Beck co-host Gray: "Let's not sugarcoat ... Robert Gibbs is butt stupid"
September 03, 2010 11:19 am ET
From the September 3 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
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.
I'm not sure if he qualifies for stupid or just having terrible taste in friends.
<sarcasm>
Pat Gray, like Beck is uneducated. He's a drop out.
Why do these these far right yackers wade into a battle of wits unarmed all the time? Are they really that dense?
Gibbs, by comparison, graduated with honors.
Daily we hear morons like, Hannity, Beck, Gray, Rove, Weiner, Limbaugh, and many more right wing pundits, rail against education. It's pure, basic, jealousy and low self esteem.
The Teabagger movement is symptomatic of an anti-intellectual backlash that has consumed Wingnut Republicans. That's why uneducated, stupid people like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are so popular right now, and why Teabagger Candidates for the Senate think it's a good idea to snub the Press. These days, being smart is considered a liability, at least among Republicans.
It's really frightening if you think about it. The movie Idiocracy seems more prophetic every day.
I know some very "smart" rightwingers who reject the advice/direction of experts all the time if it conflicts with their ideas.
It's not so much rejecting intelligence as it is rejecting an idea that is different from one's preconceived notions of how things are.
So, simply stating Obama is a Christian falls into this category?
Which do you considered to be the "indefensible" part? That the President is a Christian, or Christianity itself?
He said that he was "mainstream, committed Christian". That simply gives those who actually are the chance to say bullcrap and point out the hypocracy. This isnt an important issue, but Gibbs isnt entitled to make up his own "facts". Black Liberation Theology IS NOT a mainstream form of Christianity.
Yeah....it's mainstream alright.
So, why don't you simply break from the Beck on this issue? You're smart enough to know that this is just a phony issue designed to take the place of the whole "secret Muslim" phony issue, which was designed to take the place of the whole birther nonsense.
Debate policy with us. Not this load of goose dropping.
You disagree with the church he attended based upon truncated clips of 2-3 sermons given by one man who preached at that church. Seriously, don't you think, if there were more than those 2-3 clips, they'd be ALL OVER the internet? The man preached for YEARS at this church, which contains many WHITE congregants.
You're making up your own facts, MM, just as your hero Beck does . . . he even had to admit that he lied in his speech about holding George Washington's inaugural address in his hand. And what did he do when he was admitting it? HE LIED. He said that he couldn't touch the thing because of what Sandy Berger had done. . .Sandy Berger wasn't allowed access to original documents, either. He took COPIES. So, Beck couldn't even tell the truth when he was admitting that he couldn't tell the truth.
Get your head out of your a**.
WTF are you on about? Care to provide some substance to your claims?
Har! He accidentally made a wingnut joke in the middle of reciting the Blimpy Limbaugh Show.. I think it's a more European version of "Utopia".
The national debt under Bush [which included his final 2009 budget which ended on September 30, 2009] was $11.814 TRILLION which was more than twice what it was when he was inaugurated . . . that debt increased at the rate of 4.13 Billion per day from September 28, 2007. Who was president then, MM?
Get your head out of your backside.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
No rose colored glasses for me, hon. I'm just calling BS on your comment.
On September 2, 2009, the National Debt was what I posted above. Twenty eight days later, when the final Bush budget expired, it was at almost $12 trillion. There has been another $1 trillion added.
This is a breakdown of how the debt increased under GWB.
Obama inherited a 12 trillion dollar National Debt and a very, very serious recession. It's currently at 13 trillion, partially because of the stimulus plan which independent economists have credited with preventing the unemployment rate from hitting 11.4% and with helping to stimulate the economy.
Get your head out of your backside.
So Tax Increases = Socialism?
You really need an education before you come "debate" here. I put debate in quotes because all you ever do is spout talking points and conspiracy theories with no facts, sources or even sound reasoning. I know colleges are socialist indoctrination camps but if anyone needs to spend a few years at one... It's you.
Yet, you elected him TWICE. Not once, TWICE. Now that you admit how undeniably WRONG you have been for a decade, perhaps you should quiet down for a bit and spend some time reflecting on why you have made all of these bad decisions and ask some tough questions about the ideology you have mistakenly clung to for so long.
Get an education, squawks.
The Bible speaks for individual charity and churchwide community philanthropy. The Bible never condones or approves (in the context of "spreading the wealth") of taking property by force (income taxation). You have to separate individual/personal charity/philanthropy and government redistribution through force.
Jesus quite clearly tells his followers that they are to pay their taxes, grunt. He also tells the rich young ruler that the only way to follow him is to sell ALL of his wealth and give the proceeds to the poor.
I'd suggest you read the red letters. Those are Christ's words.
I'm very aware of Christ telling his followers to pay their taxes. "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." However, that has nothing to do with the government's role in charity. That role was clearly given to the Church by God.
-"True communism has nothing to do with government, grunt."
What is your point? In this forum, we are talking about the government structures of capitalism, socialism, communism, etc.
-"He also tells the rich young ruler that the only way to follow him is to sell ALL of his wealth and give the proceeds to the poor."
Why did He tell the ruler that? It wasn't a commandment to all of Christ's followers. In His omniscience, Christ knew that the man's riches separated him from am unadulterated relationship with God. He knew that the man's riches were more important to him than serving God.
-"I'd suggest you read the red letters. Those are Christ's words."
Are you all talking about charity or government? You talk about "true communism" and "true socialism" being free of government. If that is your reference, then you are referring to modern day CHARITY. However, in these forums, and in our society, we talk about communism and socialism in terms of government structures and role IN society. Therefore, the Bible certainly never preaches state-administered socialism or communism. The major difference is income taxation vs. tithing and offering. Income taxation is forced (never praised by Jesus. In fact, tax collectors were looked down upon for their corruption and thuggery). Jesus commanded us to pay our taxes in accordance with other scripture referencing laws of the land.
I'll repeat, read the words in red letters.
Even still, you have not proven in any way that the Bible is a socialist or commmunist book in any way other than societal and through charity. It certainly does not preach socialism or communism as a government structure of forced redistribution.
My point is that your idea of the government structure of communism is totally WRONG
Are saying that communism as a government structure is voluntary?
By this sentance you are implying that in communism the government has a role in society, when in fact thee is no central government in true communism. So if you have an idea of any kind of government structure in communism, YOU ARE WRONG
There is always a power structure in society. That is how we operate. Every species operates through a power structure. A true communist society would lead to violence on a massive scale. The Bible surely doesn't promote such a society.
The book of Acts begs to differ, grunt:
The early church was indeed communal in organization.
Societal Communism and socialism is far different than church communism. When it is administered in society it is far different.
You aren't separating the Church and the believers and society. They aren't one in the same.
Go look up the meaning of the word society, third and lastly.
Third, I know the meaning of society.
Tell us which book of the bible can that reference be found in?
If Jesus is God, did He not know of this principle? - grunt
Ahh, Christianity. The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathetically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...yeah, that makes perfect sense. So adorable.
Credit to mookie for that poster.
Where in the book of Acts? Even a certain chapter???
Income taxation is not taking property by force. Income taxation is the bill you pay for living in society.
If income taxation were the bill we pay for living in society, we would all pay a flat tax as a percentage of our income.
Taxation of consumption is the bill you pay for living in society. Based on the amount you are able to consume, you pay the bill for the resources you consume. That is the bill for living in society.
But let's go with what you are saying. How is it that you are forced out of your money through income tax?
Yes, but citizens only pay when they spend or consume. I can choose how much I spend. Those who consume the most pay the most.
-"How is it that you are forced out of your money through income tax?"
Money is taken from my paycheck each Friday. I don't have a choice. It isn't taken when I spend or when I consume. You see, under a consumption tax, I choose when I pay my taxes. If a consumer is short one week, they wouldn't consume as much, therefore having more money. There are obvious differences between the two.
Income taxes are payed once a year and depending on your income and tax rate you can get deductions. Ironically, the higher your income, the more deductions you can likely get.
Not true, you can opt to have 0 witholding, but you remain on the books for owing the tax. Freelancers can tell you a lot more about how that works.
And, come to think of it, don't many nurses belong to a union, oh "bone doctor"?
Good lord--the birdbrain supports communist organizations!
Education is evil!
Second socialism is not being abandoned it is being rethought in a way to make it more efficient.
Third history has shown that every time today's form of conservatism has been tried since the middle age it has resulted in either a major rescission or a depression.
You need to learn from history.
I live in an area which hasn't been hit as hard, so I guess we're lucky here. Our unemployment rate is 3% below the national average. Our housing starts are up, new home sales are up . . . we have new retail outlets opening.
All in all, things are going pretty well for me and most people in our community.
High unemploment figures, do they turn you on?
Good job with "teh stupid" today, squawks. You're got it DOWN today. LOL!
Just one more dark, shadowy enigma of this president who has lived 48 years leaving no footprint, no evidence of his existence on the planet.
Yes, government sector jobs. = seahawks
Awesome. There is absolutely NOTHING any of us could write that would make you look as stupid as the things you write yourself, seahawks. Please, do carry on.
See, it is only your side who uses that anointed one theme, started by Hannity.
There's a short article about it on Huffington Post. He wasn't very kind in his assessment of Simple Sarah:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/10/sarah-palin-201010
One can tell a lot about how successful a person is in the real world by the position he/she rises to and the value of that position.
Radio personality? Can make lots of money, but doesn't necessarily depend upon academic-related skills.
WH Press Secretary? Doesn't make as much money as the former, but depends heavily upon academic-related skills.
Give me the person whose job is based on academics every time.