In long rant, Beck suggests that the "only right" progressives "want you to choose is the right to be able to kill a baby."
October 22, 2009 12:49 pm ET
From the October 22 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Of course, it all makes sense now.
He pretends to be "not a Republicans" but its always about abortion with these guys.
How else can you explain his presence on television? He has no talent, a dwindling sponsor base... yet they pay him $30 million a year to spew this nonsense?
In what business model does this make any sense?
If you understood business, you would understand the model this makes sense in. Beck averages over 3 million viewers at the 5 o'clock time slot (nearly 4x previous show average). He beats the other networks combined each night. The 5:00 time slot is very important. If you can secure 3 million viewers in that slot, you will secure a certain percentage for primetime programming. In turn this gives your primetime programming higher value to advertisers (more money). Beck still fills his entire advertising block. Fox News isn't going to risk losing 3 million primetime viewers because of a boycott. Those advertisers will eventually come back to his slot, and in turn will increase advertising revenues.
Me, personally, I'm anti-abortion, pro-life and pro-choice. I'm anti-abortion because of my own religious beliefs, I'm pro-life because my religion tells me that all life is sacred and I'm pro-choice because I live in a country which does not require anyone else to share my religious beliefs . . . I cannot force anyone to share my beliefs . . . it would be against my religion AND against the laws of this country.
But, that's just me.
Try spending a little more time and energy finding a job, and spend a little less time and energy completely FREAKING OUT over a President that is pretty much just as ineffective at bringing "change" as every President before him.
Just because majority of Americans like Obama, that doesn't give him some kind of super power that's going to allow him to start a maoist or marxist revolution. Get real. Your paranoia and delusions are getting boring. Get a job.
Try spending a little more time and energy finding a job, and spend a little less time and energy completely FREAKING OUT over a President that is pretty much just as ineffective at bringing "change" as every President before him.
Just because majority of Americans like Obama, that doesn't give him some kind of super power that's going to allow him to start a maoist or marxist revolution. Get real. Your paranoia and delusions are getting boring. Get a job.
http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657/
Wait, you provided no evidence at all, you just posted an ignorant statement that you pulled out of your ass.
Deep down in my psyche there was a voice, which sounded a lot like Al Franken, constantly telling me that all good liberals must kill their babies.
It sounded so tempting. But somehow I was able to ignore these progressive "urges" and I ended up allowing them to live.
Unfortunately, most of my progressive friends have in fact killed their own babies. As a result, our movement will be dying a slow death in the coming generations, as there will be nobody to carry our message of anti-America this and anti-America that. Damn you Glenn Beck!
Beck: "How much money does SEIU spend on lobbying?".
Answer: About 1% of what the insurance lobby or the defense lobby spends.
Beck: "If we could get all the pizza companies run by the government. It's Uncle Sams-a Pizza".
Answer: Huh?
Please don't argue with the strawmen questions. They aren't 'real' questions.
When it comes to executive wages, you have to look at them differently than the average worker. First, they aren't given a check for $200 million. They are compensated based on company performance through stock options, bonuses, and other peformance based measures. Stockholders (typically comprised of lower-level employees) typically have a say in executive compensation. I think it is important for stockholders to voice their concerns as often as possible.
When you look at wages, it is most important to look at the value the employee brings to the company. An assembly line worker brings a measure of value to the company. However, the revenues and capital that employee brings do not measure up to what MOST (not all) bring to said company. It is important to note that a healthy business compensates its executives based on the value they bring. If we think we should dictate executive wages, be prepared to see some very unhealthy businesses.
This is where some union employees get hit the hardest. Instead of standing out for their performance and the value they bring, they are represented by a hostile union that represents all kinds of employees and expects them to all be treated as a one-mold worker.
Most importantly, study labor economics and see what causes higher unemployment. Out-of-control wages on both sides, executive and lower-level, hurt the employment numbers.
You are correct. Small businesses make up over 75% of employment in this country. Calling for higher taxes will not help grow employment. These small business owner use their profits to grow and invest in new technology and new labor. Again, it is important to know that labor growth can only come from profits. Unless we expect companies to operate at a loss, profits are where job growth will come from, and essentially where our economic growth will come from.
What the bankers did should not translate to your typical business. Please, do not apply that to how most owner's run their businesses. They were betting on bets.
So, being billions of dollars 'in the red' is a good thing?
Can you list the deregulation under Reagan that caused the problems we have today? Why wouldn't you dump unproductive units and employees? My point is that you have to look at ecnomics the same way you look at science.
In many large companies, the average employee is offered stock options as part of their compensation packages. It is healthy for the stock, and it is healthy for the company when the employees are "owners."
Do you honestly believe, when over 75% of the jobs come from small businesses, that overpayed CEO's is the reason for 9.5% unemployment? Give me a break!
I don't necessarily agree with someone earning a $200 million dollar bonus, but then again, it isn't my company so, I don't believe, it is my place. I don't believe in imposing my "moral superiority" over these companies and the executives. It isn't my place. You would think that if "liberals" actually stood for liberty anymore, they would agree.
I also like how you ignored my point about the value a worker brings and unions and all of that.
Something about government cheese? Government pizza?
Liberals do not condone the exploitation of privatization, and therefore, obviously want the government to run all business especially pizza while doing painfully stereotypical/Super Mario-esque Italian accents?
Is that what I am suppose to gather from this rant?
Good point, Beck.
I've heard Beck refer to himself as a libertarian, but he's definitely not. And he's not a conservative or a republican. He's just angry, really.
My dad's a conservative. Although he really doesn't think about his political philosophies in that kind of binary way, and I don't either, but I think it's fair to say that most of his ideas fall on the more conservative side of the spectrum. He's incredibly smart, impressively well-read, and exceedingly reasonable (even though we do disagree on a lot of things). So, I really don't have anything against conservatives or republicans, but the movement is being dominated by guys like Beck and Hannity and etc. who really don't represent true conservativism at all.
The essential Republican, conservative value is smaller government, less government interference in our lives. But when it comes to these social issues like abortion and gay marriage (which are more and more becoming the dominant issues in the party as they start catering more and more to the religious base--I mean, try being a pro-choice, pro-same sex marriage Republican. It doesn't work. Look at Meghan McCain, they attack that girl all the time for not being a "true" Republican) they are actually in favor of more government authority. They want abortion illegalized, they want a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. They want to give the government more power to dictate its citizens personal life choices. They're abandoning their most essential principle.
And a distinction that a lot of conservatives have trouble making is that you don't have to particularly like the idea of abortion in order to realize that it shouldn't be illegal. That's how my dad feels. He isn't okay with abortion morally, but he realizes that it can't and shouldn't be illegal. People have been getting abortions for thousands and thousands of years, long before their was such a thing as an abortion clinic. Banning it wouldn't cut down on the number of abortions, it would just drastically increase the number of illegal abortions being performed in garages with rusty coat hangers or blows to the abdomen with baseball bats.
So my point here is, conservatives and Republicans need to stop making abortion such a big issue. It's not feasible for it to be illegalized, and it just drags them further away from their real principles.