aroddoold aroddoold

The best of Glenn Beck

The best of Glenn Beck

Just saw this:

 

Awesome! No more proof needed that he is Grand Cyclops of the Tinfoil Brigade.


Epic Seduction Fail. Try to read her thoughts of him on her face.


Glenn Beck screaming like a girl getting dumped by the Jonas Brothers. Starts at 3:38 for the preliminary screams but the epic yell comes at 3:52. It's really worth watching from the beginning.


Beck finally meets his master ... or rather mistress. Hard to believe but it's possible to outcrazy even him. Michele Bachmann's insane ramblings are too much even for Beck.


1,209,770 views 296 replies
Reply #276 Top

Potato, potatoe.

Reply #277 Top

Potato, potatoe.

 

Dan 'Confucious' Quayle :w00t:

Reply #278 Top

And when pointed out that liberalism centers on the belief of the importance of individual freedom as opposed to fascism which favors the state over the individual, he replies by arguing that "that was classical liberalism, not the modern american one". He counters a fact by claiming that others simply got the meaning of the word wrong.

 

The only problem Goldberg has is that everyone he's interviewed by is a damned idiot.

 

The classical definition of liberal is based on the origin of the word, liberty.  The group in US politics that defines that would be the libertarians.  They are both socially and fiscally hands off.  The government should be as small as possible, only doing that which is necessity.  By necessity, they mean actual necessity, not these horse shit excuses we keep making these days.  A defense force is necessity, a highway system is probably necessity, much further than that and you're shit out of luck.

 

The self ascribed modern liberal is no such thing.  They are the exact opposite of liberty, as they continually tell people how to do things.  It's supposedly for their own good, but you cannot take control from the populace and be a classical liberal at the same time.  They claim to be liberals because those evil conservatives have all them irritating moral issues.  What they really mean is they want buttsex, open borders, etcetera.  They are however going to tell you how to raise your kids, who you can hire, what kind of church you can have, the list goes on.  Pushing for organic foods is yet another thing the state is trying to tell you to do.  Any compulsory requirement is the opposite of liberty.  The dissolution of the flop house was an infringment on liberty, rent control is an infringment on liberty, our needing a permit and a perc test to stick a septic system on 780 acres is an infringment on liberty.  Control and freedom are incompatible.

 

Classical liberalism died in this country with the rise of the progressive movement in the late 1800's, and it hasn't resurrected since.  That progressive movement was the rise of fascism in Europe and communism in Russia.  Your education sucks though, so you never learned that they were all the same brand of trash with minor differences.  The only pertinent difference between them was their level of success.  All of them led to more dominant central governments, less liberty.

 

Instead of expressing disbelief that anyone believes Beck, you should delve into history for yourself.  You needn't go back very far, freedom has had a rather brief, and likely soon to be gone stint.  It's not even hard to find the information.  All you have to do is avoid your school text books, they're approved by those same wolves pretending to be sheep.  You could try some economics while you're at it, truly depressing how well that brain washing has taken.

+1 Loading…
Reply #279 Top

Uh-huh.

So your fear of buttsex drives your hate against liberals?

And conservatives want to uphold values of living but are against being told how to raise their kids?

Strange. I always had the impression that it was conservatives trying to protect their kiddies from the dangers of buttsex. By the force of law.

But kidding aside: Compulsory requirements (such as laws) aren't the opposite of liberty. They are the borders in which liberty can thrive. Some might argue that borders are nothing but a cage and liberty doesn't exist inside a cage. But unlimited freedom is nothing but chaos. We have this proverb "Your freedom ends where someone elses freedom begins". Rules define where freedom ends. "Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not steal.". 

Ok, demanding that you eat organic foods is not on the same level as not killing your neighbour - and some liberal ideas are as whacky to me (in my case veganism - i assume that's liberal, too) as some viewpoints of the conservative tinfoil brigade - but trying to change the rules of the country doesn't make them fascists.

Oh, and thank you for telling us that our (or my) education sucks. I thought that was funny coming from an american and I had a good laugh.

Let's share buttsex some time.

+1 Loading…
Reply #280 Top

So your fear of buttsex drives your hate against liberals?

I knew that would the first comeback.  Bait a hook, works every time.

but trying to change the rules of the country doesn't make them fascists

Kinda depends on the proposed rules, wouldn't ya think?

Reply #281 Top

 

uh huh ... like patriot act vs. legalizing buttsex marriage?

let's see, one promotes individual freedom, the other limits them ... hmm.

 

I knew that the first rebuttal would be some helpless shit to avoid defending a lost talking point.

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #282 Top

Quoting psychoak, reply 278

What they really mean is they want buttsex, open borders, etcetera.


Oh please...the modern conservative wants to have buttsex, too; they just want the buttsex to be openly between a man and a woman, and closeted between same sex partners.

This is one of those total non-issues that clogs up any discussion of the real issues between the parties.  Anybody who wants to have buttsex is going to have it.  It's just that some partners like to keep the dirt on it, because it makes them feel sexy.

Reply #283 Top

Predictable as always.  You can't actually read anything that disagrees with your viewpoint or it would be obvious that I just trashed both sides for being control freaks.  I despise federalists in general, liberals are just the more dangerous of the two to me personally.

 

"Classical liberalism died in this country with the rise of the progressive movement in the late 1800's, and it hasn't resurrected since."

 

If it's been dead for over a century, it obviously can't be one of the two parties that have frequently held power since.  If conservatives actually were conservatives, marriage licenses would be a violation of the peoples rights.  If the right to have a family isn't one of the unlisted rights, there aren't any.  By definition, anyone that wants the state to control who can get a marriage license has already breeched the requirements for being a real conservative by accepting that government should have anything to do with it at all.

 

Your argument against unrestricted liberty on the otherhand is quite wonderful.  Unfortunately, you fail to grasp it entirely or you wouldn't be posting such nonsense.  Everything the progressive movement has accomplished has been an infringment on one persons liberty to "help" someone else.  The entire concept of progressing society through government is that you force people to behave in a way you think they should.  It is the opposite of personal liberty.  That nearly every accomplishment has been catastrophic to the target would be poetic if it weren't so damned sad.

Reply #284 Top

uh huh ... like patriot act vs. legalizing buttsex marriage?

Actually, I'm for both.  Not that it matters to you.

Reply #285 Top

Aroddo, off topic but I find your posting style pretty repulsive at times.

Sort of an.. I'm so clever attitude.

detracts hugely from any point you might be trying to make I'm afraid.

It's sort of like when someone says.. I don't smell.. leave it to others to let u know how smelly... or clever.. you might be.

;)

My 2c.

+1 Loading…
Reply #286 Top

Quoting Aroddo, reply 281
 


uh huh ... like patriot act vs. legalizing buttsex marriage?

let's see, one promotes individual freedom, the other limits them ... hmm.

 

I knew that the first rebuttal would be some helpless shit to avoid defending a lost talking point.

 

Aroddo... this is way out of line. No one should post {as vStyler so rightly put it} repulsive stuff like this. You need to back off language and hateful language like this.

v...thanks for seeing this first and saying something. I'm surprised the Mods haven't lit into this.

Reply #287 Top

In fairness to Aroddo, he was quoting psychoak.

Reply #288 Top

I assume that Goldberg is a reasonably intelligent man and also an idealist. Thus he must have noticed that one of the most important american values - individual freedom - is a liberal concept.

Then why are they laboring so hard to proscribe how we live our lives?  What we should think?  What we should say?  What we can't say?  Being illiberal in the name of liberalism makes no sense, unless liberalism (defined as individual freedom, anyway) is not the goal.

Reply #289 Top

he was quoting psychoak

No difference imo.

Reply #290 Top

Six-months-a-year care beats NO months a year care.

Excellent...then you're going to love the government plan just fine.

Reply #291 Top

I looked it up, generals get paid more than the newest congressman. 184,000 to 174,000. Not to mention other benefits generals get such as free housing and not having to run for your job every two years.

Bravo! And the general (0-10) only has to give 30+ years (He/she could retire @ 20 years but would be lucky to have made Colonel in that amount of time) while the congressman gets his 174K for being a noob. Sure the general gets housing, so does the congressmen while in DC. Oh and that congressman... he doesn't have to serve for 20 years to a pension, just win one re-election and he's covered for life. Also if an officer is past over for promotion 3 times (at any point of his career) he goes home. I know it's not a pesky re-election, but hey. Your noob congressmen gets the same vacation as a career congressmen, about 3 or 4 months off for the year. That general gets the same vacation as a private - 30 days a year. Also check your congressman's perks, his/hers medical is the same as it is when active and after they retire. The General has to go to the VA. Lets recap:

                             Congressman                                        General (0-10)

pay                $174k starting day 1 - increase each year    $184K after doing 30+ years adjusted annually by congress

retirement     Full retirement after 2 terms (8 yrs.)             retirement at 20yrs. but nowhere close to reaching 0 -10

paid vacation  months                                                        30 days

Housing         Paid for while in DC                                       full housing on base, allowance if off base

perks            all the military gets, plus                                military, Medicaid upon 65 years old (usually the age @ retirement)

Allowances   ????? Best kept secret in DC                          Based on location, special skills or status

You decide which is more valuable

Reply #292 Top

No, what I want from you is some reason that Czars are bad. Please explain to me why.

Because czars are not vetted by congress. Heck, you could end up with a racist, communist as part of the presidents policy making advisors...wait... isn't that want happened? What's next? Appoint a tax cheat as secretary of the treasury? Oh wait that happened too! But at least the tax cheats in Congress got the final say on that one.

As to point number 2, you might want to do a little research, Obama rode his candidacy on the back of ending the war in IRAQ. He has always always always spoke for a returned focus to the war on Afghanistan. I followed the election very closely and at every opportunity he said there needs to be a withdrawl from Iraq and a focus on Afghanistan.

It's true Obama ended the already won Iraq War....my hero. His "focus" on Afghanistan is winning him scores of followers in his own party...not. But it must be nice that media such as NBC doesn't show the anti- war protesters like they did so often for Bush. Good to have GE in your back pocket Mr. President.

Reply #293 Top

Sorry for all the catch up posts...back from Bahrain.

Reply #295 Top

I'm sorry...I have a hard time getting facts from pundits that display occasional somewhat bizarre behavior. It makes me distrust their ability to determine what is a fact and what is a delusion.
---k10w3

Beck's chosen style is to be humorous and over-the-top, just as Limbaugh's is to be pompous and self-righteous. This is done simply to irritate the left. Clearly, it works like a charm, because no matter how they try to marginalize them, or how often they say these men should just be ignored, they, themselves seem incapapable of doing either.

Many, especially younger, people get their "news" from "pundits" such as Jay Leno, David Letterman, Janenne Garofalo, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Is Beck really any better or worse?

Reply #296 Top

Is Beck really any better

 

Yea... I think so :w00t: