Glenn Beck

[Ravi]

I can't even figure what he is trying to say, other than he wants someone to shoot him in the head, along with some other group. With his references to different groups and the overuse of the pronoun "they", it's hard to tell if he's talking about tea-partiers or congress-critters.

I read it a few times and this is what I believe he is saying:

Tea parties believe in small government. We believe in returning to the principles of our Founding Fathers. We respect them. We revere them. Shoot me in the head before I stop talking about the Founders. Shoot me in the head if you try to change our government.

I will stand against you and so will millions of others. We believe in something. You in the media and most in Washington don't. The radicals that you and Washington have co-opted and brought in wearing sheep's clothing — change the pose. You will get the ends.

He is identifying himself as a teapartier and saying basically that "they" i.e. the radical commies, will have to shoot him in the head to get him to shut up.

You've been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You're going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.

They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind. And if they feel you have lied to them — they're revolutionaries. Nancy Pelosi, those are the people you should be worried about.

Here he goes on to talk about Obama supporters that are calling for a revolution and are Marxist commies. Not sure where he got that anyone is calling for a revolution, aside from perhaps the teapartiers.

The only way to stop these radical commie Marxist Obamites is to shoot them in the head, but be warned because they might shoot back (because they are of course radical Marxist commie Obamites).

Hyperbole on his part? Perhaps. But his overall message is clear.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I doubt Beck said this because it would be National News considering today's overtly political AP.

And I think Beck's a whackadoodle loon so I mean, I've got no dog so to speak.

The comment is actually months, if not a year, old.

 

[Ravi]

In another thread a Liberal posted there is a voice recording of Glenn Beck telling people to shoot Progressives ( rather marxist progressives) in the head.

While I doubt he actually literally means for anyone to shoot people, it is over the top. It is direct and irresponsible. Of course having condemned it, my question is will the left condemn their spokesmen for similar speech and direct irrefutable lies about right wing politicians and performers?

I can think of several Liberal commentators and News programs that have directly attacked Palin and others with lies and misinformation and haven't quit as more facts come out that the Arizona shooter did not do the crime because of anything Palin said or believes.

We have posters right on this board that continue to claim Palin was somehow responsible for the Arizona shootings. Others that claim her rhetoric and map were over the line ( ignoring the fact that in 2004 and 2009 the same imagery was used by Liberals) and claiming she has some blame coming to her.

I already know the answer.

Names and quotes....I'll be happy to condemn anything comparable.

As would I. Expect him to post something that isn't comparable.

 

[G.T.]

I doubt Beck said this because it would be National News considering today's overtly political AP.

And I think Beck's a whackadoodle loon so I mean, I've got no dog so to speak.

The comment is actually months, if not a year, old.

Is it real and in context? If so, I stand corrected and would say that he only reaffirms his lunacy, to me.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Why 'begrudgingly'? Are you not happy to learn that he didn't do it, or does your loathing of Beck outweigh your intellect?

It's about on par ... I really despise glennbeck.

I really despise Nancy Pelosi. But anytime anyone claims she said something, I give her the courtesy to find out the facts before I judge her on it. If I were you, I would try doing the same thing with Beck. I have been told all kinds of crap that he's 'said'. Every single time, I have found the original accusation to be based on bullshit.

And, for the record, I don't have much time for Beck either. I don't despise him. But I am not a Beck fan. I just really like to be sure of what I'm saying before I say it. That way, I don't make myself look stupid as often.

Beck is like Scotch.

Best in small doses on rare occasions so that it can be enjoyed each time.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I doubt Beck said this because it would be National News considering today's overtly political AP.

And I think Beck's a whackadoodle loon so I mean, I've got no dog so to speak.

The comment is actually months, if not a year, old.

Is it real and in context? If so, I stand corrected and would say that he only reaffirms his lunacy, to me.

He said it, but it's so far out of context that it doesn't mean anything that the person that posted just the quote wants it to mean.

the line was at the end of a paragraph.

 

[California Girl]

I can't even figure what he is trying to say, other than he wants someone to shoot him in the head, along with some other group. With his references to different groups and the overuse of the pronoun "they", it's hard to tell if he's talking about tea-partiers or congress-critters.

I read it a few times and this is what I believe he is saying:

Tea parties believe in small government. We believe in returning to the principles of our Founding Fathers. We respect them. We revere them. Shoot me in the head before I stop talking about the Founders. Shoot me in the head if you try to change our government.

I will stand against you and so will millions of others. We believe in something. You in the media and most in Washington don't. The radicals that you and Washington have co-opted and brought in wearing sheep's clothing — change the pose. You will get the ends.

He is identifying himself as a teapartier and saying basically that "they" i.e. the radical commies, will have to shoot him in the head to get him to shut up.

You've been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You're going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.

They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind. And if they feel you have lied to them — they're revolutionaries. Nancy Pelosi, those are the people you should be worried about.

Here he goes on to talk about Obama supporters that are calling for a revolution and are Marxist commies. Not sure where he got that anyone is calling for a revolution, aside from perhaps the teapartiers.

The only way to stop these radical commie Marxist Obamites is to shoot them in the head, but be warned because they might shoot back (because they are of course radical Marxist commie Obamites).

Hyperbole on his part? Perhaps. But his overall message is clear.

When he talks about someone having to shoot someone in the head, he is, I believe talking TO the Democrats. As I said previously, I think he's saying that 'you guys brought these people in but those people you brought in are radicals, and revolutionaries and there may come a time when you are going to have to stand against them.'

And if you are interested, I can provide you with links to where these radicals on the left are actually calling for revolution.... the actual armed kind of revolution.

 

[WillowTree]

But that crazy Fuller guy wanted to torture Mrs. Palin and Bachman and make ear necklaces.. ain't that crazy... not a peep from the left. nary a peep.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

In the link provided by Ravi he clearly states that he thinks she's not, but that she has the support of radicals

Beck does not think she is a marxist revolutionary according to ravi's link and stated that she wasn't.

In your link he clearly says she isn't a communist.

I am curious to see what/where he is pointing to here though:

I don't know where Barack Obama fits. Is he over here? Or is he over here?

Cass Sunstein — I don't know where he fits.

Nancy Pelosi, I'm not sure. I don't think she fits over there but I'm not sure she fits over here. I don't know. It's for you to decide.

I think he is saying he isn't sure and that the people watching should research these individuals themselves and then decide on their own

BECK: America, I thank you for watching every night. And I ask that you would not — please don't believe me because I say it and I'm on TV. Anyone can be on TV. They gave me a show. Anyone can be on TV.

You need to do this research yourself. You need to find out what you believe. You find the truth. It's out there. It is. Tonight, I've been trying to show you the division within the left. If you are a Democrat, I want you to understand that when I talk about revolutionaries and communists, I don't mean the average Democrat.

I don't even mean the average Democratic politician. Progressives are not necessarily communists but there are communist revolutionaries. Revolutionary is what you need to focus on tonight.

I think he is pretty clear about what he meant.

 

[California Girl]

But that crazy Fuller guy wanted to torture Mrs. Palin and Bachman and make ear necklaces.. ain't that crazy... not a peep from the left. nary a peep.

The difference between Beck and Fuller.... Beck did not say what he is accused of saying.

 

[WillowTree]

But that crazy Fuller guy wanted to torture Mrs. Palin and Bachman and make ear necklaces.. ain't that crazy... not a peep from the left. nary a peep.

The difference between Beck and Fuller.... Beck did not say what he is accused of saying.

That's why we call them DemonRats.

 

[Ravi]

I can't even figure what he is trying to say, other than he wants someone to shoot him in the head, along with some other group. With his references to different groups and the overuse of the pronoun "they", it's hard to tell if he's talking about tea-partiers or congress-critters.

I read it a few times and this is what I believe he is saying:

He is identifying himself as a teapartier and saying basically that "they" i.e. the radical commies, will have to shoot him in the head to get him to shut up.

You've been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You're going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.

They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind. And if they feel you have lied to them — they're revolutionaries. Nancy Pelosi, those are the people you should be worried about.

Here he goes on to talk about Obama supporters that are calling for a revolution and are Marxist commies. Not sure where he got that anyone is calling for a revolution, aside from perhaps the teapartiers.

The only way to stop these radical commie Marxist Obamites is to shoot them in the head, but be warned because they might shoot back (because they are of course radical Marxist commie Obamites).

Hyperbole on his part? Perhaps. But his overall message is clear.

When he talks about someone having to shoot someone in the head, he is, I believe talking TO the Democrats. As I said previously, I think he's saying that 'you guys brought these people in but those people you brought in are radicals, and revolutionaries and there may come a time when you are going to have to stand against them.'

And if you are interested, I can provide you with links to where these radicals on the left are actually calling for revolution.... the actual armed kind of revolution.

Yes, he is telling Democrats to shoot Obama supporters in the head. Somehow I guess that makes it okay.

Unless you have some well respected liberal commentators or politicians calling for revolution, no I'm not interested in the ravings of the great unwashed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

In another thread a Liberal posted there is a voice recording of Glenn Beck telling people to shoot Progressives ( rather marxist progressives) in the head.

While I doubt he actually literally means for anyone to shoot people, it is over the top. It is direct and irresponsible. Of course having condemned it, my question is will the left condemn their spokesmen for similar speech and direct irrefutable lies about right wing politicians and performers?

I can think of several Liberal commentators and News programs that have directly attacked Palin and others with lies and misinformation and haven't quit as more facts come out that the Arizona shooter did not do the crime because of anything Palin said or believes.

We have posters right on this board that continue to claim Palin was somehow responsible for the Arizona shootings. Others that claim her rhetoric and map were over the line ( ignoring the fact that in 2004 and 2009 the same imagery was used by Liberals) and claiming she has some blame coming to her.

I already know the answer.

You should identify the posters who are in fact still claiming that Palin WAS RESPONSIBLE for the AZ shootings, and post how you determine that.

 

[California Girl]

I read it a few times and this is what I believe he is saying:

He is identifying himself as a teapartier and saying basically that "they" i.e. the radical commies, will have to shoot him in the head to get him to shut up.


Here he goes on to talk about Obama supporters that are calling for a revolution and are Marxist commies. Not sure where he got that anyone is calling for a revolution, aside from perhaps the teapartiers.

The only way to stop these radical commie Marxist Obamites is to shoot them in the head, but be warned because they might shoot back (because they are of course radical Marxist commie Obamites).

Hyperbole on his part? Perhaps. But his overall message is clear.

When he talks about someone having to shoot someone in the head, he is, I believe talking TO the Democrats. As I said previously, I think he's saying that 'you guys brought these people in but those people you brought in are radicals, and revolutionaries and there may come a time when you are going to have to stand against them.'

And if you are interested, I can provide you with links to where these radicals on the left are actually calling for revolution.... the actual armed kind of revolution.

Yes, he is telling Democrats to shoot Obama supporters in the head. Somehow I guess that makes it okay.

Unless you have some well respected liberal commentators or politicians calling for revolution, no I'm not interested in the ravings of the great unwashed.

No, not 'Obama supporters', he says there may come a time when those radicals will want pay back... and if they don't get it.... then they might take up arms and if they do, the Dems will need to decide whose side they are on. The radicals or the American people.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's pathetic about a good number of you people is that you've reduced the Tucson debate to several thousand posts which contribute nothing more than to say 'hey! what about the other guy!?'.

If your only defense of something is to point fingers at someone else and say hey he did it too,

you have NO defense, and are wasting your time.

 

[Article 15]

The Dems had all of Congress and the White House for almost two years and didn't deliver for the far left radicals.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

What's pathetic about a good number of you people is that you've reduced the Tucson debate to several thousand posts which contribute nothing more than to say 'hey! what about the other guy!?'.

If your only defense of something is to point fingers at someone else and say hey he did it too,

you have NO defense, and are wasting your time.

Tucson Debate? What debate?

Some deranged lunatic who had an obsession with a congresswoman shot her in the head then shot into the crowd....the dude was nuts and since it was public knowledge he was unstable the person who sold him the gun and cleared his background check should both be fired and they should put this man (the shooter) in prison with the max punishment.


Tuscon Debate? There is nothing to debate about it.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I read it a few times and this is what I believe he is saying:

He is identifying himself as a teapartier and saying basically that "they" i.e. the radical commies, will have to shoot him in the head to get him to shut up.


Here he goes on to talk about Obama supporters that are calling for a revolution and are Marxist commies. Not sure where he got that anyone is calling for a revolution, aside from perhaps the teapartiers.

The only way to stop these radical commie Marxist Obamites is to shoot them in the head, but be warned because they might shoot back (because they are of course radical Marxist commie Obamites).

Hyperbole on his part? Perhaps. But his overall message is clear.

When he talks about someone having to shoot someone in the head, he is, I believe talking TO the Democrats. As I said previously, I think he's saying that 'you guys brought these people in but those people you brought in are radicals, and revolutionaries and there may come a time when you are going to have to stand against them.'

And if you are interested, I can provide you with links to where these radicals on the left are actually calling for revolution.... the actual armed kind of revolution.

Yes, he is telling Democrats to shoot Obama supporters in the head. Somehow I guess that makes it okay.

Unless you have some well respected liberal commentators or politicians calling for revolution, no I'm not interested in the ravings of the great unwashed.

He's not talking about shooting democrats. He's talking about having to fight back, when the radicals start fighting.

And there has been more than one person mentioning the need for open revolt, you're just not crazed enough to know they are around.

 

[California Girl]

I read it a few times and this is what I believe he is saying:

He is identifying himself as a teapartier and saying basically that "they" i.e. the radical commies, will have to shoot him in the head to get him to shut up.


Here he goes on to talk about Obama supporters that are calling for a revolution and are Marxist commies. Not sure where he got that anyone is calling for a revolution, aside from perhaps the teapartiers.

The only way to stop these radical commie Marxist Obamites is to shoot them in the head, but be warned because they might shoot back (because they are of course radical Marxist commie Obamites).

Hyperbole on his part? Perhaps. But his overall message is clear.

When he talks about someone having to shoot someone in the head, he is, I believe talking TO the Democrats. As I said previously, I think he's saying that 'you guys brought these people in but those people you brought in are radicals, and revolutionaries and there may come a time when you are going to have to stand against them.'

And if you are interested, I can provide you with links to where these radicals on the left are actually calling for revolution.... the actual armed kind of revolution.

Yes, he is telling Democrats to shoot Obama supporters in the head. Somehow I guess that makes it okay.

Unless you have some well respected liberal commentators or politicians calling for revolution, no I'm not interested in the ravings of the great unwashed.

He's not talking about ordinary Americans who support Obama. He's talking about very specific groups. You do know who those groups are, I assume? Because if not, you really should.

And, when I talk about links, I'm not referring to media links. I'm referring to the groups themselves.... people within those groups.... talking about 'armed revolution' against this country.

 

[Two Thumbs]

What's pathetic about a good number of you people is that you've reduced the Tucson debate to several thousand posts which contribute nothing more than to say 'hey! what about the other guy!?'.

If your only defense of something is to point fingers at someone else and say hey he did it too,

you have NO defense, and are wasting your time.

I'm not saying the other guy does it.

I'm saying it doesn't mean a pile of crap that it's done.

The sheriff LIED his ass off in public, FOX and only FOX called him on his lies, but the left hit the ground running with it blaming the right, when they do it themselves.

you wanna throw the bullshit flag, make sure you make the proper call.