John Stewart Glenn Beck impression

[native]

Cue native vehemently agreeing with Beck.

Colbert was funnier and more relevant tonight, with his interview of Fr James Martin.

[native]

Mao had a life philosophy. So did Hitler, Lenin, Jesus, Stalin, Churchill, Thomas Jefferson, et al.

What kind of idiot in a high visibility political position would praise Mao to invoke inpiration and confidence in "choosing your own path" for political change? That would be like praising Jefferson Davis to invoke praise and confidence in choosing your own path to free enterprise.

i never said i agreed with the example, but of the above mentioned none of them had the odds set against them like Mao did (and I wouldnt feel bad about about a Jefferson davis examples for free market principals)

the video is not fresh on my mind but im fairly certain that the speech's point had NOTHING to do with political change as you assert falsely

Hitler didn't give up either, but somehow I think I can say with confidence that I would not invoke either Hitler or Mao in giving a speech intended to inspire perseverance.

Nor would I choose Jefferson Davis as an example to extoll the virtues of capitalism. Rather, I would point to Davis and American slavery as an evil anomoly.

[youngterrier]

Do you not understand words or are you just dumb? forget about you. Im not debating you anymore you're a blind ideologue who isnt worth my time. I'm not going to argue with someone of such zealous opinion that he is blind of reason and trust outside of his own little world(and dont respond saying you are "understanding ofother people's perspective" because Ive been surfing these boards for about 2 years and have seen nothingbut partisan hackery on your part) then turns around, talks down to me, and says i don't understand other's viewpoint when you don't know me and if you did know me you would notice I was way liberal about a year ago so i know how they tick. Good night and good luck

Was there some substance hidden somewhere in that post?

What did Beck do wrong in the Ellison interview?

Kalm had all the substance neccesary and so i figured you should knowyour incompetence and ignorance to all things that cast your patron saint glenn beck in a bad light is really pathetic and not worth my time

[native]

Stewart is pretty darn funny!

But as someone who whines constantly about Beck's supposed lack of substance, I wonder why you focus on the insubstantial issues and fail to engage or even acknowledge the issues of substance. Presumably you could demonstrate why Beck is in error.

Stewart pretty much presents my point, he assumes that those who disagree with him are radical socialists and then compares them to and transitions to Nazis, communists, etc. without really drawing a connection other than they're liberal/progressive

Do you understand the history of Hitler's rise to power? Beck's allusions deserve neither praise nor criticism without scrutiny. I am surprised that you have no desire to provide the scrutiny of an honest broker. Your misrepresentation of Beck is a mirror image caricature of the caricature you love to hate.

[youngterrier]

i never said i agreed with the example, but of the above mentioned none of them had the odds set against them like Mao did (and I wouldnt feel bad about about a Jefferson davis examples for free market principals)

the video is not fresh on my mind but im fairly certain that the speech's point had NOTHING to do with political change as you assert falsely

Hitler didn't give up either, but somehow I think I can say with confidence that I would not invoke either Hitler or Mao in giving a speech intended to inspire perseverance.

Nor would I choose Jefferson Davis as an example to extoll the virtues of capitalism. Rather, I would point to Davis and American slavery as an evil anomoly.

Mao had it harder as he actually had to fight a war for his power...and i don't like glorifying mao

youstill think t he civil war was because of slavery?

[native]

Hitler didn't give up either, but somehow I think I can say with confidence that I would not invoke either Hitler or Mao in giving a speech intended to inspire perseverance.

Nor would I choose Jefferson Davis as an example to extoll the virtues of capitalism. Rather, I would point to Davis and American slavery as an evil anomoly.

Mao had it harder as he actually had to fight a war for his power...and i don't like glorifying mao

youstill think t he civil war was because of slavery?

Yes, although I did not say so, in part I believe the Civil War was about slavery, but not esxclusively so.

[youngterrier]

i never said i agreed with the example, but of the above mentioned none of them had the odds set against them like Mao did (and I wouldnt feel bad about about a Jefferson davis examples for free market principals)

the video is not fresh on my mind but im fairly certain that the speech's point had NOTHING to do with political change as you assert falsely

Hitler didn't give up either, but somehow I think I can say with confidence that I would not invoke either Hitler or Mao in giving a speech intended to inspire perseverance.

.

Which is why it was for the sake of humor.

[native]

Was there some substance hidden somewhere in that post?

What did Beck do wrong in the Ellison interview?

Kalm had all the substance neccesary and so i figured you should knowyour incompetence and ignorance to all things that cast your patron saint glenn beck in a bad light is really pathetic and not worth my time

Beck is not my patron saint, but he asks better questions than anyone else on the tube.

So, what did Beck do wrong in the Ellison interview? Really?

Why do you avoid such a straightforward question?

[native]

Some of the liberals who disagree with me are obviously not communists, and liberalism in the United States has a long patriotic history which in some cases has included a proud tradition of opposing communism,both foreign and domestic.

But most of today's progressive solutions are so transparently socialist and the methods used by the Obama administration so deviously bolshevist that the progressives themselves must be either dishonest with the outside world about their true colors or dishonest with themselves about the ramifications of the programs they support.

I will provide the citation eventually but it will take me a while because my copy of Obama's bio is in storage. I apologize.

the solutions themselves are "Social Capitalist" though personally I think they lead to a socialist-like economy. My issue with Beck and you is this: your putting words in the progressives' mouth, how is it fair (and not McCarthyist) to say that they are out to get you and if they tell you different it's just a lie? that rationalization puts them in the indefensible position of they are A) out to get you or B) out to get you and lying about it. To assume they are just being dishonest and not just ignorant of the ramifications is just assuming that they are out to get you IMO.

People who espouse forced redistributive solutions have not been backed into a corner by me. They have backed themselves into a corner by espousing failed solutions proven in failure by more than 120 million dead bodies in the last 90 years. More than 120 million dead bodies. Incrementalism is no excuse.

[youngterrier]

Stewart pretty much presents my point, he assumes that those who disagree with him are radical socialists and then compares them to and transitions to Nazis, communists, etc. without really drawing a connection other than they're liberal/progressive

Do you understand the history of Hitler's rise to power? Beck's allusions deserve neither praise nor criticism without scrutiny. I am surprised that you have no desire to provide the scrutiny of an honest broker. Your misrepresentation of Beck is a mirror image caricature of the caricature you love to hate.

because America is different than Germany, i wont be concerned about obama being hitler until we start thinking about giving emergency powers, burning books, infringing free speec, etc

[youngterrier]

Kalm had all the substance neccesary and so i figured you should knowyour incompetence and ignorance to all things that cast your patron saint glenn beck in a bad light is really pathetic and not worth my time

Beck is not my patron saint, but he asks better questions than anyone else on the tube.

So, what did Beck do wrong in the Ellison interview? Really?

Why do you avoid such a straightforward question?

He implied that he was working with the enemy because he was Muslim. classic example of the "Im not saying this but I am saying this but i really mean what i inititally said" implication

[native]

Do you understand the history of Hitler's rise to power? Beck's allusions deserve neither praise nor criticism without scrutiny. I am surprised that you have no desire to provide the scrutiny of an honest broker. Your misrepresentation of Beck is a mirror image caricature of the caricature you love to hate.

because America is different than Germany, i wont be concerned about obama being hitler until we start thinking about giving emergency powers, burning books, infringing free speec, etc

It seems to me that it would be a useful exercise to analyze the diferences and similarities, YT.

[youngterrier]

the solutions themselves are "Social Capitalist" though personally I think they lead to a socialist-like economy. My issue with Beck and you is this: your putting words in the progressives' mouth, how is it fair (and not McCarthyist) to say that they are out to get you and if they tell you different it's just a lie? that rationalization puts them in the indefensible position of they are A) out to get you or B) out to get you and lying about it. To assume they are just being dishonest and not just ignorant of the ramifications is just assuming that they are out to get you IMO.

People who espouse forced redistributive solutions have not been backed into a corner by me. They have backed themselves into a corner by espousing failed solutions proven in failure by more than 120 million dead bodies in the last 90 years. More than 120 million dead bodies. Incrementalism is no excuse.

And thats why you and glenn are McCarthyittes because any form of government assistance is communism and thus those who advocate such things are communists. social capitalists do not want communism they just drink the keynes kool-aid

[youngterrier]

because America is different than Germany, i wont be concerned about obama being hitler until we start thinking about giving emergency powers, burning books, infringing free speec, etc

It seems to me that it would be a useful exercise to analyze the diference and similarities, YT.

I agree that we should remind ourselves what principals we believe in and why we believe them but when we auto matically assume that thos who advocate social capitalistic principals we shouldnt jump straight to how they're Marxist, we should talk about why those principals of government are wrong from an economic or other standpoint. whenever you compare people in a debate to nazis you lose most sympathy and moral support from those who are undecided on the issue. when you use facts and logic people are more likely to listen

[native]

People who espouse forced redistributive solutions have not been backed into a corner by me. They have backed themselves into a corner by espousing failed solutions proven in failure by more than 120 million dead bodies in the last 90 years. More than 120 million dead bodies. Incrementalism is no excuse.

And thats why you and glenn are McCarthyittes because any form of government assistance is communism and thus those who advocate such things are communists. social capitalists do not want communism they just drink the keynes kool-aid

Some drink the Keynes koolaid and some drink the Maoist koolaid. Here is part of the actual transcript from Anita Dunn's speech:

"...In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said 'You fight your war and I’ll fight mine'...”

You can validate the transcript for yourself from the embedded video previously posted.

Arthur Waldron describes results of Mao's methods in Commentary magazine: “...Mao was the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century. Much of the killing was direct, as in the torture and purges at Yan’an. After the Communist seizure of power in 1949, the practice became countrywide. Mao set his numerical targets openly, and stressed the ‘revolutionary’ importance of killing....”

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs ... ner/130642" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To Anita Dunn, Mao is one of the "...people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not..."

Why not kill 70 million people, eh, Young Terrier? Why not?

[native]

Beck is not my patron saint, but he asks better questions than anyone else on the tube.

So, what did Beck do wrong in the Ellison interview? Really?

Why do you avoid such a straightforward question?

He implied that he was working with the enemy because he was Muslim. classic example of the "Im not saying this but I am saying this but i really mean what i inititally said" implication

I figured that is what would be in the tape, and I waited for that moment in the tape, but it never came. He implied no such thing. The tape does not incriminate Beck.

Who is paranoid?

[youngterrier]

And thats why you and glenn are McCarthyittes because any form of government assistance is communism and thus those who advocate such things are communists. social capitalists do not want communism they just drink the keynes kool-aid

Some drink the Keynes koolaid and some drink the Maoist koolaid. Here is part of the actual transcript from Anita Dunn's speech:

"...In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said 'You fight your war and I’ll fight mine'...”

You can validate the transcript for yourself from the embedded video previously posted.

Arthur Waldron describes results of Mao's methods in Commentary magazine: “...Mao was the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century. Much of the killing was direct, as in the torture and purges at Yan’an. After the Communist seizure of power in 1949, the practice became countrywide. Mao set his numerical targets openly, and stressed the ‘revolutionary’ importance of killing....”

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs ... ner/130642" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To Anita Dunn, Mao is one of the "...people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not..."

Why not kill 70 million people, eh, Young Terrier? Why not?

the choice she was alluding to was not to kill 70 million people (no one denies he did) in her speech she was alluding to the choice of choosing to take the easy way out or go the hard way when the odds are against you as Mao did

[youngterrier]

He implied that he was working with the enemy because he was Muslim. classic example of the "Im not saying this but I am saying this but i really mean what i inititally said" implication

I figured that is what would be in the tape, and I waited for that moment in the tape, but it never came. He implied no such thing. The tape does not incriminate Beck.

Who is paranoid?

If you cant see that in the video thats your ignorance, everyone else did

[native]

Some drink the Keynes koolaid and some drink the Maoist koolaid. Here is part of the actual transcript from Anita Dunn's speech:

"...In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said 'You fight your war and I’ll fight mine'...”

You can validate the transcript for yourself from the embedded video previously posted.

Arthur Waldron describes results of Mao's methods in Commentary magazine: “...Mao was the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century. Much of the killing was direct, as in the torture and purges at Yan’an. After the Communist seizure of power in 1949, the practice became countrywide. Mao set his numerical targets openly, and stressed the ‘revolutionary’ importance of killing....”

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs ... ner/130642" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To Anita Dunn, Mao is one of the "...people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not..."

Why not kill 70 million people, eh, Young Terrier? Why not?

the choice she was alluding to was not to kill 70 million people (no one denies he did) in her speech she was alluding to the choice of choosing to take the easy way out or go the hard way when the odds are against you as Mao did

I cannot for the life of me understand why you think this explains everything and lets Dunn off the hook. Lots of people have fought against all odds and prevailed. To choose Mao as an example is insanity. To make excuse for Dunn is bizzarre.

[native]

Do you understand the history of Hitler's rise to power? Beck's allusions deserve neither praise nor criticism without scrutiny. I am surprised that you have no desire to provide the scrutiny of an honest broker. Your misrepresentation of Beck is a mirror image caricature of the caricature you love to hate.

because America is different than Germany, i wont be concerned about obama being hitler until we start thinking about giving emergency powers, burning books, infringing free speec, etc

Obama has already taken emergency powers that he promised not to take during his campaign (Patriot Act and dozens of administrative fiats), he and his minions have already denied access to his college transcripts, failed to post information as promised, failed to provide transparency as promised, and have attempted to deny free speech to Fox and conservative commentators.

What is the name of the universe where you live?

[youngterrier]

the choice she was alluding to was not to kill 70 million people (no one denies he did) in her speech she was alluding to the choice of choosing to take the easy way out or go the hard way when the odds are against you as Mao did

I cannot for the life of me understand why you think this explains everything and lets Dunn off the hook. Lots of people have fought against all odds and prevailed. To choose Mao as an example is insanity. To make excuse for Dunn is bizzarre.

Because the use of a catholic nun and a dictator in the same sentence and comparison has a bit of comedic flavor to it

[youngterrier]

the choice she was alluding to was not to kill 70 million people (no one denies he did) in her speech she was alluding to the choice of choosing to take the easy way out or go the hard way when the odds are against you as Mao did

I cannot for the life of me understand why you think this explains everything and lets Dunn off the hook. Lots of people have fought against all odds and prevailed. To choose Mao as an example is insanity. To make excuse for Dunn is bizzarre.

Because the use of a catholic nun and a dictator in the same sentence and comparison has a bit of comedic flavor to it

[native]

I figured that is what would be in the tape, and I waited for that moment in the tape, but it never came. He implied no such thing. The tape does not incriminate Beck.

Who is paranoid?

If you cant see that in the video thats your ignorance, everyone else did

You are making things up, YT.

[native]

I cannot for the life of me understand why you think this explains everything and lets Dunn off the hook. Lots of people have fought against all odds and prevailed. To choose Mao as an example is insanity. To make excuse for Dunn is bizzarre.

Because the use of a catholic nun and a dictator in the same sentence and comparison has a bit of comedic flavor to it

Springtiiiiiime for Hitleeeeer and Geeermanyyyyy!" Remember that Mel Brooks flick?

You really honestly think that Dunn was striving for comedic relief? If so, you are not merely an apologist for Dunn, you are a contortionist on her behalf!

[youngterrier]

because America is different than Germany, i wont be concerned about obama being hitler until we start thinking about giving emergency powers, burning books, infringing free speec, etc

Obama has already taken emergency powers that he promised not to take during his campaign (Patriot Act and dozens of administrative fiats), he and his minions have already denied access to his college transcripts, failed to post information as promised, failed to provide transparency as promised, and have attempted to deny free speech to Fox and conservative commentators.

What is the name of the universe where you live?

powers gwb used to but the right wing didn go crazy when he used that power(thats call hypocrisy)
the transparency thing I'll give you but presidents in the past have done the same thing (i remember a Reagan quote about him joking his high scool grades were top secret information)
the fox news thing is BS, they have not been censored in anyway and he is not required to go on their show if he doesnt want to

so in other words i live in t he reality in which th e left wing president does the same things as the right wing president but chooses not to go on fox....how are we more in a nazi germany state than we've been in the 8 yearsbefore? if we arent why do we care when a different president takes the wheel?