Glenn Beck Rocks!

**S Landreth** · 06-10-2009, 05:53 AM

^When I got here maybe 4 (5?) years ago I was going through the channels at the girlfriends to see what they had to offer,……………FOX News was one channel (came in a package with many other channels). She called it the Bush channel. Go figure?

They have it here in Thailand also,…………but funny thing, I have never ever seen (I watch it for the humor) one paid advertisement on the channel. They slip those FOX News Extra’s in instead of commercials.

**BillyBobThai** · 06-10-2009, 10:28 PM

This is not about Glen Beck, but I think he is on the right track. He is trying to wake up the American voter to what is really happening to our country. Obama promised all of this change, but all is going to deliver is the destruction of the American way of life. For many on this forum, the American way of life must seem to be bad reading from many of your remarks. Thats fine, just stay the fuck out of my country if you do not like it. We do, both liberal and consertive alike. Americans love America.

I am an American living in Thailand for the last 6 years. I used to call my self a Republican, but now and Independent as the Republican party has sold me out just like the Democratic party has sold out their members. In my estimation, every politician in Washington is corrupt and should be voted out and prosecuted for their crimes against their constituents. A revolution is needed now more than any time since the founding of the country. I agree that many of the people in the U.S. are not the best educated, our government schools have allowed the teachers unions to ruin them, but neither are Great Britian, Austrialia, New Zeland or many other western nations. As far as that goes, neither are the Asian community. The Russians and Chinese are also good examples of ways to brain wash and controll the population. The U.S. has done things that I am not so proud of, but compared to most of the rest of the world countries, we are well above average. We are not saints but neither are we devils.

It is possible to change the entire U.S. Congress every 6 years. Senators are elected for 6 year terms and congressman for 2 year terms. The entire house of represenatives and 1/3 of the senate is up for election every 2 years. All of the house of represenatives and 1/3 of the senate should be voted out every 2 years until the politics of Washington can be broughr under control. These bastards have not been working for us for a very long time. Once they get in Washington, they forget what it is like in the rest of the country. Term limits are one way we can bring back their accountability. At the same time laws have to be put in place that keeps politicians from profiting from their time in Washington. Our leaders should be held to a higher standard. If convicted of using their influence to profit after leaving office, the sentance should be very severe. There are many changes needed to the American political process, and a revolution is truly needed. All Glen Beck is doing is to try and wake up the populace.

**Muadib** · 06-10-2009, 10:44 PM

^ I agree with your synopsis BBT... Glenn Beck used to be much more moderate and the points he made while on CNN were usually balanced and to the point... This is when I first began to watch his show... After he switched to FauxNews, he is seen as nothing more than another blathering, over-the-top idiot with an agenda of gloom & doom all being laid at the feet of the libbies... The message is important, but when the messenger is a raving lunatic it negates the information being presented...

Fundamental change is necessary in American government and I like your idea of term limits for Congress & the Senate... Serve one term and then out... In today's model, once a Congressman or Senator become entrenched in office, they become targets for corruption by lobbyists, who serve their master and not the best interests of the American public...

**MrG** · 07-10-2009, 06:30 AM

Originally Posted by BillyBobThai

All Glen Beck is doing is to try and wake up the populace.

Glenn Beck is a cynical little man who plays on people's fears and emotions to make a lot of money.

Originally Posted by Muadib

Fundamental change is necessary in American government and I like your idea of term limits for Congress & the Senate... Serve one term and then out... In today's model, once a Congressman or Senator become entrenched in office, they become targets for corruption by lobbyists, who serve their master and not the best interests of the American public...

Term limits have clearly failed at preventing the corruption from lobbyists that you refer to. This is 2009, not 1809. The issues before Congress require more experience and knowledge of complex issues than ever before. Term limits ham string that experience and allow ignorance to rein every new session, IMO.

Want to stop corruption in Washington: reform campaign contribution laws and put a brake on the revolving door between Washington and the private sector.

**panama hat** · 07-10-2009, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by Muadib

The message is important, but when the messenger is a raving lunatic it negates the information being presented...

Absolutely right, the man has zero credibility with the majority of the population, and let's not kid ourselves that a viewing and listening audience of a few million does not give the man a lot of power politically

Originally Posted by MrG

Term limits have clearly failed at preventing the corruption from lobbyists that you refer to.

But term limits are important . . . it does prevent (theoretically) an entrenched sitting official from simply pandering to whomever will get him the most votes/money

Originally Posted by MrG

Want to stop corruption in Washington: reform campaign contribution laws and put a brake on the revolving door between Washington and the private sector.

Yes, I agree.

Back to term limits, and I believe Bugs and I have had discussions about this - why have the president have term limits and not senators and congressmen?

**Humbert** · 07-10-2009, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by MrG

Want to stop corruption in Washington: reform campaign contribution laws and put a brake on the revolving door between Washington and the private sector

Agree wholeheartedly. Politicians are too beholden to big contributors.

Glen Beck bases his arguments upon fallacious snippets linked together by ultra nationalistic fear mongering. He knows the American public cannot recognize illogical reasoning.

**Norton** · 07-10-2009, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by panama hat

why have the president have term limits and not senators and congressmen?

Short answer. Franklin D. Roosevelt.

**MrG** · 07-10-2009, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by panama hat

But term limits are important . . . it does prevent (theoretically) an entrenched sitting official from simply pandering to whomever will get him the most votes/money

There may be some truth to that, with emphasis on the may be. And there are plenty of people who you could say stayed on because of that very reason, Strom Thurmond, for instance. But then there's also Ted Kennedy, who grew in office and did a hell of a lot of good. I think it is better to try and preserve some continuity and institutional memory in places where big decisions are made and not leave it all up to Newbies. Not to forget the knowledge of issues and the experience factor mentioned earlier.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Back to term limits, and I believe Bugs and I have had discussions about this - why have the president have term limits and not senators and congressmen?

The presidency didn't have term limits except by tradition until after FDR. As I understand it, the Republican Party wanted to make sure someone else didn't do a Roosevelt so they had the two presidential term made into law. Ironically, the next president popular enough to have won a thirt term was Eisenhower, a Republican. So it goes. Trite but true, our term limits are elections.

But if Glen Beck is ever elected, all bets are off.

**panama hat** · 07-10-2009, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by Norton

Short answer. Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Originally Posted by MrG

I think it is better to try and preserve some continuity and institutional memory in places where big decisions are made and not leave it all up to Newbies.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. What I don't like seeing is a senator or other elected officials having the same 'job' for 30 or 40 years . . . it's simply not good for development (generally)

Originally Posted by MrG

Not to forget the knowledge of issues and the experience factor mentioned earlier.

True. The same goes for mandatory retirement set at a specific age . . . I'm nowhere near it, plus I am self-employed, but I look at some of the people here who are forced to retire at 57!!! The wealth of knowledge lost is stunning

Originally Posted by MrG

our term limits are elections.

Well, yes . . . as they are elsewhere . . . and so it should be.

Term limits prevent gerrymandering. We had this case in our own little banana republic, called Queensland, within our banana republic where the long-sitting Joh Bjelke-Petersen rigged the electoral boundaries to ensure his re-election time after time

Originally Posted by MrG

But if Glen Beck is ever elected, all bets are off.

I thought Hannity was going for the presidency at the behest of God. Beck v Hannity . . . with Palin as the sidekick. Amusing

**MrG** · 07-10-2009, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by panama hat

What I don't like seeing is a senator or other elected officials having the same 'job' for 30 or 40 years . . . it's simply not good for development (generally)

That's one of the bad parts about no limit politics. Entrenchment with vested interests, baggage and close friends. Plenty of that going around here. But I'm sure there are some who come into office already corrupt and with corrupt intentions. They could do a lot of damage in a short time too, when they know they have nothing to win again.

Gerrymandering is a big problem. If I remember correctly, a few years back the State of Texas gerrymandered itself 3 new representatives just by changing a few boundaries. All Republican. Who knew...?

Originally Posted by panama hat

some of the people here who are forced to retire at 57!!! The wealth of knowledge lost is stunning

I don't know what the job is, but 57 is pretty early for most jobs I can think of. Brutal if you don't want to retire. We have people where I work who are over 70. Most of them seem to be still productive if a little slow. Research and stuff.

Originally Posted by panama hat

I thought Hannity was going for the presidency at the behest of God. Beck v Hannity . . . with Palin as the sidekick. Amusing

Maybe then it should be a God/Hanity ticket. But no...that won't do. Hanity would have to share. And, of course, the Becker Heads just won't be denied. Can you imagine the tears. So who will do color commentary? Rush Limbaugh or will we be treated to The Sara Palin Moment on Fox?

**Norton** · 07-10-2009, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by panama hat

What I don't like seeing is a senator or other elected officials having the same 'job' for 30 or 40 years . . . it's simply not good for development (generally)

Originally Posted by MrG

That's one of the bad parts about no limit politics.

Agree as it relates to the downside. The upside in not having term limits is accomplishment of long term policy initiatives. Constant change in government representatives and policy can lead to getting nothing accomplished.

**sabang** · 07-10-2009, 05:03 PM

This editorial from the NY Times puts it in a nutshell-

"It is the winter of 2007. The presidential primaries are approaching. The talk jocks like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and the rest are over the moon about Fred Thompson. They’re weak at the knees at the thought of Mitt Romney.

Meanwhile, they are hurling torrents of abuse at the unreliable deviationists: John McCain and Mike Huckabee.

Yet somehow, despite the fervor of the great microphone giants, the Thompson campaign flops like a fish. Despite the schoolgirl delight from the radio studios, the Romney campaign underperforms.

Meanwhile, Huckabee surges. Limbaugh attacks him, but social conservatives flock.

Along comes New Hampshire and McCain wins! Republican voters have not heeded their masters in the media. Before long, South Carolina looms as the crucial point of the race. The contest is effectively between Romney and McCain. The talk jocks are now in spittle-flecked furor. Day after day, whole programs are dedicated to hurling abuse at McCain and everybody ever associated with him. The jocks are threatening to unleash their angry millions.

Yet the imaginary armies do not materialize. McCain wins the South Carolina primary and goes on to win the nomination. The talk jocks can’t even deliver the conservative voters who show up at Republican primaries. They can’t even deliver South Carolina!"

Same story with the Hillary/ Obama Democrat nomination- the talk jocks wanted Republicans to put spoiler votes in for Hillary, to dent or demolish Obamas campaign. No impact, Obama won comfortably- and went on to win the Presidential elections in a landslide.

For all of their media hype, audience numbers and astronomical paypackets, in real terms these shock jocks deliver nothing- real referential power only arises from credibility, and they have none. Audiences may tune in, but they do not really "Listen"- apart from the electorally insignificant Right wing Dittoheads. You would have been unerringly right if you had bet against their predictions and preferences (ditto Ann Coulter & Michelle Malkin, of the same ilk).

As usual these days, the last laugh is on the Republicans:-

"The rise of Beck, Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and the rest has correlated almost perfectly with the decline of the G.O.P. But it’s not because the talk jocks have real power. It’s because they have illusory power, because Republicans hear the media mythology and fall for it every time."

Full Article- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/opinion/02brooks.html

**Jet Gorgon** · 08-10-2009, 12:51 AM

^ Someone posted that on the media thread. The author is just jealous of their appeal and ratings.

**sabang** · 08-10-2009, 05:05 AM

The author is unquestionably pro-Obama, but the fact remains- the Right wing shock jocks have seen their preferred candidates defeated everywhere, and their populist bombast has had no real impact at the Ballot. Not even South Carolina.

By catering to them the GOP just demonstrates it's lack of leadership, and alienation from the real voters.

**Jet Gorgon** · 08-10-2009, 07:11 AM

^ Maybe. But many people are getting angry.

**sabang** · 08-10-2009, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

But many people are getting angry.

With 25% of mortgages underwater, record foreclosures, and unemployment near 10% I can see why!
But it's a case of misdirected rage, I reckon.

The broader economy is on a recovery track (how strongly I won't speculate), but how that translates to Obamas popularity will depend on jobs. There is some evidence that, with the recession having been so severe, the lag in employment growth will be longer than normal this time- which won't help him.

**attaboy** · 08-10-2009, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by Norton

Originally Posted by panama hat

What I don't like seeing is a senator or other elected officials having the same 'job' for 30 or 40 years . . . it's simply not good for development (generally)

Originally Posted by MrG

That's one of the bad parts about no limit politics.

Agree as it relates to the downside. The upside in not having term limits is accomplishment of long term policy initiatives. Constant change in government representatives and policy can lead to getting nothing accomplished.

California legislature has term limits. Imo, it leads to newly elected legislators hiring from the same pool of experienced state employees to show the inexperienced legislators the workings of the office. The staff in effect become unelected officials guiding legislation over the period of their careers as staff. The elected official becomes window dressing. As I say it's just my opinion.

**Norton** · 08-10-2009, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by attaboy

California legislature has term limits. Imo, it leads to newly elected legislators hiring from the same pool of experienced state employees to show the inexperienced legislators the workings of the office. The staff in effect become unelected officials guiding legislation over the period of their careers as staff. The elected official becomes window dressing.

Originally Posted by attaboy

California legislature has term limits. Imo, it leads to newly elected legislators hiring from the same pool of experienced state employees to show the inexperienced legislators the workings of the office. The staff in effect become unelected officials guiding legislation over the period of their careers as staff. The elected official becomes window dressing.

Exactly. The bureaucracy (civil servants) the folks that really establish policy for the elected figurehead are the ones needing term limits. California is a good example of a system out of control. The size and expense has grown at an incredible rate starting when Govenor Moonbeam was in office. Having been a resident of the state for most of my life, I have seen taxes increase beyond anything reasonable with little payback value.

A large portion of these taxes pay the salaries of the bureaucracy whose primary job is to award contracts to "consultants" whose qualifications seem to be they are either former employees in government or employees of companies who stand to profit from government contracts.

The entire system is out of control in California and Washington both out of touch with the desires of local communities. Time to get tax dollars paid to and spent by local government and stop the folly of sending tax revenues to the state and federal coffers so they in turn can send it back to the local communities after extracting the overhead cost to pay their bureaucracy.

**Humbert** · 08-10-2009, 02:37 PM

I just found out today that Glen Beck is a mormon. That explains a lot. Anyone who believes that Jesus Christ was born in Missouri is a nut case.

**barbaro** · 08-10-2009, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Humbert

I just found out today that Glen Beck is a mormon. That explains a lot. Anyone who believes that Jesus Christ was born in Missouri is a nut case.

Jesus also went to outer space, and returned.

The Native American (Indians) were from the lost tribe of Israel and the refused Mormonism, when Jesus went there to talk with them.

Many other bizarre things with Mormonism.

This isn't the Mormon thread, but in the "religious" section, I'll put up some Mormon theology documentaries and cartoons - all produced and distributed by, the Mormon church.

**bsnub** · 08-10-2009, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ Maybe. But many people are getting angry.

Angry at who? I think most in the US are angry at the right for fucking up this country so bad and causing this recession to begin with not even talking about the wars they started and left behind.

No one buys that tea party bs...

**barbaro** · 08-10-2009, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ Someone posted that on the media thread. The author is just jealous of their appeal and ratings.

It was Limbaugh who said Brooks is jealous of him.

This is laughable.

I've been reading David Brooks for years.

And lets say for the sake of argument that Brook is jealous?

How does Limbaugh know? Did Brooks tell him. Did brook explicity state, or imply that he was jeaous?

Did the jealously come out in the article in tone?

I read the article. I didn't see any jealously in it.

What I see in Brook's perception, is what a lot of so-called "traditional/Paleo conservatives, and fiscal conservatives are perceiving with how the GOP is being associated with Fox's Hannity & O'reilly, and Limbaugh and Beck.

**Jet Gorgon** · 09-10-2009, 12:47 AM

^ Your opinion, Milkie. The left media is in attack mode on radio/cable righties who are topping the ratings.

Originally Posted by Humbert

I just found out today that Glen Beck is a mormon. That explains a lot. Anyone who believes that Jesus Christ was born in Missouri is a nut case.

Geez, I was astonished to hear that Michael Moore is a practising catholic. He even embarrassed Hannity when the latter said he goes to church every Sunday but couldn't answer what scriptures (or whatever they use) were said on the past Sunday.

**barbaro** · 09-10-2009, 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ Your opinion, Milkie. The left media is in attack mode on radio/cable righties who are topping the ratings.

I agree with you, it's my opinion on Brook's perception.

But "leftie?"

What are you talking about?

Brooks is a "conservative."

Brooks always has been.

What are you referring to?

**sabang** · 09-10-2009, 01:40 AM

I think lot of the cringing re the right wing jocks is coming from the moderate Right actually- many of whom voted for Obama. I can't see the GOP luring them back in great numbers unless they disassociate themselves from the more rabid elements.

Thread: Glenn Beck Rocks!

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions