Wow, so much to catch up with.
I really must have struck a nerve.
To the people accusing me of lying. I did not lie at all. I told the exact truth as I see it.
Yes, but you arent the judge of what's true. The fact is anyone who watches Glenn regularly knows you're outright lying when you claim he is inciting people to violence.
1. Mr Beck hosted a program where he spent most of it strongly suggesting that Nazi Eugenics and the Democrats plan for public health care were basically the same thing, and that Mr Obama and his staff were basically the same as Hitler and Goering. (This is a fact about Beck.)
And those are accurate facts. The fact these legitimate points dont bother you about the Obama administration is downright frightening. His Czars speaking on involuntary sterilization through the nations water supply. Death counseling for seniors. Suggesting we shouldnt spend money on seniors if they cost too much. suggesting that already born children can be killed if their parents wanted to abort them. Holy crap the only thing they havent suggested is actual death camps. And you see absolutely no legitimate connection between this?
2. To back up his assertions, he presented a large presentation dealing with the history of the Nazis and Eugenics in America, further tieing Mr Obama with Hitler. (This is also a fact about Beck.)
Yeah, and he accurately backed it up. Obama is a totalitarian. He is more than willing to seize as much power as he can and he is actively doing so. And we the people need to stop this.
3. During these portions of the program he had "emotional outbursts" to prove the sincerity of what he was saying, and made sure that what he was suggesting was clear to everyone. (This is a fact about Beck.)
He is sincere. He isnt faking emotional outbursts.
In effect, this part of the program clearly implied that Mr Obama, and the Democrats, were the same as Hitler and his party.
So because youre ignoring obvious parallels we are supposed to?
4. Then at various points Mr Beck did indeed deny, in short statements, that he was trying to suggest any such thing. (Fact)
That's because he was showing parallels. He was explaining why this administration is dangerous. And he has obviously succeeded if you want to silence him so much.
But he may as well have had his fingers crossed behind his back. His made his denials, through brevity and lack of expression, seem like he was just saying it because he did not want to believe the worst in people.
He doesn't want to believe the worst in people. He just isnt stupid enough to stick his head in the sand when there are so many freaking signs.
The overall effect of the program was that Mr Beck truly believes Mr Obama and the Democrats are in fact Nazis, but was exclaiming, at various points items like "But I'm not saying Mr Obama wants to kill your grandmother", to cover his ass in case the shit hit the fan. In other words, he was doing it to create plausible deniability. (this is my informed opinion, based on the facts).
Obama has recently been speaking about maybe it would have been better if his grandmother died instead of going through costly proceedures to extend her life. If he is throwing his grandmother under the bus, do you honestly think he gives a damn about yours?
And glen is trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. It's who glen is. He doesnt want to think the worst of people. But again he isnt going to ignore reality.
5. I further went on to say that such comments were extremely incendiary and could easily lead to violence. (This is a fact.) Assuming that Mr Beck is not a moron, he must know this to be true.
Cause encouraging non-violent protests is extremely incendiary. Got ya.
None of this is a "lie". None of it can be proven to be false. None of you have proven what I said to be false. You simply stated that I was somehow a "liar" and "stupid" for even bringing up the subject.
You are a liar when you try to claim someone advocating non-violent uprising is trying to incite violence.
Attacks on your opponent's character, as opposed to disputing the facts themselves, do not win an argument.
Which is probably why this thread has gone on for 28 pages.
You're right. Your attacks on Glenn's character instead of addressing the facts themselves do not win arguments. Trying to silence your political opponents does not win arguments. The fact is your position is indefensible so you have to attack Glenn and try
Does anyone have proof that my facts are false?
Um the actual broadcast shows your "facts" are wrong. If you would stop confusing your opinion for fact, you'd probably get alittle further with your arguments.
But until you stop claiming that encouraging non violent resistance is somehow inciting rebellion, you have zero credibility. You have no facts to begin with.