It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who is now listening to Dr Glenn Beck?

page: 9
12
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Glenn Beck is a total act and not that good of one. He is the guy that tells u good things about the constitution then turns on you and says pay more taxes. This is the guy that says pray for obama those truthers are inside the white house. I mean cmon. Really the guy who made this post is either really slow or just trying to rile ppl up . This video is only a small part of the reason why i dislike the guy. "K33pItR3al"
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Jlwtherealtruth]




posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jlwtherealtruth
Glenn Beck is a total act and not that good of one. He is the guy that tells u good things about the constitution then turns on you and says pay more taxes. This is the guy that says pray for obama those truthers are inside the white house. I mean cmon. Really the guy who made this post is either really slow or just trying to rile ppl up . This video is only a small part of the reason why i dislike the guy. "K33pItR3al"
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Jlwtherealtruth]




You say that he isnt a good act but look at his rating rise. You may not like him but if all he was is just an act he'd still be a good one because the ratings dont lie.

Sure he says pray for Obama and his safety. You'd expect he should do the opposite? I cant stand Obama and hope his agenda goes down in flames but certainly do not wish the man any physical ill will. Just political. Thats what Beck means.

And yes, he is trying to rile people up with the truth about whats going on. People need to get riled up! 8/28 is going to be full of riled up people. Peacefully riled up of course but ready to put the government on notice none the less.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


I see no duplicity there. Youre not being honest if you say you do.

Thanks for not understanding what you were posting back up my argument. You shoulve read it better if you were going to play gotcha with me.

He has said time and time again said that he was for the bailouts for a very very short time until he saw that the government was using them for nothing more than a fascist takeover of industry. That opened up his eyes to what they were doing. After that he was staunchly against them. He saw that coming down the road were a never ending chain of " bailouts " and " stimulus " packages that were meant for nothing more than patronage to high value and swing states.

Do a little digging friend. Look up patronage in the age of FDR Read New Deal or Raw Deal by Burton Folsom Jr.

He is specifically saying in that conversation with Romney that he has a problem with the salary caps. He says he doesn't like the bailouts and if you are stupid enough to take them the government has every right to tell you what to do with your company. I agree with that too. Again no duplicity.

Its like getting an adjustable rate mortgage that you can barely afford. I think its a stupid idea but hey, if you take it and the rate goes up the bank has every right to take your house because you were too stupid to think that far ahead.

Again no duplicity.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 


Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I can only handle him fro 10 minutes and I can counter argue most things he says.Like the rest of fox, he has points most 6th graders could argue against.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jlwtherealtruth
Glenn Beck is a total act and not that good of one. He is the guy that tells u good things about the constitution then turns on you and says pay more taxes. This is the guy that says pray for obama those truthers are inside the white house. I mean cmon. Really the guy who made this post is either really slow or just trying to rile ppl up . This video is only a small part of the reason why i dislike the guy. "K33pItR3al"
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Jlwtherealtruth]




God I love this guy. Thanks for that vid. Its going into my personal archive. Keep up the good work Beck!

I believe what he says about Obama in that clip BTW. Painfully obvious.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 


Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I can only handle him fro 10 minutes and I can counter argue most things he says.Like the rest of fox, he has points most 6th graders could argue against.



You do know Fox stomps a mudhole in its competition dont you?

Could it be that they are telling the truth and people want to hear that? So you can counter the truth with what?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Longview

Originally posted by Jlwtherealtruth
Glenn Beck is a total act and not that good of one. He is the guy that tells u good things about the constitution then turns on you and says pay more taxes. This is the guy that says pray for obama those truthers are inside the white house. I mean cmon. Really the guy who made this post is either really slow or just trying to rile ppl up . This video is only a small part of the reason why i dislike the guy. "K33pItR3al"
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Jlwtherealtruth]




You say that he isnt a good act but look at his rating rise. You may not like him but if all he was is just an act he'd still be a good one because the ratings dont lie.

Sure he says pray for Obama and his safety. You'd expect he should do the opposite? I cant stand Obama and hope his agenda goes down in flames but certainly do not wish the man any physical ill will. Just political. Thats what Beck means.

And yes, he is trying to rile people up with the truth about whats going on. People need to get riled up! 8/28 is going to be full of riled up people. Peacefully riled up of course but ready to put the government on notice none the less.


Good point Longview, You again channel my thoughts exactly.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Regarding Beck and Obama's daughter - get over it!!!!!



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


I see no duplicity there. Youre not being honest if you say you do.

Thanks for not understanding what you were posting back up my argument. You shoulve read it better if you were going to play gotcha with me.

He has said time and time again said that he was for the bailouts for a very very short time until he saw that the government was using them for nothing more than a fascist takeover of industry. That opened up his eyes to what they were doing. After that he was staunchly against them. He saw that coming down the road were a never ending chain of " bailouts " and " stimulus " packages that were meant for nothing more than patronage to high value and swing states.

Do a little digging friend. Look up patronage in the age of FDR Read New Deal or Raw Deal by Burton Folsom Jr.

He is specifically saying in that conversation with Romney that he has a problem with the salary caps. He says he doesn't like the bailouts and if you are stupid enough to take them the government has every right to tell you what to do with your company. I agree with that too. Again no duplicity.

Its like getting an adjustable rate mortgage that you can barely afford. I think its a stupid idea but hey, if you take it and the rate goes up the bank has every right to take your house because you were too stupid to think that far ahead.

Again no duplicity.




Alright then, lets assume that I don't see deceitfulness (I do, but for the sake of argument) even so, he is COMPLACENT and THAT requires no brain power to see. He was FOR the bailouts under bush, then during the Obama transition, he changed his tune. I mean he couldn't decry them under bush and call it a fascist takeover, right? Does that not smell of someone who is ALL about partisan politics? How are you fooled so easily?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Dr. Glenn Beck.


The establishment always heaps praise on it's minions. Only in this reality will they get that praise.

Peace



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


I see no duplicity there. Youre not being honest if you say you do.

Thanks for not understanding what you were posting back up my argument. You shoulve read it better if you were going to play gotcha with me.

He has said time and time again said that he was for the bailouts for a very very short time until he saw that the government was using them for nothing more than a fascist takeover of industry. That opened up his eyes to what they were doing. After that he was staunchly against them. He saw that coming down the road were a never ending chain of " bailouts " and " stimulus " packages that were meant for nothing more than patronage to high value and swing states.

Do a little digging friend. Look up patronage in the age of FDR Read New Deal or Raw Deal by Burton Folsom Jr.

He is specifically saying in that conversation with Romney that he has a problem with the salary caps. He says he doesn't like the bailouts and if you are stupid enough to take them the government has every right to tell you what to do with your company. I agree with that too. Again no duplicity.

Its like getting an adjustable rate mortgage that you can barely afford. I think its a stupid idea but hey, if you take it and the rate goes up the bank has every right to take your house because you were too stupid to think that far ahead.

Again no duplicity.




Alright then, lets assume that I don't see deceitfulness (I do, but for the sake of argument) even so, he is COMPLACENT and THAT requires no brain power to see. He was FOR the bailouts under bush, then during the Obama transition, he changed his tune. I mean he couldn't decry them under bush and call it a fascist takeover, right? Does that not smell of someone who is ALL about partisan politics? How are you fooled so easily?




Good, glad you are paying attention. Dont forget that he was against Bush long before the bailout and the support at the time for the 300 bil bailout wasn't proxy support for Bush. I think that you are disingenuous for trying to paint him that way when you know better. You have read the transcripts I posted haven't you?

The reason Obama cemented his opposition in the stimulus/bailout was he was using it for a fascistic takeover of the United States economy.

You're losing this argument. Why do you continue?

I've been there bud, I understand, its tough to admit you're wrong in front of a bunch of people. But then again, that's what Beck does. It shows integrity and character.

I cant see how you can sincerely make the claim that this man is pro establishment or partisan. You don't listen to him, its obvious.




[edit on 29-5-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


I see no duplicity there. Youre not being honest if you say you do.

Thanks for not understanding what you were posting back up my argument. You shoulve read it better if you were going to play gotcha with me.

He has said time and time again said that he was for the bailouts for a very very short time until he saw that the government was using them for nothing more than a fascist takeover of industry. That opened up his eyes to what they were doing. After that he was staunchly against them. He saw that coming down the road were a never ending chain of " bailouts " and " stimulus " packages that were meant for nothing more than patronage to high value and swing states.

Do a little digging friend. Look up patronage in the age of FDR Read New Deal or Raw Deal by Burton Folsom Jr.

He is specifically saying in that conversation with Romney that he has a problem with the salary caps. He says he doesn't like the bailouts and if you are stupid enough to take them the government has every right to tell you what to do with your company. I agree with that too. Again no duplicity.

Its like getting an adjustable rate mortgage that you can barely afford. I think its a stupid idea but hey, if you take it and the rate goes up the bank has every right to take your house because you were too stupid to think that far ahead.

Again no duplicity.




Alright then, lets assume that I don't see deceitfulness (I do, but for the sake of argument) even so, he is COMPLACENT and THAT requires no brain power to see. He was FOR the bailouts under bush, then during the Obama transition, he changed his tune. I mean he couldn't decry them under bush and call it a fascist takeover, right? Does that not smell of someone who is ALL about partisan politics? How are you fooled so easily?




Good, glad you are paying attention. Dont forget that he was against Bush long before the bailout and the support at the time for the 300 bil bailout wasn't proxy support for Bush. I think that you are disingenuous for trying to paint him that way when you know better. You have read the transcripts I posted haven't you?

The reason Obama cemented his opposition in the stimulus/bailout was he was using it for a fascistic takeover of the United States economy.

You're losing this argument. Why do you continue?

I've been there bud, I understand, its tough to admit you're wrong in front of a bunch of people. But then again, that's what Beck does. It shows integrity and character.

I cant see how you can sincerely make the claim that this man is pro establishment or partisan. You don't listen to him, its obvious.




[edit on 29-5-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]




Wow, you're response is so far off the mark. You obviously don't know what I know, cause you're right, I DO know better. I'm not losing anything except faith in my fellow man to see through the deceptive personalities and false substance put forth by the media.

Glenn is a neoconservative, he admits to hating the 9/11 victims families and fiercely bashes those who are suspicious of others involved outside of radical Islam, he falls for false wars (I'll give him the benefit of the doubt), loves big government as long as another "compassionate conservative" is sitting in office, never points to the families, think tanks, bildeberg meetings, CFR, trilateral commission and other organized efforts to control this country and indeed, the worlds direction outside of the constitution and certainly outside the will of the people.

There, I'm done throwing diamonds into the mud, Later.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 


Actually it is because they have cable access in the south that some other MSM do not.
Which is why the majority of their viewers are over 60 and in the south. Combine that with the fact that they are the only right wing station compared to 3 or 4 others.

Also, about 20% of the people who watch Fox are democrats, because it has the Howard Stern affect. They watch it for entertainment value to see what they are goin to say next and because dems want to know what the opposition is saying. But it is only half that of repubs watching other stations for the same reason.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by nixie_nox]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 


Actually it is because they have cable access in the south that some other MSM do not.
Which is why the majority of their viewers are over 60 and in the south. Combine that with the fact that they are the only right wing station compared to 3 or 4 others.

Also, about 20% of the people who watch Fox are democrats, because it has the Howard Stern affect. They watch it for entertainment value to see what they are goin to say next and because dems want to know what the opposition is saying. But it is only half that of repubs watching other stations for the same reason.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by nixie_nox]



C'mon now.Thats a total BS claim about the demographics. And I wouldnt call it a right wing station , I would call it the correct wing station. I see them as neither right nor left.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


You know when the other person has lost the debate whe they start making stuff up. Thin air isnt a reliable source to pull your facts from.

Youre not completeley coherent on your radical islam statement. By the way you wrote it it seemed to state that he is suspicious of those outside radical Islam.

What false wars. You made the claim now own it.

You prove that you dont listen to his show and know nothing about the man when you say he is for big government. He he pushes smaller governnment daily. DAILY. Unless youve been living under a rock or getting all of your hard hitting journalism from John Stewart you would have known about the 8/28 rally coming up that he's sponsoring. Google it.

The way you ended your post just made me shake my head. You know nothing. You are just lobbing unfounded, whacked out, left field conspiracies.

And the way it was structured was very VERY difficult to gain any semblence of direction and point. Please, I mean this for your benefit, get someone to edit and proofread your posts before you hit submit. I can see you were probably making an attempt at brevity and wit there but it just tripped all over itself...








[edit on 29-5-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

But yeah, Medina is the enemy? Lets see, she supported:

Eliminating the property tax in Texas (You're RIGHTS are derived from property, so this makes constitutional sense).

Supported gun rights and the nullification federal laws infringing upon them.

Securing the border, for real.

Keeping federal powers in check and in line with the constitution and in balance with the state.

A completely constitutional candidate...but that is the enemy? Cause she is suspicious that we were not told the complete truth about 9/11? I couldn't fit that much nonsense in a church. He bashes Ron Paul, then Debra Medina when the only things they have in common are GOOD IDEAS instead of the SAME OLD CRAP...that right there tells me that Glenn is a game player for the team owners.




Yes Medina was the enemy. The fact that she was a truther disqualified her. It shows a lack of critical thought and that is a dangerous quality to have in someone that holds office. That question should be asked of every candidate. If they are a truther, See ya, thanks for playing, sayonara, buh bye, hit the road jack!



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


You know when the other person has lost the debate whe they start making stuff up. Thin air isnt a reliable source to pull your facts from.

Youre not completeley coherent on your radical islam statement. By the way you wrote it it seemed to state that he is suspicious of those outside radical Islam.

What false wars. You made the claim now own it.

You prove that you dont listen to his show and know nothing about the man when you say he is for big government. He he pushes smaller governnment daily. DAILY. Unless youve been living under a rock or getting all of your hard hitting journalism from John Stewart you would have known about the 8/28 rally coming up that he's sponsoring. Google it.

The way you ended your post just made me shake my head. You know nothing. You are just lobbing unfounded, whacked out, left field conspiracies.

And the way it was structured was very VERY difficult to gain any semblence of direction and point. Please, I mean this for your benefit, get someone to edit and proofread your posts before you hit submit. I can see you were probably making an attempt at brevity and wit there but it just tripped all over itself...








[edit on 29-5-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]




What false wars? LEFT field? Are you SERIOUS? Now listen to me, either you seriously lack reading comprehension skills or....ohhhh. I am slow.


YOU ARE A TROLL! I get it now. Whew, I feel much better. For a moment, I actually thought such mental density and cognitive dissonance existed!



Edit: I asked if you are delusional, so I had to edit that out.



[edit on 29-5-2010 by SmokeandShadow]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Longview

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

But yeah, Medina is the enemy? Lets see, she supported:

Eliminating the property tax in Texas (You're RIGHTS are derived from property, so this makes constitutional sense).

Supported gun rights and the nullification federal laws infringing upon them.

Securing the border, for real.

Keeping federal powers in check and in line with the constitution and in balance with the state.

A completely constitutional candidate...but that is the enemy? Cause she is suspicious that we were not told the complete truth about 9/11? I couldn't fit that much nonsense in a church. He bashes Ron Paul, then Debra Medina when the only things they have in common are GOOD IDEAS instead of the SAME OLD CRAP...that right there tells me that Glenn is a game player for the team owners.







Yes Medina was the enemy. The fact that she was a truther disqualified her. It shows a lack of critical thought and that is a dangerous quality to have in someone that holds office. That question should be asked of every candidate. If they are a truther, See ya, thanks for playing, sayonara, buh bye, hit the road jack!



Well that is great, but she never claimed to be a truther and was not outspoken. She just thought some arguments were compelling. I think it is a QUALITY to question rather than "see no evil" which neoconservatives (and many people in general) excel at. It clearly didn't interest her enough to investigate and take a hard line stance.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

What false wars? LEFT field? Are you SERIOUS? Now listen to me, either you seriously lack reading comprehension skills or....ohhhh. I am slow.


YOU ARE A TROLL! I get it now. Whew, I feel much better. For a moment, I actually thought such mental density and cognitive dissonance existed!



Edit: I asked if you are delusional, so I had to edit that out.



[edit on 29-5-2010 by SmokeandShadow]



Yes left field and I am sure he is serious.

Enough about Smurf, what about Glenn beck? Cant attack the message so your going after the messenger now? Weak, real weak.



Please answer the question...What wars?





[edit on 29-5-2010 by Longview]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow

Well that is great, but she never claimed to be a truther and was not outspoken. She just thought some arguments were compelling. I think it is a QUALITY to question rather than "see no evil" which neoconservatives (and many people in general) excel at. It clearly didn't interest her enough to investigate and take a hard line stance.




Oh she was a truther alright. I listened to that show in absolute shock! Look at the transcripts bud.

Did you know you can actually be something without calling yourself such? Like insane for example...Its crazy I know, but its true.

Ya, Medina has good ideas alright. Like Bush blew up the world trade centers....She should be in a position of power with that character flaw.

You've brought it up a couple of times now with regard to Medina. Its apparent to me now that all you have is a personal vendetta against Beck for pointing out the truth about her. Tough! All these kooks need to be brought to light and marginalized. Good reddens to her. We don't need her kind in power.






[edit on 29-5-2010 by Longview]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join