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:42:45 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:36:36 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/12/2009 4:32:53 PM, Nags wrote:
He is so uncredible that Van Jones was forced to resign.

He showed a bunch of videos of Van Jones talking about communism and showed a bunch of articles Van Jones authored and other stuff. It was mostly primary sources. He wasn't pulling his ideas out of his a$$.

There is no proof that Glenn Beck caused Van Jones to resign;

It is pretty obvious.
http://www.politico.com...

and just because he talked about communism and etc., doesn't give cause to resign. A major political party leader here used to be apart of the Communist party; does it mean he's a communist now? No; it just means he held views at one time, and wasn't close-minded enough to discount everything that wasn't flying under the banner of an elephant.

I disagree. I don't want any communists, past or present, advising my President and spending taxpayer dollars.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:46:24 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:42:45 PM, Nags wrote:
It is pretty obvious.
http://www.politico.com...

Obvious =/= reality.

I disagree. I don't want any communists, past or present, advising my President and spending taxpayer dollars.

Your opinion on what advisers should be near the president =/= what advisers will be near the president.

This silly bias against communists makes me believe that Obama should have kept Jones on; just because he was a past communist, that makes him inherently evil and unacceptable? And what about allowing different opinions to be presented to the president; why can't he have a communist, a capitalist and whoever else to advise him on some options he can take?

Silly, absolutely silly.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:52:15 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
A president should at least be VERY WARY of someone of a difficult ideology. Why?

Well, why the hell would that person give honest advice, considering how they want you to fail in achieving your goals?

The only exception is someone whose "ideology" isn't really held by them in practice, because they like to be bribed out of it or whatever. But then you have to make sure they can't be bribed
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:52:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
*different not difficult.*
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:52:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
and it should end "can't be bribed back."
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:54:26 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:52:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
A president should at least be VERY WARY of someone of a difficult ideology. Why?

Well, why the hell would that person give honest advice, considering how they want you to fail in achieving your goals?

The only exception is someone whose "ideology" isn't really held by them in practice, because they like to be bribed out of it or whatever. But then you have to make sure they can't be bribed

I think that probably describes Van Jones very well.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 4:59:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
The bribe part?

Wouldn't know, I know nothing of Van Jones as such :).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 5:01:08 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/12/2009 4:59:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The bribe part?

Wouldn't know, I know nothing of Van Jones as such :).

Pretty much. XD

Of what I know, he's generally left-leaning, but he seems to be the sort of guy that would start spouting out libertarian doctrines if he was paid enough.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 5:15:34 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Meh, fortunately for Obama, he only has to pay enough to get him slightly closer to the center :).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2009 5:38:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Glenn Beck is just another one of the eccentric conservatives like Rush, Hannity, Savage, and the insane one Mark Levin. They are entertainers working for money, that's all. Everything they do revolves around peddling their client's products. They would never survive in an actual debate; the only reason they seem like they are wise and reasonable is because the calls that they take are screened. Hannity is the worst. He'll take 3 callers that agree with him, then one liberal nutcase that can barely catch his/her breath long enough to make a point because they are so inarticulate, and then he'll follow it up (usually) with some sexxy sounding conservative hot chick with a southern accent. The formula is a proven success. In the event they actually do accidentally field a call from someone who is articulate, they will switch to plan B: talk over them, fire rhetorical questions at them, and last but not least (when they point out the unfair medium they are hosting) they will say "this is my show and you can ask the questions when you get your own show". It's pretty bad, but I still don't support the fairness doctrine because I think that the way to truth is not buy forcing these conmen off the air, it is by supplying logic and reason and letting the people sort it out. If they can. If they can't, well, then they just aren't ready for the truth! We can only hope that someday they will be...
Master P is the end result of capitalism.