I do not think he adheres to positive traditional American conservative values.
Honesty.Seriously? I politely beg to differ. He represents those values FAR better than anyone else in the national spotlight. Please name a single traditional value he doesn't adhere to?
Then allow me to supply you with another.I realize that some people are turned off by the idea of "conspiracy theorists." But if you can name a single thing where he has been wrong, I'd like hear it. (Only thing I can think of is the fact that he followed along with most of the conservative media in bashing Mitt Romney early on. By the time he realized just how truly conservative Mitt is - and admitted that he had been wrong - the damage had already been done).
Let's see...liberals/progs/socialists/Democrats/communists stand for raping my paycheck in order to facilitate baby murder, free cell phones, free food, subsidized rent, etc. for the indolent, indoctrinate our children in public warehouse camps euphemistically called public schools, support open borders, ignore the Constitution on a wholesale level, use the public propaganda media to reinforce their totalitarian message, support crony capitalism to a higher level than ever before seen, use executive orders as a means to circumvent congress, raise taxes, spend unwisely, interfere with the economy, reduce the military, and on ad infinitum and you have the temerity to declare Glenn Beck and his "ilk" have done even more damage to the conservative (American) cause?No, Beck and his ilk have done more to hurt the conservative cause than all the communists in the country combined. They show up on everyones radar as extreme right bigots, and we all get tarred with the same brush.
It gets progressively worse.Cultivation is at least one of the greatest natural improvements ever made by human invention. It has given to created earth a tenfold value. But the landed monopoly that began with it has produced the greatest evil. It has dispossessed more than half the inhabitants of every nation of their natural inheritance, without providing for them, as ought to have been done, an indemnification for that loss, and has thereby created a species of poverty and wretchedness that did not exist before.
In advocating the case of the persons thus dispossessed, it is a right, and not a charity, that I am pleading for. But it is that kind of right which, being neglected at first, could not be brought forward afterwards till heaven had opened the way by a revolution in the system of government. Let us then do honor to revolutions by justice, and give currency to their principles by blessings.
Having thus in a few words, opened the merits of the case, I shall now proceed to the plan I have to propose, which is,
To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property:
And also, the sum of ten pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age.
It's all well and good to make pretty speeches, but it is by a man's fruits that you know him. Do you gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Stuff he says like this right??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solo
Glenn has... some interesting points of view. I have never been a fan of most of his opinions.
Ditto.
Well, apart from completely misunderstanding Thomas Paine, telling lies, and abusing the word "literally"?What do you SEE him doing wrong?
As hard as it may be to believe, I love more things than just guns.What is Glenn Beck doing to take your gun rights away?
+1 on this for meWell as far as our goverment has come is EXACTLY how our country has fallen so low. If we don't speak now then we'll get exactly what they want to give to us. ZIP.... NADA... ZILCH.... No guns, no ammo, no reloading, no mags, did I mention no guns, lastly.......... No Rights... I endorse Glenn and his views on our current country sad state of affairs.... I only wish more would stepup to the plate and fight for our Rights to Keep Our Freedom...
A-FIXER
Strictly speaking, that's entirely possible.I don't know how someone could be pro-gun but not pro-constitution?
Actually, there is no need to target such people. The left (and I dislike the label since I think it is both inaccurate and unhelpful in describing our country's political dynamic) loves guys like Rush, LaPierre, and Beck, since they are focal points to rally the troops around.The left like Soft Targets.... quiet people.... no opposition
Their own self-interest? These guys are political celebrities--the equivalent of Lindsay Lohan compared to real statesmen and philosophers whose ideals our nation is supposed to be emulating. I have far more respect for lesser-known "hacks" like Neil Boortz who I've found at least has a coherent world-view, instead of the conflicted mish-mash that is the Republican/Democrat platforms.Glenn, Rush, Palin, Maher, Coulter ... . They do serve a purpose of sorts.
colonel kernel said:I like him and what he stands for but ive been wondering about this since the last 4 or 5 times ive heard his radio show lately, he was talking about guns, gun rights,etc (he is very pro gun/constitution) and he also has a book coming out about these topics also..You all will probably bash me on this since we need everyone we can get but he seems to be a lightning rod of sorts. i mean, its almost like the left are even more determined when someone like Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh are carrying the flag for a certain cause...i think i wish that he would just be quiet so the other side can just move on to the next thing..i feel more comfortable when all is quiet on the gun front i guess (can we get the global warming crap started back up again?)..what thinks ye?
The best defense is offense.
I find it more than a little ironic that someone touting honesty would cite blatantly left-leaning sources that claim to be neutral. (Politifact.com, factcheck.org, snopes.com).Honesty.
Such as?I find it more than a little ironic that someone touting honesty would cite blatantly left-leaning sources that claim to be neutral. (Politifact.com, factcheck.org, snopes.com).
Just looking at the first 2 "arguments you cited, and they are full of holes. The first claims that Beck's statements were based on a book quoted out of context, when in fact, he had multiple sources to confirm what he said, even if the other side denied it repeatedly.
That's somewhat beside the point of whether they grant birthright citizenship to people born in those countries.And the countries cited in the second article fail to mention that they do NOT automatically grant citizenship to those born to parents who are there illegally. That's a big distinction that they conveniently left out. I stopped reading when I saw that the other two were from the same "honest" source...
That is a perfect illustration of the worthlessness of Beck. We need doers, not talkers.For those who think Beck is doing more harm than good, what are YOU doing?
He may not be a perfect voice, but I don't hear very many other people saying what needs to be said as openly as he does.