why the left hates glen beck

[Oldandtired]

And yet, Dunn (and others) are on tape admitting and even bragging about their Marxist and communist ideals.


Where?



Where have they indicated that they want us to be a communist nation?

I don't watch Beck so I really don't know for sure about these accusations - did he really say "I checked" did he really lie about the other things? If there are more reasonable explanations, I think they are more germaine to this thread than "dunn and others." Dunn and others may be an important topic to discuss - maybe important enough for their very own thread ??????? - and I'll be interested to look in on that one and hopefully learn something ..... but what I'm looking for HERE is whether Glenn Beck really lied about these things.

He did not lie...he did not exaggerate...he allowed us to listen to ALL of Dunns remarks...and the others as well.
Chavez was heralded by the #2 FCC appointee as well....for his dealing with the press...you know...the press he shut down?

It is quite concerning mny friend.....

 

[Coyote]

It doesn't matter to me what Beck said - I filtered him out and fast forwarded through him. I saw the tape of Dunn herself saying that Mao is one of her two favorite political philosophers. That is unacceptable to me.

Her words and her views are beyond inconsistent with the highest levels of a constitutional democracy.

There is a vast difference between quoting from political or military philosphy and supporting a political ideology. If you think there isn't, than you need to question many quite respected figures:

Stephen Shadegg, a political campaign manager for Goldwater wrote in "How to Win an Election" quoted Mao:[/U] "Give me just two or three men in a village and I will take the village." Shadegg comments: " In the Goldwater campaigns of 1952 and 1958 and in all other campaigns where I have served as consultant I have followed the advice of Mao Tse-tung." "I would suggest," writes senator Goldwater in Why Not Victory? "that we analyze and copy the strategy of the enemy; theirs has worked and ours has not."
(Harper's Magazine, November 1964)

Even President Bush recommended that Rove read Mao's biography.

Military strategists have used his strategies or philosophies.

They are successful. That does not mean they follow or approve of his ideology.

Again, it doesn't matter to me what Beck said. A White House advisor said herself, on tape and in public, that one of her two favorite political philosophers is Mao.

That view and ideal is inconsistent with someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution in a constitutional democracy.

Focus not on what you think I said.

I'm not talking about what Beck said. I'm talking about what YOU said. I am telling you there is a difference between political philosophy and ideology and you are blurring that distinction in an attempt to make it sound as if she supports that ideology and it is incompatible with a constitutional democracy. There is no evidence anywhere to suggest she holds to those ideological beliefs - none. Simply saying that Mao and Mother Theresa are two of her favorite political philosophers isn't enough particularly when you look at it in the context of what she was saying.

If that is the sort of person with whom you are comfortable having at the highest levels of our government - a constitutional democracy - fine for you. I'm not pleased that so many are passive about this infiltration, though. And, if the passives are not willing to fight it, I will.

In your misguided assumptions, I am sure that you will require a return to loyalty oaths too.

 

[Si modo]

There is a vast difference between quoting from political or military philosphy and supporting a political ideology. If you think there isn't, than you need to question many quite respected figures:

Stephen Shadegg, a political campaign manager for Goldwater wrote in "How to Win an Election" quoted Mao:[/U] "Give me just two or three men in a village and I will take the village." Shadegg comments: " In the Goldwater campaigns of 1952 and 1958 and in all other campaigns where I have served as consultant I have followed the advice of Mao Tse-tung." "I would suggest," writes senator Goldwater in Why Not Victory? "that we analyze and copy the strategy of the enemy; theirs has worked and ours has not."
(Harper's Magazine, November 1964)

Even President Bush recommended that Rove read Mao's biography.

Military strategists have used his strategies or philosophies.

They are successful. That does not mean they follow or approve of his ideology.

Again, it doesn't matter to me what Beck said. A White House advisor said herself, on tape and in public, that one of her two favorite political philosophers is Mao.

That view and ideal is inconsistent with someone who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution in a constitutional democracy.

Focus not on what you think I said.

I'm not talking about what Beck said. I'm talking about what YOU said. I am telling you there is a difference between political philosophy and ideology and you are blurring that distinction in an attempt to make it sound as if she supports that ideology and it is incompatible with a constitutional democracy. There is no evidence anywhere to suggest she holds to those ideological beliefs - none. Simply saying that Mao and Mother Theresa are two of her favorite political philosophers isn't enough particularly when you look at it in the context of what she was saying.

If that is the sort of person with whom you are comfortable having at the highest levels of our government - a constitutional democracy - fine for you. I'm not pleased that so many are passive about this infiltration, though. And, if the passives are not willing to fight it, I will.

In your misguided assumptions, I am sure that you will require a return to loyalty oaths too.

OK. I make no assumptions - we are a constitutional democracy. Fact. She is at the office of the highest level of that constitutional democracy. Fact. Federal government employees take an oath to defend the Constitution. Fact. She has publicly stated that one of her favorite political philosophers is Mao. Fact. If you are talking about assumptions about you, note my use of 'if' above and that should clear that up immediately.

She is on tape saying that one of her two favorite political philosophers is Mao. Mao's political philosophy is COMMUNISM. Communism is beyond inconsistent with a constitutional democracy. She took an oath to defend our constitution.

Your conflating the knowledge of Mao's political philosophy with one who admires it (being one of her favorites) is illogical.

 

[Charles Stucker]

End of life counseling has nothing to do with "death panels" - .

Yet.

It would be far too easy for a bureaucratic nightmare to evolve wherein we might get:

So Simple Only a Child Could Understand by Charles Stucker

The gravesite was still, only a father and son leaving flowers beside the newly turned earth.
“Dad, will I go mad like grandpa?”
“Your grandfather wasn’t mad.”
“The State Assisted Serenity Board proved it in court.”
“The State Assisted Suicide Board you mean,” the father muttered angrily, “proved to a jury of twenty-something’s that your grandfather wanted to live.”
“That’s the same thing.”
“No son it’s not. You’ll understand when you’re older.”
“Will you accept the board’s recommendation if they think you should go to heaven?”
“No.”
“I will, I don’t want to be mad.”
“Too late, you already are.”

Permission is given to reproduce and distribute freely so long as the story is unedited and credit is given the author.

 

[California Girl]

No one hates clowns. They are there to laugh at. It's the right who takes them seriously.

Good grief. For the love of God, how many more times do we have to go through this....

During the Bush Administration, Beck was quoted time after time by the LEFT... for his accusations against Bush. The LEFT did not laugh at Beck then - they quoted him. They used his comments and work as a stick with which to beat Bush.

So, given that he was not a clown during the Bush Administration, logic tells us that he is not a clown now.

You cannot have it both ways. Which bit of this is hard to understand?

 

[Si modo]

No one hates clowns. They are there to laugh at. It's the right who takes them seriously.

Good grief. For the love of God, how many more times do we have to go through this....

During the Bush Administration, Beck was quoted time after time by the LEFT... for his accusations against Bush. The LEFT did not laugh at Beck then - they quoted him. They used his comments and work as a stick with which to beat Bush.

So, given that he was not a clown during the Bush Administration, logic tells us that he is not a clown now.

You cannot have it both ways. Which bit of this is hard to understand?

For rdean, pretty much anything is difficult for him to understand (unless it's some emotionally driven rant about his pet paranoias about the GOP or religion).

 

[nodoginnafight]

I don't watch Beck so I really don't know for sure about these accusations - did he really say "I checked" did he really lie about the other things? If there are more reasonable explanations, I think they are more germaine to this thread than "dunn and others." Dunn and others may be an important topic to discuss - maybe important enough for their very own thread ??????? - and I'll be interested to look in on that one and hopefully learn something ..... but what I'm looking for HERE is whether Glenn Beck really lied about these things.

He did not lie...he did not exaggerate...he allowed us to listen to ALL of Dunns remarks...and the others as well.
Chavez was heralded by the #2 FCC appointee as well....for his dealing with the press...you know...the press he shut down?

It is quite concerning mny friend.....

That's not what I was asking about. I was asking about whether or not he lied in the instances I cited. He may have told the truth in the instance YOU are reffering to (I don't know) but does he ALWAYS tell the truth - does he lie? I posted several links that suggest he does - but I am patiently waiting to see if any alternative explanation can be offered.

The links came from from some guy I've nebver heard of, so if they're fake - I'd be interested in finding that out. Once I find out someone has faked something - I know they aren't to be trusted. (Can be useful info)

Since YOU were the one who asked for ANY evidence of lie - I would have thought you'd be all over those claims and evidence.

No?

 

[Wicked Jester]

Two more reasons why the lefty's hate Beck:

1) His ratings are continuing to soar.
2) He is causing CLEAR THINKING americans to take a second look at the prez and his administration. The second looks are definitely having a negative impact on their approval ratings. People are beginning to see what the prez. and his administration is all about, and they are obviously not liking what they are seeing. That's a very good thing.

It is absolutely comical to see a few of these clowns admit that they don't watch Beck, but they sure seem to know what he's talking about. These are the clowns you can't take seriously on any issue.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Lets look at the real reasons why the lefty loons hate Beck.

1) Nancy Killifer (Tax cheat) Beck exposed her, she's history!
2) Tom Daschle (Tax cheat) Beck exposed him, he's history!
3) Bill Richardson (Corrupt Clown) Beck exposed him, he's history!
4) Reverend Wright (Racist, anti-american preacher) Beck exposed him, Obama thew him under the bus!
5) Van Jones (communist scumbag) Beck exposed him, he's history!
6) ACORN (Corrupt liberal organization) Beck exposed them, they're history!
7) Charley Rangel (Tax cheat) Beck exposed him, the DNC threw him under the bus.

And now, lets take a look at the lefty dirtbags Beck is going after, and RIGHTFULLY exposing:
1) Kevin Jennings (piece of garbage)
2) Cass Sunstein (insane piece of garbage)
3) Valerie Jarret (corrupt piece of garbage)
4) Anita Dunne (Mao loving piece of garbage)
5) Harold Koh (Sharia law loving, anti-american piece of garbage)
6) Mark Lloyd (Chavez loving, anti-american piece of garbage, and the most dangerous of the bunch)

The above named are going to get hammered. They will be history.

And lets not forget the most important piece of garbage that Beck absolutely MUST continue to expose:
Barack HUSSEIN Obama himself!

Yeah, you lefty's are watching the pillars of your twisted minds crumble by the day.

Thank you Glenn Beck!
You're a true american!

So, I suppose that the first 7 listed were tossed aside because Beck didn't get his facts straight. He lied. Yeah, that's why Obama and the dem's fought so hard to keep them.

Fact is, Obama and the dem's didn't put up any kind of fight, because they knew Beck had them pegged dead center with facts!

And I Suppose the last 6 listed didn't have anything to do with Obama WEAKLY WHINING about FOX news.

Fact is, Obama and the dems know damn good and well that the facts on those scumbags can never be disputed, they are being proven, and they will fall like rocks, just like the other 7 dirtbags.


Fact is, Obama knows that Beck is honing in on him WITH FACTS. That is why Obama so WEAKLY WHINED about FOX NEWS!

 

[California Girl]

Actually, the reason is much simpler. He's a hatemonger.

Our country doesn't need that kind of "love".

That's intelligent! When you can't argue facts, resort to name calling.

Look at what I was responding to.

What bit of that post is name calling? He's not a liberal, he is right, he loves his country..... and you call him a 'hatemonger'.

Namecalling is the sign of a lost argument.

 

[Coyote]

And yet, Dunn (and others) are on tape admitting and even bragging about their Marxist and communist ideals.


Where?



Where have they indicated that they want us to be a communist nation?

Dunn was on tape saying that Mao and Mother Teresa are who two favorite political philosophers...and she said it to high schoolers....


Call me nuts....but a man who is responsible for 50 million deaths of his own people should NEVER be put on ANY type of pedestal...He could be the best chef in the world but is not worthy of such notation based on his OTHER actions.

Call me nuts but I fail to see how he is being put on a pedestal. Unlike Beck's lies - she did not call him her "hero". Frankly, this condemnation based on an appreciation for some of his quotes smacks of partisan hypocrisy when you consider that many have quoted him.

The reality of Mao is complex, a bit like Machievelli. But that doesn't mean their philosophies don't have some merit or - more important something to learn from. Mao, like Machievelli is required reading in a number of disciplines and not because he was a mass murder. Appreciating some of his philosophy is not the same thing as condoning his behavior or how he used it.

Even today, when great gridiron heros are discussed, most overloook Simpson...and the few that do add him ion usually say.."well, if you include Sinpson"...

But she did not even put that "asterisk" next to his name....she simply included him in as her two FAVORITE political philosophers.

Now....if she said....witrh all of his faults, he was spot on with this philosophy...and then went on to point out one smart thing he did or said...I could ALMOST accept it. But listen to the tape...she makes him sound like he should be revered.

It was sickening to listen to.

I understand what you are saying but frankly - why should she have to do that? Consider the context in which she was speaking and the message she was trying to impart to her audience (and not, it wasn't a marxist message either). Her detractors picked out one item and ran with it all out of proportion and bereft of context. It's nuts.

You still didn't answer the questions:
Where did Dunn bragging about her Marxist and communist ideals.
Where has she indicated that she wants us to be a communist nation?

 

[nodoginnafight]

So, given that he was not a clown during the Bush Administration, logic tells us that he is not a clown now.

What if we thought he was a clown then too?
Do we still get a balloon?

 

[nodoginnafight]

so nothing on those links old and tired?

OK, but you were the one who asked for them.

Anyone else?

 

[theHawk]

That's intelligent! When you can't argue facts, resort to name calling.

Look at what I was responding to.

What bit of that post is name calling? He's not a liberal, he is right, he loves his country..... and you call him a 'hatemonger'.

Namecalling is the sign of a lost argument.

Thats all these libs can do, call him a 'clown', and a 'hatemonger'. They can't actually defend any of the shitbag liberals that Beck has exposed, so they revert to the oldest and most predictable tactic - discredit the messenger.

 

[Coyote]

That's intelligent! When you can't argue facts, resort to name calling.

Look at what I was responding to.

What bit of that post is name calling? He's not a liberal, he is right, he loves his country..... and you call him a 'hatemonger'.

Namecalling is the sign of a lost argument.

I call him a hate-monger based on my opinion of what he is saying. That is hardly name calling. He is using deliberate distortions in an attempt to - do what? Create hatred towards his targets? A mob mentality? I've given numerous examples. If I were name calling I'd be calling him a moron, Retardican, conservitard and a host of similar stupid things.

"He is right" - well, that is a matter of opinion. "He loves his country". That is debatable and a matter of opinion. He has a strange way of showing it.

 

[Oldandtired]

so nothing on those links old and tired?

OK, but you were the one who asked for them.

Anyone else?

Busy at work. Will look at them later. Sorry....had the site minimized for the last couple hours. Did not mean to ignore you.

 

[theHawk]

The reality of Mao is complex, a bit like Machievelli. But that doesn't mean their philosophies don't have some merit or - more important something to learn from. Mao, like Machievelli is required reading in a number of disciplines and not because he was a mass murder. Appreciating some of his philosophy is not the same thing as condoning his behavior or how he used it.

Ah of course, all those communists like Marx, Che, Castro, Mao have some merit in their philosophies. We just have to ignore all those "bad things" that came as a result of their philosophies. We can all still learn alot from them.

 

[nodoginnafight]

so nothing on those links old and tired?

OK, but you were the one who asked for them.

Anyone else?

Busy at work. Will look at them later. Sorry....had the site minimized for the last couple hours. Did not mean to ignore you.

No sweat my friend - I am interested in your input because I trust it to balance the input I got from the guy who posted those links. If I don't run into you again today, have a great weekend.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Look at what I was responding to.

What bit of that post is name calling? He's not a liberal, he is right, he loves his country..... and you call him a 'hatemonger'.

Namecalling is the sign of a lost argument.

Thats all these libs can do, call him a 'clown', and a 'hatemonger'. They can't actually defend any of the shitbag liberals that Beck has exposed, so they revert to the oldest and most predictable tactic - discredit the messenger.

Shall I throw up my list of the 7 liberal dirtbags that Beck has already bagged and tagged WITH FACTS. And the 6 liberal dirtbags that Beck is on the brink of tagging and bagging WITH FACTS?

Because I will!
Really, I WILL!

 

[QUENTIN]

I'd love to see some evidence of the left praising Beck or using him as some regularly quoted source during the Bush years when he, *stifling laughter*, was a supposed regular critic of the Administration.

I don't mean one article you can find on Daily Kos where some anonymous commenter says "Even Glenn Beck doesn't like this," as he like every other spinner had to voice discontent once in a great while with a minor Bush policy so as not to appear to be the complete and total lapdog he was, I mean any evidence that demonstrates that Glenn Beck was anything but laughed off as an idiot by the left then too because he was a servile GOP spokesman.

This argument that the left used to like or cite Glenn Beck pre-Obama administration is pure revisionism and sorry clowns, but it's too recent for you to be able to get away with. We're talking a couple of years here, and anyone paying attention would remember that's decidedly not the case. Beck was rightly grouped by the left with O'Reilly and Hannity as an extension of Bush's press secretary, the most attention he got from the left was when he idiotically asked a Muslim congressman to prove he wasn't a traitorous infiltrator.

Cut the crap and can the lies, Beck's been known as a phony faux-populist far-right loon since the moment he became popular, it's not some big reversal because suddenly he's attacking Democrats, that's always been his schtick, as a GOP spokesman with a talk show, that's his very purpose. Like a lot of so-called conservatives, he just now found his supposed anti-government roots because his party is no longer in office.

I don't hate or fear the man, just know that he's an idiot, a liar, and is making a career out of manipulating people based on irrational fears while ignoring the genuine, reality-based and consequential issues people should be alerted to and concerned about.