The Glenn Beck chart
Glenn Beck's affinity for chalkboard diagrams charting out the frequently illusory "connections" in the growing liberal conspiracy to undermine America is well-documented. In that spirit, Media Matters for America has explored Beck's links to the extremist, unhinged, and sometimes paranoid people and groups that inhabit the world of right-wing political activism and laid them out in a Beck-style chart, but with two key differences: these connections actually exist, and they were spell-checked.
Legend
1. GLENN BECK → W. CLEON SKOUSEN: As documented by Salon's Alexander Zaitchik, W. Cleon Skousen, a right-wing activist and conspiracy theorist, is "Beck's favorite writer and the author of the bible of the 9/12 movement, 'The 5,000 Year Leap.' A once-famous anti-communist 'historian,' Skousen was too extreme even for the conservative activists of the Goldwater era, but Glenn Beck has now rescued him from the remainder pile of history, and introduced him to a receptive new audience." Beck frequently touts Skousen's work on his television and radio programs and wrote a foreword for the 30th anniversary edition of The 5000 Year Leap, which he promotes on his website.
2. GLENN BECK → THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY: Beck interviewed Sam Antonio, a national spokesman for the John Birch Society, on the July 25, 2007, edition of his now-defunct CNN Headline News program. Leading off the interview, Beck said to Antonio: "I have to tell you, when I was growing up, the John Birch Society, I thought they were a bunch of nuts, however, you guys are starting to make more and more sense to me." Beck was discussing with Antonio the Security and Prosperity Partnership, an economic and security initiative of the United States, Canada, and Mexico that the John Birch Society believes is a vehicle "to stealthily merge the three North American nations."
3. GLENN BECK → ABC NEWS: In January 2007, ABC News hired Beck to appear as a "regular commentator" on Good Morning America. The announcement was made not long after Beck's interview with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the first Muslim elected to Congress, during which Beck said, "I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.' " Beck appeared on Good Morning America several times as a "commentator."
4. GLENN BECK → SIMON & SCHUSTER: Every one of Beck's books has been published by Simon & Schuster or one of its imprints. Beck's latest offering, Arguing with Idiots, was published by Threshold Editions, Simon & Schuster's conservative imprint.
5. GLENN BECK → NEWS CORP.: In October 2008, Fox News announced that Beck would be joining the network in 2009. The first episode of Glenn Beck aired on Fox News in January 2009.
6. GLENN BECK → HANNAH GILES: Beck was the first to air excerpts from James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles' undercover videos, in which the two dressed as a pimp and prostitute and attempted to solicit advice from ACORN employees on how to operate their proposed brothel. Giles appeared on the September 10 edition of Beck's Fox News show to discuss the videos.
7. GLENN BECK → ANDREW BREITBART: Beck has relied heavily upon Matt Drudge protégé Breitbart for the content of his radio and television programs and has praised Breitbart highly, calling him a "great journalist" and his work "instrumental."
8. GLENN BECK → 9-12 PROJECT: Beck is the founder of the 9-12 Project, the creation of which he tearfully announced on the March 13 edition of his Fox News program.
9. GLENN BECK → MICHELE BACHMANN: On the October 14 edition of his radio program, Beck interviewed Rep. Bachmann and offered to "have a fundraiser" for her after Bachmann claimed that "Speaker Pelosi has made me her number-one congresswoman to defeat next year." Bachmann herself has called for an investigation to root out the "anti-America" members of Congress.
10. JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY → W. CLEON SKOUSEN: Though he claims to never have been a member, Skousen was a staunch defender of the John Birch Society. He authored a 1963 pamphlet titled "The Communist Attack on the John Birch Society," in which he alleged that people who criticized the group "usually did so without realizing they were promoting the official Communist Party line." Salon's Zaitchick wrote that Skousen "aligned himself" with John Birch Society founder Robert Welch's accusation that Dwight Eisenhower was a "dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy."
11. W. CLEON SKOUSEN → 9-12 PROJECT: On the March 13 edition of his Fox News program, which was the official launch of the 9-12 Project, Beck provided his studio audience with a selection of books, one of which was Skousen's The 5000 Year Leap. Beck lauded the "fantastic" book," telling the audience that "it is the 29 principles that our founders put together, and how they put this genius country together."
12. SIMON & SCHUSTER → MARY MATALIN: Matalin, a Republican political consultant and former Bush White House aide, is the chief editor of Threshold Editions, Simon & Schuster's conservative imprint.
13. SIMON & SCHUSTER → CBS: Simon & Schuster is a division of CBS Corp.
14. ANDREW BREITBART → JAMES O'KEEFE: Breitbart worked closely with O'Keefe in promoting and distributing O'Keefe's undercover ACORN videos, which were first posted on Breitbart's BigGovernment.com. Breitbart is also one of many media conservatives who have offered to raise money for O'Keefe and Giles' legal defense fund after the two were sued by ACORN.
15. HANNAH GILES → JAMES O'KEEFE: Giles and O'Keefe collaborated on a series of undercover videos shot in ACORN offices in which they would pose as a prostitute and pimp, respectively, and solicit ACORN employees for advice on how to run a brothel. O'Keefe later claimed that he and Giles were not rebuffed at any of the ACORN offices they visited -- a claim that was later undermined by ACORN officials who produced a police report showing that ACORN had contacted police about O'Keefe's visit to their Philadelphia office.
16. HANNAH GILES → YOUNG AMERICA'S FOUNDATION: Giles is an alumnus of the Young America's Foundation's National Journalism Center.
17. GLENN BECK → CBS: Beck was interviewed by Katie Couric for the September 22 broadcast of the CBS Evening News. Couric disclosed during the program that Simon & Schuster, the publisher of Beck's Arguing with Idiots, is owned by CBS.
18. JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY → JOHN McMANUS: McManus is the long-serving president of the John Birch Society. A June 25 New York Times article on the John Birch Society reported that former members of the group had released "recorded snippets of Mr. McManus lecturing to Catholic groups that Judaism became a dead and deadly religion after the establishment of the Catholic Church."
19. MICHELE BACHMANN → 9-12 PROTESTS: On September 12, Bachmann spoke at a "tea party" rally in St. Cloud, Minnesota, during which she attacked President Obama's health care proposals. Bachmann has been supportive of the tea party movement in general, videotaping a message of support to the Minnesota Tea Party Patriots, telling them, "Sign me up for your tea party, patriots."
20. 9-12 PROJECT → 9-12 PROTESTS: The connection between the 9-12 Project and the 9-12 protests -- in particular the "March on Washington" -- should be obvious. As CNN's Howard Kurtz put it, the protest was "something that Glenn Beck practically conceived, promoted." The 9-12 Project website worked closely with other groups in organizing the march, and Beck was chief among the Fox News personalities hyping the event.
21. YOUNG AMERICA'S FOUNDATION → 9-12 PROTESTS: YAF was a "bronze co-sponsor" of the 9-12 "March on Washington." YAF receives funding from the Castle Rock Foundation, the F.M. Kirby Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
22. JAMES O'KEEFE → LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE: O'Keefe reportedly received funding from the Leadership Institute while in college and worked for the group after he graduated.
23. COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE → 9-12 PROTESTS: Hosted a "BureauCrash Happy Hour" as part of the 9-12 March on Washington. CEI has extensive links to corporate interests and once reportedly claimed Exxon Mobil Corp. as a "major donor" due to the group's position that the burning of fossil fuels does not contribute to climate change. CEI also receives funding from the Earhart Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.
24. TEA PARTY EXPRESS → 9-12 PROTESTS: The March on Washington was the final stop on the Tea Party Express tour of America. One of the Tea Party Express organizers told CNN that a racist sign depicting Obama as a witch doctor "says to me that a lot of people in this country are angry about the direction that the administration and Congress are taking us."
25. OUR COUNTRY DESERVES BETTER PAC → 9-12 PROTESTS: Our Country Deserves Better was a "gold" co-sponsor of the March on Washington. The group ran an advertisement comparing Obama to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and is the home to birther Mark Williams, who promoted the tea parties on Fox News.
26. FREEDOMWORKS → 9-12 PROTESTS: Led by Dick Armey, FreedomWorks aggressively promoted the first round of tax day tea parties, was the national sponsor of the 9-12 March on Washington, and disseminated wildly inflated estimates of the crowd size at the march.
27. AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY → 9-12 PROTESTS: Americans for Prosperity are major tea party promoters and brought its "Patients First bus" to the 9-12 March on Washington. AFP representatives frequently appear on Beck's radio and television programs.
28. LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE → 9-12 PROTESTS: The Leadership Institute was a "bronze" co-sponsor of the 9-12 March on Washington and put on several "grassroots activism" seminars as part of the 9-12 March agenda. The Leadership Institute receives funding from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the F.M. Kirby Foundation, and the Castle Rock Foundation.
29. TEA PARTY EXPRESS → OUR COUNTRY DESERVES BETTER PAC: The Tea Party Express "tour delegation" featured two members of Our Country Deserves Better, one of whom is birther Mark Williams.
30. FREEDOMWORKS → AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY: AFP is a splinter group of Citizens for a Sound Economy, which was later renamed FreedomWorks.
31. GLENN BECK → LOU DOBBS: During his time with CNN Headline News, Beck interviewed Dobbs several times on immigration-related issues. During a 2007 interview on the immigration reform legislation before Congress, Beck introduced Dobbs by saying: "[T]here's no more leading authority on this congressional debacle and just how badly it's hurting our country than Lou Dobbs." For his part, Dobbs has enthusiastically embraced Beck's reporting style and news sensibility and has praised his former colleague for having "the guts to stand up."
Why don't you find proof that these people are capitalists and believe in free speech and not squashing the folks who disagree. You just might be on their list next.
There's nothing on MM's chart that's even CLOSE to resembling the Van Jones, ACORN, or Kevin Jennings issues that Beck has reported.
The Obama administration has brought some really slow days for "conservative information," eh?
-
Correction: issues that Beck has lied about. Beck doesn't report. He fearmongers to the lovers of whackjob conspiracy theories.
Congrats, Shoes. I've seen you posting here for a few years, and you may have finally got one right.
MM's chart is based on facts,and it links Beck to idiots, extremists, and anti-Americans, unlike Beck's charts, which are complete propaganda.
Looking forward to your inadvertently scoring another win in a few years.
------------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
My goodness! You don't! You folks have started buying into and believing your own rhetoric. This is hilarious.
Real Marxists and communists despise us every bit as much as they despise you, if not more so. Why more so? Simple - our policies keep capitalism bolstered up in the wake of the Great Depression and countless recessions. Right-wing economic policies have, time and again, brought our capitalist system to the brink of collapse. Marxists and communists want the system to collapse so they can implement their systems - that is what their ideology is all about.
They see what you guys do as far more beneficial to their cause than anything we do. You'd learn that if you ever opened one of their books to learn about their beliefs rather than rely on Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh for your information.
On that note, why do you Conservatives want to aid the Marxists and communists? Why do you insist on promoting policies that are going to destroy our system and why do you stand in the way of policies that have been proven to help it?
What are you folks hiding?
And for some of you to claim that you're capitalists is equally absurd. You guys don't seem to understand what a free market is because you're so completely unschooled in classical economics. You can't claim to be a capiltalist and support the complete socialization of healthcare. Healthcare is already half-socialized and many of you don't grasp that, either.
We do not have a free market in this country, nor have we had one in many generations. We have a mixed economy that is drifting ever closer to small s socialism or European style socialism if you will. We do not have a free market in money or banking because of the lack of a gold standard and the existence of the Federal Reserve System(a cartel arrangement). Our short term interest rates are also set iondirectly by the Fed in lieu of the free market. We don't have a free market in wages(a labor price) because of minimum wage laws. We have destructive rent control laws in many of our cities. We have endless mandates that make it impossible to achieve efficiency in many sectors of our economy. Our own retirements are largely planned by that Ponzi scheme known as our social security system. The energy producing sector is heavily centrally planned. We have socialized large swaths of our Agriculture Department. We may actually have more bureaucrats in the Agriculture Dept. than we have farmers. That many Republicans also support alot of these statist programs is no defence. They are in many respects even worse than the democrats.
Leftists support all of this socialist garbage but still want to be called capitalists. The phrase 'sytematic distortions of thought' comes to mind when I think of the leftist mind. State- worshipping leftists no more support free markets than I support any variant of collectivism.
Second, just because some people here label accept the label of "socialist" doesn't mean all "liberals" do. Leave your generalizations at the door. You make it seem as though you can't possibly imagine that the left is FAR from a monolithic ideological bloc and is instead composed of many different points of view, just like the right. C'mon, you're smarter than that.
Third, you are obviously completely unschooled on the developments within classic capitalist economic theory which have occurred SINCE capitalist theory was first formulated. You obviously have no grasp on the sort of Keynesian theories that have bailed out our economy time after time. You furthermore have a tenuous at best grasp of history, as you are obviously ignorant of the fact that every time the unregulated capitalism you advocate has been tried, it has failed horribly. You also fail to understand that mixed sector capitalism is STILL capitalist.
Fourth, you know next to nothing about socialism or communism. You don't even realize the point that socialists and communists actually cheer when you guys take power because they know that your system inevitably leads to economic collapse and they savor the thought of being able to step in and fix it. They actually despise mixed-market approaches to capitalism because they see us as delaying what they consider to be inevitable.
Fifth, you need to learn that life and politics are more than just the "white" of your ignorant little point of view and the "black" of collectivism in which you group all of us that disagree with you. There are many shades of gray in-between those two choices, and there are also, in fact, many other colors as well.
I suggest learning about them before bothering intelligent people with this tripe.
I am a bit of a sadist. Sometimes I just have time to kill and need to decide between debating people like WWS or picking a fight with the handicapped kid down the street.
I've been feeling a bit out of it so I decided to go with the easier option.
Also, I nearly fell off my chair when you said that Keynesianism has saved us many times.(pause for laughter....continue reading) Some one had better call the 70's and notify the people there. The stagflation of the 70's refuted much of Keynesianism. High unemployment rates and high price inflation were supposed to be mutually exclusive according to Keynes and his followers. (Keynes was a Fabian Socialist, by the way. You guys can look that up in your free time).
The experience of Japan in the 90's should have completely buried Keynesianism forever in a rational mind. They dramatically increased the money supply and started various make work projects on a massive scale and they got a depression that lasted for well over a decade for thier efforts. The Japanese suffered from a credit crash in the late 80's that was a result of excessive credit creation by their central bank. They should have let all the malinvestment be purged and let companies and banks fail.The disease was the credit bubble that preceded the crash. The cure(much like a fever) was the recession that followed it. They didn't let the recession cleanse the system of all the malinvestment because of general ignorance and political concerns. It would have been very painful in the short run, but it would have been over in a year or two. They could have started afresh on solid footing. They resorted to crackpot economics instead.
The state can't create wealth by increasing the credit money supply. The money itself is not wealth. It's just the means of exchange .It only represents goods and service in the economy. Propping up zombie companies with bailouts didn't help the Japanese, either. Make work( so-called stimulus) projects directed by politicians for political ends only misdirected capital(that had alternative uses) into projects that were inefficient and didn't meet consumer preferences. They employed all the techniques that Keynes and others advocated and failure was the result. The Nikei index is still well below its 1989 value. The Keynesian's response to this obvious failure was that Japan didn't go far enough in their efforts. How convenient! How delusional!
The Keynesians didn't see the housing bubble crash coming, either. It caught Mr. Krugman and his ilk completely offguard. They were, in fact, some of the biggest cheerleaders for the creation of the housing bubble in the wake of the collapse of the dot.com bubble. These credit bubbles were both the work of the Federal Reserve. It's boilerplate Keynesianism to try to replace one bubble with another. The Keynesians and many of the neo-classical economists have yet to learn that you can't replace real savings with the Federal Reserve's printing press. (I use 'printing press" as a euphemism. They actually create new digital money or accounting money out of thin air). Real credit can only come from real savings.
I also suspect that you haven't actually read Keynes 'General Theory.' If you actually did read it and still swallowed it whole in the wake of Keynesianism's numerous failures then you are even denser than I thought.
I take umbrage with the fact that you can believe that with no proof whatsoever. I am a Liberal who looks at the truth, which is to say I look at facts from all sides, and base my decisions on the most concrete of those facts. I let no one drive me, I form my opinions on my own. You, on the other hand, only seem to listen to Alan Colmes, a "liberal whose credentials are suspect at best.
In case you weren't aware, stagflation occured because the wealthiest 2% of Americans, in an effort to avoid paying their taxes, created a cottage industry of taking advantage of loopholes in the tax code so that they never HAD to. As a conservative (and make no mistake, Welfare, you are a NEOCON!), you should appreciate that the multitude of problems began with nixon, who was so far to the Right he was Lost In Space. Reagan, a NEOCON, dropped the tax rate ON said wealthiest 2%, that's true, but he also closed the tax code loopholes. It's the ONLY thing I give him credit for.
Now, CohibaMan, I daren't let you off the hook unscathed either. The policies of the '90's that stabilized out economy were NEVER Keynesianism, they were just common sense. FDR, in an effort to prevent another economic collapse of Great Depression proportions, and with Congressional approval and votes, enabled TOUGH regulations that would ensure long-term economic growth. This is not Keynesianism, this is basic economics. Is it therefore a coincidence that every time deregulation has been enacted, we have experienced a near Great Depression collapse again? 1987, 2008, when will neocons learn that rules are put into place for a reason? There's a rule that says innocent until proven guilty, but Bush and Neocon Republicans tried their best to deny us even THAT. Neocons are anarchists, plain and simple, and in MY book, that's worsethan Communism. Anarchism is DEATH.
But seriously, Welfare, stop insulting my intelligence, please.
I do understand enough, however, to know that unregulated and purely private sector economies invariably lead to situations where it is no longer profitable to invest in the supply-side of the equation due to surpluses and other factors which prevent profitability. In these situations it strikes me as beneficial to have a public sector which can stimulate demand in order to eliminate those surpluses when they are connected to vital goods. I always thought that was a part of Keynesian economics but I might very well be mistaken.
It would certainly neither be the first or last time. :-)
Just remember, they say Kenesian, you say "Laffer-esque."
Cheers!
Fed. If the market had been regulating interest rates, we could have never had the credit bubble to begin with. Our net savings rate has been near zero for a long time. How can interst rates be low? Answer: because your regulators at the Fed took them below their free market level. We don't regulate by market in credit, money or banking. We regulate by bureaucrat in those areas and have for along time.
I did enjoy your criticism of CohibaMan, though, I think you kind of missed his point. The dot.com bubble of the late nineties did create the illusion of prosperity for a time. It was just another Federal Reserve created bubble in the end, though. The bubble is fun on the way up, but it is doomed to pop because the real savings and credit aren't there to sustain it. More projects get started, but they are dependent on the continuation of the artificial credit bubble. The denoument must come eventually. If the central planners at the Fed try to keep it going indefinetly, they risk a currency collapse. The only way to artificially lower interset rates is to increase the credit money supply you see.
Our central planners at the Fed are busy trying to create another bubble, but they aren't going to be able to this time. The dollar's status as reserve currency enables us to export alot of our inflation to the rest of the world. Those days are coming to a close. It made it easier for the Fed to blow these credit bubbles so long as we were the reserve currency. They are only going to create massive price inflation this time around with the concomitant chaos that resluts from it.
Cheers!
Also, have you noticed that when the Feds raise the rates of interest, it's always those who've invested in Treasury bonds, the safest investment in the world, that make out the best? Unfortunately, the housing market always suffers. This is why the regulations exist.
And to correct you, we liberals do not love "Big Government," that was a lie made up by the anti-Communist movement to scare Americans into conservatism. What we DO believe in is a (pay attention, all you conservatives who read this) strong, central government. It was a weak government that botched the Katrina Relief efforts. It's a weak Government that has allowed the atrocities that have been committed by that Hitler-lookalike Head of Blackwater (who IS a white supremacist, BTW.). It was Federal outsourcing that placed enviornmental polluters in charge of the agencies that are in charge of (le gasp!) regulating pollution!
That never happened with Clinton. With that guy, our bases and every embasy we have was guarded by the best guards in the world: the U.S. Military. Now, we have Wackenhut. In Kabul, you and I are paying for a GIANT FRAT PARTY!
Ok, now on to your theory on the dot.com bubble. That wasn't created by the reserve, my friend. It was created by a combination of the internet (which you are ON), get-rich-quick buisnessmen (Ever see those late-night mail order company infomercials? Yeah, that.), and an the foundation of the NASDAQ tech stock exchange. However, there was no regulation for these dot.com companies, so the bubble burst. The Reserve had nothing to do with it. HOWEVER, I DO blame Greenspan for the whole Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle, and for the housing crisis, as the Fed Rates are responsible for that. This is why I am watching Bernake [sic?].
The Federal Reserve can artificially increase the credit money supply by open market operations(buying Treasury Notes, e.g.), lowering the discount rate, and lowering reserve requiremnts for member banks.(The Fed is actually a cartel arrangement). The only way they can lower the discount rate(the interest rate at which banks borrow from each other) is to increase the credit money supply. Where does the Federal Reserve get the money to do this? They create it out of thin air. If this sounds fishy to you, then you understand it just fine.
The interest rate is supposed to coordinate production across time. This is why it is absolutely crucial that the interest rate be telling the 'truth.' The interset rate is nothing more than the price to borrow capital. The interest rate in a free market should be driven by the available savings in an economy in coordination with the number of people seeking credit. Real credit HAS to come from real savings. Remember that the dollars represent goods and services in the economy; the dollar is just the medium of exchange. When you save some of the dollars of your paycheck, you are delaying present consumption for future consumption. Those dollars represent claims on goods and services in the economy. Your delaying current consumption enables other people to borrow your saved dollars to invest in new capital equipment, for example. If no one is saving(i.e. delaying current consumption),but rather, consuming then interest rates can't possibly be low.
This is where the Federal Reserve comes in. Our national savings rate has been very low for sometime.(This is also the product of Fed monetary policy that results in a curency that is constantly being debased- it disincentivizes people to save). The Fed artificially lowers the interest rate and encourage consumer spending and many new projects when the savings rate can't possibly justify it. The real capital isn't there to justify the new projects. The economy is getting stretched in two directions at once you see. You get alot of new projects started(some even get completed), but these projects are dependent on the continuation of the artificial credit bubble. The bubble can't be extended forever lest you kill the currency. It is a bubble looking for a pin!
Is it any wonder that people would wildly speculate with artificially cheap credit money being thrown at them? Bush was quoted as saying that, " Wall Street got drunk." Yes, that is right. They got drunk right along with Mainstreet. The question that he should have asked was, "Who was pouring the alcohol?" Answer: Our glorious central planners at the Federal Reserve.
I'm glad that you are,"keeping an eye on Bernanke." Helicoptor Ben along with Greenspan were two of the primary architects of the housing bubble. Ole Helicoptor Ben and the boys at the Fed are busy trying to blow a new bubble now. The new bubble is in government bonds(that they've been buying themselves at an alarming rate). They won't be able to keep this one going for long. The Crisis of '08 wasn't the real crisis at all; it was just the prelude. The real crisis is the dollar crisis yet to come. It'll play out over the next five years. It will not be pretty.
Cheers!
The federal government can take mmoney by force through taxation or simply print the money to "compete" with insurance companies. The private insurers will go under and you guys will get your rationed care, waiting lists and precious government monopoly. That is the intent.
While that may or may not be true, how would that be a bad thing? Can you answer NY Rep. Weiner's question:
What do insurance companies bring to the table in regards to health care?
go alleviate your guilt with your own money and leave mine alone.
I see that many of you collectivists still don't grasp the difference between small s socialism and pure Marxism. To purposefully belabor the point, since so many of you learn slowly, I never indentified the Obama administration as Marxist. I always make sure to properly identify them as socialists not communists. Others make that mistake because they don't understand the terms any better than most of you.
you are using it as an insult which would be ok except that it's like me calling you a toad. it might make me feel good but clearly you are not a toad. the toad is smarter. what i don't get is why you are so willing to give up your freedom to be the slave of the corporations in this country. the wall street meltdown and the health care crises have been caused by a few greedy people trying to scam as much money from the rest of us as they can get away with. that's why we need federal regulation of these businesses. and please don't try and sell the idea that the problems we are having were caused by a couple of bad apples. the people who go to work on wall street are greedy by definition. that's why they work on wall street. you have zero proof that the obama administration is any more or less socialist than any other administration. even your beloved saint ronnie who expanded corporate welfare more than any other administration in modern times. do you consider him socialist?
please try and use that Grey matter between your ears for something intelligent instead of just spewing opinion based on nothing more than air.
For you to be "disturbed" about the number of Marxists and Communists, it would behoove you to know what those political ideologies entail. Since you used them to describe Mr. Obama and his administration, it is quite clear you have NO clue.
I'm skeptical about that chart with all its links and documented quotes. But I know for a fact Beck is right when he told me Comrade Obama's Federal government is full of lying Pinko Reds and Karl Marxes.
"...This concern combines with a profound sense of collective identity. They readily identify themselves as a minority in this country - a minority whose values are mocked and attacked by a liberal media and class of elites. They also believe they possess a level of knowledge and understanding when it comes to politics and current events, one gained from a rejection of the mainstream media and an embrace of conservative media and pundits such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, which sets them apart even more..."
The zombies( most of them, anyway) have been very well trained to not mention it, and to substitute other factors that are more socially acceptable.
Enjoy your new software. Charting software is fun.
---------------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
As for the rest of MMFA's chart, it's pretty stupid too but I don't have all day.
I can hear the construction crews working on Obama's Amerexico Highway with the Illegal Occupants-Only high-speed lane, and I just wet my bed.
Your subject? Another right wing tinfoil hat style conspiracy. The SPP.
Of course you "don't have all day".... you must set aside time for shock treatments and proscribed sedatives.
Obama opposes the NAU, but he "he more or less confirmed the NAFTA Superhighway", in which the website cites their own website in which they cite Obama as saying "something sounding an awful lot like the NAFTA Superhighway". The article also says Obama supports Bush's Security and Prosperity Partnership, citing yet again their own website, in which they cite an article written by Barack Obama, in which he used both the words "prosperity" and "security" and even going as far as having another sentence with the word "partnership" at the end. To get even crazier, the article states that Obama "spoke in code", which means the author wanted to hear what they wanted to hear, and if it wasn't there, they would have to put on their secret decoder ring and then see it.
I never realized BHO wanted to combine America, Canada, and Mexico into one big country. I never picked up on that, and I never realized that the president is capable of such changes to our nation... but maybe after the socialist revolution, he will do whatever he wants with no consequences, right?
----------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
As for the parts of your comment that seem to revolve around BHO's statements, there's a video at one of the links with BHO discussing the Superhighway and seeming to confirm it. IOW, he confirmed something that sites like MMFA tell us are myths.
And, the editorial was about the SPP but didn't mention it by name. However, one would need to be a fool (or a BHO cultist) to not recognize that he was using certain code words in order to send a message to powerful folks that he was on their side.
It just doesn't exist. There is no money for it. No plans. No office and no evidence of it. Everyone involved in various highway projects denies it is happening and denies it was anything but a hoax. If you want to connect several state projects together into some new world order fear mongering go right ahead. You will have to wait a long long time to feel vindicated.
We're all doomed.
Just remember, so long as you wear your tin foil hat they can't affect your mind with their satellite-operated mind control rays!
". . . guts to stand up".......Beck gets $20 mil a year to "stand up"
---------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
Are we killing the goose to get the golden egg? What actually concerns me is Government that screws up can turn around and say this is why you need more government, because times are worse now... I just want to live and breath free...
Randy
Seems to me that some of the folks back then believed that WE THE PEOPLE are the government.
Neither is going to happen anytime soon.
Most all liberal Christians I know understand the words just fine. They understand that Jesus never said anything against homosexuality. They understand the social justice emphasis of Jesus, and his community support.
Well, too bad. You have to 'breath' Obama's rancid Kenyan Commie Muslim Arab air. Perhaps your super-Patriot training can help you to hold your breath for the next eight years. Start now.
...and BEGIN.
Just for fun, Obama did refer to himself as having Muslim faith. It was only hafter his friendly media corrected him, did he say, Oh yeah my Christian faith...
Randy
Obama's sentence construction was a reference to those falsely saying that he's a Muslim.
It was Obama saying "McCain has not been talking about "my Muslim faith". Obama was not saying that he himself actually has a Muslim faith to be talking about. It's that McCain hasn't been talking about Obama having a Muslim faith to talk about!
dclayton is being dishonest once again when he says "I saw it and therefore my interpretation of the event cannot be dismissed".
You don't know that for a fact, DellDolly. It may just be very stupid.
Second, who the hell is O'bama? I have seen no such person referenced in this thread.
Third, "Muslim" is usually capitalized. And fourth, "Arabia" isn't a continent.
That's an excellent job of obscuring who is responsible for what. The screw ups were from Republican government killing regulation and the goose along with it. Now Democratic government is trying to put some rules in place so that everyone doesn't lose their shirt. No doubt Republicans will get back in eventually and we will be expected to trust their "deciders" who strangely don't count as government.
You should write James Bond movies, Your imagination is that broad.
Randy
"Obama is a white-hating racist". You see, what Beck was doing there was asking where we are progressing, that's all.
All I can say about new frontier is you must be joking!
You support the John Birch Society? I'm beginning to wonder if your soul is as impaired as your mind.
Yes their [sic] are wacky people on the right, but what Beck does in an all-be-it strange way is ask if we know where we are progressing...
You keep making this inept apology for Beck. Beck is not asking difficult questions, he's making inflammatory and untrue statements. There's a huge difference.
Are we killing the goose to get the golden egg? What actually concerns me is Government that screws up can turn around and say this is why you need more government, because times are worse now... I just want to live and breath [sic] free...
Feel free to leave. The sooner the better.
Obama is like a law-mower mechanic opening the hood of a Corvette and saying let me see... if we replace this motor it could be affordable to everyone. Yeah, then we widen the frame and everybody can ride. Then everyone will have a Corvette and we will all be wonderful...
BTW, it's John Birch.
FBI FILES ON BIRCH SOCIETY
It is ridiculous that the party for the most part sits idly while this fringe group runs amok. I find it surprising that people like Glenn Beck call the mainstream media the "fringe", which would seem to be an oxymoron.
-----------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
Mmmm the left however want the constitution to match the times and be a living changing document....Changing so much to give them power...and endorse their sense of morality in law... Which has more characteristics of facism
--------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
By the way, I am against all Social policy being set at the Federal level, Abortion, marriage, gay rights, etc. They are moral questions best left to communities, churches and local governments.
On Obama, she said she was "concerned that he may have anti-American views."
Although she represents a more extreme wing of the Republicans, lets not forget the numerous statements made by Glenn Beck, in which he is actively trying to get administration officials removed, by making far-fetched conspiracies and associations...
-------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
"ridiculous" that the most part of the 'GOP' "sits idly" for, oh, 35ish years "since Nixon" reluctant to disavow that 'amok-running fringe-elements group' which would should could be marginalized ... by now, or starting now.
Except, but ..., 'they' got all the money. All the money that finances the 'GOP' imprimatur prop. The fringers are rich. Since 'Nixon.'
Modern historians ignore or write around the biggest jolt in The Economy since WWII, which occurred about 1975. Or, at least, the jolt is hardly seen in the welter of '-gate this' and '-gate that' going on about 1975.
The 'jolt' I mean is pay (cable) TV. Boom, right from its start, 1975ish, it was $one million a month 'fees' to each channel in the bundle, and within months it was $ten million /month /channel. (Today, over $hundred mil/mo/channel-top-tier.) Do the math: Cash Cow. And 'moralizers' was one channel in that early Basic bundle, (at least), and milked one of those cash cows.
And all those 1970s million$ going to Falwell and Bakkers and Robertson (and Swaggart, was it?), and more, mother's milk cash-on-hand got thrown into pockets of any politician who'd lip-service televivid theocratics and drama queens.
Yet today, the pay TV (cable,dish) Channel that is the 'FOX'-congregation, leads the GOP around by the (Beck-drama) hook-in-the-brain, and by a wad of monthly cash in the hundred-million range -- 'cash' or 'trade-in-kind' and in politics the currency of 'trade' is air-time, posterism.
So it becomes less 'ridiculous'-looking to see the 'regular Republicans' (oxymoron alert), slavering unprincipled and immoral, licking the jackboots even, at the behest of FOX-congregation PayTV because FOX-congregation fringers have all the money or the power money buys: airtime face time.
And here's the kicker: FOX-congregation gets its slice-of-your-cable-bill money, cash flow, whether you watch that channel OR NOT!
And EVERYbody pays their cable bill on time, religiously ...
--------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
Glenn Beck wants as little government intervention in society as possible. That is why he recommends literature published by people and organizations that share his convictions and values. Genuine fascists (or any other statists for that matter) prefer MASSIVE government intervention into society -- which is why we describe them as authoritarian or totalitarian forms of government.
You obviously want to dumb-down the meaning of terms you do not understand and then use them in lowest-common-denominator (LCD) arguments. LCD arguments proceed as follows:
All cats have 4 legs
All elephants have 4 legs
Therefore, all cats must be elephants (and vice versa).
Glenn Beck is NOT a fascist...and NOTHING he believes can genuinely be described as "fascist" convictions. SHAME ON YOU!
-----------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
Um, that's an example of a syllogism that suffers from an irrelevant conclusion. I've never even heard of "LCD arguments." A quick Google search doesn't yield any relevant results, either. So I'm gonna assume you pulled that one out of your Cheney.
As to dumbing down the meaning of terms I do not understand, I don't think you really want to try and impugn my intelligence or my education. I'll play nice, if you do. Fascism is the collusion of public policy and corporate interests. Bush was a fascist. Glen Beck has routinely stated his wariness of government intrusion into the private sphere, but when it comes to government backing of the corporate intrusion into our lives, Beck is more than happy to push a supportive meme.
By the way, Beck was a total liberal before he was a conservative.
Probably someone who can't put together a coherent argument of their own.
Where did you find that definition? It certainly was not in any book written by leading scholars of fascism such as Jeffrey M. Bale, Roger Eatwell, Roger Griffin, George Mosse, A. James Gregor, Stanley G. Payne.
Once again, you are selecting one component of a complex constellation of ideas and values and then declaring that anyone whose behavior matches what you consider "collusion" between corporate interests and public policy is, ipso facto, a "fascist". That is totally absurd.
Here is a bottom-line test:
EVERY fascist leader and movement in history has advocated severe constraints upon economic and political freedoms within their societies. They also have advocated massive government intervention and/or proscriptions in the lives and activities of individuals, organizations, and businesses.
So unless you can establish that Glenn Beck advocates:
(a) massive government intervention in the economic and political spheres of our society and
(b) severe proscriptions against what is deemed impermissible behavior for individuals, businesses, and organizations
---then you cannot even begin to build a case that Beck subscribes to "fascist" principles.
With respect to your statement that you have never heard of LCD arguments, it is probably because in formal logic, the form of defective reasoning I described is referred to as Fallacy of Definition.
The purpose of a definition is to state precise word meanings. Good definitions enable readers to 'pick out' instances of the word or concept with no outside help.
For example, suppose you defined the word "apple". If your definition is successful, then anybody should be able go out into the world and correctly identify apples.
If, however, your definition results in someone not recognizing some types of apples or if that person includes other items (such as pears or oranges), or that person can't tell whether something is an apple or not, then your definition fails.
Your definition of fascism is so vague and imprecise it could be used to mis-identify anyone who wants to facilitate accomplishment of an objective by engaging corporate influence. For example: perhaps Bill Gates or Steve Jobs are "fascists" to you?
I fell out of my chair laughing at this, and plan to use it frequently in the future, shamelessly claiming it as my own.
boburell, you are a gentleman and a scholar. I thank you for this priceless phrase!
All I am suggesting is that whatever faults Beck has, he does not deserve to be maliciously libeled as a "fascist". That notion trivializes and euphemizes what actual fascists believe to the point where nobody could possibly recognize what fascism really is.
Excuse me, but nutcases on the right do that with every other breath. Where have you been?
Even if it were truthful and accurate that Beck supports corporate America's interests -- that, by itself, is NOT an indicator of "fascism" -- anymore than liberal support of the progressive income tax is (as some right-wingers claim) an indicator of support for "Marxist" principles.
We have got to get past these childish attempts to dumb-down our understanding of controversial political matters. Demonizing our perceived political opponents might have superficial emotional appeal but it only contributes to the toxicity in our public policy debates that makes negotiation and compromise impossible.
Sorry, I wish you were right, but you're not. These guys are mainstreamed by elected Republicans and the conservative media. Michael Steele can't wipe his nose without Limbaugh's approval. That wack job, Michele Bauchman, is a mainstay on these ridiculous rightwing shows. Jim Dement, espoused, 2 months in advance of Beck, his intention to make the healthcare reform fight Obama's "Waterloo." Joe Wilson... well enough said. They are all orchestrated, by any means necessary, in an effort to bring Republicans back into control of our government.
No, the fringe of the right is, in fact, the mainstream of conservatism today.
In other words, why don't you tell us why it is that positions taken by Beck et al correspond closely to those politicians who ARE scored as genuine conservatives (i.e. 80-100 scores by right-wing groups and 0-30 by left-wing groups).
Why should any of us accept the proposition that YOU know what a genuine conservative is?
I will not stoop to your level and use ad hominem slurs against you, but you obviously have never done any independent research into standing on a political spectrum.
However, Roundhouse's comment actually refuted an earlier post that stated Beck, et al, were not conservatives. Roundhouse said they were, indeed, conservatives, though he seemed a bit morose about it. So you were also wrong.
Watch it on Huff Post, it's the 'icing on the cake' . .
I guess he never heard President Kennedy's inaugural speech:
"ASK NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU, BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY"
Becky's equates this to Mr. Obama's COMMUNISM
Talk about your sick puppies!
LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS
When looking at many of the those surronding Obama they do not seem to have the values of the above.
FYI, any individual that walks into a hospital needing help can not be turned away, and your lies about 40,000 Americans dying every year is such crap, and unless you can prove your point, you LIE.
So again, I do not see anyone on the list above that do not agree in LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
Making you pay into a Healthcare system is not Liberty.
And, while we're on it, though the Supreme Court doesn't generally give the Declaration of Independence the force of law (that's where the "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" quote comes from) I'll bite. 40,000 Americans are denuded of at least two of those inalienable rights by huge healthcare corporations every year, so by your logic, we need to fix that right now. Thanks for being of of those very rare conservatives who have had the courage of conviction to stand up and demand healthcare reform.
FYI your stude says the following -
Dr. Woolhandler, who has also conducted extensive research on medical-related bankruptcies, cautioned that expanding coverage would not be meaningful if the coverage is not generous enough. People might still not be able to afford care if they have to pay large deductibles or too great a share of their over all medical bills. ( which means they want free health care, or nothing out of pocket)
SO yes I am a genius, cause unlike you I can think for myself and see the history of failed government run programs.
By the way, Medicare isn't a corporation, the Post Office has a mandate to NOT be profitable, and Amtrack was always going to be unprofitable because, outside of the Eastern seaboard, people don't take the train. You want to know why Medicare is going bankrupt? The Republicans continually try to defund it through all sorts of backdoor devices like Part D and Medicare Advantage. Yeah, let's sign a law that says Medicare can't use its bargaining power to negotiate lower drug prices! Yeah, let's privatize large swathes of the Medicare user population and pay the private companies an additional 20% to provide exactly the same services!
1.)If you mean could afford it but refused it, I find that hardly the case when the study found that the major causes that led to death were untreated chronic conditions; diabetes,hypertension,asthma,COPD-Emphysema. All could be treated but without insurance medications are expensive as are trips to the doctor. I hardly think if you could afford insurance with those conditions you wouldn't get it.
“The uninsured have a higher risk of death when compared to the privately insured, even after taking into account socioeconomics, health behaviors, and baseline health,” said lead author Andrew Wilper, M.D., who currently teaches at the University of Washington School of Medicine. “We doctors have many new ways to prevent deaths from hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease — but only if patients can get into our offices and afford their medications.”
The study, which analyzed data from national surveys carried out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), assessed death rates after taking into account education, income, and many other factors, including smoking, drinking, and obesity. It estimated that lack of health insurance causes 44,789 excess deaths annually.
Deaths associated with lack of health insurance now exceed those caused by many common killers such as kidney disease. An increase in the number of uninsured and an eroding medical safety net for the disadvantaged likely explain the substantial increase in the number of deaths, as the uninsured are more likely to go without needed care. Another factor contributing to the widening gap in the risk of death between those who have insurance and those who do not is the improved quality of care for those who can get it..."
So I find your implication really doesn't make sense,and from the study we most certainly see that the main reason was due to lack of affordable insurance,not that people could afford but just refused it. I could assert the study didn't say how many knew they had these conditions but wanted to end their life, but then like you I would be playing games,and obfuscating and I'am not. This is serious business people are dying and suffering and it's not because they don't want to pay their fair share.
Your second point is well...pointless,the problem is real as you acknowledge. Infact the 45,000 estimate is larger than other agencies had though,and this information is shared and used by our CDC. It's hardly bogus so stop trying to narrow the numbers and/or the significance of the report unless you have data to the contrary your beliefs have no real weight.
The present insurance system has/is not working 47 million are uninsured, the private sector alone is not working. You conservatives say government does not work then proceed to prove it when you get in power. I whole heartedly agree the way you guys run it it smells, but government works in so many ways you just take for granted. I won't go into now, I just find your government can do no right mantra funny. The present reforms working there way through congress don't threaten the extinction of private health insurers or a government takeover of healthcare. Despite the many problems in MediCare I'd bet you would find few who would refuse it and all would be a lot worse off if it wasn't there.
Government is not a business, so it should not be run strictly like one, and healthcare is a right and not a privilege and shouldn't be based on a for profit system in IMO. I assume in the next to last paragraph the comment in parenthesis is yours and not the Doctors. I find that to be a blatant distortion of what the doctor said,and frankly quite "dumb" since you printed his quote right before your comment. WTF man! You'll have to explain how twisting the Docs words right in front us is genius,becuase thats just plain stupid to me. In reality what you did was twist and distort what was said in the report to fit what you wanted to believe. I don't know but that is not the thinking of a genius.
I never said drilling for oil was evil. I think there are far cleaner, more sustainable ways to power our economy. Green power will actually create jobs for Americans. More oil will only create wealth for the elite, not jobs. They look at the likely $100 trillion in oil reserves around the planet and refuse to let go of the dream of that much power. Once they've pumped out the last barrel, then and only then will they seriously think about some other way to provide energy. Likely through leasing solar cells, wind towers, etc. They have to maintain control, right? And they have to keep getting mountains of money, right?
Here is the study I was referencing, by the way. Feel free to read it for yourself. You were right, it's not 40,000 Americans. It's 45,000 Americans.
Making you pay into a Healthcare system that everyone in the country uses is not Liberty. It's Justice. Justice in the form of health care who previously couldn't afford to pay, and justice for those who can in the form of reduced costs.
So, which are you, markbfoot199? A health insurance exec, or a major oil exec? We already know you are a socialist. :)
Drilling oil local does not mean Socialist, unless you think the government should take over the drilling, much like Chavez. FYI, Chavez has problems now since the major companies that provide parts to oil and gas companies are outside Venz, and are unwilling to supply him with his needs. Once they all break down, he will have no income.
FYI, Socialism means the following since you seem to not understand – (Webster )
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
You really should learn how the Oil and Gas companies do their business, I would recommend going to goggle and research how it goes from idea to your gas tank.
Cat, , FYI, yes domestic drilling does create jobs, who do you think works the rigs? who do you think finds the oil? Designs the rigs, transports the minerals, so on and so forth.
I have not idea why I even talk to such individuals that are so thick headed. Simple question, how are we going to pay for this entire healthcare? Justice it not taking from those whom have worked hard to provide a living so those whom are too lazy to get something for nothing.
FYI, I believe in hard work and reaping the benefits of my hard work.
So Cat, which are you Communist and a individual that does not work and only gets a government check each week or just too mad at the world that you will never get ahead since you do have a drive and expect others to provide for you.
Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska's Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry — a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared.
Isn't that, well...SOCIALIST!!!
First, a word about socialism. If government funded health care is socialism, then so is government funded petroleum. Right? That seems quite simple. Government controls the land the rigs stand on, and leases the mineral rights to the oil underneath. Government control of resources is socialism, right?
How we are going to pay for health coverage is the crux of the current debate. With insurance companies keeping 25-30 cents of every dollar for 'administrative costs', as opposed to the 5-10 cents that Medicare spends, hopefully costs will go down. Everybody has access to medical care in emergency rooms. What we need is more wellness care coverage, to prevent emergency room visits, which turns out to be an insanely expensive way to provide health care.
Who am I? I am a full time parent. I work 17 hours a day, 7 days a week. During my preciously limited downtime, I am a part time student, working on my third degree. It's likely that, unless you are also a parent, I have worked harder every day of the last five years than you have, and I receive room and board as my pay.
Domestic drilling may create temporary jobs, but not on any kind of large scale, and not permanently. Petroleum is a diminishing resource. Surely you must realize this. Turning to a sustainable energy economy, however, produces many more jobs, and for the most part they will be permanent.
So, what you are saying is MMFA just made up stuff to have a cute little board like Beck.
Unfortunately, you have fallen into precisely the trap which Communists create by their propaganda campaigns. I suppose if a Communist finds a cure for cancer you will then refer to that as a "Communist" idea which nobody should support?
Half right. MMFA didn't make their stuff up, as their exhaustive list shows, but they do want to have cute little board like Beck.
Randy
Who knew that Glenn ("Obama is a racist who hates white people") Beck was a lib?
Exactly. And that's the point.
What I see around here now is that MMFA has become the puppet of this Administration, MMFA has become the anti Fox website.
See Fox is proving to American that this Administration wants to change this country for all the wrong reasons.
2010, the Houses will be cleaned, and 2012 will follow.
You are a right-wing militant terrorist who drowns kittens. Now all you gotta do is prove that you're not. "Should be easy to do!!"
Ron Bloom "Generally speaking we get the joke. We know that the free market is nonsense. We know that the whole point is to game the system, to beat the market, or at least find someone who will pay you a lot of money because they're convinced that there is a free lunch. We know this is largely about power, that it's an adults only, no limit game. We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun. And we get it that if you want a friend, you should get a dog."
If only Anita Dunn would shoot an email to Beck and say "No, I'm not a Communist", Glenn Beck would accept that as proof and then apologize.
Tautologies are the first refuge of those who have nothing to say.
Randy
No, they're not.
Randy
Oh, wait, you didn't.
Y'know, something transcendental stilled me when I looked at the blackboard of 'connections.'
Each of us is in the center circle of a diagram like that.
These are the diagrams drawn by software of the NSA/CIA/eavesdropping snoops on each of us.
So they know 'what we know' in sum, and 'what we each know.' They could tell us (that they know 'what we know') but then they'd have to kill us.
And, transcending, in the future a person's Blackboard of Connections could amount to the 'individuality' of a fingerprint or signature; and the 'viability' of a well-adjusted personality or pre-employment psychological profile; and the 'sociality' of a Face-Space-Twitter-Blog caste or class (warfare?) position. And such. 'Individuality.' 'Citizen.'
Besides Media Matters commentary, here's my B-of-C showing 'what I know' frequently, (selecting iconoclastic(s) you probably never seen).
www.WayneMadsenReport.com (paid up; 1yr = 1mo cable bill)
www.MikeRuppert.blogspot.com/ ne www.FromTheWilderness.com
TheOilDrum.com
WSWS.org (World Socialist Web Site)
nytimes.com/pages/APonline/news/index.html
AdBusters.org
Whaddaya know? As individual as a portrait photo tag.
One thing I figured out is that wonk is 'know' spelled backwards.
Obviously, people like Glenn Beck represent a viewpoint not shared by everyone in this thread. But I have a question to everyone here who is maligning Beck:
Do you recognize as legitimate ANY alternative competing point of view to your own personal political preferences?
In other words, if Glenn Beck's ideas or positions are unacceptable to you --- then can you specify some names of persons whose political convictions are opposite from yours but you are prepared to acknowledge that those persons are intelligent, decent, moral, honorable, patriotic individuals with legitimate alternative ideas (albeit mistaken in your judgment)?
OR
Is your position that there is always only ONE correct interpretation of available data and only ONE correct public policy option and those interpretations and options "coincidentally" always conform to YOUR personal political preferences?
For some reason the Dunn bashing about Mao comes to mind.
Beck is a propogandist, pure and simple, like Karl Rove. He is an entertainer. He pretends to be a newsman, and people take him seriously. That makes him dangerous. If I were to go around suggesting violence against our government during the previous administration, I would have been deemed a terrorist, even if I had neither the will nor the means to execute such a task. Beck does it on a national platform but no-one has come around to investigate his activities and connections (much as he'd like us to believe THEY are out there right now watching every move.) He's paranoid, has no self-control, is an egomaniac (just watch how smugly he'll dodge certain questions), and absolutely does *not* respect anyone with a different idea or worldview than his own. He is a staunch ideologue, but worse yet he doesn't even believe in anything...except hating anyone who doesn't think the way he does RIGHT NOW. The man is contemptible and deserves no forum that may involve rational discussion because he is *incapable* of such discussion.
Unfortunately the "free market" deems it otherwise...in spite of his advertisers abandoning him.
Beck really gets under the socialist's skin. You know that a man is getting a little to close to the truth when the leftist establishment drones go after him en masse. This Beck Derangement Syndrome probably has a clinical diagnosis. I recommend agressive treatment soon.
You just exposed the average Beck watcher's wish list.
Randy
Project much?
Randy
The truth is that we don't follow the Original Constitution. Leftist intellectuals sometimes like to crow in their journals that we live under a Shadow Constitution. They are sadly right. We used to have a federated system where the states were soveriegn and the federal govt. was only powerful within a very limited sphere. That has slowly been eroded by people hostile to the original intent of our founding document. The states are now basically vassal states to that Leviathan in D.C.
Oh here we go. States rights are all the rage again by the right wingers now that the same people that brought in the US Supreme Court to over rule the Florida Supreme Court during the 2000 election recount and Federal Congress to meddle in the Terri Schaivo aren't driving the big Leviathan bus. We now know it's all the same bait and switch. Just like Newt's promise to add term limits in the "Contract with America" once the righties won the majority that was right out the window.
Was there anything in our Constitution to forbid human slavery or to disincentivize it? Nope!
So a "Constitutional Republic" can enthusiastically embrace, facilitate, and forgive/disregard oppression of entire categories of human beings---right?
Our "federated system" produced a situation described as follows in 1961 by the noted African American conservative intellectual, George S. Schuyler:
"The White Citizens Council which has branches or cells everywhere, controls by terror such states as Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, and to a lesser extent, Virginia...It has defied and disrupted the operation of the laws of the land. It has used threats and vicious economic reprisals...It has become a legal arm of Mississippi's Government." [4/22/61 Schuyler column in Pittsburgh PA Courier]
Once again, here, you fail to understand one vital truth:
Article V of the Constitution says this:
This is a method of making changes, or if you prefer, amendments to the Constitution. This means that All the amendments, from the first to the twenty-seventh, are Just as much a part of the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land, as the Preamble is.
And I don't know if you know this but:
Granted, it was not part of the ORIGINAL draft, that not including the Bill of Rights, but it did allow for changes as needed. And in the years since it's adoption, it HAS BEEN NEEDED.
Now, on to your next point:
This is just stupid. If you had ever read the 14th Amendment, you would see it reads as thus:
Now, aside from the part about our credit as a nation shall not be questioned, you can see that this Amendment grants equal protection to ALL CITIZENS.
Thus, you fail. Sorry, buddy, that's just the way it is.
But keep trying, I enjoy this back-and-forth.
What else is new?
I've shown in the past, that you can connect Becky with Hitler in just 2 steps.
Yawn.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-9894881-80.html
I swear, this numb-skull must read my posts.