Why I like Glenn Beck

[Hawk]

I don't like Glen Beck, I LOVE Glen Beck !

He clearly demonstrates the absurdity of the current Republican positions.

However I am afraid of the people who don't understand that he is a Democrat and his entire show is a sarcastic portrayal of said Republicans.

He is a libertarian, not a democrat .. and he blasts both sides. A lot of what he says is true. The Dems are Idiots ! ..

And here is actual proof of how he fools people. Thanks for proving my point f !

[zman1200]

I like libertarians as long as they look like the hot chicks on cnbc and fox. actually any chic with money I like YES DEAR

[f.sciarrillo]

I don't like Glen Beck, I LOVE Glen Beck !

He clearly demonstrates the absurdity of the current Republican positions.

However I am afraid of the people who don't understand that he is a Democrat and his entire show is a sarcastic portrayal of said Republicans.

He is a libertarian, not a democrat .. and he blasts both sides. A lot of what he says is true. The Dems are Idiots ! ..

And here is actual proof of how he fools people. Thanks for proving my point f !

Liberals hate him

[Hawk]

He is a libertarian, not a democrat .. and he blasts both sides. A lot of what he says is true. The Dems are Idiots ! ..

And here is actual proof of how he fools people. Thanks for proving my point f !

Liberals hate him

As I stated, "I LOVE him" ! And that's a fact ! And I'm generally considered (mostly financial issues, not social issues) ) to be liberal.

[RobTheDrummer]

Glenn tells it like it is. You can't dispute the facts.

[tornandfrayed]

Glen tells it like he wants to tell it. Watch Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman and you will see that they also have all the facts. Beck and Hannity have all the facts also but a completely different story.

So if these guys all have all the facts and end up with opposing viewpoints does it not come down to how you interpret the facts and the spin you put on them?

And seeing how that must be true. Why must it be true? Because if we only had facts and no one put a spin on anything then we would all see the same story. The facts all exist together in reality. Problem is that the TV goons pull their facts selectively to back their spin/ They all do it left and right, good and bad.

Again I must say that they are making a living off of keeping us divided.

[Hawk]

Glen tells it like he wants to tell it. Watch Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman and you will see that they also have all the facts. Beck and Hannity have all the facts also but a completely different story.

So if these guys all have all the facts and end up with opposing viewpoints does it not come down to how you interpret the facts and the spin you put on them?

And seeing how that must be true. Why must it be true? Because if we only had facts and no one put a spin on anything then we would all see the same story. The facts all exist together in reality. Problem is that the TV goons pull their facts selectively to back their spin/ They all do it left and right, good and bad.

Again I must say that they are making a living off of keeping us divided.

Well said. That's why I watch / listen to both sides. I pity the fools who only listen to Fox, Savage, Limbaugh. And it's easy to recognise who they are on Rockpage.

[zman1200]

IF Katis Couric smiles will her face crack

[witchhunt]

We could buy some advertising time in Beck's time slot for cut rate prices.

[PStl]

BTW I watched the clip you posted. You know that is just entertainment and has nothing to do with any "Truth" right? No one really believes that stuff, right?

This actually a good week to sample Beck. The tv show is focusing on the "czars", who they are, and their connections. Also, who was behind the writing of the stimulus package.

[songsmith]

We could buy some advertising time in Beck's time slot for cut rate prices.

Stop, dude, you're killing me! BURN!--->JMS

[RobTheDrummer]

Glen tells it like he wants to tell it. Watch Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman and you will see that they also have all the facts. Beck and Hannity have all the facts also but a completely different story.

So if these guys all have all the facts and end up with opposing viewpoints does it not come down to how you interpret the facts and the spin you put on them?

And seeing how that must be true. Why must it be true? Because if we only had facts and no one put a spin on anything then we would all see the same story. The facts all exist together in reality. Problem is that the TV goons pull their facts selectively to back their spin/ They all do it left and right, good and bad.

Again I must say that they are making a living off of keeping us divided.

Point out to me on that video the parts that aren't true...

[Hawk]

Glen tells it like he wants to tell it. Watch Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman and you will see that they also have all the facts. Beck and Hannity have all the facts also but a completely different story.

So if these guys all have all the facts and end up with opposing viewpoints does it not come down to how you interpret the facts and the spin you put on them?

And seeing how that must be true. Why must it be true? Because if we only had facts and no one put a spin on anything then we would all see the same story. The facts all exist together in reality. Problem is that the TV goons pull their facts selectively to back their spin/ They all do it left and right, good and bad.

Again I must say that they are making a living off of keeping us divided.

Point out to me on that video the parts that aren't true...

Rob, it's all about how the facts are used, or what facts are left out.

For instance Michael Steel (head of the Republican party) is on record (recently) for saying he is against any of the cost cutting for Medicare that Obama is for.

In 2005 Michael Steel is on record saying, "We MUST make cuts in Medicare spending".

Now Fox will report his current stand. MSNBC will report that which he stated in 2005. Both are right, but you have to watch more then ONE SLANTED source to get the picture. And that's a fact.

[RobTheDrummer]

Glen tells it like he wants to tell it. Watch Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman and you will see that they also have all the facts. Beck and Hannity have all the facts also but a completely different story.

So if these guys all have all the facts and end up with opposing viewpoints does it not come down to how you interpret the facts and the spin you put on them?

And seeing how that must be true. Why must it be true? Because if we only had facts and no one put a spin on anything then we would all see the same story. The facts all exist together in reality. Problem is that the TV goons pull their facts selectively to back their spin/ They all do it left and right, good and bad.

Again I must say that they are making a living off of keeping us divided.

Point out to me on that video the parts that aren't true...

Rob, it's all about how the facts are used, or what facts are left out.

For instance Michael Steel (head of the Republican party) is on record (recently) for saying he is against any of the cost cutting for Medicare that Obama is for.

In 2005 Michael Steel is on record saying, "We MUST make cuts in Medicare spending".

Now Fox will report his current stand. MSNBC will report that which he stated in 2005. Both are right, but you have to watch more then ONE SLANTED source to get the picture. And that's a fact.

That's because 2005 was different than now. You still didn't answer my question, and you won't. What did he leave out and use?

[songsmith]

I simply cannot believe I wasted five minutes and seven seconds of my life on that garbage, Rob.
What's not correct? Barney Frank's inexplicably overstated role in the financial meltdown; the omission of who authorized the sale and resale of toxic assets (the GOP congress in 1999), the massive amounts of money taken out of the whole debacle by executives, collusion by all culpable parties involved, outright corporate fraud... the whole Beck vid focuses on the response to the financial crisis because if it concentrated on the goddamn CAUSE, it would make the Bush Admin look bad, and he was still a Bush apologist in February when this vid was made.
Beck: Not Funny. He couldn't come up with actual humor if his last name was Knock-Knock. He's the thinking man's Hannity. No wait, thinking men don't need a Hannity. --->JMS

[RobTheDrummer]

I simply cannot believe I wasted five minutes and seven seconds of my life on that garbage, Rob.
What's not correct? Barney Frank's inexplicably overstated role in the financial meltdown; the omission of who authorized the sale and resale of toxic assets (the GOP congress in 1999), the massive amounts of money taken out of the whole debacle by executives, collusion by all culpable parties involved, outright corporate fraud... the whole Beck vid focuses on the response to the financial crisis because if it concentrated on the goddamn CAUSE, it would make the Bush Admin look bad, and he was still a Bush apologist in February when this vid was made.
Beck: Not Funny. He couldn't come up with actual humor if his last name was Knock-Knock. He's the thinking man's Hannity. No wait, thinking men don't need a Hannity. --->JMS

Glenn Beck also criticized Bush when he was in office.

[Hawk]

Point out to me on that video the parts that aren't true...

Rob, it's all about how the facts are used, or what facts are left out.

For instance Michael Steel (head of the Republican party) is on record (recently) for saying he is against any of the cost cutting for Medicare that Obama is for.

In 2005 Michael Steel is on record saying, "We MUST make cuts in Medicare spending".

Now Fox will report his current stand. MSNBC will report that which he stated in 2005. Both are right, but you have to watch more then ONE SLANTED source to get the picture. And that's a fact.

That's because 2005 was different than now. You still didn't answer my question, and you won't. What did he leave out and use?

1. I didn't watch it.
2. The only difference is they will be against anything Obama if for. If Obama said lets leave Medicare alone, Steel would say we need to cut Medicare spending. No doubt in my mind about that.

EDIT: Rob, what exactly is different in 2009 that would cause Steel to be against Medicare cuts ? I need to understand that one ?

[Hawk]

OK, I watched it. What a lot of slanted bull !

Clinton left Bush surlpus, he left that fact out.

The deficit increased THE MOST under Reagan, Bush and Bush. He left that out. I guess it was OK to borrow from China under the liberal Republicans.

He forgot to mention that taxes were cut to the rich which led to less money going in to the treasury.

He forgot to mention that because of said tax cuts and an unjust war ans a lack of oversight, and too much deregulation, Bush left Obama with us as close to a depression we've been in since 1929.

He forgot to mention that Bush knew that the American Auto industry was near collapse and told his cohorts that he would DO NOTHING about it and leave the problem for Obama.

He forgot to mention that Obama had to spend to save the collapse of the banking industry and wall street. He forgot to mention that this fast acting President saved us from a depression. A major depression.

He forgot to mention the DOW is up about 1200 points since Obama.

I can go on...

Rob, please watch more than Fox and learn something. Please!

BTW...that was way too easy.

[f.sciarrillo]

Obama increased the deficit by more than ten fold in the first six months of his term. That is more than any President in history.

I still say that he will not be re-elected, and he knows it. He even said that he doesn't care if he is re-elected, as long as he can run the country into the ground this term. I think he is doing a fine job - OF KILLING EVERYTHING THIS COUNTRY STANDS FOR !!

Edit: I always heard that Jimmy Carter was the worst President in history. From what I been saying so far, I think Obama has him beat to worst by a land slide.

[shredder138]

I think he is doing a fine job - OF KILLING EVERYTHING THIS COUNTRY STANDS FOR !!

I thought Bush already did that, and he got elected twice.

[witchhunt]

He even said that he doesn't care if he is re-elected, as long as he can run the country into the ground this term.

Did he really say that? Wow.

[DirtySanchez]

He even said that he doesn't care if he is re-elected, as long as he can run the country into the ground this term.

Did he really say that? Wow.

It was part of his inaugural address.

[RobTheDrummer]

Rob, it's all about how the facts are used, or what facts are left out.

For instance Michael Steel (head of the Republican party) is on record (recently) for saying he is against any of the cost cutting for Medicare that Obama is for.

In 2005 Michael Steel is on record saying, "We MUST make cuts in Medicare spending".

Now Fox will report his current stand. MSNBC will report that which he stated in 2005. Both are right, but you have to watch more then ONE SLANTED source to get the picture. And that's a fact.

That's because 2005 was different than now. You still didn't answer my question, and you won't. What did he leave out and use?

1. I didn't watch it.
2. The only difference is they will be against anything Obama if for. If Obama said lets leave Medicare alone, Steel would say we need to cut Medicare spending. No doubt in my mind about that.

EDIT: Rob, what exactly is different in 2009 that would cause Steel to be against Medicare cuts ? I need to understand that one ?

You really can't criticize Glenn if you don't watch or listen to him. Lots of people do that because they are sheep who follow what the liberal media has to say.

2009 is different, because since about 2007 we've been spending and spending and spending out of control! Now we have a president that spends even more, with no plan of being able to pay for the spending. And wants to pass a health care bill that he hasn't even read, or knows very little about. That's what is different.

[witchhunt]

You really can't criticize Glenn if you don't watch or listen to him. Lots of people do that because they are sheep who follow what the liberal media has to say.

Damn skippy! It's obvious that all of my conservative brothers and sisters here think for themselves, while the liberals just parrot whatever NPR tells them. Hopefully that Kool-aid tastes good. Sure, we listen to the great minds of Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, and Liddy, but we can consume the information and make a cogent decision about its validity ourselves (99% of the time, those minds are correct).

It blows my mind that the liberals here haven't read the health care plan while us conservatives are very well versed in its text. I guess it won't matter when the death panels condem us all, anyways.

Biggest pile of bullshit I've seen so far today. Damn.