Glenn beck is a traitor to the partriots and conservatives

Now they are trying to call illegal immigrants "refugees"? Well, confiscatory taxes are now contributions, might as well change the meaning of illegal immigration too.

 

They already have changed the language, knowing full well that if you can control language, you can control the thought templates of people's thinking. George Orwell explored this process thoroughly in his masterpiece, "1984". The formulations are loosely part of what he called "Newspeak": http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/1984/section11.rhtml and . http://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/n/1984/critical-essays/the-purpose-of-newspeak

Thus, illegal alien has instead become "undocumented immigrant". And then there's crass political manipulations, like changing radical terrorist to "freedom fighter", and welfare bum and social parasite have become "social services client". And you're right -- confiscatory taxes are now "contributions", and, IMHO, those of us who are critical of criminally despotic autocrats like President Transparency automatically become "racists"! The most insulting part of this whole pantload of crap is that the people who churn this bilge out think the rest of us are too stupid to see through their bull****. THAT is the part that really hurts!

 

Go to the UN and ask for aid, declare a humanitarian crisis, go to the border and do what he does best, make stirring speeches, tell about the corruption in Mexico and Central America...Take his 'yes we can' message to the world regarding fixing this crisis, call on those governments to clean up their cesspools of violence and corruption. Basically do what Presidents do best, use the 'bully pulpit'' to point out the dismal state of affairs in those countries and how it impacts not only America but other countries to which these kids are fleeing. I don't believe he cares that much though because it seems that everything he does is a political calculation.

Instead of bashing the Congress, SHOW them he is willing to put himself on the line, in short...Be a LEADER.

Yes, and you get more radiation from those and even sleeping next to your significant other than any nuclear power plant has given the average person. Originally I provided a link in my signature but was told it is verboten to do so. It explained the hundreds and thousands of tons of radiation pollution coal plants spew forth constantly unabated.

 

Look! It's raining out.

 

What does any of this have to do with race? Simple. Not a single charge against Obama stands up to even the most cursory analysis. It's all a bunch of tissue thin rationalizations and fantasies that have absolutely nothing to do with reality. So then the question becomes what exactly are you rationalizing? Why the elaborate fabricated narrative? This is what I was talking about before. What we have are a large number of people just throwing every conceivable reason for possibly disliking Obama at the wall in an apparently desperate hope that something will stick. But none of it does. All of it, every lest bit, evaporates under closer examination. I refuse to believe that humans are truly irrational beings that do and say things for literally no reason. Therefore I conclude that there must be a real reason behind all of this, and it must be something that is not mentioned as part of the rationalizations. That doesn't leave many potential candidates. If you can suggest something that all of this boils down to other than extreme mental illness or "Holy s***, there's a n***** in the White House!" please share.

(Brandishes a scalpel with an evil grin) Now for the fun bit: dissecting the delusions.

Marx and Lenin were communists, not socialists. Socialism, communism, Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, fascism, and Naziism all have distinct meanings and are not interchangeable, even if some of these categories are subsets of others. The fact that you don't seem to appreciate that simply proves my point from before: you clearly don't have the faintest idea what socialism actually is. If you're just going to throw the word "socialist" around as a generic insult for anyone you dislike, you may as well accuse people of having cooties as being socialists.

If Obama were a dictatorial autocrat, why in the world would he pay the slightest attention to a lawsuit from the House, a judicial ruling on the subject, or even a court order? For that matter, why would he pay any attention to impeachment proceedings? If you actually believed that, then your only recourse would be armed revolution. Are you raising an army to march on Washington and summarily execute Obama? If not, then (*)(*)(*)(*), you hypocritical, hyperbolic, bloviating self important windbag. That's such an obvious load of self serving BS that I'm amazed you'd actually say it in public.

A dictatorial autocrat wouldn't care if Congress raised the debt ceiling or not, they'd simply keep borrowing money and probably throw the nutters responsible for the fiasco in jail. Nor would a dictatorial autocrat care if the House refused to pass immigration reform - they'd simply declare it the law of the land. A dictatorial autocrat wouldn't bother negotiating with the opposition, they'd tell the opposition to fall in line or else. Can you imagine someone like Vladimir Putin going hat in hand to the Duma begging for the money to deal with a surge of refugees on the border? To say nothing of a Joseph Stalin or a Benito Mussolini? Get real. Accusing Obama of such a thing is laughably absurd.

Where Obama has had to resort to governing by executive order, it's simply because the crazy people running the GOP have left him little choice. While I'm sure you think that the entire country should come to a screeching halt because you're throwing a political temper tantrum, the fact of the matter is that life goes on. Congressional Republicans have made the entire Legislative Branch completely incapable of functioning or governing. While I personally think that deliberately trying to sabotage the country is pretty darn close to outright treason, the immediate real effect of removing Congress from the governing process is to leave everything up to the President. The country is not going to be put on hold because you lot are holding your breath like a bunch of five year olds.

Obama is a bald faced liar? Maybe, but no more so than any other politician. The sad fact of the matter is that American voters have a history of punishing politicians who tell them truths that they don't want to hear. As a result, spin, double-speak and pandering are simply the way US politics are conducted. You can't blame Obama for that any more than you can blame him for the prevalence of attack ads in political campaigns. In point of fact, Obama is actually pretty honest for a politician. He usually does little more than put a positive spin on things. I certainly can't think of him delivering any whoppers of the magnitude of "We firmly believe that cutting spending will create jobs," or claiming that Mitt Romney hasn't paid taxes for ten years. Check Politifact's file on Obama if you don't believe me. They rate statements on a six point scale: True, Mostly True, Half True, Mostly False, False, or Pants on Fire. They've rated 74% of Obama's statements as True, Mostly True, or Half True. For comparison, Biden comes in at 68% Half True or better, Boehner at 45%, McConnell at 60%, Pelosi at 58%, and Reid at 50%. (To be fair, Obama has a much larger sample size than any of the others, which makes direct comparisons a bit problematic.)

So, Obama is a horrible leader for intervening in Libya, right? Except of course before he intervened, when he was a horrible President for not helping the Libyans throw off the shackles of Khaddafi. And then he was a horrible President for not supporting Mubarak as a US ally, and for not getting rid of Mubarak as a despot, and for allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to come to power and then for allowing the Egyptian military to overthrow the democratically elected government. And let's not forgot how horrible Obama was to not overthrow Assad, and the how weak he looked going to Congress for authority to attack Assad, and now how horrible Obama is for not having intervened in Syria in order to stop the rise of ISIS. He's a horrible President for leaving troops in Afghanistan, and for not leaving troops in Iraq.

MAKE UP YOUR FRAKING MINDS ALREADY!!

You lot will accuse Obama of being incompetent and jeopardizing national security for literally anything and everything he does related to foreign policy. There is absolutely no rhyme or reason of any kind to the criticisms being thrown at him. Haven't you ever heard of "Politics ends at the water's edge"? Honestly, don't you have a shred of patriotism in your body? Is the idea of putting the national interest ahead of your personal politics really so utterly foreign to you that you're incapable of even comprehending it?

Recess appointments are directly authorized by the Constitution A2S2. George Washington used a recess appointment for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Can you imagine the uproar if that happened today? Recess appointments are a regular and established part of how the government works, and have been since the beginning.

The fact of the matter is that Congressional Republicans have been deliberately trying to make entire sections of the federal government incapable of doing their jobs by refusing to to confirm any appointments of anyone. To further that end they've been using parliamentary chicanery to try to circumvent the President's constitutional authority to fill vacancies by artificially keeping Congress in session by having the janitor gavel it into session and out again when there's nobody there. And the President is a horrible tyrant for not rolling over and letting the crazy Tea Partiers destroy the country?

The very existence of GITMO is an afront to the very concept of human rights, due process, and the rule of law. It is a blatant violation of international law and tramples on the Constitution. Democracies do not disappear people into legal black holes and stay democracies for long. And Congress has done everything in its power to obstruct any attempt to resolve the situation. To be blunt, what the President ought to do is have the DoJ find that there is no legal authority to continue to detain anyone at GITMO and dare Congress to leave him no choice but to just set them all free.

As for the specifics of the Bergdahl case, it's Obama's job to do everything he can to bring home our soldiers. It's his job to make the hard calls on things like prisoner exchanges. That's what a President does. You're attacking him and accusing him of being a tyrant for performing the most basic duties of his job description. And let's be honest here - if he hadn't made the exchange, you lot would be jumping up and down screaming about how Obama abandoned a serviceman and has broken the most sacred trust of our military.

Uh-huh. Using the word "tax" instead of the word "mandate" is obviously a massive lie and cover up of staggering proportions that clearly merits impeachment. Or, wait, was it the other way around? What's the difference, exactly? Honestly, is the worst accusation you can make against Obama about the distinction between the words "tax" and "mandate"? Especially when the actual content of the law was never in any doubt of any kind? That's so laughable I don't even know where to start mocking you. Were you ever in any doubt whatsoever that what we were talking about was that you'd have to have health insurance one way or another or pay a penalty? and you expect people to be up in arms ready to tar and feather Obama over whether that's a tax or a a mandate? Seriously? Just how delusional are you?

And in what fevered hallucination is Obamacare in any way, shape or form socialized medicine? Well, I guess I shouldn't be surprised since it's already been clearly established that you don't have the faintest idea what socialism actually is. In any case, Obamacare would be much better if it were socialized medicine. Because guess what? People in countries that have socialized medicine invariably love it, and will tar and feather any politician who even suggests getting rid of it. In point of fact, one of the cheapest way to smear a political opponent in those countries is to accuse them of wanting to institute American style medicine.

You know, it strikes me that most of the things you accuse Obama of doing are actually attempts to fix a crisis, mess or disaster that Republicans deliberately created for purely political purposes. That's low, even for politics. It's hypocritical, despicable, unpatriotic, and un-American. You do not get to damage the country just so you can make a cheap political attack.

 

He is pledging PRIVATE CHARITY, instead of GOVERNMENT FORCED INTERVENTION. You oppose that?

 

So, what? You want to chain these kids to trees and leave them to starve while awaiting deportation proceedings? Oh wait, chains would cost money! What exactly do you think "processing and deporting" means? Waving a magic wand and making the kids vanish in a puff of smoke?

Well, if you want people to be honest in calling things what they really are, you should lead by example. Go ahead and tell us what you really think - that they're all a bunch of sub human sand n******.

Taxes are the price of living in a civilized society. And yet some people seem to think that they''re entitled to the benefits of that society without having to pay for it.

Don't forget how "despotic divine right aristocrat wanna-bes" have become "job creators" and "entrepreneurs."

I'm sorry - I'm confused. I thought you didn't like the UN? Or am I mixing you up with someone else? I apologize if I am.

In any case, if we went to the UN, the first thing the UN would say would be, "Okay, and who's going to pay for it?" Remember that the UN has no taxation authority, and is dependent on contributions from member nations to finance its operations.

It seems to me that what you're talking about is pretty much what Obama already is doing. the media doesn't cover every speech he gives, you know. Especially ones that don't include any concrete policy initiatives.

And while giving speeches is important, the bottom line remains that in order to take concrete action to actually do something, someone is going to have to come up with the money.

 

I don't and this is one of the main reasons why. I think the UN should have its 'sovereign territory' in some other country. How about Nicaragua? They could sure use some UN help right now.

Well the UN sure as he!! had the 'authority' to designate these people as refugees causing the U.S. to have to circumvent their immigration laws. The UN could also designate a host of countries capable of taking in these poor folks. Obama could address THAT with the UN.

Have you seen the news lately? He's not doing much of anything except blaming congress and flying over the disaster area.

Obama has been vaunted as being a great orator, he should be front-and-center and ubiquitous regarding this American border disaster. Reagan's 'tear down this wall' speech freed East Germany and crushed the Soviet Union.

Politicians make speeches to get campaign funds, to get bills passed that require money etc. That's what they DO.

 

I'd hate to be your hammer because you hit a lot of nails right on the head. Anyway I don't care much for Beck. He's always so full of himself and always making everything sound like some big emotional drama but I think a lot of it is just done for effect. I remember him going on and on about how the economy was going to crash totally in just about another week or two and that everybody had better rush out and buy gold and silver. I'm glad I didn't waste what little money I had doing that!

The truth is that without the Fed and the other central banks screwing around with every countrys economy then gold would probably be over $5,000 an ounce and silver would be off the chart too. Beck might have been right about the theory but he is always totally wrong about the reality!

 

Don't grant them deportation hearing.

Just send them back as we do the Mexicans.

 

I did answer the question. Care to reread it?

 

Riiiight, because why would anyone bother with something silly like due process when dealing with subhuman sand n******, right? Or maybe you want to put them to work doing something useful. Maybe picking cotton? Since we all know that they don't deserve human rights. Those are just for white people.

 

And just how much impact do you think the Tear Down This Wall speech would have had if Congress had refused to give Reagan one thin dime for his military build up?

 

I guess you did. It was non responsive, but it was an answer.

 

Uh-huh, it's very "simple" to see what any of this has to do with "race"? And yet you failed to explain this at all! And oddly, even if you were right in everything you did say, what did any of it have to do with "racism", per se...? Your knee-jerk reaction when President Transparency is attacked, rightly or wrongly, is immediately to retreat to the defense of the race-card. Odd that you never did elaborate on that.... Do you really think this goes unnoticed?

Moreover, everything I cited is a matter of historical FACT: breaking the War Powers Act, breaking the law regarding prisoner exchanges from GITMO, breaking the law regarding his fraudulent "recess" appointments, etc., etc. You may dispute my assertions using your own highly subjective rationalizations about what you think is justifiable, but the letter of United States LAW and the United States Constitution define a different reality.

Ah, the other reflexive defense tool (besides the ubiquitous race cards), of Obama's loyal "Praetorian Guard" -- the vicious ad hominem personal attack! Now I'm a "hypocritical, hyperbolic, bloviating self important windbag"? Yet you'll notice that I haven't launched a vicious personal attack on YOU. I don't need to. All I have to do is stay rooted in the FACTS of Obama's malfeasance, irresponsibility, and unconstitutional, power-grabbing autocracy.

Obama is an AMERICAN Socialist, not a Communist, as I said. I was attempting to refer to the difference between what we commonly associate with American Socialism (harking back to its destructive roots during the rule of Frankie Roosevelt) and "European", "Asian", or other varieties of Communism. I wasn't trying to pretend that I was the person who discovered fire, or anything.... . Now I'll try to make something "simple" -- an American Socialist is a variety of political/economic parasite that leverages an ability to steal from the working, productive class of citizens to provide unearned support for a constituency of other parasites and leeches who will dependably allow the politician to retain and steadily increase power. In practice, a socialist movement grows in numbers because as more and more of those who were productive workers become worthless parasites, the socialists are empowered to take over more and more of the economy of the entire nation because of the power they can project in government processes. Thus, the process is not like that which the Communists used in Russia after WWI, or like they tried to use in Germany in the 1920's... no, instead of armed violence, the American socialists use the seductive allurement of something-for-nothing and its appeal is as pervasive as it is ruinous in any nation.

Indeed, Obama cares little for what anyone in the House of Representatives thinks about anything. Now he even turns away in disinterest from his lapdogs in the Senate. No... now Obama sees that he can rule the country with "a pen and a phone", and he proudly has proclaimed that fact (HIS words, not mine). But it's nothing new. I've already pointed out the FACTS of how he has flagrantly broken the law and taken unconstitutional power into his own hands to do whatever he pleases. The irony? Even HITLER bothered to get the German Legislature to provide him with an "Enabling Act" before he started acting like a dictator....

At last -- ONE thing we can agree on! Obama IS a bald-faced liar! But immediately you have to redistribute you groundless slander to "any other politician" without giving any specifics relating to your charge. How carelessly you smear other people without any reason. This is also symptomatic of adherents to policies of dictatorial autocracy, and, hypocrisy. Paint with a broad brush, and to hell with specifics or accuracy! [/QUOTE]

Whether Obama is a "horrible leader" is beside the point, Kessy. He broke the War Powers Act! Got it? Have you ever read the War Powers Act? Here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

The most important part is this (emphasis mine): "The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

NONE of those conditions existed when Obama cavalierly decided to remove Gaddhafi from power with acts of war, allowing elements of the Muslim Brotherhood to take over Libya. For this illegal act ALONE Obama should have been impeached and removed from office! BTW, what part does "racism" have to do with any of this?

Yes, Kessy, "Recess appointments are directly authorized by the Constitution...." The recess appointments made by Obama, however were illegal, improper, and unconstitutional -- not merely my opinion, but the opinion of the Supreme Court: http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...e4fefa-e831-11e3-a86b-362fd5443d19_story.html . Now, I'll just let you absorb that much without me "bloviating" about it....

You certainly have a right to your opinion of GITMO. Again, however, there was a LAW (which Obama signed into law himself, just last year) governing the process required for prisoner exchanges from the GITMO population. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW! I hate to keep sounding like a teacher in a school for retarded people, because it's so pathetically OBVIOUS what happened with the whole illegal Bergdahl travesty. How can I make it more "simple"...? Personally, I don't care if he exchanged Bergdahl for five sacks of flour instead of five high-ranking Taliban field commanders. The point is OBAMA BROKE THE LAW, and we see this behavior in him over and over....

No, no! Obamacare, per se, is not an impeachable offense, but lying about it IS! Again, to keep it "simple", the big difference between a "mandate" and a "tax" here is that with a "mandate", the Federal Government orders you to DO something, whether you want to or not, just because you live and breathe. A "tax", however, is a government-imposed charge upon something related to an activity that a citizen chooses to participate in. Thus, if you choose to work, you pay an income tax. If you choose to purchase an item that has an excise tax, you pay. On and on and on. Surely you "get" this...?

Obama LIED through his teeth about the very basic nature of his "affordable care act", stating again and again that a citizen would have complete ability to make his/her own decisions about insurance coverage, doctor, etc., but the reality is that the Federal Government decides what we may, and may not, choose from! And yes, Obamacare is, in the American style, "socialized medicine" -- if only because the Federal Government lays out the plans, and the Federal Government will pay SUBSIDIES (a.k.a., "welfare") to be applied to the premiums for people in certain income brackets. This comes from the same socialist brain-fart as "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need!" -- Karl Marx. Ooops! My bad! Marx was a COMMUNIST! . . -- "So, that's not, I mean, like, Socialism or anything... right?"

Oh, and for the last time... WHAT DID ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH OBAMA'S RACE?!

But, back on topic for a brief moment, I wouldn't buy GOLD on the advice of Glenn Beck no matter what. He knows as little about the economy and commodities markets as Barack Obama knows about the Constitution.

**** My apologies to the Moderators. My post, and that of my opponent, is inexcusably off-topic. I will end my participation in any further adventuresome extensions of this thread now. But I welcome any other opportunity to discuss Obama and his performance as President of the United States. ****

 

That would be in violation of 8 U.S. Code § 1232 - Enhancing efforts to combat the trafficking of children.

 

Amend the code.

 

I just want to send them back to their home country rather letting them into the US.

 

The Guy shore was a big disappointment.He's ALL about himself and promoting
his ego.He's the very definition of a Huckster.
What got me to thinkin' was the way he made it a point to run around Fox
and insist they never even entertain the idea of having Alex Jones on.
Plus Glenn Beck lives to smear his competitors while stealing some of their
material.He's a punk and a little control freak.

 

Whether Obama is a "horrible leader" is beside the point, Kessy. He broke the War Powers Act! Got it? Have you ever read the War Powers Act? Here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

The most important part is this (emphasis mine): "The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

NONE of those conditions existed when Obama cavalierly decided to remove Gaddhafi from power with acts of war, allowing elements of the Muslim Brotherhood to take over Libya. For this illegal act ALONE Obama should have been impeached and removed from office! BTW, what part does "racism" have to do with any of this?



Yes, Kessy, "Recess appointments are directly authorized by the Constitution...." The recess appointments made by Obama, however were illegal, improper, and unconstitutional -- not merely my opinion, but the opinion of the Supreme Court: http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...e4fefa-e831-11e3-a86b-362fd5443d19_story.html . Now, I'll just let you absorb that much without me "bloviating" about it....



You certainly have a right to your opinion of GITMO. Again, however, there was a LAW (which Obama signed into law himself, just last year) governing the process required for prisoner exchanges from the GITMO population. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW! I hate to keep sounding like a teacher in a school for retarded people, because it's so pathetically OBVIOUS what happened with the whole illegal Bergdahl travesty. How can I make it more "simple"...? Personally, I don't care if he exchanged Bergdahl for five sacks of flour instead of five high-ranking Taliban field commanders. The point is OBAMA BROKE THE LAW, and we see this behavior in him over and over....



No, no! Obamacare, per se, is not an impeachable offense, but lying about it IS! Again, to keep it "simple", the big difference between a "mandate" and a "tax" here is that with a "mandate", the Federal Government orders you to DO something, whether you want to or not, just because you live and breathe. A "tax", however, is a government-imposed charge upon something related to an activity that a citizen chooses to participate in. Thus, if you choose to work, you pay an income tax. If you choose to purchase an item that has an excise tax, you pay. On and on and on. Surely you "get" this...?

Obama LIED through his teeth about the very basic nature of his "affordable care act", stating again and again that a citizen would have complete ability to make his/her own decisions about insurance coverage, doctor, etc., but the reality is that the Federal Government decides what we may, and may not, choose from! And yes, Obamacare is, in the American style, "socialized medicine" -- if only because the Federal Government lays out the plans, and the Federal Government will pay SUBSIDIES (a.k.a., "welfare") to be applied to the premiums for people in certain income brackets. This comes from the same socialist brain-fart as "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need!" -- Karl Marx. Ooops! My bad! Marx was a COMMUNIST! . . -- "So, that's not, I mean, like, Socialism or anything... right?"

Oh, and for the last time... WHAT DID ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH OBAMA'S RACE?!

But, back on topic for a brief moment, I wouldn't buy GOLD on the advice of Glenn Beck no matter what. He knows as little about the economy and commodities markets as Barack Obama knows about the Constitution.

**** My apologies to the Moderators. My post, and that of my opponent, is inexcusably off-topic. I will end my participation in any further adventuresome extensions of this thread now. But I welcome any other opportunity to discuss Obama and his performance as President of the United States. ****[/QUOTE]

Kessy whips out the race cards and then cannot show one reason why. Typical of so many Obama lovers in this forum. But why do you strain so hard to rebut them? You will never change their minds, not for you or logic or facts or anything else. And if theyre on welfare they'll go on being maniacal socialists forever anyway. I think you wrote this once, "don't ever try to get between a parasite and its food"!

As far as Beck goes, he kind of reminds me a lot of Michael Reagan. A lot of pumped and scripted emotion that needs a more factual presentation. I prefer Michael Savage or Limbaugh myself, with all the combat and none of the schmaltzy tear-jerking crap. Hawking gold all the time has proven to be of no use to anybody, except the people who sell gold.

 

Kessy whips out the race cards and then cannot show one reason why. Typical of so many Obama lovers in this forum. But why do you strain so hard to rebut them? You will never change their minds, not for you or logic or facts or anything else. And if theyre on welfare they'll go on being maniacal socialists forever anyway. I think you wrote this once, "don't ever try to get between a parasite and its food"!

As far as Beck goes, he kind of reminds me a lot of Michael Reagan. A lot of pumped and scripted emotion that needs a more factual presentation. I prefer Michael Savage or Limbaugh myself, with all the combat and none of the schmaltzy tear-jerking crap. Hawking gold all the time has proven to be of no use to anybody, except the people who sell gold. [/QUOTE]

********************************************************
And don't forget because it was never publicly reported that a few years ago Obama
declared himself a seat on the United Nations.He had the opportunity to
temporarily plant himself as UN Chairman.
On September 9,2009 Barack Obama appointed himself
Chairman of the United Nations Security Council for it's September 24 meeting
in New York,in lieu of U.S. Ambassador to the UN,Susan Rice.
Despite constitutional language that prohibits a U.S. elected official from
holding any international title,Obama presided over the global nuclear non-profileration
and disarmaments talks on Sept. 24 ,bringing the U.S. one step closer to implementation
of UN " Agenda 21 "

 

Beck always has been and always will be nothing more than a sleazy attention grabbing huckster of the lowest kind. Hed sell out his own kin if itd make him a centavo.

 

I don't fault Beck for trying to sell gold any more than I would fault anyone else for selling any legitimate, legal product. But it's the WAY he tries to sell it that makes me mad. He doesn't just say, "Hey, buy some gold! It's pretty! You can make jewelry and stuff out of it. And if you want to, you may be able to sell it for more than you paid for it." No, Beck always has to preface his pitch for gold by making all these alarmist, unprovable statements indicating that the dollar-based economy is going to crash almost any minute and so you should RUN (don't walk) to call Goldline (the company he shills for) and order up a bunch of gold! BTW, if you are curious about "precious" metals prices, this is always an excellent source of info: http://www.monex.com/

As an aside, let's say you buy, say, $50K worth of gold coins. And let's say that the economy does crash suddenly one morning and all hell breaks loose.

What are you going to do? Waltz down to the grocery store and get three or four bags of groceries and pay for it with a 1 oz. gold American Eagle coin that cost you $1,402 (today's price)? Oh, yeah, that's brilliant, isn't it.... Especially when you are observed, followed home, and visited later by "da boyz in da 'hood" with the unexpected kicking-in of your front door and the theft of everything you own. Would it have been a better idea to take that $1,402 and buy a shotgun, several boxes of .00 buckshot shells, and a big pile of canned goods to eat...? . I know it's been said before, but try EATING a gold coin....

I liked Beck a lot better when he simply stuck to defending the Constitution and pointing out the illegalities, blunders, and stupidities of the Obama regime. The gold-hawking routine just tarnishes everything else he does, IMHO....

 

My Mom beleives every word he says. he is a nut and she is very old.

 

Oh for crying out loud... Just how far are you willing to ignore reality to suit your ideology? Unfortunately, "I reject your reality and substitute my own," doesn't actually work. Let's cut through all this. You're claiming that you hate Obama because of things he's done, specifically the intervention in Libya that started on 19 March 2011, The recess appointments Obama made in 2012, keeping US forces in Afghanistan long term, which was provided for by the US Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement, which draft was finalized on 22 April 2012, the Sgt. Bergdahl prisoner exchange, that took place in May 2014, and having Obamacare's individual mandate upheld as a tax, which was decided by the Supreme Court on 28 June 2012.

Now allow me to remind you of a post you made 25 Nov 2010, months before the earliest of these supposed reasons ever occurred.

It sounds very much like you hated Obama before any of the supposed reasons for that hatred ever occurred. Now, are you going to claim to be prescient, or are you going to admit that these are all justifications for your feelings toward Obama created after the fact? So the question is what's the real reason you hate Obama? And if you can't or won't give a real reason, what am I supposed to think?

All the Republican attacks on Obama are like this. Dig a little and every single reason I've come across for the Republican venom towards him turn out to be rather obvious after the fact rationalizations. So what's the real reason? I've come to the conclusion that it must be about race because I've exhausted every other other possibility I can think of. If you want to change my mind and have me apologize for jumping to conclusions, all you have to do is provide just one reasonable basis for the hatred that stands up to examination. Just one. And I really really wish you would give me one, because I really hate the idea that America is still in such bad shape when it comes to race.

Just let me clarify one thing. I am well aware that very often people just adopt the attitudes of the people around, the people they respect, the people they trust. And there's nothing wrong with that - if you aren't inclined to delve deeply into a subject, it's a pretty reasonable way to go. So I'm not necessarily making judgements about your personal motivations - I don't actually know you, after all. But someone somewhere had to get the ball rolling. This stuff doesn't just appear out of nowhere, someone creates these memes. And someone has to spread them. It's the motivations that underlie the memes that I'm talking about, not any particular individual.

It is not a personal attack to point out that you're being hypocritical. If you really believe that Obama is an out of control tyrant, then your only recourse is armed revolution. You haven't disputed that. Since I assume you aren't raising an army, that makes you a hypocrite.

Foolardi and conservaliberal, do I need to go digging through the databases for what you two were saying about Obama before any of these supposed crimes took place?