Schultz calls Beck's "100-year plan" "psycho talk"
November 24, 2009 11:53 am ET
From the November 23 edition of MSNBC's The Ed Show:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Beck THEIR SAVIOR?!!! And someone on youtube just told me that no one really takes him that seriously. Apparently, savior is not that serious? Geez, i DONT think anyone I have ever met could accurately be described as my savior never mind some psycho I watch on tv. This country really is heading for disaster arent we?
I really don't see any hard and fast evidence that everything he speaks of is a out right lie as you say.
Figure it out on your own, dum-dum.
So when did Beck endorse the bank bailouts? I'd like to see some evidence of that.
Of course, dork still won't get it. But good try anyway.
Again, I'm an independent, and I try to be objective. I tend to lean conservative, but I'm no partisan hack.
http://vodpod.com/watch/2221811-lie-beck-claims-he-hated-bush-for-starting-the-700-billion-bailouts-
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200911240014
I think like everyone else who had little or no information at the time on the bailout, all the financial elites in government were screaming pass it, pass it.
That was the thought at the time but as time has passed and the bailout did nothing per say everyone has realized that was not the thing to do because the money never got to where it was supposed to.
I'd find a more informed, more intelligent hero.
Anyway...Beck seems well informed on the Constitution. I don't agree with everything he says, but he makes some good points.
I even think that the Constitution makes room for a public option, IF we could afford it. WE CAN'T, right now.
Beck is not "well-informed" on the Constitution and makes NO good points on anything. If you believe that, then you are not well-informed on it, either.
Are you saying the debt is meaningless and doesn't and can not affect average citizens?
I with you that there needas to be reform, don't get me wrong.
Like "Obama is a white-hating racist"?
Do you EVER look anything up? I mean SERIOUSLY or do you just post whatever you've heard one of your heroes spew?
Whatever. How about the rhetoric out of his church and from his "SPIRITUAL ADVISOR?"
Would you have a sprititual advisor who thinks the government created AIDS to kill black people?
It was only a matter of time right?
How you cons hold conflicting thoughts in your head and reconcile them really tickles me. President Obama hates white people but white people overwhelmingly supported and voted for him as their president. More people in the history of US elections voted and he received more votes than any other oother canidate in the history of US elections but he hates white people? How silly can you be. Can you tell me why Glenn Beck frequently host white supremacist on show, and can you explain what Glenn Beck meant by white culture?
The trick is to let him get comfortable and make him feel unchallenged in his future actions while holding him accountable for at least calling the President a racist. He will dig his own shallow grave.
What does interest me is the man in the crowd alluding to Glenn Beck as a savior. The conservatives, especially the media, often claim that the left almost worships President Obama as though he were Jesus returned. I've personally never seen or heard anyone call Obama a savior, or messiah, but here is a Beck follower, using just that word about what is admittedly a much less worthy man. Jesus can be found in the Bible, folks. If He came back today, Beck would be on the front lines of those who deny and castigate Him, because the truth does not abide in Glenn Beck.
Jesus Christ would be completely horrified at the push by some folks to have a "Christian" government. He understood the need to keep religion and government separate. "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and until God that which is His." Matthew 22:21.
Even the Southern Baptist Faith and Message states:
XVIII. Religious Liberty
God alone is Lord of the conscience, and he has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to his Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to the church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work.
Your assumption that it is the "atheist left and the 'progressives'" who want separation of church and state is patently false. Any Christian American who wishes to keep the freedom to worship in whatever manner they deem correct wants separation of church and state.
George Washington himself said that Aerican freedom was intended for, and can only be maintained by a religious people.
So, what is NOT good for society is separation of morality and state, which is what it seems to ME that the atheist left and SOME progressives are after.
It is not separation of church and state that I want. Rather, my aim is to keep the state from advancing or promoting any particular religion over the others. The FauxCons seem to think this country should be run on what they believe are Christian principles. This is against the teachings of Christ, and against the wisdom of history, which shows theocracies as being quite bad in practice.
I don't think believeing that abortion is murder and marriage should remain between a man and a woman are calls for theocratic rule.
There are plenty of families that can't have children that would love to. Adoption is a much better option, in my view.
But YES, I think there should be some sort of penalty for the wanton termination of a fetus's life.
I think it's murder, OK. It isn't a fundamental right. Sure, I'm for small government, but that doesn't mean that their shouldn't be regulation where needed, and I think if people WANT to DISMEMBER FETUSES, then there needs to be regulation.
There always seem to be more men than women at all the Anti-abortion protests.
Just asking, you seem to be knowledgeable.
What a Dick! What a Dorky thing to say! Dork!
Pregnancy occurs when a sperm meets at egg. The woman didn't put the two together unless she's a lab tech. It was the father's choice to have unprotected sex! There for he is just as responsible for the woman! If a woman is punished for having an abortion, the father should be, too! And he should definately pay for the abortion, if that is what they decide! I am opposed to abortion, but there are lots of reasons besides rape and incest that would make a woman choose abortion. For instance, she might not want to have a child by someone so disgustingly sexist and irresponsible as to make the above statement!
You make it sound like women order abortions like drive thru fast food. Fail.
Of course. Because those are the two choices. Either you believe those who have abortions are murderers or you believe it dismembering fetuses are a good thing. Please. Grow up. You come here and pretend to be a reasonable independent when you are nothing of the sort. It is no wonder that Glenn Beck is your hero.
Tell us some more how Beck is not a race-baiter for claiming Obama has a deep-seated hatred for white people and white culture but that Obama is a divisive racist for calling his grandmother a typical white person. You are such a reasonable independent.
If abortion is actually murder why would it be OK in these instances. Suddenly murder becomes OK to you? Truly bizarre. You may want to turn off Glenn Beck and think through some of your core beliefs.
Women in Brother Dork's world - breeding stock.
At what? Making their own choices? Or, are they making choices you disagree with? If you believe abortion is wrong, you are free to refrain from having one. If you think marriage is between a man and a woman only, then date the opposite sex. As for the definition of marriage, hey, I even agree with you. That being said, I do favor a civil union that allows same sex couples to make the same commitment in the eyes of the state, because they deserve the same rights that male-female couples share. See? More rights for citizens is a good thing. So is more choice.
Believing that abortion is murder and believing that marriage should remain between a man and a woman are religious points of view. Calling for your religious point of view to be the law of the land is indeed a call for theocratic rule, k1dork.
Oh, and some of the most moral and caring people I've encountered in recent years are atheists and agnostics and some of the most immoral and uncaring have been church-going "Christians," so your posit is faulty. Generalizations are rarely true.
This country was NOT built on Christian principles.
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.-----Thomas Jefferson, in his Autobiography in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
It was the intent of our founders that ALL religious and/or non-religious beliefs would be honored in this country.
He may have had some input, but I'm not sure.
I do know that our constitution was mainly the work of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison. None agreed with Washington's sentiment about "a religious people".
And your statement implies that only believers can be moral and that Atheists are not moral.
I'm also taking this with a grain of salt but, if true...really? You choose this to play the race card on? Grow up.
Media Matters provides us plenty videos of people talking stupid, in their own words, unfiltered.
I just call it as I see it. Why in the hell are you on this site? Do you not know what this site is about?
You want to defend stupidity?
Wouldn't you feel more at home talking with people you have something in common with? May I suggest "dummiesrus.com"?
I just call it as I see it. Why in the hell are you on this site? Do you not know what this site is about?
You want to defend stupidity?
Wouldn't you feel more at home talking with people you have something in common with? May I suggest "dummiesrus.com"?
If any of the founding fathers were suddenly to come to life today, he would literally be completely overwhelmed to the point of madness by the modern world. He would be entirely ill-equipped to process the complexity.
Becky's fans and followers are scary for this country, because of the fact of being un-informed and also the fact that Becky does not tell the whole story of any of his topics. All he does is cherry-pick stories or comments.
His fans comments also reminded me of the line outside a book store where fans of Sarah Palin were really talking Psycho Talk!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKKKgua7wQk
This idiot gets no sympathey from me. Far as I'm concern Beck is a lynch mob leader.