Haha, no, it doesn't matter.

Learning to spell won't suddenly make him a journalist who is required to have at least a passing relationship with truth or sanity.

Why is OUR President surrounding himself with Communists and Marxist advisors? This to me is VERY frightning. I hve been seeing and hearing this on Beck's program. If this is not true, I will stand corrected!

Please, let them NOT change our Constitution.

There you have it, the typical leftist attitude that if anyone isn't in lock step with them it is just because they aren't as "learned" as them.  Democrats and leftists don't watch TV?  Ha!  Why on Earth would every network other than Fox just totally cater to the left then?  I think that people who tune in to Fox are looking for something other than the Democratic talking points and snarky Republican bashing that is a constant on the other networks.

I'll put my husband's reading and radio listening experience up against anyone on the left's. 

This is why I watch FOX. They report, YOU decide!

Don't get hung up on this. That's one guy, not the perspective of the average progressive. Fact is books are expensive, no one I know except my uncle who works for the LA times and gets sent books for free actually reads even 200 bucks worth of books a month, liberal or democrat. Basically all new books cost 20-40 bucks since they're almost always hardback at first, and I think most people can polish off a book in 4 days or so, so clearly someone whose sole news source would be finishing them every 1-3 days. That means we're at what, 30 bucks every say two days, aka 15 books a month, aka about 450 bucks a month ignoring sales tax? That doesn't represent the majority of any political consituency, and the guy who made that statement doesn't reflect my perspective on liberals or conservatives, and I'm a liberal.

This is kind of a funny statement though. Fox News gets more viewership than the majority of the other news networks combined, does it not? Who's to say those other networks aren't the counterpoint to Fox's right-wing talking points and democrat bashing?

The truth is that they're all owned by massive corporations and they report whatever will make money, which seems very much in line with the republican's perspective of the free market, aka it's fair game and it shouldn't be complained about.

I'm sure he reads a lot, my family is generally very catholic and fairly wealthy, so we have a lot of conservatives in our clan and some of them do read a lot. That being said, listening to the radio is pretty much just a good way to double up on your fox news intake if you're listening to Beck, O'Reily and Limbaugh (yes I realize he doesn't have a show on Fox), unless you're listening to radio stations with distinctly different approaches, like NPR.

Obama doesn't have Communist or Marxist advisors. But Fox&Friends say so.  And they WANT you to be frightened because frightened people don't think but follow the herd. And leading the herd are those that scream loudest, not those that think and act calmly.

 

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt

First off that's now how changing the constitution works. The president has no direct role in the process of accepting an amendment. It needs to either be proposed by Congress or a collection of state legislatures, and regardless of how it's proposed, it must be passed by the state legislatures.

When I look at the in-fighting and lack of cohesion when it comes to health care I just can't see the democrats getting a radical constitutional amendment through Congress and it then surviving at the state level.

The only real way for a president to change the constitution is by manipulating the supreme court through the seating of judges aligned to his political perspective, and when you look at the history of the supreme court you can see that's a very long and unpredictable process. Until just recently with Alito and Roberts, the republicans have had very poor luck getting the judges they appoint to follow the party line, why would it be easier for the democrats, especially when Obama picked a moderate like Sotomayor? Even Alito and Roberts can't be trusted to vote conservative forever, judges tend to gravitate towards the center over time.

As for whether Obama's Czars are radicals, bear in mind the first Czar was appointed by Nixon and Reagan and the Bushes had theirs too. Critiques of the history of specific czars are fair game and I'd love to read honest reviews of them, but the stuff I pulled up on a cursory google search of the issue (including a link to Beck's site) were very slanted and didn't really seem that compelling to me.

 

Slanted because of where you found the info..?  Why is it if a specific piece of information comes from a particular source it is automatically slanted. The quotes and videos and audio he plays isnt him slanting it. He isn't putting the words in their mouths.

It is them.. saying it.

 

As far as Czar history goes, No communist or 'former' self proclaimed communist's or Marxxist's really spring to mind.

The problem isn't the Czars, it is who they are and what they believe.

Here's the glenn beck list of czars btw, I only see one on there that's even remotely objectionable:

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29391/

 

There's 32 of them from my cursory examination (I have to leave for class in about 5 minutes) it looks like Beck doesn't even object to at least 30 of them.

The fact that there's 32 of those people kind of undermines the notion of them being czars, as the original definition is of a person who claims the same rank as a roman emporer. I never heard of 32 emporers ruling rome together.

Also the term "surrounding" seems to imply a much more personal level of interaction than Obama's likely to have with 32 of these people in addition to his own cabinet, vice president, and other lawmakers. They're important cogs, but they're still just cogs nonetheless.

Lastly when you have to find 32 people who have ideas which are workable with your own to direct major national issues it's highly likely that the pool you can draw from is so narrow that some will have said some questionable things in their past, and it's also probable with 32 of them that one or two will be a mistake, which some of them may very well be. Pointing those out is fair game too.

However, claiming Obama is intentionally surrounding himself with communists in an implied attempt to overthrow democracy is not a legitimate argument.

Cass Sunstein

Yeah there is obviously nothing objectionable about this guy as long as your between 2 and 60,

If animals could vote, this guy would be a shoe in.

They believe we are too stupid to make our own choices. news flash... a lot of us aren't.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhgvJfPRkG8

 

John Holdren

In his own words.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F29t52MQBrQ&feature=fvw

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyp2iw0qu9E&feature=related

 

What is it you don't find objectionable about this?

 

Theres plenty more and personally I think 'surrounding' is a perfectly acceptable way to describe the Czar - Obama relationship. Much the same way he surrounded himself with racist preachers, radicals, homegrown terrorists, 'typical white people' and the like on his way up.

 

Its..... a.... pattern... of ... behaviour.

 

Funny you mention that. Beck's faith started out under the ideology that all money should go to the church and then be redistributed so everyone was equal. When it fell apart because no one wanted to share their money, they imposed a compulsory 10% tax on it's members. So they have gone from a communist ideology to a Marxist ideology when it comes to their members money.

Watch out..Van Jones might join the Mormons next.

Sure, I agree with that, however Mormons have their own issues, have no bearing on my existence and irrelevant to this discussion.

Just a minor point - DrJBHL mentioned USA having an Advanced Democracy; in fact representative democracy shouldn't even have the d-word there, because its more akin to oligarchy than anything to do with the rule of the people.

When each voter gets a unique ID token which can be used from a home computer to vote on day-to-day matters, then you can talk about democracy. As it stands, no country in the world can claim to be a democratic one.

Of course, the current system is in place because while an individual may be competent, smart and informed, masses are dumb, fearful and violent. Best not to let them express their opinion too often, eh.

P.S. You guys have some first-class nutter entertainers over there... our guys here in the Balkans are nothing compared to yours!

I would like to make a comment on universal healthcare.  There is a massive debate in the USA about creating  government involvement  in healthcare.  I understand why americann`s would be tentative about a change like this.

 

I`m going to reference my own experience as a canadian with universal healthcare.  It`s exspensive, Every paycheck 33% is paid in provincial and federal income tax.  A large portion of that goes to fund the healthcare system.  I wouldn`t trade it for anything in the world.  If I`m sick, If I need help for anything it`s there.  There are problems with it, Wait time`s to see a specialist as the number one.  Overall, I feel it is well worth the investment. 

 

I couldn`t imagine going through life knowing that a significant injury could backrupt me.  I couldn`t imagine walking around uninsured knowing an illness could kill me because my wallet wasn`t large enough to be considered worthy of treating.

 

IMO, Healthcare should not be a for profit industry.  Healthcare should be focused on the patient, Not the bottom line.

Healthcare should be a right.

All depends who is paying for it.

 

What about Sunstein and Holdren?  No comments?

 

False ‘Death Panel’ Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots

NEW YORK TIMES

i think he would make a killing selling avon.......

ill be honest, i started watching him and i got scared..why? because he seems to have a way of pulling you in...

not sure if its charisma, or the way he talks or his presence...but im an aussie so i have nooo idea what he is talking about, so I knew i coudlnt continue. im not saying anything against beck, just my own personal experience i had with him.

i only found one thing strange and that is how he commented on how he had no idea how he ended up in a fox studio doing that show....his biography pretty much tells it  how he got there, first  a dj, then a radio host, then a host on a tv show...so not sure why he says he dosnt get it, or understand why if he accepted every new job that he did.

either way its a strange show! we dont have anything like that here in aus. in aus we are pretty up to date with what goes on in our parliment. we have a show on the abc called 'question time' and its broadcast live inside parliment where you actually get to see what goes on, i love it.  we know a fair bit of what goes on in our political system, so im rther greatful for that.

and our stimulous package has really helped our ecconomy too! WE LUV KEVVY!  (prime minister kevin rudd)

Oh.. well if the Times disputes it , it must be contrived ... they must have not spoken the words clearly quoted and heard on tape.

In the bill or not... these two (more) nutjobs are now in powerful posititions delegated by the Obama admin.

Wait wait.. don't tell me.. they have recently renounced their manifests for killing children and sterilizing the water supply.??

 

 

 

He couldn't  sell Avon. As soon as he found out that the rep above him was making money from his sales and it was all a big pyramid scheme, his head would explode..I mean his ass...no wait...

.the hip bone's connected to the...

 

what I said.

This clip is presented in a way which makes it pretty easy to dismantle.  Simply put, it's foundation is based on two things: one is the assumption that these people think we're stupid and two is that we're not stupid.  Since the assumption is that if we were stupid we would have our lives regulated in a way which would force us to choose a healthy diet, exercise, etc. and the majority of Americans do not do that, we are actually fairly stupid, by the logic presented here, which dismantles the second aspect, imo.

As for the first, that's not something I can prove or disprove, it's just opinion.  I don't think that the people in charge believe we're stupid, by the definition which was implied in the segment or by a more standard definition.  I can only assume they're referring to things like sin taxes on cigarettes, sugary drinks, etc., and I see those as more of a clever way to both generate revenue and diminish demand for those items. 

Lemme give an example of how I can rationalize smart people making 'stupid' choices with which sin taxes can help without implying people are stupid.  Where I live there's literally only one fast food restaurant which has healthy food, which is Subway, and even Subway only offers drinks made with high fructose corn syrup.  Making the unhealthy foods less profitable won't eliminate unhealthy foods as a meal choice, but it will make healthier foods which are more expensive a much better option and they might even make a better effort at serving juice or other beverage alternatives after breakfast.

When it comes to animals having rights which supercede the rights of humans I don't have an issue with that. Currently even plants have a right to exist in our national parks and endangered species are protected from our incursions. As for them showing up in the court room I don't see how you would take issue with that either. Now I can't imagine having a dog which has been beaten physically present in the court room would help, but if you have a video of a dog which is shown being friendly with a number of people and it then cowers in fear when placed near its owner who's accused of abusing it, then perhaps that could be part of a larger case with all the standard colleciton of evidence. If you're talking about a cat meowing and sentencing someone to death, like Beck seems to be implying we're headed towards, then that's just absurd.

 

I'll respond to the others later. I read the relevant part Holdren's work and the text around it and the date of its publication tell a much different story. Anyway, I've gotta do some homework.

The valid complaints about Beck.  He's sophmoric, if we're being generous.  Then again, at least half of the adult population his age hasn't grown up either, so it's not terribly surprising that he acts like a high schooler most of the time.  Read your own posts, most of us aren't any better.  He's dramatic, traumatically so at times.  On occasion he's downright annoying, like the retarded shit he pulled a couple days ago with computer voices reading statements by the crazy czars we've been saddled with.  End of complaints, you don't like his sense of humor.

 

His sense of humor isn't of any value in determining whether he's giving factual information or not, as you have ignored every time it's been presented, Po.

 

If you're not a proponent of the top down planned economy, Obama is a crazy person.  He's got more communists(stop the McCarthy name dropping, several of then are self admitted communists and you're just going to have to get over it) in his administration than we've had altogether since the Russian revolt.

 

If you actually bother to read a little history, everything they don't dare mention in school, he's a fucking nightmare.  The claim that this country could never be Nazi Germany is real nice, but we've already been there and done that for the most part.  You just don't know about it because your public education has expunged all that nasty stuff the progressives did the last time they had real power.  Try the NRA on for size.  The organization you never heard about in your history classes when they were talking about how much good was done by that catastrophic fuckup for a president.  Start there and then work your way to political prisoners and corporate corruption.  Of note, GE was in bed with Uncle then too.  They were pushing fascism of all things.  Hilarious huh?  The only thing we didn't do was the wonderful bit about ethnic cleansing.

 

Not everyone wants Uncle to run their life for them, and that's what you're getting if the guy has his way.  If all the racists he's hanging with are any indication, you better not be white either.  The mission statement for his church read like a KKK pamplet, the only thing different was what color they liked.  For all his protestations that he somehow missed the blatent racism there, he's got plenty more black supremacists working with him now, Van Jones for instance.

Thanks vStyler. Could not agree more.

Amazing. Some people think Glenn Beck is sane, honest and reporting facts.

Wow.