 |
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Ron Paul and Glenn Beck, Friends and Foes
- Text size
NOTE: Ron Paul is appearing on the Glenn Beck Show (CNN) April 1
Ron Paul and Glenn Beck have an interesting history. Last year Ron Paul canceled an appearance on Beck’s show at the last minute and Beck seemed to hold a grudge that went beyond his disagreement with Paul on foreign policy. He joined in with the near-sighted pundits and called Ron Paul crazy a few times. He implied that his supporters were like terrorists. Then something strange happened. When Ron Paul finally appeared on his show Beck told him that he “could french kiss him” when he heard Ron Paul talk about his position on taxes.
This proves that the introduction to Beck’s radio program is spot on when the voice over says his show is “the fusion of entertainment and enlightenment”. Glenn Beck is an entertainment opportunist, and I do enjoy his shows (both radio and TV) for the most part. He echoes Ron Paul on just about every economic issue. When the discussion turns to foreign policy though they could not be further apart. Tonight Ron Paul will be a guest on Beck’s television show. I expect most, if not all, of the discussion will be on the state of the economy and the Federal Reserve.
|
|
|
|
|
No doubt Ron Paul will attempt to make the point that America’s foreign policy expenditures are directly related to the downward spiraling economy. Glenn Beck will gloss over and/or change the subject if Paul makes this argument. This is sad because that is an argument Americans need to hear. It needs to be explored in a thoughtful way and I think these two gentlemen could be successful at doing that without raised voices.
I respect Glenn Beck because of his views on the economy. He is dead right, like Ron Paul. Though for some odd reason he can’t seem to take the next step and link the economy and foreign policy together as Paul does. It’s almost like Beck is a child who covers his eyes when he sees something that scares him.
The gold standard and competing currencies may be the only area on the economy where Paul and Beck may be in disagreement. We know Ron Paul’s position on this, but Beck’s is a bit of a mystery.
Glenn Beck has spoken out against the North American Union, a potential one world government, the possibility of the deliberate devaluation of the dollar in order to make way for a new currency, the evils of the federal reserve, the military industrial complex, the liberal bent of John McCain, and other favorite topics of the Ron Paul faithful. On all of these issues he is a close friend with Ron Paul.
Beck has also spoken out supporting the surge in Iraq, preemptive war, attack them over there so they don’t attack us here, and as he says, “shooting the bad guys in the head.” On these issues he couldn’t be more of a foe to Ron Paul.
It seems odd that Beck can be so right about one issue and so wrong about another. It’s almost like he uses rational thought to get to his economic position and neo-conservative group think to arrive at his foreign policy position.
It is not likely Beck will change his mind on foreign policy tonight, but if anyone can start him down that road it is Ron Paul. After all it was Beck that called Ron Paul the candidate today that most closely resembles our founding fathers.
NOTE: See Ron Paul’s hour long appearance on Glenn Beck’s show from December 2007 here. Also, audio from a later excellent interview (January 2008) with Ron Paul on Beck’s radio show is available here.
| WATCH ALEX JONES’ ENDGAME ONLINE NOW in its entirety. View more High quality trailers at www.endgamethemovie.com |
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
- Share on Twitter
April 1st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Hopefully he’ll also make clear ,, HE IS STILL IN THE RACE ~
April 1st, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Danksta , take your Prozak ,, it’s that time !
April 1st, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Beck is a homo, but there’s more…
April 1st, 2008 at 1:15 pm
How much do we spend in Iraq daily? Add it up for the past year. Then multiply it by how long we’ve been there plus how long we’re gonna stay regardless of who the next pres is. Then add in how much we spent and are still spending in Afghanistan. Then add our military bases in Korea, Vietnam, Europe, etc all over the world. Now add in the money we spend building newer and deadlier weapons of war. The pain gun, those f---ing creepy as hell military dogs, the list goes on…
Jesus god man, that’s a s---load of money. Where’s it come from? The f---ing FED s---s it out by the ton! And we wonder why our economy sucks?
A loaf of bread costs almost 2 f---ing dollars now. For a basic necessity of life. It’s only getting worse, too.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:23 pm
glen beck needs more viewers so of course hes gonna say somthing stupid, if u ask me he aint different from bill o reilly
April 1st, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Okay:
I have to admit at one time I actually did like G. Beck, but this was probably before he had his TV show on CNN. Now he thinks he’s god and he must align w/ the zionist policy or his little testicles will be squashed. This is how our media works, anyone out there that watches TV right now does have a clue, the problem THEY are so brainwashed and affraid (FEAR true fear) that they actually believe the lie. This is why so many people either didn’t vote for Ron Paul or not only fear from going away from mainstream, but the feeling of being different. Wow amazing huh or is it just simple CIA/MOSSAD mind control (remember MK ultra it really does exist and don’t forget HAARP). But really the classical way to “condition” humans or animals can be found with Pavlovs dog (forgive me if it is mispelled) but it is called classical conditioning, the only problem is that we are the experiment. Also people aren’t ready to give up “dancing with the stars” for their true freedoms, and leave fear of the worlds 2% controllers. I’m tried of saying “WAKE UP AMERICA” but it seems that most of these words fall on deaf ears.
Roger OUT!
TSS
April 1st, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Glen Beck and Nancy Grace should fight to the death for the title or worlds most retarded on TV.
Glen Beck is dumb, but I think Nancy is worst lmao, can you believe she was a freaking lawyer?
April 1st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
#9
Id be near 100% sure there is no mind control lmao, come on, not too hard to find a shill willing to make a few mil a year to be on TV. No offense, but if you paid me 3 mil/year, Ill talk a bunch of right wing non sense myself
Just look at Tucker Carlson, a complete jackass on TV, then you hear him off the record on Bubbas show, and he is a pretty cool guy.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:37 pm
we need to demand that Ron Paul run as an independent. Now.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:04 pm
You people really need to stop and think about what you’re fighting against. If G.Beck is saying the same damn thing R.Paul is saying about the Fed and the people who control our money supply… wouldn’t it be kinda smart to have 2 voices singing the same song together than 2 voices singing the same song separately? Make sense retards? Think about it… you are lumping Glen Beck in with the same liberal and/or neo-con garbage on t.v. when what you “SHOULD” be doing is helping the cause along. He’s an outlet that is willing to hear this side of the argument and ACTUALLY AGREE’S WITH US ON IT!!! Use your brains people… if the fed controls the government, and the government is running an illegal war and G.Beck & R.Paul are both against the Fed … doesn’t that make them allies???
Amazing how stupid people can be sometimes.
Take the emotion out of the argument and make logical statements and you would be amazed at how much further you would get in a debate. Just some advice.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Beck is just trying to get viewers when he is nice to Ron Paul. It’s all about ratings.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:27 pm
MeFoo, I totally agree. look at it this way, people: This is america, and in said america, we can disagree. We can agree on some things, and disagree on others. Glenn Beck is mostly truthful, and so is Ron Paul, BUT: they don’t agree on everything… does that mean they can’t come together to reach a common goal? Think, fools… Think! And, for the record, Glenn Beck is a mormon… hardly zionist material -.- If anything, he’s more prepared for the coming s---farm than most of you dimwits, because that’s the mormon motto, ‘be prepared’… for anything. Ron Paul has some amazing platforms, but there are certain thing I don’t agree with, that does not mean I wouldn’t vote for him. I have parents, friends, co-workers that I vehemently disagree with on certain issues, but I refuse to ostracise them because of their different views, because thats what makes this country great (for now), because we can have those views without getting shot in the damn head for them (for now)!
In closing, if you have some better outlet than the third most listened to talkshow in america (Beck’s), and the 1st most watched in news prime time (Beck’s), by all friggin means, use it… but I have to say now, that if Beck gets involved, and I believe he will, to some extent, that is a great thing indeed. He’s not just a talking head. We need as many outlets as we can get, and just because some guy is syndicated all of a sudden he’s a zionist and a sellout? please, people… think about this: Jefferson, Monroe… they were the pundits before they were the power. The president? Ha! he doesn’t have any power. Glenn Beck and Ron Paul? They have potential power. Beck has one voice, one vote. Paul is ostracised because he speaks the truth about things, and people call him a whack job… guess what? put those two together, give them both some decent credibility and airtime, viola! We have ourselves a bonifide friggin platform with which to channel our collective voices.
Disagreement is part of the american way.. as soon as you call me a name because of my views, just name yourself a socialist, get your foodstamps at the foodline, take the government handout they give you, and stfu. As for me, I’ll be behind the gunfire, where it’s safe from socialist democrats/republicans like you.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:28 pm
I love how when he has ron paul on, he is very mild and likeable. Then when Ron Paul isnt on, he rips at him and calls him a loon.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Sorry Tangalor, I agree with you that Ron Paul+Glenn Beck is a good forum for legitimizing alot of our concerns on a national scale… However, the other s--- you said was a bit fanatical. You think Glenn Beck is third best pundit on CNN because he’s THAT good?? Does it seem strange to you that the secret service protects him at his book signings? There’s something that Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, and yes folks… GLENN f---ING BECK all have in common… They take their orders from the establishment… They lead us in a certain direction, but only to an extent… Their task is merely to heard our ideas in and call out the “loons” or “troofers” or in Michael Moore’s case, to ignore that aspect altogether. Don’t forget this when dealing with sly foxes like Beck or Lou Dobbs, they are reading off a prompter, their job is to persuade you and quell your anger.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Alcoholic Glen Beck overdoses on drugs, sees dead people, attempts suicide, french kisses Ron Paul, then kills him for 9/11:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=PAPG3_apspI
April 1st, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Thanks for refreshing us on that Pirate TV… Did you get that Tangalor and MeFoo??? He’s an arrogant and insulting bastard just like you both are. You can go off about Republicrats and the Fed and whatever else you want… But when you bring up Glenn Beck as a means for people to see Ron Paul’s ideas, yea you’re right… BUT YOU BOTH COMPLETELY IGNORE THE CHARACTER ASSASSINATION THAT COMES WITH IT FROM THAT “PUNDIT”. JUST LIKE HOW BECK COMPLETELY IGNORES THE UGLY TRUTH ABOUT THE ESTABLISHMENT, WHICH HE IS APART OF BY THE WAY. f--- YOU BOTH. TRY OUT LITTLEGREENFOOTBALLS.COM IF YOU WANNA RUN YOUR IDIOTIC MOUTHS ABOUT THIS s---, THIS SITE IS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AWARE OF CERTAIN TRUTHS BROUGHT FORWARD BY ALEX JONES.
April 1st, 2008 at 3:08 pm
After Nazi sex scandal, FIA president Mosley might miss Bahrain GP
Associated Press
Updated: April 1, 2008, 12:15 PM ET
* Comment
* Email
* Print
The president of auto racing’s governing body might not attend the Bahrain Grand Prix following a story in a British tabloid that accused him of engaging in sex acts with five prostitutes that involved Nazi role-playing.
Max Mosley
Mosley
Max Mosley, the president of International Automobile Federation (FIA), also was to join the Bahraini royal family for a formal dinner. But those plans are in doubt following the News of the World report.
Formula One chief executive Bernie Ecclestone urged Mosley to skip the race. Jody Scheckter, the 1979 world champion, called for Mosley, 67, to resign.
“Mr. Mosley was originally scheduled to arrive in Bahrain, but FIA is not aware of his travel plans,” FIA said Tuesday in a statement to The Associated Press. “Mr. Mosley has been busy holding discussions with lawyers and has not communicated his latest plans to us.”
A video posted Sunday on the News of the World’s Web site showed a man identified as Mosley arriving at an apartment and then taking part in sex acts with women, one in a prisoner’s uniform, while also speaking German. The video can no longer be found on the paper’s Web site.
“He shouldn’t go, should he?” Ecclestone told The Times of London. “The problem is he would take all the ink away from the race and put it on something which, honestly and truly, is nobody else’s business anyway.”
Scheckter said Mosley should step down before the president’s fourth term ends in October 2009.
“There is absolutely no question in my mind that Mosley should resign,” the former South African driver told The Guardian newspaper. “From a purely motor racing point of view you can’t have somebody like this running the sport or any other sport come to that.”
Mosley is the son of British Union of Fascists party founder Oswald Mosley, a former British politician who served in Parliament for both the Labour and Conservative parties. Oswald Mosley died in 1980.
Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press
April 1st, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Glenn beck defended the government on 9-11 last interview with ron paul like he was a nutjob if he supported the 9-11 truth movement. .. Glenn beck is a establishment schill. There is so much available info about 9-11 any journalist that discounts 9-11 truth as nutcases is either not a journalist or a disinfo agent.. Glenn beck is a disinfo agent. Hell, the MSM itself is pure disinfo…
April 1st, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Glenn Beck, is a Mis Guided Christ Peddler and Half Wit.
No Real Christian would support the War.
April 1st, 2008 at 3:39 pm
” Glenn Beck is third best pundit on CNN because he’s THAT good?? Does it seem strange to you that the secret service protects him at his book signings? ”
I chortle. He has those guys there because he’s a wanted man… or so I surmise… I could be wrong.. it happens on occasion -.-
” Did you get that Tangalor and MeFoo??? He’s an arrogant and insulting bastard just like you both are. ”
TaDa! Now call youself a socialist and get back in line like I asked you to do.
I’m not sucking anyone off, including beck or paul.. I disagree with a lot of what both have to say.. but I listen, nonetheless… you know why? because, even if one, or both, of them happened to be ‘informists’, it is still a good idea to keep track of what the ‘enemy’ is doing… I don’t buy into half the crap that spews out of anyones mouth, but i pay attention anyway, because: AFTER I HAVE RESEARCHED IT LIKE A PROPER EDUCATED PERSON, I COME UP WITH MY OWN OPINION, unlike some, who would have me believe things just because they say it is true. Call me what you want, but that’s the bottom line isn’t it? Call me names, single me out for my opinion on certain issues, then dial in your rhetoric about whatever it is you happen to be arguing about at the time. Spare me the nonsensical inuendos about fanatacism.. if there are FANATICS in the room, please, post one thing since this website has been established. Consider case rested. We’re all fanatics about one thing or another… I wasn’t being overly sensational in my viewpoints, I was making an observation, so spare the name-calling.. I haven’t called anyone on here a name because I respect everyone’s viewpoint, and will listen, with interest sometimes, to what others have to say. So, spout on, you crazy diamonds, spout on.
April 1st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Glenn Beck=ANOTHER LYING NEO-CONMAN PROPAGANDIST…
April 1st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
I’ve gone several times to the CNN Website, and posted that ‘Glen Beck can stick his thumb up his ass!’, to no avail!
April 1st, 2008 at 4:15 pm
bugstomper: “I’ve gone several times to the CNN Website, and posted that ‘Glen Beck can stick his thumb up his ass!’, to no avail!”
Well, no wonder… Glenn Beck nearly died of an ass operation… so that is clearly a threat on his life.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:19 pm
You don’t resort to name calling except to call people socialists? Or wait, I’m supposed to call myself that right… You didn’t call me that. Dude you refer to us as “dimwits” in your first post. Furthermore, your whole attitude is rather condescending, so don’t try and play the surprised card now that I’m insulting you. How about you use your f---ing brain… Ron Paul has people out to get him and he’s a congressman, does he have the secret service protecting him? f--- NO! We are talking about a political security group in Washington D.C… Why would some T.V.-hack pundit get that treatment? I’m a socialist??? I question what that makes you for being such an avid CNN lover… Here’s some real name calling for you: YOU ARE ONE OF MANY IN A FLOCK OF SHEEP. I HOPE YOU ENJOY STARING INTO THE SCREEN LIKE A ZOMBIE WHILE BECK FILLS YOUR HEAD WITH MORE OF THE SAME s--- YOU SPOUT. That is all dude. Now f--- off… If you disagree with this site or whatever, stop posting your uninformed bulls--- and hit up Beck’s CNN comments page already… Christ.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:22 pm
so don’t try and play the surprised card now that I’m insulting you. How about you use your f---ing brain… Ron Paul has people out to get him and he’s a congressman, does he have the secret service protecting him? f--- NO!
Umm…. wrong. EVery presidential candidate has secret service.
YOU ARE ONE OF MANY IN A FLOCK OF SHEEP. I HOPE YOU ENJOY STARING INTO THE SCREEN LIKE A ZOMBIE WHILE BECK FILLS YOUR HEAD WITH MORE OF THE SAME s--- YOU SPOUT
Uhh… I don’t have cable, so… no luck there either.
If you disagree with this site or whatever, stop posting your uninformed bulls--- and hit up Beck’s CNN comments page already… Christ.
I never said i disagreed with everything, just some things. nice try, though!
April 1st, 2008 at 4:25 pm
The seven candidates who “currently meet or exceed” the “criteria for consideration” of protection but don’t have it, according to Chertoff, are: John Edwards, Rudolph Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson. (The “criteria for consideration” for Secret Service protection are not publicly available.)
April 1st, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Are you going to f--- off now dude? Try CNN Pipeline or something if you don’t have cable…
April 1st, 2008 at 4:29 pm
And even if Ron Paul did have the Secret Service protecting him, they have a long history of standing down when they are needed. For instance, JFK figured that one out… Or Barrack Obama recently at one of his events discovered that the SS packed up and stopped frisking people for the last hour of entry to his event. You have QUITE a bit more reading to do and less arguing… Until then, you’ll continue to look like a jackass.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:31 pm
He ripped that show apart!!
April 1st, 2008 at 4:31 pm
The seven candidates who “currently meet or exceed” the “criteria for consideration” of protection but don’t have it, according to Chertoff, are: John Edwards, Rudolph Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson. (The “criteria for consideration” for Secret Service protection are not publicly available.)
Aww… panties in a bunch?
Are you going to f--- off now dude? Try CNN Pipeline or something if you don’t have cable…
Apparently.
Hey, anyone can hire off duty cops for pennies on the dollar. In fact, seeing the current trend in fascism and abuse, cops are WAY better than secret service agents.. spare me the logistics of presidential touring. Beck, Paul, Jones, doesn’t matter… blackwater is blackwater, no matter who’s paying them. 
April 1st, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Also the Secret Service and FBI seized thousands of Ron Paul Liberty Dollars… So don’t try and f---ing play it out like they’re going be protecting him anytime soon… He’s an establishment enemy UNLIKE GLENN BECK
April 1st, 2008 at 4:33 pm
You have QUITE a bit more reading to do and less arguing… Until then, you’ll continue to look like a jackass.
Erm… hmm… you may have a point there, dear sir. I only read readers digest and TV guide… Digest so I know what to do and not to do, and Guide so I don’t have to watch t.v…. i have so much to learn.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:35 pm
The seven candidates who “currently meet or exceed” the “criteria for consideration” of protection but don’t have it, according to Chertoff, are: John Edwards, Rudolph Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson. (The “criteria for consideration” for Secret Service protection are not publicly available.)
Aww… panties in a bunch?
You got nothing better than that??? No facts, just more speculation from Tangalor… Come on, try harder than that man, I thought you said you were educated?
April 1st, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Wait…. Ron Paul Liberty Dollars…. erhm… Aren’t dead people supposed to be on dollars? I haven’t heard of him being deceased yet o.O
April 1st, 2008 at 4:36 pm
what, readers digest not educated enough for ya?
April 1st, 2008 at 4:37 pm
I love it when you call me names, Global. keep pushing… get mad! channel the anger!
April 1st, 2008 at 4:39 pm
I think I’ve cleared up the FACT that you have no solid foundation for your arguements other than your speculation… While I agree with some of your statements about Blackwater, I’m still quite sure that you are a total moron. Do you honestly believe Ron Paul would hire nazi-ass-kicking cops to protect him? You are TOTALLY misunderstanding this movement and I really can’t stress enough that you hit up LewRockwell or something and do some ACTUAL investigation. I’m done wasting my time on you, I thought you would come back with some fact but f--- was I wrong… Nightynight you socialist. AAHAHAH.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Global… See, I’m slightly amused by your anger, but not swayed in any way shape or form, because i have developed this thing called an opinion. It’s really neat, see… I take all of this information, and use it to develop said opinion. When someone calls me names and chastises me, I laugh! It’s incredible! I really love it though, when someone challenges my ideas, provokes thought, makes change, by intyelligent debate. Something you have failed to do. so sorry.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Do you honestly believe Ron Paul would hire nazi-ass-kicking cops to protect him?
Nope. I was suggesting. Like i said, I could be wrong.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Glenn Beck is, apparently, still in the Neocon matrix with regard to the phony war on terrorism. This is typical of those within the mainstream media who will support to some degree the positions of Ron Paul, but will always parrot the party line regarding terrorism in order to cover their six.
It goes without saying that, although he has stated that our foreign policy of intervention has contributed to the draining of our resources, Ron Paul still insists that the “war on terror” is real.
For that reason alone, I suspect that he is either grossly ignorant of the true facts regarding the CIA/Mossad engineered attack on the WTC, or he is in collusion with those who have carried out this event while creating the illusion that he is the “champion of liberty”.
It goes without saying that Ron Paul is in dire need of a copy of “Loose Change”. However, that may not even have the desired effect. I have discovered that there are indeed some people who are simply unwilling to “go there” regarding 9/11. For them it is simply too difficult to believe that their own government could kill 3000 of its own citizens in order to start a war.
Those who fail to learn from history truly are doomed to repeat it.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:43 pm
excuse any and all typos, I’m excited by the thoughts of you getting past your assumptions and name-callings so we can get to the idea-swapping thing.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Aww, all done? we haven’t swapped email addy’s yet! damn… I was so close to getting good websites, too
April 1st, 2008 at 4:46 pm
I’m not chastising you Global, if you would like to educate me, then bring on the education and stop calling me things.
this is your time to shine!
April 1st, 2008 at 4:55 pm
I will now roll my eyes and walk away, once again. I try, sometimes, to entice people to get past the anger and bring on the idealism and thought-provoking comments some of those sheep out there so desperately need… it is no wonder people take alex for a kook, all they would have to do is take a quick glance at the websites comments to see most people aren’t into engaging one another with ideas and messages. Sad, really…
April 1st, 2008 at 4:55 pm
you probbly are wrong. stop fillin the forum w/ that s---.
April 1st, 2008 at 6:14 pm
I wouldn’t be surprised if Ron actually thought that there was prior knowledge/involvement with 9-11. Forgetting about the ego, and patriotic stance on crying wolf, It does not effect my respect for Ron either way. What chance would he have for the Republican nomination if he was going around saying that 9-11 was an inside job? Let alone calling for the elimination of the Federal Reserve. Truthers are persecuted by just about every other group out there almost as badly as the Jews were in WWII, respectively. I would vote for him regardless, but do any of you really think it would help his campaign? No, It wouldn’t. He has been keeping his opinion to himself in that regard.
Ironic, everything that Ron was talking about is coming to a head. The people have been given proof of whats to come and still people are denying him. I am not religious, but it is almost like he is the modern day equivalent of Jesus. Maybe thats going a little too far, heh.
With all that is going on today, I am almost hoping that some kind of civil/revolutionary conflict ensues. At least that way my children have a chance in living in a country where usurpation and economic slavery is non-existent.
I am and have been in preparations for the coming turbulence that fuel and food shortages will cause. For those of you who live in heavily populated areas, I would seriously start thinking about an exit strategy.
Good luck and peace…
April 1st, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Wow I thought this article was satire so I passed it by.
“Though for some odd reason he can’t seem to take the next step”
Beck is a Coward, it isn’t that big a mystery.
“It’s almost like Beck is a child who covers his eyes when he sees something that scares him.”
Again, that would be a coward! Mystery Solved!
April 1st, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Perhaps Beck is allowed only to go so far. Typical – leak a little here, a little there. It’s a huge puzzle most aren’t interested in investigating.
Off subject, but maybe not, what about the WANTAGATE scandal? Anyone know if it’s true? HELP me please. I want to know if I’ve fallen for a clever piece of fiction designed to create false hope.
Anticipation…as in ‘Ron Paul Billionaire”.
Dr. Paul needs to avoid the inside job part at this time. Too many have accepted the “911 nutcase/internet troll conspiracy theorists’ O’Reilly wants to murder and we need to win them over with surface stuff. They’re too stupid to advance past kindergarten at this point.
April 1st, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Glen Beckstein..
April 1st, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Glenn Beck is a pompous bandwagonist that doesnt believe a word he says.
He’s that akward but agressive guy at parties that hollers behind the popular opinion while eyeballing the room to make sure he’s still on the right side.
He’s like Hannity or Scarborough but with self image problems and mediocre acting skills.
Open letter fact: If you will not/can not debate(on air), discuss, conclude, without the use of hypno-distracting hand BS and/or the use of personal and general sanity attacks you are a useless coward and a clown. This also includes cutting to something else when your complicit patsy is getting his improperly trained ass handed to him.
You’re also on the losing side, and will no doubt face endless insult and obscurety after being shown for what you are: The real version of a useless eater.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Beck is a dillweed
April 1st, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Ron Paul has my vote!!!!!
April 1st, 2008 at 9:35 pm
As far as I can see it I agree with Canadian person 51 and think he has Beck the Blowhards number.I’ve been following this thing for so long that you can smell disgusting phonies like Glenn. The guy would suck a golf ball, through 50ft of garden hose to advance his career.He Hannity ,ORielly make my stomach sich. I would rather listen to someone who belives what he sys but just doesn’t understand yet. At least there honest in there own warped way.Its very hard to listen to some of this crap sometimesd. Shamus
April 1st, 2008 at 10:08 pm
I agree with #51 .I think Glen has been brainwashed. Next time he calls the 911 truth seekers nutjobs i’m blackballing his show.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Glen Beck is on the Elite’s payroll and like so many of these fools out there, little does he know he’s getting used and little does he know he will be paying the price, just like everyone else. All those media buffs who think they are getting away with the lies they portray will pay in one way or another.
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 am
Transcript from Glenn Beck last night:
GLENN BECK
Congress Grills Oil Execs; Ron Paul Weighs in on Economy; Illegal Immigrant Cab Driver Sues Police
Aired April 1, 2008 – 19:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GLENN BECK, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, oil executives summoned to Capitol Hill for a congressional inquisition. Who`s the bad guy here? The oil executives or the opportunist politicians?
Then, leading libertarian Ron Paul will stop by. He`ll tell me why he thinks the government`s proposed overhaul of the nation`s financial markets is a bad idea.
And Obama, clearly trying to be Mr. Moderate. But he may be a lot more liberal than you think.
All this and more tonight.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BECK: Hello, America.
Barack Obama will be by later to punish all with a baby. I`ll explain coming up.
And also, the headline today was the Great Depression. That`s what they were calling for in America over in the newspapers in Great Britain. We`ll have “The Real Story.” It ain`t the Great Depression. Coming up.
But let`s lead with this. Senior executives from the five largest U.S. oil companies were called in front of the principal`s office again. Congressional committee today wanted them to defend their success. I know it sounds crazy, but, remember, Congress is made up of lawyers who went all politician on us. And why would we expect lawyers who are now politicians to use logic or principles? So here`s “The Point” tonight.
Since when in this country do we have a maximum wage law? Today`s move by Congress is yet one more sign that capitalism is in trouble and socialism is marching right around the corner. And here`s how I got there.
I want to make this really clear. I don`t like paying $3.50 a gallon any more than you do. I hate it. I look at it — I cuss these oil companies all the time. But it`s just a popular thing to do, I guess.
We have to put aside our feelings when we`re talking about oil companies and their profits. Feelings and logic, different. Oil is a commodity. Just like milk or coffee, it is subject to the simple laws of supply and demand. And I`ll explain in a minute. Also now speculation.
Back in the late 1990s, oil companies like Exxon were taking a bath in red ink, losing money. Today, things are looking up. Good for them. Isn`t that what we used to say in America?
Why are we now pulling them in for hearings in front of Congress? If Congress wants some credibility, maybe they should go after big milk, as well. Milk is up 26 percent. Oil is up 26 percent. How about we talk to big egg? Because eggs are up 40 percent. Where are their profits going? How is that happening?
Too bad we haven`t been taught to hate farmers the way we have been taught to hate the oil industry. Remember, we live in a gloriously capitalist system, right now. And big oil companies help fuel our economy. We need them to succeed. That`s what kills me every time I hear one of these presidential candidates say something like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We thought it would be easy to change our energy policy. Exxon Mobil made $11 billion last quarter.
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If you saw Exxon Mobil profits last year: $40 billion in profits.
OBAMA: Now Exxon is making $40 billion a year, and we`re paying $3.50 for gas.
I`m Barack Obama. I don`t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: I don`t take money from — he can`t. It`s against the law to take money from companies, but that`s a different story.
Vilifying the evil rich. Makes a great speech, makes a great campaign commercial. But until people like Barack Obama and Clinton, who both make over a million dollars a year, get their wish in turning America into a socialist nation, keep one thing in mind, will you? Corporations like Exxon and Shell are not owned by one big fat guy who`s sitting in a room, lighting his cigar with 100-dollar bills. They`re publicly held companies. The shareholders are people like you.
In fact, one of the biggest beneficiaries of big oil success are these huge retirement funds that a lot of moms, a lot of dads, maybe even you or Grandma`s depend on their survival.
Let me use the same tactic that the politicians like to use in Washington. Why is it all of these congressional people want Grandma eating cat food? Of course they don`t want that. Think hard before you jump on this Marxist anti-oil bandwagon.
Tonight, America, here`s what you need to know. A tax on windfall profits is just another progressive ploy of redistributing wealth in America. Here, success should be encouraged, not penalized. All businesses, big ones, small ones, one that climb on rocks, everything in between, deserve the opportunity to enjoy the reward that results from their risk. They should also pay for their penalties if they, you know, go ahead. They lose, they made a bad investment, bye-bye. I`m not there to bail you out.
Remember, that`s the way the stock market works. Big oil is only big because it`s made up of a bunch of little investors like you. Unfortunately, doesn`t seem like anybody is telling you that besides me tonight.
David Weidner is the Wall Street columnist for “Marketwatch.”
David, the FTC has done study after study after study that shows the profits are in line with big oil. What`s the beef here?
DAVID WEIDNER, COLUMNIST, “MARKETWATCH”: Well, the beef, I mean, the reason you see these executives paraded up on Capitol Hill is that it`s a very simple answer in a political season to a very complicated problem about rising fuel prices. I mean, the reality is, is that the market is driving these prices higher, and the oil companies are really only one part of this.
BECK: Let me — let me jump in here on this one. Because there`s — the falling dollar, which is directly tied to the Fed and their moves is rising oil prices.
But also the hedge funds. There`s speculation now on what the price of oil is going to be in six months. Why aren`t we dragging the hedge funds in front of Congress?
WEIDNER: Well, why not retail investors, too. I mean, you know, there are opportunities for individuals now to go and plan these markets that didn`t exist even just a few years ago.
So the reality is that while the — while, you know, this isn`t a supply and demand game anymore, this is all about financial instruments, derivatives, things that we used to think were so — that were the demand of sophisticated investors, it`s in the hands of everyone now. And these markets are being played. So this isn`t — this isn`t a simple supply and demand game anymore.
BECK: David, it`s really frightening to me that we seem to be living in a country that doesn`t understand capitalism anymore. We just go after people who are villains, no matter what the truth is.
Why isn`t anybody going after big egg and big milk? The prices are up just as much as oil. I think the reason is, is because Congress is responsible for the price of milk going through the roof.
WEIDNER: Well, I don`t know if the Congress is responsible for oil or milk going through the roof…
BECK: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait, wait, wait. Let me defend that one.
WEIDNER: OK.
BECK: Yes, they are. And tell me where I`m wrong. The reason why we are having so much problems with milk and eggs is because farmers can`t afford the food for their beef. They can`t afford the food for their beef because they can no longer afford to buy corn. They can`t afford to buy corn because Congress is mandating ethanol. I mean, they are responsible for the rise in food.
WEIDNER: I see your point. But you`re making the same mistake that Congress made today. And they`re playing the blame game. And the reality is we need to start holding hearings about the solution, about energy policy in this country that will work.
You know, the reality is, is that, you know, these rising prices are maybe good for oil companies in the short-term, but in the long-term, they`re not. Because Americans are going to, like any other economy, Americans are going to get smart and they`re going to say, “Hey, I want a hybrid car. I want to — I`m going to curtail my use of energy. I`m going to find other sources.”
And these oil companies are not big players in alternative energy right now.
BECK: You know what, I…
WEIDNER: They`re going to price themselves out of business.
BECK: All right. David, thanks a lot.
Let me switch gears here and go to Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BECK: Ron, that doesn`t make any — it doesn`t make any sense at all to talk about, “Well, maybe we should get more into hybrids.” That`s the problem with all of this, is there`s too much money in the system. We`re gaming the system.
You go after oil, and not the farmers because, well, the farmers are more popular. You go after oil and not GE because, well, GE is doing clean energy. Big oil is doing dirty energy. Why should we be playing this game at all?
REP. RON PAUL (R), TEXAS: Well, we shouldn`t be. What we should do is to protect the marketplace, let the market determine what is the best source of energy. This whole idea that when prices go up, we have to blame somebody, sometimes people want to blame labor unions for the inflation and the high cost of living, and sometimes people want to blame profits like for the oil companies.
And they never want to talk about the real problem, and that is there are too many dollars floating around because they`re created by the Federal Reserve. And some prices go up faster than other prices. And that`s why we have this tremendous price inflation in energy.
But I think we`re looking at symptoms and not at the cause. And they`re getting all over the place on trying to solve a problem like putting taxes on energy companies. That`s not going to solve the problem.
BECK: Well, I have to tell you, I am more convinced than ever the cause of almost all of our problems in our nation come from the building that you`re standing in right now.
Almost everything that Congress does, at least in the last 100 years, we end up paying for. And then they`re fixing the problems that they created. I mean, it`s — this story over and over and over again. And yet, you know, they want to expand programs, they want to make everything bigger.
PAUL: And I can boil that down to the fact that the people around this place in D.C. and in the capital and the executive branch and in the judicial branch, they don`t care that much about our Constitution, because if we followed the Constitution, we wouldn`t have these spending programs and we wouldn`t be causing all these problems.
And yet the more problems we create, the more government the people demand. For every problem we create down here, or try to solve, then we create two new problems. And it goes on and on and it pyramids up. And some day we`re going to have to realize we can`t afford this much government any longer. We`ve got — we`ve got to depend on ourselves and on freedom and sound money rather than thinking that Washington, D.C., can solve all our problems.
BECK: I have to tell you, they — we had the Fed up on Capitol Hill, and everybody is trying to get more regulation, more power to the Fed. Yet we`re calling oil in front of Congress to explain their profits. Part of the reason why oil is so expensive is because of the Fed.
Do you mind, Ron — we`re up against a break. Will you stay for a couple of minutes and we`ll talk to you about the Fed coming up on the other side of the break. We`ll be back in a minute. Tonight, brought to you by the sleep number bed. It is the sleep number bed, the bed that counts by select comfort.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: The British newspaper “The Independent UK” claims that we`re in the Great Depression here in America. Great headline, huh? How about the content? Unfortunately for all of our friends over in England, they`re just wrong. And I`ll tell you why in tonight`s “Real Story.”
But first, I swear to you, the entire stock market ganged up today and decided to play one giant, you know, April Fool`s joke on investors. Because I cannot explain how the stock market rocketed today in the face of the morning news that gas prices are hitting another record high.
UBS is announcing another $19 billion in write-downs, along with the resignation of its chairman. The Deutsche Bank is revealing another $3.9 billion in write-downs. And maybe I`m missing the forest through the trees, but the bad news this morning seemed to be irrelevant compared to yesterday`s announcement of the most sweeping reform in regulation of the financial sector since the Great Depression.
So if that is why the mark set so happy, how long is that going to last? I mean, Isn`t this a little like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? Isn`t it already too late? Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is back with us.
Giving the Fed, the organization that answers to nobody in our government, more power when they created these bubbles is beyond me, Mr. Paul.
PAUL: I think you`re absolutely right. We do need regulations in all markets. The market itself regulates itself by supply and demand and bad businesses going out of business and consumers benefiting when a business does a good deal.
But the regulation has to be on government. The regulation has to be on the Federal Reserve. You`re absolutely right. The Federal Reserve has so much power and is very secretive. And now we`re planning on giving it even more. But that`s what should be regulated. What we need is an oversight of the Federal Reserve. We have no oversight of monetary policy. They can create all the money they want out of thin air, and that is the creation of the bubble. It causes the malinvestment and the excessive debt.
And now they`re coming in and they want to regulate the — it`s sort of like putting wage and price controls on once you have inflation. Not realizing the inflation comes from the Federal Reserve inflating the money supply.
BECK: OK. The — I think we`re absolutely on the road to nationalism. I mean, we`re going to nationalize these banks and this debt. I mean, I don`t know how you get out of it.
They were saying yesterday — I think it was yesterday in the newspaper, I saw that they`re on a road to nationalization, the Nordic way. Well, the Nordic way, when they bailed out their banks, they let the stock — they let the stockholders and the shareholders fail. They lose their money. None of these CEOs walked away with any money. That`s not what we`re doing here. We`re talking about bailing out the mortgages and bailing out the banks. What kind of system is that?
PAUL: no, I think we are on the road to nationalization. But we`ve already been on that road, and this is just accelerating the pace. Because the large banks especially are in collusion with the Federal Reserve. Because once the Federal Reserve creates the high-powered money, the banking system then can further inflate through fractional reserve banking. So they`re in cahoots in this whole — whole process.
BECK: Congressman, I have to tell you that I find myself increasingly in a place mentally that I just don`t want to be. I`ve never been a conspiracy theorist. I`ve never been any of these — you know, I`ve never been a John Birch or anything. I always thought those people were crazy.
But the more you learn and the more you look at history — this weekend I was reading about the crash of 1907, and how that thing was controlled and what came out of that and came to the Fed. I mean, we`re repeating the same mistake, and it was always to give these private individuals control, almost a fourth branch of government or a separate tree, of our economic system. How do we get — how do we untangle ourselves from that?
PAUL: There is no more ominous power than to give this authority to a secret bank to create money out of thin air. And it works as long as people trust the money.
But if the money has no backing to it and it is not convertible into anything, it eventually ends. And this is what we`re witnessing, the beginning of the end of the dollar hegemony. It is going to end, because the world is starting to reject it.
But no, we need a new monetary system, and it will come. All paper money self-destructs. Now we`re seeing what is happening. They`re able to patch it together now and then for decades, even Bernanke who is getting a lot of blame now, he didn`t create most of these bubbles. Yet he`s trying to keep this system that is unsalvageable together by just further inflating.
But eventually we will have to have monetary reform. It is coming, and it`s coming quickly.
BECK: Congressman, I had David Walker on. I know you know who he is, the head of the GAO. And he said this is a nightmare coming. It`s a giant meteor coming, falling out of the sky our way.
He said that it will only be solved by a third party. You`re not going to be the Republican candidate. Why don`t you run as a third party? You have a lot off support out there.
PAUL: Well, one reason is that, you know, there`s not a whole lot of democracy in this country. You know, in the third party, you really have a tough job. I tried it one time. Spent most of my money just trying to get on the ballot.
So unless you`re Ross Perot, you can`t compete. You know, you do get marginalized even if you have nonconventional ideas, you get marginalized in the major parties as I have been. Right now it is — I think there is a fertile field out there right now for a third party. There`s a lot of frustration and anger and aggravation. And it`s a stalemate.
You know, I don`t see any difference between the three leading candidates right now.
BECK: Congressman…
PAUL: And people are starved for some other answers. I agree with you on that.
BECK: I have to tell you, I don`t agree with everything that you say. But there are a few things that, man, you got it right on, and nobody else is saying it. Thank you very much.
PAUL: Thank you, Glenn.
BECK: Now, time to find out where I`m wrong. Letting people and businesses fail is not only the capitalist thing to do; it is the compassionate thing to do. Failure builds strength. Agree or disagree? I can`t wait to see this poll. Go CNN.com/Glenn right now and cast your vote.
All right. Coming up, when is it illegal to report an illegal, and what is an honest cop to do? We have the latest on an illegal immigrant suing two NYPD officers for reporting him to the authorities. It will make blood shoot out of your eyes.
And a former Wal-Mart employee takes on the mega-store. But should this case be swayed by sympathy or by the law?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: Executive order 41. And executive order is when the president or a mayor or a governor knows they can`t get something by Congress or their city council so they just write it up themselves.
This one was issued by New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg in 2003. Essentially, it was a pledge that the city would not alert immigration authorities to illegals who otherwise obey the law. And it was intended, or they say, to encourage illegal immigrants to seek help from the police and other agencies without fear that they`d be turned in to federal immigration officials. Well, wait until you hear this story.
New York City cab driver now crying foul because he says a police lieutenant here in New York tipped off the feds about his illegal status. So it`s in court now. He`s suing.
Jessica Vaughn is a senior policy analyst for the Center for Immigration Studies and former foreign services officer.
Jessica, first of all, let`s start with this. How did this guy get called? Why did the police officer call?
JESSICA VAUGHN, SENIOR POLICY ANALYST, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: Well, this guy had a history of illegal activity: of traffic tickets, of dangerous behavior with respect to other people. He was like a ticking time bomb in this community.
BECK: OK. Give me some — give me some examples here of the things that he had done.
VAUGHN: Well, he had been involved in fights with other people. He had apparently tried to run somebody over with his car.
BECK: Over a parking space.
VAUGHN: Yes.
BECK: I mean, it`s like that “Seinfeld” episode. It is.
VAUGHN: So he`s clearly a danger to other people in New York. Aside from the fact that he`s an illegal alien.
BECK: Right. That doesn`t — wait, wait, that doesn`t quite go far enough. When you think of illegal aliens, the media has trained us to go, oh, but it`s only because Mexico is so bad, and they`re just trying to come over here and feed their family because of the economy of Mexico.
This isn`t an illegal alien from Mexico. He`s an illegal alien living in New York City. Where is he from originally?
VAUGHN: He`s from Palestine. The West Bank.
BECK: The West Bank, yes. He`s from the West Bank. The place where they were handing out candy and cake on 9/11. How did this guy get into the country?
VAUGHN: He came in on a visa, and he simply overstayed.
BECK: I thought we were going to fix that as our government — after 9/11. Wasn`t that the first thing we were going to fix?
VAUGHN: Well, supposedly. But the — the mechanism has not been implemented at all. I mean, overstayers are as many as, you know, 40 some percent of illegal aliens.
BECK: Yes. No, I know. It is — the problem has actually doubled in size. But executive order 41, let me go to the city now. Executive 41 was for trying to get poor illegal aliens who are here to feel comfortable to calling the police. But you say that`s not even a problem.
VAUGHN: No. All of these executive orders, sanctuary orders and so on are based on junk social science. If you look at the Justice Department`s crime statistics, specifically on victimization and on crime reporting, they don`t keep statistics on immigrants in particular.
But what you find is that Hispanics, for example, actually have higher rates of crime reporting than non-Hispanics. So there`s no reason to believe that this is even a problem, much less that this executive order is the way to deal with it.
The social science research does show that the main reason immigrants don`t report crimes by far is language barriers and not understanding how…
BECK: Well, we should all speak all languages then.
Jessica, one final question here. I have only, like, 30 seconds. He`s suing now. Who`s paying the court fees?
VAUGHN: Well, the Asian-American Legal Defense Fund is representing him. But I imagine the taxpayers of New York City are picking up a big part of the tab, too, to defend the police officer.
BECK: Well, it`s only the right thing to do. Jessica…
VAUGHN: It is a great country, isn`t it?
BECK: It really is. I love it more every day. Jessica, thanks a lot.
VAUGHN: You`re welcome.
BECK: Coming up, front page headlines will tell you the U.S. economy has sunk now — this is the headline from Great Britain — into the Great Depression. Really? We`ll find out in tonight`s “Real Story.”
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: Welcome to “The Real Story.”
If you saw “Drudge” this morning, you probably saw this: the U.K.`s “Independent” Paper declaring that yes, in effect, America is already in the Great Depression. If you`ve watched this program for a while, you would think that I would agree. Oh, he`s going to say, I told you so.
No. “The Real Story” is “The Independent” has it completely wrong. We`re not in the Great Depression. In fact, I think the story is about something else that I`ve been warning about for months now — this country`s slow but steady creep toward socialism.
The Independent`s main piece of evidence to support their depression announcement is a new government study that projects 28 million Americans will be on food stamps later this year. Like somehow food stamps are now the official depression indicator.
The number will be the highest level of people on food stamps in the history of our country and the program. It`s also exactly what progressives in government have been hoping for.
After the last few years, the progressives have been quietly streamlining our enrollment process, loosening the eligibility criteria. And most importantly, they have been running television and radio advertisements all designed to convince people to give food stamps a try.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Living on one paycheck can`t be easy.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It`s not. But at least we`re eating healthy. I found out about food stamps from one of my neighbors. I applied and qualified. That`s really helped our family.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Food stamps? You qualified even with Jeffrey working?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sure did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Sure did. You can too. Everybody, have some more free government cheese.
Is there no shame in this country anymore? Food stamps are just the tip of the now taxpayer-funded iceberg lettuce. The same expansion of government social programs is happening everywhere.
Last week I told you how they made it so easy to enroll in Medicaid that one-third of all New York City residents are now on that program. Even Pell grants for low-income college students are up 41 percent. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find a social program that isn`t getting more popular in America today.
A “USA Today” study found that 25 major government entitlement programs increased enrollment on the average of 17 percent in the last five years. The population of the country has only grown five percent during that time.
I`ve said it before on this program and I`m laughed at by every expert that gets on this program, but mark my words, America, in three to five years, if we don`t change this course and wake up, we will be a European- style socialist country. We don`t need any new government programs to get there. All we need to do is just keep expanding the ones we already have.
Please wake up. It`s no longer morning in America if no one gets out of bed and goes to work.
Amity Shlaes is syndicated columnist for Bloomberg and the author of “The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression.”
Amity, it`s always great to have you on. I`ve learned so much from your book, and it started just a series of explorations in my own life. But I saw this headline and I immediately thought of you, because I knew you would laugh harder than I did when they announced that we`re in the Great Depression. We`re not even close to the Great Depression with what we have got going on now.
AMITY SHLAES, AUTHOR, “THE FORGOTTEN MAN”: Well, yes. And you know the U.K. loves to see negative in the United States. It`s a habit that they happen to have. But when it comes to food stamps, it`s a cyclical program, so food stamp use always goes up in a downturn. That doesn`t mean there is a depression, and I think…
BECK: Wait, wait, wait, wait. These numbers have been going up in the good times. We have moved more people into the upper class from the middle class, and the lower class has not changed its number. It`s not getting bigger. So these numbers are in good times.
What happens when we actually hit bad?
SHLAES: Well, we haven`t actually hit bad yet. But when any upturn in unemployment, you`ll see more people getting food stamps. It`s a cyclical program.
And yes, Glenn, you`re totally right. The Bush administration has plugged the food stamp very hard.
Most of the people who get food stamps are not hungry people. It`s a form of welfare instead of money. The country isn`t comfortable anymore with giving money, but we are comfortable with handing out debit cards for food. And that`s what they are.
BECK: You know what? This is what we`re showing right now. There is a debit card, and I asked in the monologue, is there no shame anymore? No. There is no shame.
Part of the reason why people didn`t want to be on food stamps is because it`s uncomfortable. I would hope that it is. It`s uncomfortable to take that in to a store and buy something. Well, now you`ve got a credit card, so you`re just like everybody else. Of course there is no shame in this anymore.
SHLAES: Well, that`s right. Nobody wants to shame other people, but to act like a credit card or a debit card is real credit is misrepresentation to people.
BECK: Hold on just a second. Hold on just a second.
If I may go back to our founding fathers, you don`t want to make people comfortable in poverty. You want to have them have motivation to get out of poverty. You know? And when you make it easier and easier and easier for people to live in poverty, and say, oh, no, don`t worry about it, you`ll get food stamps, sure have some more, have some more money, nobody gets out, and you kill the spirit of man.
Am I wrong?
SHLAES: No, you`re right. And I think it`s interesting that this is our welfare that we don`t talk about. We think — we pat ourselves on the back for getting rid of welfare. Meanwhile, this program is going millions and millions of people on it. It`s hard to hate. There it is.
BECK: There you go. Thanks a lot, Amity. I appreciate it.
Now, eight years ago, a woman was in a tragic car accident. She was in an accident with an 18-wheeler, an accident that left her permanently brain damaged. This story is a horrible, tragic story. This is bad things happen to good people.
The good news in this story is the woman`s employer, Wal-Mart, stepped up to the plate immediately, paid $470,000 for the woman`s medical care. But then the woman`s family sued the trucking company, won a $700,000 settlement.
Well, everybody seemed to be happy except for one small problem. Like almost every company`s health plan, you probably have it in your health plan, Wal-Mart`s plan required them to be paid back in the event that the victim won a legal settlement.
Well, the woman didn`t want to give the money back. She said — well, actually her husband said she needed it more than Wal-Mart. So they sued, and they lost. And they appealed, and they lost again.
And now the media, namely MSNBC, which sees Wal-Mart just as another evil profit-hungry black-hearted corporation, has used their own evil black-hearted corporation to take up her cause and deliver to GE some well- deserved ratings.
Well, while the tragedy of this story is unavoidable — again, bad things happen to good people — “The Real Story” here is quite simple. This is about putting people and principles first, even when everything in us screams to compromise on those principles and help the people.
What happened to this woman is heartbreaking, and the story really gets worse from there. There is no doubt about it. But labeling Wal-Mart as the villain is the easy way out, and I`m not surprised that Keith Olbermann would take that easy way.
Let me ask you this, Keith, why are the victims` attorneys not villains as well? I mean, they took somewhere around a third of her $700,000 settlement. Did they need it more than she did?
Why didn`t they just take the case pro bono and do the right thing? What about the court fees and the expenses for the experts?
If this is really about the good of the victims, shouldn`t those fees have been waived as well? Does the government need that money?
The truth is this story isn`t about villains or money at all. It`s about living up to the agreements that we make. Mean what you say and say what you mean, especially, especially when those agreements do not work in our favor.
Vanessa Fuhrmans is a staff reporter at “The Wall Street Journal” who has been covering this tragic story.
And you know what? It`s really hard for me to take the side of Wal- Mart, because it`s easy to blame them. But even their attorneys said, if I may quote here, “We`re not contending that Wal-Mart isn`t entitled to a payment.”
So what are they doing exactly?
VANESSA FURHMANS, “WALL STREET JOURNAL”: Well, I think the question here is, you`re right, that it is legal, this is a mechanism that has been in insurance circles for years to prevent people from getting paid for the same thing twice. But I think the question that the story raises is, what happens when somebody like Mrs. Shank is in this position and she`s not made whole by the settlement?
BECK: OK. Well…
FURHMANS: The question is, should the company get first crack in all of the money, or should it be divided proportionately?
BECK: Well, I just want to say something that has probably not been said about Wal-Mart on television anytime soon because it`s not convenient for ratings. Wal-Mart is the sixth largest charitable organization on planet Earth. When you put the Wal-Mart family, when you put the — what is it, the Walden family? When you put the family in the mix, they`re number two, and they`re only behind Bill and Melinda Gates.
This is not an evil corporation, no matter how people try to paint it.
What is this corporation supposed to do? Are they supposed to pay out and then set a legal precedent so everybody doesn`t have to worry about their insurance program? What are they supposed to do? How do they win here?
FURHMANS: Yes, you`re right. I mean, they`re a very convenient target, they are the lightning rod for everything that is supposedly evil about capitalism in this country.
Wal-Mart is by no means the only company that has this kind of clause in their health plan. It`s very standard. I will say, though, Wal-Mart has been a leader in terms of making sure their legal language on this issue is very tight.
BECK: Wouldn`t you? Vanessa, wouldn`t you if you`re Wal-Mart? You`re constantly a target. You`re the second biggest charitable organization on Earth and you`re always evil.
I`ve got to run, Vanessa. Thank you very much.
That`s “The Real Story” tonight. We`ll be back in a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: I want to show you something that we found from a speech by Barack Obama. He was on the campaign trail talking about sex education and his daughters. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I`ve got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I`m going to teach them, first of all, about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don`t want them punished with a baby.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Punished with a baby? I mean, OK, you`re going teach your kids about morals and virtues, great. How about consequences? How about personal responsibility?
I know I`m going to get hammered on this one. People are going to say, oh, you`re taking him too literally.
Forgive me. I`m a little biased. I`ve been blessed with four children. I think they`re nothing short of miracles. If you have children, I bet you feel the same way.
My 3-year-old son is adopted, and his mother was a teenager, a young woman who took responsibility for her actions, and at the same time blessed my family with a beautiful little boy. He is a miracle both to me and I believe his birth mother.
I feel there is too little personal responsibility in this country. What has happened to us? When are we going to say, sucks to be you, you made a mistake?
We have to teach our children that their choices have consequences. We have to stop giving trophies out to the eighth place finisher. You didn`t win and it`s OK.
You know what? The speech has nothing to do with said education, and it has nothing to do with the right to life. It has everything to do with responsibility and living with the choices of your own actions.
I guess I shouldn`t be surprised from Barack Obama. I don`t see eye to eye with him on just about anything, but this kind of twisted thinking goes way beyond the realm of even an uber-liberal.
He likes to paint himself as a moderate, but the reality is his political career has largely been spent as a craftsman of liberal stands on gun control, on the death penalty, and abortion.
Kenneth Vogel is a reporter for The Politico.
I mean, it kills me that the — that babies now, Ken, are a punishment with him. Am I reading too much into this?
KENNETH VOGEL, POLITICO: Well, I`m sure his people cringed when they heard him say that as well. And they`ve since done quite a bit of damage control, actually using the words that you just used, saying that Senator Obama believes that babies are miracles, but he believes that there are too many unwarranted teen pregnancies, and that he would work to reduce that.
His track record though does provide quite a bit of fodder for folks who are looking to go after him on abortion rights and sex education issues. In 2004, when he was running for U.S. Senate, he said that — take parental consent, for instance. He said that he would support parental consent laws as long as there was a bypass for sexually abused girls. However, in 1996, on a questionnaire that Politico obtained, he said he would flat-out oppose parental consent laws. And on another questionnaire in that `96 race, which was for state senate, he said that he would support them possibly for extremely young girls.
So, there is fodder there, both to question his consistency, and to go after him as Republicans likely will on abortion.
BECK: I have to tell you, this guy is all about victims. That`s what he`s about. He`s about victims.
If you look at the preachings of his — or the teachings of his preacher, it`s all victimhood. Well, that`s the same thing here.
This baby is going to punish or victimize his daughter if she happens to get pregnant. Instead of taking personal responsibility for her own actions, the baby is going to punish her. Well, how about the mother who is 40 years old or 35 years old who went out one night, got pregnant, and now does she have to be punished for her actions? No. She would be a victim of that child.
People are only a victim of their own choices in life. Sometimes bad things happen to good people, as we pointed out a few minutes ago. But, you know what? It sucks to be you, make something good come out of that.
How am I missing Barack Obama and — or how is the rest of the country missing Barack Obama and his love with victimhood?
VOGEL: Well, you know, Barack Obama has never had to run a tough race versus a Republican in a general election. So he`s been able to take largely liberal views, and it`s kind of even more pronounced than it is for a typical Democratic politician. All Democrats, like all Republicans, move to the base during the primary election and then come back to the center during the general.
Well, Barack Obama has never had a tough general election, so he`s never really been held to account for some of these views that folks on the right would take issue with, including some of this stuff that we`re now hearing from you.
BECK: If you don`t — if you don`t think, Democrats, that Barack Obama is going to get it from 527s, they`re going hammer this guy. You`re doing yourself a disservice by not taking him on right now. See if he can stand up to the scrutiny.
All right. We`ve got to move on to “The Real America,” brought to you by CSX.
World Autism Awareness day is tomorrow, creating awareness for the condition while doctors continue to look for new treatments. But one mom in Staten Island isn`t sitting idly by. She`s taking matters into her own hands, showing a little perseverance and a couple of basketballs can go a long way.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BECK (voice over): It`s the kind of thing that most parents take for granted — watching your son or daughter play ball. But for parents of a special needs child, something so simple is too often inconceivable.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh! Nice work. Nice work.
BECK: Not here. Every Friday at Fastbreak Basketball Center in Staten Island, New York, a group of 27 children with autism get together and, like any other kid in America, they play basketball.
CHRISTINE DUNN, ORGANIZED AUTISTIC BASKETBALL PROGRAM: They can have their limitations, but at the same time, they can build their self-esteem and try their hardest. And they`re with kids just like them, so it makes it a lot nicer and easier on the parents. Easier on them because they don`t have to feel the pressure to be like, you know, everyone else.
BECK: Christine Dunn came up with the idea to start the program when her son Joseph expressed an interest in sports. There was just no place where her autistic son could join a team, so she started her own. Christine merely hoped Joseph would learn to play. It turns out he learned a whole lot more.
DUNN: Go, Joe, go!
This started, I`ve noticed, tremendous socialization. He talks about his friends at basketball. He names names and he wants to see them and he wants to play.
I notice that he`s actually getting good at it. He`s, you know, getting the ball in the net occasionally. He`s running, which is sometimes difficult for him, but he`s running as fast as he can. And he`s trying and he`s happy. And to me that`s, you know, the most important thing.
BECK: There`s no fear of teasing here, no worries about keeping up with other kids or being picked last for the team. It`s just about kids playing ball and parents watching proudly.
And it`s Joseph`s sister, Sarafina (ph), that puts it best.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I like Friday. He usually, like, is watching TV or something. But on Friday he`s usually now playing with everybody. And it`s very nice.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BECK: I have to tell you, that`s “The Real America,” seeing a problem and doing something about it yourself and fixing it, and making the world a better place.
If you would like to see more stories like this one, click on cnn.com/glenn and look for “The Real America” session.
Tonight`s “Real America” sponsored by CSX. It`s how tomorrow moves.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: So what do your kids watch when they get home from school, a little “SpongeBob SquarePants,” or maybe “Dora the Explorer,” which is my personal favorite. Perhaps they like something a little, you know, less stimulating and more on their intellectual level, like, I don`t know, “Countdown with Keith Olbermann,” maybe.
Whatever they watch, you can be sure that it`s not a puppet show featuring the murder of the president of the United States. No, no, no.
Moms in our country just generally seem to shy away from that sort of thing for their kids. But not over on good old Hamas TV. No, no. They`ve got it. And this is the sort of thing that is indoctrinating children to a life of violence and poverty and supposed martyrdom.
Watch this.
Where are the women? Where are the women? Where are the mothers going — my wife won`t let my kid watch “Speed Racer,” for the love of Pete. “It`s too violent!”
Where are the moms?
By the way, this is the same network that put that Mickey Mouse-type character to teach children the glorious benefits of armed resistance. It`s what we`re facing, best we recognize it.
I`ll put a link to this video in my email newsletter tomorrow. It has links to the stories we talk about every day, analysis, and much, much more.
It`s free. Just sign up right now at glennbeck.com.
From New York, goodnight America.
April 2nd, 2008 at 5:07 am
Bleck always confuses socialism and facism.
USA is not on the way to Socialism, but on the way to Facism.
He always belittles 9/11 truthers, but indeed, he agrees with them.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:29 am
I guess I might watch his show if I only had one channel.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:10 am
Here’s the lowdown for the slow people. Let me help you link it all together so you understand.
Fed controls the government via money supply.
Government goes to war with “iraq/afgan” because someone wants more power.
Government comes out money and says it’s going to give the Fed more power.
Ron Paul wants to eliminate the Fed.
Glenn Beck wants to eliminate the Fed.
So… know you know some of the most important variables … solve the problem.
If you eliminate the fed… the fed no longer controls the government… which in turn means that we have a chance to take back our government. If we control the government… then WE (the people) dictate what policies are pushed in this country.
So how do you get to this point??? YOU HAVE TO INFORM THE STUPID PEOPLE. GUESS WHAT THE STUPID PEOPLE WATCH???? T.V.!!! How do you get the message out to the stupid people? You find outlets that the stupid people watch. TAKE A GUESS AT ONE OF THE PROGRAMS THE STUPID PEOPLE WATCH. GLENN BECK’S program!!!
Use your brains!!!! Stop throwing people under the train because they don’t believe everything you believe… in order to change people’s minds… you have to start somewhere. Glenn is a great talk show host… but you can surely tell that the show on cnn is scripted. If you don’t listen to his radio program.. you should.. it is much different than the t.v. show. He is starting to believe that things are done by design… and if he’s starting to believe it.. THEN HELP IT ALONG WITH CALM, GOOD INSIGHT.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:24 am
Thanks, MeFoo! my sentiments exactly!
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:01 am
No problem tangalor…. People really need to stop and take the emotion out of the debate and think before they speak. Want to talk about fanatics??? Alex Jones is a fanatic in what he believes. Is he a “conspirator” now? Is he part of the “system” because he a fanatic?
The main reason the 9/11 truthers can’t get anything done and not many to listen is because they just run out with not more than emotion and start screaming. No one wants to hear that kinda bull crap. Stop and take the emotion out of the argument and slowly tear their arguments apart in a calm way and make them feel stupid in the process.
But regardless of all that… INTERNATIONAL BANKERS control our money supply. By “logical” thinking … they control our government via money. If they are in charge of the government… and the government is at war against nothing… then wouldn’t it make sense to unite as many people (whether they agree on ALL things) as possible against the main cause? Hell… even if it were only the FED they agreed on and both worked to get the message out to people… then at least they took out the major driving force of all our problems.
It just amazes me how stupid people can be sometimes when they don’t stop to think. They would rather distance themselves from everyone because the others don’t believe EVERYTHING that they believe instead of finding the things they DO AGREE on and trying to solve that problem. Wait… isn’t that whats wrong with America now days… People don’t find the common things… they ALWAYS look for the differences and attack them.
So I guess if you look at it that way… the people like “global” could blame themselves partly for the way our country is today. Amazing what happens when you stop to use your brain instead of just carrying it.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I’ve been seeing the word ‘militia’ in the news a lot lately. desensitize this. here’s the definition as ‘msn.com’ explains:
mi·li·tia [ mə líshə ] (plural mi·li·tias)
noun
Definition:
1. soldiers who are also civilians: an army of soldiers who are civilians but take military training and can serve full-time during emergencies
2. reserve military force: a reserve army that is not part of the regular armed forces but can be called up in an emergency
3. unauthorized quasi-military group: an unauthorized group of people who arm themselves and conduct quasi-military training
[Late 16th century. < Latin, "military service, body of soldiers" < milit- (see military)]
And here’s Websters’ definition:
mi·li·tia Audio Help /mɪˈlɪʃə/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[mi-lish-uh] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies.
2. a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers.
3. all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service.
4. a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government.
——————————————————————————–
[Origin: 1580–90; < L mīlitia soldiery, equiv. to mīlit- (s. of mīles) soldier + -ia -ia]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary – Cite This Source – Share This mi·li·tia Audio Help (mə-lĭsh’ə) Pronunciation Key
n.
An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.
A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.
The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.
[Latin mīlitia, warfare, military service, from mīles, mīlit-, soldier.]
(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Online Etymology Dictionary – Cite This Source – Share This
militia
1590, “system of military discipline,” from L. militia “military service, warfare,” from miles “soldier” (see military). Sense of “citizen army” (as distinct from professional soldiers) is first recorded 1696, perhaps from Fr. milice. In U.S. history, “the whole body of men declared by law amenable to military service, without enlistment, whether armed and drilled or not” (1777).
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper
WordNet – Cite This Source – Share This militia
noun
1. civilians trained as soldiers but not part of the regular army
2. the entire body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service; “their troops were untrained militia”; “Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia”–United States Constitution
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary – Cite This Source – Share This
Militia
Mi*li”tia\, n. [L., military service, soldiery, fr. miles, militis, soldier: cf. F. milice.]
1. In the widest sense, the whole military force of a nation, including both those engaged in military service as a business, and those competent and available for such service; specifically, the body of citizens enrolled for military instruction and discipline, but not subject to be called into actual service except in emergencies.
The king’s captains and soldiers fight his battles, and yet . . . the power of the militia is he. –Jer. Taylor.
2. Military service; warfare. [Obs.] –Baxter. Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
Now, there’s a striking resemblance, and a terrifying theme. MSN deems a militia unlawful, whilst Websters touts it something from early American Culture. Wow… seems someone’s been hard at work at the WikiMSNDictionary over the past few months… I wonder what other nonsense that site spews? google the word militia, and all you get is white supremist nonsense for the first 4 pages. Why? These two definitions clearly do not announce a white supremacy movement, yet the search engines (Yahoo, too) clearly point in the violence and nonsense of the white supremacist/unlawful direction.
I hear drum beats in teh background.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:50 pm
…and why the hell would a militia be unauthorized?
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:52 pm
The first duty of a revolutionary is to get away with it.
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:44 pm
For Heaven’s sake people, have any of you actually READ the Federal Reserve Act? I have, it only takes about 15 minutes and there isn’t anything mysterious or evil about it. The Fed is not some back-ally cloke and dagger defacto government. It’s the central bank of the United States and nothing more. It is not controlled by Isreal, the Rothchilds, “International Banksters” or anyone else. You can learn who controls the Fed by just reading the law which created it. Not only that, but you can also learn the the people who do run the Fed have a legal obligation to use their authority to assist productivity in the United States, and to keep the dollar stable against foriegn currencies. That’s written into the act. Yes, the head of the Fed can be sent to prison if he acts against the best interests of the United States! Do a little homework please, and stop believing everything you read on the internet.
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:51 pm
#67 — Federal Reserve CORPORATION is a PRIVATE CORPORATION
“Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are the United States government’s institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign swindlers.” – Congressional Record 12595-12603 June 10, 1932
“The Federal Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities.” – Lewis vs. United States 9th Circuit 1992
“Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its powers, but the truth is that the Federal Reserve System has usurped the government. It controls everything in congress and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will.” – Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency
“Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States.” — Sen. Barry Goldwater (Rep. AR)
“The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International bankers.” – Congressman Louis T. McFadden (Rep. Pa)
And YES THEY ARE OWNED BY INTERNATIONAL JEWISH BANKERS….. TEACH YOUR KIDS WHO DESTROYED AMERICA !!!
1) The Rothschilds – London
Lehman Brothers – NY
2) The Rothschilds – Berlin
3) The Lazard Brothers – Paris
4) IsraelSeiff – Italy
5) Kuhn-Loeb Company – Germany
6) The Warburgs – Amsterdam
7) The Warburgs – Hamburg
9) Goldman and Sachs -NY
10) The Rockefellers – NY
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Total B.S.! The Fed is owned by it’s member banks, that’s written into the law. Like I said:
READ THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT!
It’s not long and it’s not difficult to understand. When you’ve read it you’ll know why all this stuff about it being controled by other countries is wrong, and in fact can never happen. Oh, and by the way, just because a lot of people think the Fed is a branch of the governmnet doesn’t mean there is something sinister about it. It just means that there’s a lot of people who are lazy about learning. The Federal Reserve Act specifically says that the bank is a… Gee, guess what: A BANK! DUH.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:06 pm
FEDERAL RESERVE = ZIONIST ORGANIZATION.
TEACH YOUR KIDS WHO DESTROYED AMERICA.
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:37 am
I guess I should have been more specific in what I wrote. Let me try again.
For those of you who finished high school and know how to read, call it up and read the Federal Reserve Act. This is the law which created the Fed. It takes about 15 minutes to read and it’s not at all difficult to understand. Among the things written in it, you will discover that ONLY the banks which are a part of the Federal Reserve System can own shares in the Fed. What that means is that the Rothchilds, Isreal, “Banksters”. Zionists, and whoever else you might think of CANNOT own any part of it. The member banks are owned my thousands and thousands of stockholders. The Fed is a huge, diverse system of banks that cannot in any way be controled by a single person, or a group of people, or anyone except those who are appointed by congress to run it.
Don’t believe what you read on the Internet without doing a little research on your own. In the case of the Fed, it’s really, really easy. Just READ the stupid thing for yourself and figure it out!
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:12 am
Mike… stop and look at your own statements. “IT’S A BANK… DUH”
What does a bank do? Do they house money and work non-profit? No idiot… they house money that people put in there. Those people expect to gain a return on their money. How would fed get a return on their money? By having someone borrow some of that money and paying it back with interest. Who’s going to borrow that money since in the constitution it specifically says
“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States; (<<<loophole)
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; (<<<< what they are “supposed” to do)”
So a private entity has used a loophole to establish a stronghold on our money system. Hmmm… So in order to keep our government running… we have to “borrow” money from a private bank…. then pay that money back to them with interest. But all the while Congress is supposed to be the ones printing and regulating the money supply…. Why? Because our founding fathers were not nearly as dumb as the people are today. They knew that if a private entity controlled the money supply… that that entity would control this government they were setting up. Why? Because the private entity does NOT report to the American people. They are NOT accountable for their actions with the American people. They are NOT appointed by THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!
Use your f---ing brain man.
1. They are a private bank. Private banks must make money to stay in business.
2. They are not held accountable by the American people.
3. It was not authorized in the constitution.
What was the point of getting out from under Britain do you suppose? Was it because our forefathers didn’t like the way the British flag looked? Was it because they didn’t like having an awesome navy? Was it because they didn’t like being on that side of the world? Stop and think about the reasons why they fought a bloody war and declared independence from Britain. One of the reasons would be because they wanted to be “free” to pursue what made them happy. Keep in mind the word “free”.
“the borrower is a slave to the lender”
If they fed is “lending” money to our government… what does that make our government to the FED????????????? Stop and think before you speak next time. Understand our history. Know the reasons great men have died for this country. A private business is in control of what makes this country tick… our money. Private businesses have to make a profit in order to continue the status quo or to gain market share. Money doesn’t get borrowed while things are calm and equalized, it’s gets borrowed when things are in a disarray and a “crisis” is upon us.
Think about it in your daily life. If your a smart person… you might have a credit card but will only use it in case of emergency. urr…. soo……. there has to be an emergency in order to get you to use that card. Hmmmm…… soo….. if the credit card companies had all sorts of power over your life… don’t you think they would create an emergency in order to get you to use their card so they can profit from you? Dur…
April 4th, 2008 at 9:19 am
It’s obvious you didn’t take my advice and read the Federal Reserve Act. If you had, you would have seen why everything you said is total B.S. I’ll say it again. READ IT FOR YOURSELF. All your “questions” are answered in the text of the Act.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:30 am
Teach your Children WHO DESTROYED OUR NATION. The FED RESERVE is a Private Corporation that serves a few at the expense of the many. Communism = Zionism
April 4th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Grateful Slaves
I am a grateful slave.
My master is a good man.
He gives me food, shelter, work and other things.
All he requires in return is that I obey him.
I am told he has the power to control my life.
I look up to him, and wish that I were so powerful.
My master must understand the world better than I,
because he was chosen by many others for his respected position.
I sometimes complain, but fear I cannot live without his help.
He is a good man.
My master protects my money from theft, before and after he takes half of it.
Before taking his half, he says only he can protect my money.
After taking it, he says it is still mine.
When he spends my money, he says I own the things he has bought.
I don’t understand this, but I believe him.
He is a good man.
I need my master for protection, because others would hurt me.
Or, they would take my money and use it for themselves.
My master is better than them:
When my master takes my money, I still own it.
The things he buys are mine.
I cannot sell them, or decide how they are used, but they are mine.
My master tells me so, and I believe him.
He is a good man.
My master provides free education for my children.
He teaches them to respect and obey him and all future masters they will have.
He says they are being taught well; learning things they will need to know in the future.
I believe him.
He is a good man.
My master cares about other masters, who don’t have good slaves.
He makes me contribute to their support.
I don’t understand why slaves must work for more than one master, but my master says it is necessary.
I believe him.
He is a good man.
Other slaves ask my master for some of my money.
Since he is good to them as he is to me, he agrees.
This means he must take more of my money; but he says this is good for me.
I ask my master why it would not be better to let each of us keep our own money.
He says it is because he knows what is best for each of us.
We believe him.
He is a good man.
My master tells me:
Evil masters in other places are not as good as he; they threaten our comfortable lifestyle and peace.
So, he sends my children to fight the slaves of evil masters.
I mourn their deaths, but my master says it is necessary.
He gives me medals for their sacrifice, and I believe him.
He is a good man.
Good masters sometimes have to kill evil masters, and their slaves.
This is necessary to preserve our way of life; to show others that our version of slavery is the best.
I asked my master:
Why do evil masters’ slaves have to be killed, along with their evil master?
He said: “Because they carry out his evil deeds.”
“Besides, they could never learn our system; they have been indoctrinated to believe that only their master is good.”
My master knows what is best.
He protects me and my children.
He is a good man.
My master lets me vote for a new master, every few years.
I cannot vote to have no master, but he generously lets me choose between two candidates he has selected.
I eagerly wait until election day, since voting allows me to forget that I am a slave.
Until then, my current master tells me what to do.
I accept this.
It has always been so, and I would not change tradition.
My master is a good man.
At the last election, about half the slaves were allowed to vote.
The other half had broken rules set by the master, or were not thought by him to be fit.
Those who break the rules should know better than to disobey!
Those not considered fit should gratefully accept the master chosen for them by others.
It is right, because we have always done it this way.
My master is a good man.
There were two candidates.
One received a majority of the vote – about one-fourth of the slave population.
I asked why the new master can rule over all the slaves, if he only received votes from one-fourth of them?
My master said: “Because some wise masters long ago did it that way.”
“Besides, you are the slaves; and we are the master.”
I did not understand his answer, but I believed him.
My master knows what is best for me.
He is a good man.
Some slaves have evil masters.
They take more than half of their slaves’ money and are chosen by only one-tenth, rather than one-fourth, of their slaves.
My master says they are different from him.
I believe him.
He is a good man.
I asked if I could ever become a master, instead of a slave.
My master said, “Yes, anything is possible.”
“But first you must pledge allegiance to your present master, and promise not to abandon the system that made you a slave.”
I am encouraged by this possibility.
My master is a good man.
He tells me slaves are the real masters, because they can vote for their masters.
I do not understand this, but I believe him.
He is a good man; who lives for no other purpose than to make his slaves happy.
I asked if I could be neither a master nor a slave.
My master said, “No, you must be one or the other.”
“There are not other choices.”
I believe him.
He knows best.
He is a good man.
I asked my master how our system is different, from those evil masters.
He said: “In our system, masters work for the slaves.”
No longer confused, I am beginning to accept his logic.
Now I see it!
Slaves are in control of their masters, because they can choose new masters every few years.
When the masters appear to control the slaves in between elections, it is all a grand delusion!
In reality, they are carrying out the slaves’ desires.
For if this were not so, they would not have been chosen in the last election.
How clear it is to me now!
I shall never doubt the system again.
My master is a good man
April 4th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Since someone’s probably going to spew out more of this internet crap, I’ll just repeat what I’ve said four time before. READ THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT FOR YOURSELF! Until you’ve read it you can be taken in by any B.S. But after you read it you’ll easily be able to tell what can and cannot happen.
Fella, the “profits” the Fed make are not the same as the “profits” a regular bank makes. If you had read the Act you would know that. In point of fact the Fed is a non-profit bank. It is a private organization, but it is a private organization who’s purpose for existance and day to day activities is regulated by the Federal Reserve Act. If you had read the act you would know that. The Fed does not print money and it does not lend money to the United States. The only organizations it loans money to are it’s member banks. If you had read the act you would know that. Have I said that enough times for it to sink in?
All of the basic assumptions you’re making about the Fed come from Internet trash. NONE of them are based on the actual law which created and regulates the Fed. Since your basic assumptions about it are incorrect, all the logical deductions you are making about it cannot ever be anything except wrong.
You have to READ the Federal Reserve Act before you can make any truthful statements about it.
READ IT! READ IT! READ IT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Until then you are like a third grader trying to speak about brain surgery.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Secrets of the political establishment concerning the 13th Amendment
The real secret the political establishment would prefer not to have revealed is: the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution did not end slavery, but only nationalized it!
That most Americans acquiesce in such political arrangements, and take great offense should anyone dare to explain their implications, has led me to the conclusion that America may be the last of the collectivist societies to wither away. Most Americans, sad to say, seem unprepared to deny the state´s authority to direct their lives and property as political officials see fit. The reason for this, as my first-day question to students is designed to elicit, is that most of us refuse to insist upon self-ownership.
We may, of course, choose to accept our role as state-owned chattels, particularly if we are well-treated by our masters. We may be so conditioned in our obeisance that, like cattle entering the slaughterhouse, we may pause to lick the hand of the butcher out of gratitude for having been well cared for. On the other hand, we may decide to reclaim our self-ownership by taking back the control over our lives that we have long since abandoned.
Perhaps the insanity of our social destructiveness, including the Bush Administration´s deranged declaration of a permanent war against the rest of the world, will bring about an examination of alternative ways of living together in conditions of peace and liberty. Our political systems cannot bring about such harmonious and life-sustaining ways because they are premised on a rejection of the principle of self-ownership. In a society of self-owning individuals, there would be no place for politicians, bureaucrats, and other state functionaries. Like the rest of us, they would have to confine their lives to minding their own business, and deriving whatever benefit they could from persons who chose to cooperate with them.
There is one person who can restore you to a state of self-ownership, however, and that person is you. To do so, you need only assert your claim, not as some empty gesture, but in full understanding of the existential meaning of such a claim, including the willingness to take full control of and responsibility for your life. While your claim will likely evoke cries of contempt from many, you may also find yourself energized by a life force that permeates all of nature; an élan vital that reminds us that life manifests itself only through individuals, and not as collective monstrosities; that life belongs to the living, not to the state or any other abstraction.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:19 am
14th. Amendment to the U.S. Constitution- was the creation of an ABSOLUTE Legislative Democracy
The Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
To more fully understand this fact one must look to the claim of jurisdiction in the amendment itself- a study of the legal theory “planes of jurisdiction”- formulated by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr in his magnum opus “The Common Law” http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/Books/Holmes/claw_c.htm. Is well worth the study of those genuinely interested in individual freedom.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:24 am
The Thirteenth Amendment to the federal constitution- watch the context of the word JURISDICTION and the legal relation it creates:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:26 am
The United States is the federal government.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Yeah,that’s one version #81.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Throw those “red herring” out there War Whore.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Why do Zionists try so hard to make us think the “Jusuits”, the Vatican or Black Pope is destroying America when we ALL KNOW the Zionists NEOCONS are the ones doing it.
Major Damage control going on eh “ITSMIKE” ??
April 4th, 2008 at 10:40 am
It really starting to smell FISHY here- “The Red Herring” are fornicating.
Red Herring Defined: Wikkipedia
In literature, a red herring is a plot device intended to distract the reader from a more important event in the plot, usually a twist ending.
The term “red herring” originates from the tradition whereby young hunting dogs in Britain were trained to follow a scent with the use of a “red” (salted and smoked) herring (see kipper). This pungent fish would be dragged across a trail until the puppy learned to follow the scent. Later, when the dog was being trained to follow the faint odor of a fox or a badger, the trainer would drag a red herring (which has a much stronger odor) across the animal’s trail at right angles. The dog would eventually learn to follow the original scent rather than the stronger scent.
In literature, the most commonplace use of a “red herring” is in mystery fiction. One particular character is described or emphasized in a way that seems to throw suspicion upon that character as the person who committed the crime: later, it develops that someone else is the guilty party.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:40 am
#83 I’ll just pretend I never heard that! Please don’t ASSUME tone by words typed especially in light of punctuation employed and mood of person reading. Thank you.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:57 am
War Whore you lend new meaning to the old adage-
“If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance- baffle them with BULLs---
April 4th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Are you best defined here War Whore?
Agent provocateur- Wikkepedia
An agent provocateur is often a police officer who encourages suspects to carry out a crime under conditions where evidence can be obtained; or who suggests the commission of a crime to another, in hopes he will go along with the suggestion, so he may be convicted of the crime. These are sometimes called sting operations.
One common use of Agents provocateurs is to investigate consensual or “victimless” crimes; since each participant in such crimes are willing participants, it is often difficult for the authorities to discover such crimes without the use of undercover agents.
Agents provocateurs are also used against political opponents. Here, it has been documented that provocateurs deliberately carry out or seek to incite counter-productive or ineffective acts, in order to foster public disdain for the group and provide a pretext for aggression against the group; and to worsen the punishments its members are liable for (see Red-baiting).
Historically, Agents provocateurs activities have been one operational tactic of labor spies who may also be hired to infiltrate, monitor, disrupt, or subvert union activities.
[edit] Terrorism
Terrorists act as agents provocateurs when they seek to provoke government repression or an aggressive response, hoping thereby to reduce the credibility of the government, gain it enemies, alienate, divide, and demoralize its constituency, and increase support for themselves. In this sense, provocation may be combined with endorsement terrorism. In many cases terrorist provocation is an example of what is colloquially called “let’s you and him fight”.
[edit] United States
Within the United States the COINTELPRO program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation had FBI agents posing as political radicals in order to disrupt the activities of radical political groups in the U.S., such as the Black Panthers, Ku Klux Klan, and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. The activities of agents provocateurs against dissidents in Imperial Russia was one of the grievances that led to the Russian Revolution of 1917. Yevno Azef is an example of agent provocateur.
New York Police officers have been accused of acting as agents provocateurs during protests against the Republican National Convention in New York City.[1]
The activities of agents provocateurs pose a number of ethical and legal issues. Within common law jurisdictions, the law of entrapment seeks to discern whether the provocateur’s target intended to commit the crime he participated in with the provocateur, or whether the suggestion to commit the crime began with the provocateur. It is also debatable whether the institutionalized deception that the use of agents provocateurs implies is in fact more harmful to the social order than the various consensual offenses typically investigated by provocateurs.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:03 am
For those interested in the current discussion on this un-monitored board see previous page 8 on this particular discussion
April 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am
So many words with so little meaning-old adage! I bet you wouldn’t talk to your mother or father like that! ha ha. My advice to you is prayer,fasting and Bible reading. THEN and only THEN you will ACTUALLY know something!(God laughs at your great wisdom).HA HA HA!!!
April 4th, 2008 at 11:11 am
BULLs----THIS BEST DESCRIBES YOU- War Whore
Bulls--- (often abbreviated BS), also Bullcrap, is a common English expletive. It can also be shortened to just “Bull”.
Most commonly, it describes incorrect, misleading, or false language and statements. Literally, it describes the faeces of a bull. As with many expletives, it can be used as an interjection (or in many other parts of speech) and can carry a wide variety of meanings.
Bulls---ting is usually used to describe statements that are false, or made-up. Usually people describe other people’s action of making a lot of statements as bulls---ting in arguments, when one is making up rules or making examples that are not anything to do with what they are discussing or when one is making statements by using examples that need different rules to be applied, so this person is bulls---ting
Bulls--- may also be used as a pejorative term for fanciful, imagined, or contrived ideas ranging from George W. Bush’s War on Terror to the Star Wars universe.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Page 8 for your edification:
80
Mark Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 10:26 am
The United States is the federal government.
#
79
Mark Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 10:24 am
The Thirteenth Amendment to the federal constitution- watch the context of the word JURISDICTION and the legal relation it creates:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
#
78
Mark Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 10:19 am
14th. Amendment to the U.S. Constitution- was the creation of an ABSOLUTE Legislative Democracy
The Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
To more fully understand this fact one must look to the claim of jurisdiction in the amendment itself- a study of the legal theory “planes of jurisdiction”- formulated by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr in his magnum opus “The Common Law” http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/Boo…..law_c.htm. Is well worth the study of those genuinely interested in individual freedom.
#
77
Mark Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Secrets of the political establishment concerning the 13th Amendment
The real secret the political establishment would prefer not to have revealed is: the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution did not end slavery, but only nationalized it!
That most Americans acquiesce in such political arrangements, and take great offense should anyone dare to explain their implications, has led me to the conclusion that America may be the last of the collectivist societies to wither away. Most Americans, sad to say, seem unprepared to deny the state´s authority to direct their lives and property as political officials see fit. The reason for this, as my first-day question to students is designed to elicit, is that most of us refuse to insist upon self-ownership.
We may, of course, choose to accept our role as state-owned chattels, particularly if we are well-treated by our masters. We may be so conditioned in our obeisance that, like cattle entering the slaughterhouse, we may pause to lick the hand of the butcher out of gratitude for having been well cared for. On the other hand, we may decide to reclaim our self-ownership by taking back the control over our lives that we have long since abandoned.
Perhaps the insanity of our social destructiveness, including the Bush Administration´s deranged declaration of a permanent war against the rest of the world, will bring about an examination of alternative ways of living together in conditions of peace and liberty. Our political systems cannot bring about such harmonious and life-sustaining ways because they are premised on a rejection of the principle of self-ownership. In a society of self-owning individuals, there would be no place for politicians, bureaucrats, and other state functionaries. Like the rest of us, they would have to confine their lives to minding their own business, and deriving whatever benefit they could from persons who chose to cooperate with them.
There is one person who can restore you to a state of self-ownership, however, and that person is you. To do so, you need only assert your claim, not as some empty gesture, but in full understanding of the existential meaning of such a claim, including the willingness to take full control of and responsibility for your life. While your claim will likely evoke cries of contempt from many, you may also find yourself energized by a life force that permeates all of nature; an élan vital that reminds us that life manifests itself only through individuals, and not as collective monstrosities; that life belongs to the living, not to the state or any other abstraction.
#
76
ItsMike Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Since someone’s probably going to spew out more of this internet crap, I’ll just repeat what I’ve said four time before. READ THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT FOR YOURSELF! Until you’ve read it you can be taken in by any B.S. But after you read it you’ll easily be able to tell what can and cannot happen.
Fella, the “profits” the Fed make are not the same as the “profits” a regular bank makes. If you had read the Act you would know that. In point of fact the Fed is a non-profit bank. It is a private organization, but it is a private organization who’s purpose for existance and day to day activities is regulated by the Federal Reserve Act. If you had read the act you would know that. The Fed does not print money and it does not lend money to the United States. The only organizations it loans money to are it’s member banks. If you had read the act you would know that. Have I said that enough times for it to sink in?
All of the basic assumptions you’re making about the Fed come from Internet trash. NONE of them are based on the actual law which created and regulates the Fed. Since your basic assumptions about it are incorrect, all the logical deductions you are making about it cannot ever be anything except wrong.
You have to READ the Federal Reserve Act before you can make any truthful statements about it.
READ IT! READ IT! READ IT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Until then you are like a third grader trying to speak about brain surgery.
#
75
Mark Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Grateful Slaves
I am a grateful slave.
My master is a good man.
He gives me food, shelter, work and other things.
All he requires in return is that I obey him.
I am told he has the power to control my life.
I look up to him, and wish that I were so powerful.
My master must understand the world better than I,
because he was chosen by many others for his respected position.
I sometimes complain, but fear I cannot live without his help.
He is a good man.
My master protects my money from theft, before and after he takes half of it.
Before taking his half, he says only he can protect my money.
After taking it, he says it is still mine.
When he spends my money, he says I own the things he has bought.
I don’t understand this, but I believe him.
He is a good man.
I need my master for protection, because others would hurt me.
Or, they would take my money and use it for themselves.
My master is better than them:
When my master takes my money, I still own it.
The things he buys are mine.
I cannot sell them, or decide how they are used, but they are mine.
My master tells me so, and I believe him.
He is a good man.
My master provides free education for my children.
He teaches them to respect and obey him and all future masters they will have.
He says they are being taught well; learning things they will need to know in the future.
I believe him.
He is a good man.
My master cares about other masters, who don’t have good slaves.
He makes me contribute to their support.
I don’t understand why slaves must work for more than one master, but my master says it is necessary.
I believe him.
He is a good man.
Other slaves ask my master for some of my money.
Since he is good to them as he is to me, he agrees.
This means he must take more of my money; but he says this is good for me.
I ask my master why it would not be better to let each of us keep our own money.
He says it is because he knows what is best for each of us.
We believe him.
He is a good man.
My master tells me:
Evil masters in other places are not as good as he; they threaten our comfortable lifestyle and peace.
So, he sends my children to fight the slaves of evil masters.
I mourn their deaths, but my master says it is necessary.
He gives me medals for their sacrifice, and I believe him.
He is a good man.
Good masters sometimes have to kill evil masters, and their slaves.
This is necessary to preserve our way of life; to show others that our version of slavery is the best.
I asked my master:
Why do evil masters’ slaves have to be killed, along with their evil master?
He said: “Because they carry out his evil deeds.”
“Besides, they could never learn our system; they have been indoctrinated to believe that only their master is good.”
My master knows what is best.
He protects me and my children.
He is a good man.
My master lets me vote for a new master, every few years.
I cannot vote to have no master, but he generously lets me choose between two candidates he has selected.
I eagerly wait until election day, since voting allows me to forget that I am a slave.
Until then, my current master tells me what to do.
I accept this.
It has always been so, and I would not change tradition.
My master is a good man.
At the last election, about half the slaves were allowed to vote.
The other half had broken rules set by the master, or were not thought by him to be fit.
Those who break the rules should know better than to disobey!
Those not considered fit should gratefully accept the master chosen for them by others.
It is right, because we have always done it this way.
My master is a good man.
There were two candidates.
One received a majority of the vote – about one-fourth of the slave population.
I asked why the new master can rule over all the slaves, if he only received votes from one-fourth of them?
My master said: “Because some wise masters long ago did it that way.”
“Besides, you are the slaves; and we are the master.”
I did not understand his answer, but I believed him.
My master knows what is best for me.
He is a good man.
Some slaves have evil masters.
They take more than half of their slaves’ money and are chosen by only one-tenth, rather than one-fourth, of their slaves.
My master says they are different from him.
I believe him.
He is a good man.
I asked if I could ever become a master, instead of a slave.
My master said, “Yes, anything is possible.”
“But first you must pledge allegiance to your present master, and promise not to abandon the system that made you a slave.”
I am encouraged by this possibility.
My master is a good man.
He tells me slaves are the real masters, because they can vote for their masters.
I do not understand this, but I believe him.
He is a good man; who lives for no other purpose than to make his slaves happy.
I asked if I could be neither a master nor a slave.
My master said, “No, you must be one or the other.”
“There are not other choices.”
I believe him.
He knows best.
He is a good man.
I asked my master how our system is different, from those evil masters.
He said: “In our system, masters work for the slaves.”
No longer confused, I am beginning to accept his logic.
Now I see it!
Slaves are in control of their masters, because they can choose new masters every few years.
When the masters appear to control the slaves in between elections, it is all a grand delusion!
In reality, they are carrying out the slaves’ desires.
For if this were not so, they would not have been chosen in the last election.
How clear it is to me now!
I shall never doubt the system again.
My master is a good man
#
74
Jennifer Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 9:30 am
Teach your Children WHO DESTROYED OUR NATION. The FED RESERVE is a Private Corporation that serves a few at the expense of the many. Communism = Zionism
April 4th, 2008 at 11:48 am
I like Beck. I’ve heard the arguments that say that he is a stooge for the internationalists. But it does not matter whether that is true or not. He is one of the few who is talking the right theory. The thing that I don’t understand is the logic of encouraging fiscal sanity while supporting the bankruptcy of America with an empire.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:53 am
War Whore- your back pitching those red herring I see.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:59 am
See you later War Whore- Gotta go later-
April 4th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
#92
I also like Beck. He is entertaining and most ofthe time, his commentary is on the money. But I do have a bit of a problem with him due to his on again/off again relationship with Ron Paul. He always agrees with him where the economy is concerned but in other areas such as foreign policy he is totally 180. Glenn did say something in this interview that suprised me and that was the remark about mentally going to a place he didn’t want to go…i e conspiracy.
I fully understand his position since he does work for that prick Ted Turner and has to tow the line or else his career would be over. I also have a problem with Beck’s love for Mitt Romney but from what I understand, those Mormans tend to stick together. I just hope that he will continue to have Dr. Paul on his show in the days to come. As our financial establishment continues to spiral down the tubes, the lone voice of reason, Ron Paul, will be heard by more and more people. The r3volution is building more and more momentum.
April 4th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Question to Christians: Why all the cussing and abusive language?
Christ said to be wise as serpents and as gentle as doves. Yet from what I am reading, most of the professed Christians that post comments on infowars.com resort to cussing and insults rather than letting the Holy Spirit guide them in their communications. You argue with trolls and shills and expect people to respect you and your use of Scripture. I urge you all, in the name of our Lord and Saviour, be more like Christ and less like the people that you are trying to refute. Such behavior only deepens the rift between secular and ecclessiatical indivuals. Honestly, if I were not a Christian, I would not even consider accepting Christ with such people claiming to represent his teachings. You try and bang the Word of God on people’s heads. It is written, No man cometh lest the Spirit call him. I admonish you brethren, slow down, calm down, pray and let the Spirit guide your replies.
To non Christians:
If you believe in what this site is about then you must believe in the 1st Ammendment and accept the fact that everyone has a different point of view and a different belief. The 1st not only protect free speech but free religion and free press as well. Please show a little tolerance for your fellow Americans.
To all:
From my studies on the formation of the Constitution, there were Christians, Jews, Diest, Atheist, federalist, nationalist, statist, and aristocracy alike in the convention and after weeks of heated debate in a room with the windows nailed shut in the late days of summer/early autumn, they created a beautiful work of art as well as or Supreme law of the land. It took patience, conformatiy and above all mutual respect to achieve what George Washington called nothing short of a miracle of God.
If we , the seekers of truth and justice cannot learn to repsect each other in this fight against tyranny, how the hell can we ever hope to overcome the enemy. Rest assured, they are all on the same page…I suggest we be too. With all respect and sincerity.
April 4th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
You, Thom, are exceptional. I like the way you think. You get a gold star for your beautiful post.
April 6th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Thanks Crystal
April 6th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Caitanya was on AJ today about his confrontation of Obama crowd. Tune in – he was like the third caller.
April 6th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
WTF? I’ve not checked this message board for a couple of days and what the heck happened? Somehow we went from arguing about the Federal Reserve to something about the 13th and 14th amendments, then to red herrings and swearing and fake Christians. And don’t even get me started about that “My Master” thing. Yikes! What are you guys talking about? Here’s my two cents about all those topics:
The “My Master poem”: Really poor satire, and way too long.
The 13th and 14th amendments: The post sounded like a mixture of Ayn Rand’s Objectivism and those guys who want you to fill out a UCC form to “take back your straw man”. Oh please!
Red Herrings: They give me gas.
Fake Christians: You’ll find them all over TBN and DAYSTAR trying to talk you out of your paycheck.
All the posts about swearing and name calling: I try to never use the stuff, It’s too addicting.
The Wikipedia definitions and message recap posts: I don’t understand why they’re there, so I’m just going to pretend they’re not.
About the only post which made any sense to me is the one telling people to read the Bible and be nice to each other. That’s the best advice anyone can give.
I think that catches me up. As I’m writing this it’s Sunday night and Darth Vader is about to put his helmet on for the very first time, so I think I’ll watch the end of the movie and go to bed. Wake me up when you guys get back to the Federal Reserve.
April 7th, 2008 at 11:39 am
#101 Mike
“About the only post which made any sense to me is the one telling people to read the Bible and be nice to each other. That’s the best advice anyone can give. ”
I believe that you are referring to my post here. I only posted this because I try to read as many of the comments as I can on all the topics and articles on this sight and I have seen a recurring theme. I was not trying to be a bible thumper but a peacemaker but it seems that too many people would rather get into a pissing match with each other than work together for a real solution.
I was also the one that posted the transcript from the Glenn Beck show for those who might not have seen or read the interview with Ron Paul.
Thanks for your input about this.
April 7th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Don’t underestimate the power of Bible thumping Thom. The words of Jesus Christ strikes people right where they live. If you use them wisely, you can pin somebody down to their deepest ideas of good and evil. And in the case of people who just want to get into internet pissing contests, after a few really apt Biblical quotes they usually just throw up their hands and admit that they think God is a myth and what they really live for is the thrill of violence. Try it out, it can be very entertaining, although a bit sad too.
April 7th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Hey 103er ?????? This website is about fighting against violence in all its forms. Ok?? The s--- you’re spouting IS violence and now you’re saying that ALL people are violent. Take a look around ya! Is everybody fighting in the streets? What are you on? Take a hike junior!
April 7th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
The majority of people are on the offensive,trying to destroy something,if you want to call that violence,but to say that people who wish to maintain their way of living in a peaceful manner are violent,man,You are lost! There are many ways of doing things that don’t require being violent,like using your head,but I guess,of all your years on earth,you haven’t figured that out yet.
There are ‘legal’ ways of going about things! Ok??? Comprende’???
April 9th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Uh, fella? What part of “Read the Bible and be nice to others” do you consider to be violent?
Your mind kind of wanders around by itself a lot, doesn’t it?
April 10th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
http://www.infowars.com
February 23rd, 2009 at 1:32 am
How come nobody talks about voting fraud!
NOBAMA didn’t win the election, McShame didn’t win the nomination!
We’ve all been screwed!