Beck, Open book test.

[Mr.Fitnah]

Life imitating art?

YouTube - Obama's Idiocracy

sorry I had to post this.

Holy crap!

 

[ba1614]

What is this civilian force going to cost, and how do you plan to pay for it?

At least own up to the fact you are all partisan hacks who dislike democracy because you didn't get what you wanted and now spend your days in idle criticism. When you ruled you failed - FAILED - FAILED - do you capiche?

We have neighborhood watch groups now, it is what societies do to protect themselves from the dishonorable.

Putting your wrong characterization of myself, and the personal insults aside, you didn't answer the question, or the other ones you conveniently left out of your quoting of my post.

Here's another one for ya to avoid, What does a volunteer group that looks out for each others property, (a great program by the way), have to do with a security force that is "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the military?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

What is this civilian force going to cost, and how do you plan to pay for it?

At least own up to the fact you are all partisan hacks who dislike democracy because you didn't get what you wanted and now spend your days in idle criticism. When you ruled you failed - FAILED - FAILED - do you capiche?

We have neighborhood watch groups now, it is what societies do to protect themselves from the dishonorable.

Armed people are governed not ruled .
Roving gangs of thugs are not neighborhood watch groups.

 

[Vast LWC]

The rules are you make note of the specific time on the video.
Your posts will be ignore until you post with the required information.
A list of things you find annoying about beck does not suffice
Prove he is lying and I m talking about lying about something of substantive, not making a joke about something .

Ignored by whom? You?

I was going in order starting at the beginning, if you don't like my presentation, well then that's just too bad. Hey, I know, I'll ignore your response because it had bad capitalization and punctuation. After all, we can all be petty if we really try.

 

[Vast LWC]

The various 'lefties' on the broad have answered the initial challenge

Fail.
The structure of this thread is watch the video make note of the offending lies according to the time count on the video and bring proof they are lies.

None have even attempted beyond the first one to get close to anything other than the normal list of annoying traits .

The structure of this thread is watch the video make note of the offending lies according to the time count on the video and bring proof they are lies.

The structure of this thread is watch the video make note of the offending lies according to the time count on the video and bring proof they are lies.

Why would we possibly want to structure our responses in the manner you dictate?

I responded to the first day and a half, but instead of replying to what I said, you said you were going to ignore my post because you didn't like the way it was structured.

ROFL. Good work. You must watch a lot of Bill O'Reilly, where he tells people to "Shutup" if they don't follow his script.

LOL.

 

[Vast LWC]

It's obvious to me that you'd like any respondents to this thread to follow a set course of argumentation, that you dictate, so we can all start the conversation with the thought that Beck has valid points to begin with, and then we argue those points.

Beck's points however, are nonsensical right at the very start.

For instance:

- Why the rush on health care reform, cap-and-trade?

Implying that there is in fact a "rush" on cap and trade in the first place, when in fact this issue has been being debated for decades now.

- Why are you called "grassroots" if you are for, but "Astroturf" if you are against?

Which is a false premise to begin with.

- The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN: How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy?

Implying that ACORN has been given funds dishonestly, and is not redistrbuting said funds.

- If it was so important for Congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it, why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent six months later?

Implying that congress had not read the stimulus bill.

I could go on, and on.

The point is that it's all about how you frame your questions. Which is why I was responding with my own points rather than continue your conversation.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Why would we possibly want to structure our responses in the manner you dictate?

Its the only way to keep you honest.

 

[Vast LWC]

Its the only way to keep you honest.

You mean it's the only way to keep the conversation flowing on your terms.

I am always answering honestly. You just happen to disagree with my opinions.

 

[Jay Canuck]

"If you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot."
-- Glen Beck, scolding his sheep, Link

 

[midcan5]

Life imitating art?

sorry I had to post this.

Why are you sorry? I listened for a minute or so and it is racist crap. Is that where your ideas come from? You seem brighter. Rather sad garbage.

 

[Vast LWC]

So, since my prior lists of points were "ignored" for whatever reason. Perhaps you can answer me one simple question.

How does Beck's "expert", the black guy who hosts another FoxNews program, make the intuitive leap from the building of debt, to an attempt to centralize power in the Executive Branch?

Because that's what he did, he basically stated that the Executive branch is trying to "take over the government by building up debt".

Beck seemed to agree with the gentleman, and it was part of his presentation (though he conveniently let the other guy actually say the words).

So, how was this conclusion arrived at?

 

[midcan5]

Here's another one for ya to avoid, What does a volunteer group that looks out for each others property, (a great program by the way), have to do with a security force that is "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the military?

Please prove that. Links from a sources we can agree on.


And still no answer to my questions about Beck, I am watching him now.

 

[ba1614]

Here's another one for ya to avoid, What does a volunteer group that looks out for each others property, (a great program by the way), have to do with a security force that is "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the military?

Please prove that. Links from a sources we can agree on.


And still no answer to my questions about Beck, I am watching him now.

Prove what?
You said

We have neighborhood watch groups now, it is what societies do to protect themselves from the dishonorable.

And I asked the above question you quoted

If it's about the security force funded and supported to that extent that I refrenced, it's Obama's words not mine.
At about the 16:40 mark

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df2p6867_pw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df2p6867_pw[/ame]

I've stated Glen is a little offside, and I'm certainly not going to defend his often goofy antics. I do however like how he gets people thinking and taking another look at what's going on.

 

[Zoom-boing]

It's obvious to me that you'd like any respondents to this thread to follow a set course of argumentation, that you dictate, so we can all start the conversation with the thought that Beck has valid points to begin with, and then we argue those points.

Beck's points however, are nonsensical right at the very start.

For instance:

- Why the rush on health care reform, cap-and-trade?

Implying that there is in fact a "rush" on cap and trade in the first place, when in fact this issue has been being debated for decades now.

- Why are you called "grassroots" if you are for, but "Astroturf" if you are against?

Which is a false premise to begin with.

- The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN: How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy?

Implying that ACORN has been given funds dishonestly, and is not redistrbuting said funds.

- If it was so important for Congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it, why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent six months later?

Implying that congress had not read the stimulus bill.

I could go on, and on.

The point is that it's all about how you frame your questions. Which is why I was responding with my own points rather than continue your conversation.

THEY DIDN'T READ THE BILL!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvnwOjDjnH4]YouTube - GOP Leader Boehner Floor Speech Opposing Democrats' Trillion-Dollar Spending Bill[/ame]

Not One Person in Congress Read the 1,100 Pages

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/us/politics/14web-stim.html

 

[paperview]

THEY DIDN'T READ THE BILL!

Not One Person in Congress Read the 1,100 Pages

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/us/politics/14web-stim.html

That's what the right is claiming. You can't make that comment without any knowledge of all the players and their reading moments.

Oh, and linking to the CanadianFreePress doesn't help your cause. It's nothing more than a canuck version of the Freepers & WorldNutDaily, with maple-leafed beanies on.

 

[paperview]

But other than that, hey - great comeback to Vast LWC's well-stated, fact filled, dedicated post.

lol.

 

[paperview]

Does hitting your head against that wall hurt?

 

[Vast LWC]

THEY DIDN'T READ THE BILL!

Says John Boehner, chief of the opposition to the bill, and some conservative columnist.

Wow, that's some proof right there.

The Times article you linked didn't support this argument at all.

Let me ask you something, don't you think that perhaps the members of congress, and their staffs, read what was being written while they were writing it?

Or do you think that when something comes up for a vote, everyone just forgets what was in the bill, and needs to re-read it?

 

[Ame®icano]

THEY DIDN'T READ THE BILL!

Says John Boehner, chief of the opposition to the bill, and some conservative columnist.

Wow, that's some proof right there.

The Times article you linked didn't support this argument at all.

Let me ask you something, don't you think that perhaps the members of congress, and their staffs, read what was being written while they were writing it?

Or do you think that when something comes up for a vote, everyone just forgets what was in the bill, and needs to re-read it?

Stimulus bill had (9) cosponsors in House and (17) in Senate. There are bills with over 200 House cosponsors that cant reach the floor and be voted on.

Any proof that members of Congress wrote the bill?

How many members of Congress were involved in writing it?

What role played Apollo Alliance?

 

[Annie]

It's obvious to me that you'd like any respondents to this thread to follow a set course of argumentation, that you dictate, so we can all start the conversation with the thought that Beck has valid points to begin with, and then we argue those points.

Beck's points however, are nonsensical right at the very start.

For instance:

- Why the rush on health care reform, cap-and-trade?

Implying that there is in fact a "rush" on cap and trade in the first place, when in fact this issue has been being debated for decades now.

- Why are you called "grassroots" if you are for, but "Astroturf" if you are against?

Which is a false premise to begin with.

- The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN: How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy?

Implying that ACORN has been given funds dishonestly, and is not redistrbuting said funds.

- If it was so important for Congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it, why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent six months later?

Implying that congress had not read the stimulus bill.

I could go on, and on.

The point is that it's all about how you frame your questions. Which is why I was responding with my own points rather than continue your conversation.

I've only read a few of the posts after OP and then this last page. Screw how the question is phrased. IMHO, Beck is way too prone to hyperbole and yes, I see undercurrents of appealing to the worst impulses on the far right. With that said, I cannot disagree with his 'charts' or 'facts' that he cites, neither can the left. Therein lies the problem.

He states 'truths' in ways that are couched in a way to appeal to those I'd distance myself from in person, though the basis we agree with. Not the racism, not the other undertones towards anti-intellectual, etc.