Beck was right about one thing at least...(MSNBC CLIPS!)

[rightwinger]

This is what it looks like when the left is confronted with the truth. All they have left is a mishmash clusterfuck of stupidity and incoherent ad hominem and red herring nonsense.

FAIL

You are unable to connect the dots

 

[Liberty]

This is what it looks like when the left is confronted with the truth. All they have left is a mishmash clusterfuck of stupidity and incoherent ad hominem and red herring nonsense.

FAIL

You are unable to connect the dots

and you are unable to use that stinky glop of shit you call a brain.

 

[rightwinger]

This is what it looks like when the left is confronted with the truth. All they have left is a mishmash clusterfuck of stupidity and incoherent ad hominem and red herring nonsense.

FAIL

You are unable to connect the dots

and you are unable to use that stinky glop of shit you call a brain.

You have booger breath

 

[JBeukema]

If that was all Beck was correct about, he wouldnt be as popular and well listened to as he is.

So... Hitler, Moa, and Obama being so popular means...

shove your red herring up your ass please.

So you're saying Beck's popularity doesn't mean he's right about anything? Or you're saying Hitler was right?

 

[Liberty]

So... Hitler, Moa, and Obama being so popular means...

shove your red herring up your ass please.

So you're saying Beck's popularity doesn't mean he's right about anything? Or you're saying Hitler was right?

I am saying the evidence presented in the various clips in the youtube video show that Beck was right about this particular subject. Can you cite otherwise?

 

[rightwinger]

shove your red herring up your ass please.

So you're saying Beck's popularity doesn't mean he's right about anything? Or you're saying Hitler was right?

I am saying the evidence presented in the various clips in the youtube video show that Beck was right about this particular subject. Can you cite otherwise?

Caliphate........I'm skeered.

 

[Liberty]

So you're saying Beck's popularity doesn't mean he's right about anything? Or you're saying Hitler was right?

I am saying the evidence presented in the various clips in the youtube video show that Beck was right about this particular subject. Can you cite otherwise?

Caliphate........I'm skeered.

So, that's a no to the question I guess.

 

[rightwinger]

I am saying the evidence presented in the various clips in the youtube video show that Beck was right about this particular subject. Can you cite otherwise?

Caliphate........I'm skeered.

So, that's a no to the question I guess.

A poorly edited tape from 2004 proves what????

Caliphate.

 

[Londoner]

The video itself does not seem to provide any statistical analysis or hard data. It's a random collage of lunatics with subtitles that don't really tie anything together. The scary part is that people mistake this stuff for evidence. It would be nice if we could see exactly how all these groups hang together. What is their real size? Do they have well oiled funding networks which direct money into political action committees, publishing groups, lobbyists, university grants, think tanks, etc.? Do they have CEOs on boards of major corporations? What is the level of their influence? Are they just a bunch of marginal radicals?

Secondly, the OP's claim seems vague, e.g., "destroy Western Civilization". This has a kind of irresponsibly broad low-IQ simplicity, like it was meant for the Divine Wrath/Apocalypse crowd. Which is sad, because Movement Conservatism has been manipulating these people almost more than the Democratic party pretends to care about poor workers.

Does the OP know anything about the Western Canon? The reason I ask is because most Beck viewers are historically illiterate (-if they were historically literate, Beck would seem like a raving, moronic demagogue - long on paranoia, short on facts).

Part of the western canon is a respect for science and political pluralism, neither of which play will with Fundamentalists, who don't want any scientists sniffing around their biblical timelines; nor do they want a diversity of political options if those options collide with their absolute values. Europe is the birthplace of western civilization, and we all know what Beck thinks of Europe. Beck displays precisely the kind of monomaniacal, paranoid intolerance that he sees in his invented Muslim and communist demons. He is the last person who should be defending Western Civilization.

He is certainly not the kind of person who is going to instruct his audience on the nuances of Western Civ, e.g., the Christian Middle Ages versus the liberal, secular Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries. I'm guessing the OP, educated by Beck, doesn't know this stuff either. (Which is scary because it means the country literally being controlled by illiterate demagogues)

(wow, just wow)

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Anyone who thinks that Communism and Socialism are the same thing, really needs to do their research before posting. In Communism the government, or society as a whole owns the means of production (as well as the actual production), whereas in Socialism it's the workers who own the means of production. In a pure Socialist society there is no private property, or land ownership whatsoever-in Communism the government decides who owns what land. In Communism the government decides who gets what resources, in Socialism the society as a whole decides.

Those are just some of the fundamental differences.

Now I personally don't support either system. I think both are extremely flawed, and shouldn't be implemented in America. However when people call a movement, and/or person a Communist/Socialist one...it means they really don't know what they're talking about. Don't blindly believe things you're spoon fed, look them up for yourself. Learn more about the systems before trying to have a discussion.

edit: as a side note, what I find very funny (ok actually sad), is in our nation the majority of the people on the left, and the right have no idea what the system of Socialism really is. Like when people on the left actually think that social security, or medicare is a socialist program (it's not), and when people on the right think that in Socialism the government is so big, that it controls virtually aspect of life (it's not).

 

[Liberty]

socialism is taking wealth from one class and giving it to another.
communism is a one-class society (except for the state which holds all the power).
Socialism is the economic path that will take hold after capitalism falls and through it, communism will arise, according to Marx. They go hand in hand.

And to Londoner, while I disagree, I am happy someone was able to type out something that makes sense. Thanks.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

socialism is taking wealth from one class and giving it to another.
communism is a one-class society (except for the state which holds all the power).
Socialism is the economic path that will take hold after capitalism falls and through it, communism will arise, according to Marx. They go hand in hand.

And to Londoner, while I disagree, I am happy someone was able to type out something that makes sense. Thanks.

So by your logic Socialism and Communism go hand in hand because according to Marx Communism will naturally follow Socialism. Fair enough-Marx did say Communism would follow Socialism. BUT Marx also said(as you pointed out) that Socialism will follow Capitalism. Does this mean Capitalism and Socialism go hand in hand? Of course not-that would be ridiculous.

And you're not being totally accurate either with regards to taking money from one class, and giving it to another. Marx stated:

"Labor is the source of wealth and all culture, and since useful labor is possible only in society and through society, the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society."

Critique of the Gotha Programme-- I

If the proceeds of labor (income/money), is being distributed equally among all members of society-it's not taking money from one class to another-because there would only be one class. If everyone has an equal share of the money-how is there more than one class?

Also as a side note Marxism is just one example of Socialist theory-although it certainly is the most well known one.

The main focus is the means of production, and resources are owned by the workers (or the public at large). So next time post something that makes sense, with some sources that back up your claims.

 

[MaggieMae]

Do you go looking for the most extreme opinions of someone else in order to justify your own extreme positions? Some of it borders on hysteria. Frankly, that's the very reason I can't stomach Glenn Beck. Sometimes the dots do not connect in your world of close-minded uber conservatism. They're just words, all blurred together which makes it only appear they connect.

Damn it!

If Beck says they connect....they freak'n connect

Only a Commie would think otherwise

FYI, the clip shows the muslims and socialists in their own words...LEARN TO CLICK.

Randomly choosing clips of select statements does not equal connecting dots. Radical Islam and Communism are as far apart as lions and sheep.

Here is how one grassroots (conservative) organization defines Radical Islam:

HRCARI (info@hrcari.org) - About Us

Proper and honest analysis of the phenomenon of Radical Islam is fundamental to treating it. As a coalition we have come together to define Radical Islam. Radical Islam includes (but is not limited to) the following concepts:

Excusing or perpetuating terrorist attacks.

Intolerance of other beliefs and the requirement that Radical Islam must dominate all other doctrines.

Hate crimes against both secular and religious people.

Declaring war on people in order to spread their version of Political Islam.

Killing of apostates.

Killing of homosexuals.

Beating of women and stoning them to death for adultery.

Where do you find "Communism" in any of that? First, "Communism" is a political and economic treatise, not a splinter movement based on a set of weird moral values. Communism typically refers to a political ideology based on the communal ownership of all property and a classless social structure. Since Islamism (fundamentalist Islam) has no boundaries, has no central leadership, it therefore has no means of distribution.

 

[MaggieMae]

1. A dupe is one who is easily deceived or fooled. As far back as Washington’s Farewell Address, we find the warning against dupes: “Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

2. Dupes, in this connection, are folks who have been used by the communists to believe that either the communists are just like them, and therefore deserve their protection, or have been led to believe that the communist party is no more menacing than any other American political party.

3. The progressive left, and the liberal left, while not themselves communists, share many of the same sympathies, such of redistribution of wealth, and worker’s rights, nationalizations of industry, etc, but are not quite as far left as the communists, and would not go to the same lengths as the communists to achieve their goals. This does not mean, though, that the help of these dupes is not necessary in order for the communists to achieve victory. Even at their peak, in the ‘30’s, the Communist Party of the United States never had more than 100 thousand members: so deception of the ‘dupes’ was critical.

a. The archives tell a tale of plans and schemes between the CPUSA and the Communist International in Moscow, to dupe progressives and liberals: “go to rallies,” “don’t let them know you are a communist!,” “If anyone reveals that you are a communist, claim it is red-baiting,” “yell ‘McCarthyism!”
From Dr. Paul Kangor, Hoover Institution, Stanford “DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century”

As a wise man said, "How dense can you be?"

Do you go looking for the most extreme opinions of someone else in order to justify your own extreme positions? Some of it borders on hysteria. Frankly, that's the very reason I can't stomach Glenn Beck. Sometimes the dots do not connect in your world of close-minded uber conservatism. They're just words, all blurred together which makes it only appear they connect.

What a disappointing post.

This is the best that can be expected of you, another personal attack aimed at me, because you are no longer able to mount an actual counter?

I scoured your post, searching for a rebuttal, a counter, anything to do with my post that you are supposedly answering....

nada.

Where is the alternaive defintion, the denial that progessives and liberals were duped, tricked, had their naiveté used against them?

Couldn's come up with any?

'cause, I would use the words of Bacall and Bogart and the other libs who realised they had been duped.

How about a spirited denial that the Commintern archives didn't reveal that their machinatins were specifically designed to trick progressives, libs, lefties into the fold?

No? Not that either?

Mags, you are a pale remnant of what you once were....
Your posts, at least with reference to mine, are empty reprisals, without any real substantive purpose.

I really don't care if you dislke my style, or sources, or politics...or me....You reduce debate to bickering quibbles....c'mon, put up a real fight.

I refuse to debate your carefully selected historical items as proof of truth. Whenever I have done that, by selecting my own counterpoints (either by linking or my own opinion) and when you can see you've been beaten, you then will post an entirely NEW set of carefully selected much longer opinions often veering completely off course. Trying to stuff your own opinions with lengthy quotations by like-minded individuals is analogous to hoping someone won't notice you've stuffed your meatloaf with more bread than meat.

Nothing personal, but your often revisionist history is a waste of my time.

 

[MaggieMae]

So you're saying Beck's popularity doesn't mean he's right about anything? Or you're saying Hitler was right?

I am saying the evidence presented in the various clips in the youtube video show that Beck was right about this particular subject. Can you cite otherwise?

Caliphate........I'm skeered.

What I glean from that particular bunch of nonsense from Beck is that he actually believes the American people are stupid enough to ever allow a Caliphate to take over. And yet his Loyal Lemmings don't get that. HE'S CALLING THEM STUPID.

 

[MaggieMae]

The video itself does not seem to provide any statistical analysis or hard data. It's a random collage of lunatics with subtitles that don't really tie anything together. The scary part is that people mistake this stuff for evidence. It would be nice if we could see exactly how all these groups hang together. What is their real size? Do they have well oiled funding networks which direct money into political action committees, publishing groups, lobbyists, university grants, think tanks, etc.? Do they have CEOs on boards of major corporations? What is the level of their influence? Are they just a bunch of marginal radicals?

Secondly, the OP's claim seems vague, e.g., "destroy Western Civilization". This has a kind of irresponsibly broad low-IQ simplicity, like it was meant for the Divine Wrath/Apocalypse crowd. Which is sad, because Movement Conservatism has been manipulating these people almost more than the Democratic party pretends to care about poor workers.

Does the OP know anything about the Western Canon? The reason I ask is because most Beck viewers are historically illiterate (-if they were historically literate, Beck would seem like a raving, moronic demagogue - long on paranoia, short on facts).

Part of the western canon is a respect for science and political pluralism, neither of which play will with Fundamentalists, who don't want any scientists sniffing around their biblical timelines; nor do they want a diversity of political options if those options collide with their absolute values. Europe is the birthplace of western civilization, and we all know what Beck thinks of Europe. Beck displays precisely the kind of monomaniacal, paranoid intolerance that he sees in his invented Muslim and communist demons. He is the last person who should be defending Western Civilization.

He is certainly not the kind of person who is going to instruct his audience on the nuances of Western Civ, e.g., the Christian Middle Ages versus the liberal, secular Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries. I'm guessing the OP, educated by Beck, doesn't know this stuff either. (Which is scary because it means the country literally being controlled by illiterate demagogues)

(wow, just wow)

Right on!! Of course to your first paragraph, that's precisely what Congressman King's "hearing" was allegedly all about yesterday. I think he got an earful, however. The hearing produced zilch. So much for the rise of another Joe McCarthy.

 

[rightwinger]

I am saying the evidence presented in the various clips in the youtube video show that Beck was right about this particular subject. Can you cite otherwise?

Caliphate........I'm skeered.

What I glean from that particular bunch of nonsense from Beck is that he actually believes the American people are stupid enough to ever allow a Caliphate to take over. And yet his Loyal Lemmings don't get that. HE'S CALLING THEM STUPID.

Not to burst your bubble...

But they ARE STUPID

 

[MaggieMae]

edit: as a side note, what I find very funny (ok actually sad), is in our nation the majority of the people on the left, and the right have no idea what the system of Socialism really is. Like when people on the left actually think that social security, or medicare is a socialist program (it's not), and when people on the right think that in Socialism the government is so big, that it controls virtually aspect of life (it's not).

It's because they don't bother to look at the history of Socialism enough to realize that it's not the Marxist, Lenin, Mao versions. What we have in this country, or Great Britian, doesn't come close.

 

[MaggieMae]

socialism is taking wealth from one class and giving it to another.
communism is a one-class society (except for the state which holds all the power).
Socialism is the economic path that will take hold after capitalism falls and through it, communism will arise, according to Marx. They go hand in hand.

And to Londoner, while I disagree, I am happy someone was able to type out something that makes sense. Thanks.

What do you call it when the upper (wealthy) class takes from the lower levels? They do that by eliminating jobs when they can find cheap labor overseas, by importing foreign workers sophisticated in the same science and technical talent as Americans because they can get them cheaper, by moving their entire operations overseas. All for the precious profit, for themselves. Trickle down? What a ******* joke.

 

[MaggieMae]

Caliphate........I'm skeered.

What I glean from that particular bunch of nonsense from Beck is that he actually believes the American people are stupid enough to ever allow a Caliphate to take over. And yet his Loyal Lemmings don't get that. HE'S CALLING THEM STUPID.

Not to burst your bubble...

But they ARE STUPID

Well...I still like to believe they're just too easily led because Glenn Beck hates Obama. They'll therefore believe ANYTHING the man says.