Beck, Open book test.

[Mr.Fitnah]

If anyone else has comprehension issues with posts 130 or 131 ,please let me know.

 

[midcan5]

If anyone else has comprehension issues with posts 130 or 131 ,please let me know.

Fitnah, you have put forth the proposition that Beck's stupidity has some value and is appropriate social and political commentary. We have answered you with a few examples if you took the time to listen or read.

So now I am waiting for some criticism, speculation or conjecture - that is all he does in my mind - that is substantive. Since what he assumes is so evil and bad now that Obama is president, please tell me one thing, just one that is provable and bad for the nation. This is your chance to show he speaks honestly about the perils facing the nation and is not just a partisan emotionally unhinged bigot.

I realize this is a hard question for you wingnuts as you see only negatives in others and offer no real solutions but give us the bad and not just the rhetorical.

 

[PixieStix]

Seems the die hards, are not going to ask the hard questions, nor even actually listen to them

Not one liberal has been able to prove Beck a bigot nor a racist, which has been their only tactics, they have nothing to bring to the debate except a bunch of non sequiturs.

Question; let us see who actually has the guts to ask and maybe search their minds for a logical answer to this one

The who's, what's and why's??

Why do we need a civilian force?


Who is posing a threat to us?
Who will this "force" be made up of?
Who is the real enemy?
Does the president know of a coming event? If not, who builds an army against an unrecognized enemy?
Why won't the media get off their butts and look into these radicals in the White House? And into this civilian army?

If the people fail to question their government, it is the people who will fail

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

By reading this thread I see that "left" is focused on Glen Beck rather then on issues, while "right" is demanding opposite.

I already replied earlier in this thread and my question (about "civilian national security force") that did not get much attention. I have to agree that both sides have some valid points, but I still haven't seen answers based on facts, maybe because some questions are not completely clear.

To clear it up I had to research on my own and here is the result.

Barack Obama: Call to Service in Colorado Springs, CO​

This speech is about 26 minutes long and the part I am referring to is on 15-17 minute mark.

Transcript:

Today, AmeriCorps -- our nation's network of local, state, and national service programs -- has 75,000 slots. And I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife, Michelle, once left her job at a law firm and at City Hall to be a founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. And these programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America's greatest resource -- our citizens.

And that's why as president, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem -- they are the answer.

So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods all across the country. We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy.

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

If you read only bold letter part that Glen Beck is referring to, it's scary and horrifying. If you look at the whole speech, it gets different meaning.

Just to make it clear - as a libertarian I am not defending Obama's ideas, but I am defending the context of his speech.

In context he says he wants to double diplomacy ( that is foreign) then he goes on to needing internal security forces( who are the enemies and why do they have to be the size and funding of the army ?)

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

If anyone else has comprehension issues with posts 130 or 131 ,please let me know.

Fitnah, you have put forth the proposition that Beck's stupidity has some value and is appropriate social and political commentary. We have answered you with a few examples if you took the time to listen or read.

So now I am waiting for some criticism, speculation or conjecture - that is all he does in my mind - that is substantive. Since what he assumes is so evil and bad now that Obama is president, please tell me one thing, just one that is provable and bad for the nation. This is your chance to show he speaks honestly about the perils facing the nation and is not just a partisan emotionally unhinged bigot.

I realize this is a hard question for you wingnuts as you see only negatives in others and offer no real solutions but give us the bad and not just the rhetorical.

Please provide a lnk to the post where you have followed the rules of this thread please, please try to refrian from unessarcy derogatory remarks they do not help your case
the rules

 

[ba1614]

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

What does Obama mean when he says: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."?

What are "the national security objectives we've set" that we need a new security force to achieve?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

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

What does Obama mean when he says: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."?

What are "the national security objectives we've set" that we need a new security force to achieve?

To make the world safe for Islam.

 

[Terry]

I'm sure they will all flock to this thread to give responses once they get the talking points from the DNC.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Does no one on the left have a problem with the czars that he has appointed? Has anyone on the left done some background digging on these people? Several are self-admitted communists, they are far-left radicals, their ideals are radical, they want to change this country into . . . I don't know what. Communist? Oligarchy? Something other than what it is, something other than free. And these people are whispering in Obama's ear. They were hand-picked, appointed, answer to no one. Yes all presidents have had czars. But never this many and never people with this radical/questionable background holding this much power. All of this is just fine with you, it doesn't raise any questions? Can't you go to the video clips where he talks about the czars (I think it's day 4) and answer or discuss the questions he poses?

 

[pete]

Does no one on the left have a problem with the czars that he has appointed? Has anyone on the left done some background digging on these people? Several are self-admitted communists, they are far-left radicals, their ideals are radical, they want to change this country into . . . I don't know what. Communist? Oligarchy? Something other than what it is, something other than free. And these people are whispering in Obama's ear. They were hand-picked, appointed, answer to no one. Yes all presidents have had czars. But never this many and never people with this radical/questionable background holding this much power. All of this is just fine with you, it doesn't raise any questions? Can't you go to the video clips where he talks about the czars (I think it's day 4) and answer or discuss the questions he poses?

To add did the shit stain in office just find these people? No, he has been associated with them for years even though he denies it.

 

[Ame®icano]

By reading this thread I see that "left" is focused on Glen Beck rather then on issues, while "right" is demanding opposite.

I already replied earlier in this thread and my question (about "civilian national security force") that did not get much attention. I have to agree that both sides have some valid points, but I still haven't seen answers based on facts, maybe because some questions are not completely clear.

To clear it up I had to research on my own and here is the result.

Barack Obama: Call to Service in Colorado Springs, CO​

This speech is about 26 minutes long and the part I am referring to is on 15-17 minute mark.

Transcript:

Today, AmeriCorps -- our nation's network of local, state, and national service programs -- has 75,000 slots. And I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife, Michelle, once left her job at a law firm and at City Hall to be a founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. And these programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America's greatest resource -- our citizens.

And that's why as president, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem -- they are the answer.

So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods all across the country. We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy.

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

If you read only bold letter part that Glen Beck is referring to, it's scary and horrifying. If you look at the whole speech, it gets different meaning.

Just to make it clear - as a libertarian I am not defending Obama's ideas, but I am defending the context of his speech.

In context he says he wants to double diplomacy ( that is foreign) then he goes on to needing internal security forces( who are the enemies and why do they have to be the size and funding of the army ?)

I guess you could put it that way. On one side, US need to improve diplomacy and it's image in the world and on the other, why do we need civilian national security force for that?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I m certain the federal government for decades has been aware it is infringing to far,
Self preservation is natural
As a gesture to our enemies so they can prove they are more like them,we can have our own paramilitary force to keep the peace.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

On a side, all we have to do to improve diplomatic relations is to
stop spreading money around
stop being a toothless enemy and a treacherous friend.

 

[pete]

Who is Van Jones?

Who is Mark Loyd?

Liberals answer those two questions first, and then try to be honest with yourselves and post your findings here.

It would be much appreciated if you would simply be as open minded and as honest as you claim to be

We will be more than civil with you, if you are honest, and stop with the name calling. The hyperbole is getting old and quite dry.

Please do you and your future a favor, and ask yourselves the tough questions

Maybe the 12 step program would help you to get off the obamacidal ways

Ill add one. Whether you can tell who he [van jones] is or not (other than the fact hes a radical racist) answer this.
Whos watching over him or Apollo as he spends our 11million?
He has only to answer to the shit stain in office as a czar so what is he going to spend the money on, how, when, do we have any say at all?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DioQooFIcgE&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - The American Form of Government[/ame]

 

[midcan5]

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.

 

[midcan5]

Please provide a lnk to the post where you have followed the rules of this thread please, please try to refrian from unessarcy derogatory remarks they do not help your case - the rules

This is dialogue not school or rigid fascist like nonsense, similar to Beck. You obviously can't answer as you too are nothing but spin.

LOL and if proof of above was needed Post #155 is total nonsense.

 

[Ame®icano]

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.

In the eyes of Dems and obviously in your eyes, Reps did fail.

Now, do you believe that ruling Dems are succeeding?

 

[Terry]

Life imitating art?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i93BJiYLaj8]YouTube - Obama's Idiocracy[/ame]

sorry I had to post this.

 

[Zoom-boing]

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.

You're nothing but a boot licking, Obama zombie.

You can't even make the attempt to answer ANY question presented in this thread. NOT ONE. All you have is 'the Repubs failed' and 'Beck sucks'. It's all any of you zombies have.

Can anyone tell me why Barack Obama wants a civilian national security force just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded as the military?