The open political discussion thread. Read the first post!

[mo_feezy]

it looks like the website that the first video links from might be down tight now. but it should be up soon.

[mo_feezy]

here are some pictures of Beck's 9/12 gathering. Check out his fans: http://www.flickr.com/photos/4244831...7622224474669/

[2+2]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

Why do you and others like you expect the right to just except uber-liberalism? We are expected to shut up, sit back, and see America transformed into a fascist state completely controlled by government.

Er you might try looking up the definition of fascism. It's at the other end of the spectrum. Think of it as capitalism on steroids (with nasty people in charge). The word you were probably looking for is communism (socialism on steroids with nasty people in charge).

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by mo_feezy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-o..._b_277028.html

I do watch his show. Pretty much any time I am home when it is on. I don't watch it because it's good/intelligent/honest/informative. I watch it because it's very interesting to watch a delusional mad man slowly losing his sanity. Psychologists have a perfectly documented case study for years to come. This dude is losing it. If you have never seen his show, he cries on the air regularly. Dude is fucking nuts.

LOL, your using the Huffington Post as a source?

It's pretty funny that they're are comparing the video shown by Beck as "step dancers". The video is clearly not showing dancers (unless dancers usually wear army clothing and make pledges to Obama in a military marching form).

And what do you think of Louis Farrakhan's sermon telling his audience that "they are the instruments that God will use to bring about universal change. That's why Barrack has captured the youth, when the Messiah speaks the youth will hear".

And how about when Obama, in a speech to a large crowd declared, that we need a "civilian security force that's just as strong, just as well funded" as the US military.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

Beck is simply pointing out this movement that is indeed taking place.

Still, no lies here.

Try again.

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by mo_feezy

here are some pictures of Beck's 9/12 gathering. Check out his fans: http://www.flickr.com/photos/4244831...7622224474669/

Beck's "gathering" was only 2,000,000 people (actual estimate). But that doesn't mean anything.

And is there something wrong with the pics you linked to?

I see people standing up against...

Big government,
outrageous spending,
socialist movements,
government health care,
ect.

..and FOR the opposite. For individual freedom, liberty, free markets, fiscal responsibility, low taxes, ect.

Something wrong with that?

[mo_feezy]

lol. you are a lost cause. beck specifically showed a video of a dancing troupe from kansas city. claimed they were a part of obamas secret negro army. Using HP as a source is ok, because they link to videos from outside sources. All I wanted people to look at was the videos.

as for the size of becks gathering. it's been called out already as a blatant lie. michelle malkin got busted for showing photoshopped pictures that "enhanced" the size. they were even using pictures from Obama's inauguration as pictures of becks gathering. which is completely ridiculous to compare the two in size.

secondly, you left out the parts about what his supporters in those photos support: racism, being completely misinformed/stupid (especially the "birthers").

[supmet]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

And how about when Obama, in a speech to a large crowd declared, that we need a "civilian security force that's just as strong, just as well funded" as the US military.

Ummm, by my count somewhere around 3000 americans have died on american soil from terrorism or foreign military in the last 30 years. Meanwhile in the homeland there are 10s of thousands of murders each year, and millions of robberies. I'm not backing Obama, but I'm pretty sure I'd feel safer if we spent 3 trillion dollars fighting crime than 3 trillion on a pointless war.

As for Beck, if you believe anything the mainstream media puts out, I pity you. Every last anchor/newsman on fox, cnn, or any major news station is a bought out shill. What they say is based on what they think will draw more ratings and the paychecks from people who pay big to sway american opinion. I know crackheads and tweakers who won't touch oxycontin, but people still hang on Rush Limbaugh's every word, this frightens me to no end.

As for Obama, I'm holding back judgment. He was handed a shitstorm and a half and I think its hilarious, that after 8 years of bush wiping his ass with the constitution, the geneva convention, and personal liberties, that everyone has such negative things to say about Obama.

The whole system is corrupt. There are no true checks and balances anymore. Your government has been sold to the highest bidder. We have to rebuild from the ground up - government, education, health care, everything. We're the world's leading superpower but we have some of the dumbest, unhealthiest people in the world. Let the banks and housing markets fail and work themselves out. Stop giving money to stupid people who have already proved they can't handle money. Honestly if there wasn't so much corruption and greed from the tops of the food chains in housing, banking, medicine, and government, none of us would be here arguing.

Food for thought: the average 18 year old american could read at a more proficient level at the turn of the 19th century, just before the public school system was introduced, than the average 18 year old american living today.

[Bob Dog]

You sure got that right!

[2+2]

Originally Posted by mo_feezy

lol. you are a lost cause. beck specifically showed a video of a dancing troupe from kansas city. claimed they were a part of obamas secret negro army. Using HP as a source is ok, because they link to videos from outside sources. All I wanted people to look at was the videos.

as for the size of becks gathering. it's been called out already as a blatant lie. michelle malkin got busted for showing photoshopped pictures that "enhanced" the size. they were even using pictures from Obama's inauguration as pictures of becks gathering. which is completely ridiculous to compare the two in size.

secondly, you left out the parts about what his supporters in those photos support: racism, being completely misinformed/stupid (especially the "birthers").

Agreed.

Kal-El - I don't mean to sound disrespectful but you sound young. You don't know what a fascist is and yet you rail against them and socialists and liberals and, and, and. Why regurgitate what you've heard on the radio? It isn't really that much harder to think for yourself.

To start with, how many countries around the world are 100% socialist or 100% capitalist? You know life isn't that black and white, don't you? It's just never that simple. Most countries have elements of each system, even China.

In the health care debate, I've heard there are 1300 different insurance companies with 1300 different forms for doctors to have to figure out. You think that's efficient? I think we should go all the way <gasp> to a single payer government run system that streamlines all that paperwork. What do YOU think? No, I'm not asking you what Rush or Sean or Glenn thinks. What do you think? What's the capitalist answer to that little problem?

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by 2+2

Agreed.

Kal-El - I don't mean to sound disrespectful but you sound young. You don't know what a fascist is and yet you rail against them and socialists and liberals and, and, and. Why regurgitate what you've heard on the radio? It isn't really that much harder to think for yourself.

To start with, how many countries around the world are 100% socialist or 100% capitalist? You know life isn't that black and white, don't you? It's just never that simple. Most countries have elements of each system, even China.

In the health care debate, I've heard there are 1300 different insurance companies with 1300 different forms for doctors to have to figure out. You think that's efficient? I think we should go all the way <gasp> to a single payer government run system that streamlines all that paperwork. What do YOU think? No, I'm not asking you what Rush or Sean or Glenn thinks. What do you think? What's the capitalist answer to that little problem?

For the record, I'm 30. I was a liberal up until last year then I woke up.

When was the last time government streamlined something, reduced costs, and reduced paperwork??? LOL!! Government does the exact opposite in every chance they've gotten. They are notorious for complicating everything into 1000+ page bills and spent us into $100 trillion in obligations. And you think they are going to fix health care??? That's freakin' hilarious.

And I only think for myself, thank you.

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by mo_feezy

as for the size of becks gathering. it's been called out already as a blatant lie. michelle malkin got busted for showing photoshopped pictures that "enhanced" the size. they were even using pictures from Obama's inauguration as pictures of becks gathering. which is completely ridiculous to compare the two in size.

secondly, you left out the parts about what his supporters in those photos support: racism, being completely misinformed/stupid (especially the "birthers").

Here you go since you're so in denial....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VMXz6xGeqc

Yup, a blatant lie. It was all made up.

[2+2]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

For the record, I'm 30. I was a liberal up until last year then I woke up.

When was the last time government streamlined something, reduced costs, and reduced paperwork??? LOL!! Government does the exact opposite in every chance they've gotten. They are notorious for complicating everything into 1000+ page bills and spent us into $100 trillion in obligations. And you think they are going to fix health care??? That's freakin' hilarious.

And I only think for myself, thank you.

Good answer and I find it interesting that you were a liberal until last year.

I hear ya on your skepticism about the government's ability to do anything right. What's the alternative? Is there a non-socialist way to reduce the number of insurance companies or at least force them to all use the same paperwork etc? Even Obama's plan to force insurance companies to not drop people for serious or preexisting illnesses has some problems I think. The "experts" are all saying health care is going to bankrupt the country if we don't fix it. So what's the answer?


Edit: lol cross post. There's too many people ganging up on you Kal-El! lol I'm backing off. You're fighting a good fight though!

[Kal-El]

BTW, only 20% of Americans claim to be liberals. I think they are all on here!

So I don't expect to get anywhere with my posts. Nevertheless, I'll try to open some eyes.

I do realize I'm on a fuel efficient car forum = liberals galore. But I thought that there were more of a variety of people that bought the Yaris for economical reasons or just because they liked the car. Seems like we have a lot of people here that apparently believe global warming is real (even though it's been cooling for the last 10 years) and feel that they needed to do their part with a gas sipper. Just an observation because all of the other forums I'm on are more split politically.

Flame on...

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by 2+2

Good answer and I find it interesting that you were a liberal until last year.

I hear ya on your skepticism about the government's ability to do anything right. What's the alternative? Is there a non-socialist way to reduce the number of insurance companies or at least force them to all use the same paperwork etc? Even Obama's plan to force insurance companies to not drop people for serious or preexisting illnesses has some problems I think. The "experts" are all saying health care is going to bankrupt the country if we don't fix it. So what's the answer?


Edit: lol cross post. There's too many people ganging up on you Kal-El! lol I'm backing off. You're fighting a good fight though!

Good questions.

As everyone reinforces, health care is pretty much the most complicated thing out there. Reform of any kind will not be easy.

Conservatives call for...

-Tort reform - stop or cap the frivolous law suits that skyrocket doctor costs.

-having existing insurance companies compete and operate in most states rather than just one or a few. That way customers really have many choices among the 1300 existing companies. Most states are dominated by only a couple of companies.

-regulations that make it illegal for companies to refuse people because of pre-existing conditions (both sides agree here).

-illegal to drop customers of refuse coverage for needed procedures

Just these things alone would make a HUGE difference.
No need to overhaul the whole system and introduce a government plan that will kill off the private sector.

[Bob Dog]

I must take issue with what is a misuse of the term conservative. A true conservative is one who holds closely to traditional held values. A true conservative is slow to change, and questions the new in the light of how it would alter that which has long served our nation and protected our values. In doing so, this protects us from the usurpation of the very bedrock of tradition on which our country is founded. There is much to be said in favor of this. Many times things of great value can be lost in passing fads of political opinion. Conservatism is the political opinion those who have great entitlements, as with person of great wealth, and sometimes those who have little and are afraid of losing what little they have. This can, however, lead to a resistance to change, when change is truly necessary. Dwight Eisenhauer could be considered a true conservative. From Richard Nixon on the Republican presidents have not been truly conservative, but men with self serving agendas primarily directed at keeping the wealthy wealthy and also enhancing the degree of their wealth.

Liberalism is traditionally an openness to change. True liberals wish to alter things that exist, to right inequities and wrongs in the existing system. A true liberal’s goal is not to change the system for the sake of change, but to change the system to that degree which corrects the aforementioned wrongs. I consider Kennedy, and Carter to be true liberals. They wished to change our system mostly to correct grave injustices. Change is often a good and necessary thing, but if used carelessly much can be lost to change. Barak Obama, whom I voted for president, is not a liberal in the traditional sense. He seems to think that change for its own sake is a good thing. I withhold my very humble judgement of him, for after the radical modifications of the Bush administration, a great deal of change is in order.

A radical is a person whose opinions deviates greatly from mainstream opinion and they often are based on a personal agenda.

A reactionary is a political person whose opinions are basically a response to someone else's political opinions. They are not founded in deep thought, or consideration of the long term good of our nation. They are most often emotional in nature and self serving

An extremist is one who takes the point of view as far as possible in the direction of their particular predilection with little regard for the ultimate results that an execution of their point of view into reality.

Radical Reactionary Extremist, not conservative, is the proper category into which to place Beck, O’Reilly and Hannity.

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by Bob Dog

I must take issue with what is a misuse of the term conservative. A true conservative is one who holds closely to traditional held values. A true conservative is slow to change, and questions the new in the light of how it would alter that which has long served our nation and protected our values. In doing so, this protects us from the usurpation of the very bedrock of tradition on which our country is founded. There is much to be said in favor of this. Many times things of great value can be lost in passing fads of political opinion. Conservatism is the political opinion those who have great entitlements, as with person of great wealth, and sometimes those who have little and are afraid of losing what little they have. This can, however, lead to a resistance to change, when change is truly necessary. Dwight Eisenhauer could be considered a true conservative. From Richard Nixon on the Republican presidents have not been truly conservative, but men with self serving agendas primarily directed at keeping the wealthy wealthy and also enhancing the degree of their wealth.

Liberalism is traditionally an openness to change. True liberals wish to alter things that exist, to right inequities and wrongs in the existing system. A true liberal’s goal is not to change the system for the sake of change, but to change the system to that degree which corrects the aforementioned wrongs. I consider Kennedy, and Carter to be true liberals. They wished to change our system mostly to correct grave injustices. Change is often a good and necessary thing, but if used carelessly much can be lost to change. Barak Obama, whom I voted for president, is not a liberal in the traditional sense. He seems to think that change for its own sake is a good thing. I withhold my very humble judgement of him, for after the radical modifications of the Bush administration, a great deal of change is in order.

A radical is a person whose opinions deviates greatly from mainstream opinion and they often are based on a personal agenda.

A reactionary is a political person whose opinions are basically a response to someone else's political opinions. They are not founded in deep thought, or consideration of the long term good of our nation. They are most often emotional in nature and self serving

An extremist is one who takes the point of view as far as possible in the direction of their particular predilection with little regard for the ultimate results that an execution of their point of view into reality.

Radical Reactionary Extremist, not conservative, is the proper category into which to place Beck, O’Reilly and Hannity.

I agree with a lot of your assessment except for the last line.

I'm not a big fan of O'Really but these guys aren't radical reactionary extremist.

A liberal may see it that way, but really they are simply reassuring what conservatives and liberatarians already believe by reporting and commenting on political news from a conservative perspective. They aren't pushing a "personal agenda" but rather standing up for conservatism because no one else in media will. So their passion comes off as extreme to the other side.

People make fun of Beck when he gets emotional, but those are his true feelings coming out because of his love for the foundation and Constitution of America. He doesn't want to see it thrown away in favor of another system. So he gets passionate about it. America is lucky to have someone so brave.

[Kal-El]

You guys are OK with these people running the show?

Cass Sunstein, President Obama's friend and nominee for "regulatory czar" is a "raving animal rights nut". Calls for the banning of hunting. Believes animals should have the right to sue in the court of law.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=104820

Obama Science Czar’s Plan To Sterilize Population Through Water Supply. Believes in forced abortions.
John P. Holdren
http://www.infowars.com/obama-scienc...ady-happening/

Obama Appoints self proclaimed Communist To White House for "Green Jobs"
Van Jones
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2009/04/...ts-former.html

Obama climate czar has socialist ties. Calls for "global governance" and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.
Carol M. Browner
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ocialist-ties/

FCC 'Diversity' Czar Lloyd is virulently anti-capitalist, almost myopically racially fixated and exuberantly pro-regulation. Will basically end free speech as we know it.
Mark Lloyd
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-m...mocratic-revol

Obama: "Fundamentally Transforming the United States of America"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvJJP9AYgqU


NONE OF THIS STUFF BOTHERS YOU GUYS? And it's just the tip of the iceberg and doesn't count all of his friends and associations.

This is all from the mouths of the listed people. Not some right wing political propaganda as you guys will claim.

[Bob Dog]

Your point of view is dyadic , dividing the world into conservative and liberal as absolute things and not as adjectives. A dyadic perception of the world is inherently unreasoning. This is not a football game or some silly good guy/bad guy shoot em’ up. Political thinking is a spectrum , (actually much more multidimensional than that.) There are a few whose opinions are based on reaction, emotion and lack any regard for others who have different wants and needs in a pluralistic society. These individuals are so narcissistic and self centered that they think their singular point of view should be imposed on all of society. They may quite rightly called Radical Extremist, be they mad bombers or far to the right talk show hosts. Those who respond to political situations emotionally as children would, rather than in a reasoned adult manner are Reactionaries. Hence the title Radical Reactionary Extremist is completely accurate and for these few persons fits exactly.