I Wear Pants;466282 wrote:The current "tea party" has almost nothing in common with the Boston Tea Party.

Palin can't articulate a thought and Beck has no means to tell anyone what they can or should do or think. Yet he does daily on his show and in his books and speeches. "We need to x or you/america will die" "you need to x to restore honor to america". Who the fuck is this guy to tell anyone that?

Yes, the current tea party does have something in common. Both were/are fed the hell up with the folks running the show.
Minimal, yes. But there's the alignment.

I've understood everything that Palin has said or talked about. But, then again, I didn't dismiss her right off the bat, so perhaps I'm a little bit more open to her.

Glenn Beck is just as an important of an average American as the guy who demands that we "spread the wealth". Here's the difference:
- one doesn't hold public office, much less the leader of the greatest country of the world
- one does hold public office, and is the "leader" of the greatest country in the world ("We need to x or you/america will die" "you need to x to restore honor to america" = was the message this person put out also, just in different words)


Look. Personally, I can't stand Glenn Beck. But I think that's mostly due to his being a drama queen, the way he expresses himself. But that doesn't mean that I do not agree with his message. America can do better and should start demanding some common sense and decency from the people who hold positions of power; particularly politicians.

Then why doesn't that start with the people clamoring for common sense and decency? Common sense and decency very much dictates that you shouldn't blow up and freak out about everything and scream about how it will end your life as you know it. Common sense says to not purposfully misinterpret things to suit your cause (this goes for both people like Beck and O'Reilly as well as Olbermann and Co). By the way, at least Beck tries to misguide us with neat little skits and funny voices/chalkboard drawings. Olbermann just misguides people with a thesaurus and a fast tongue.

I Wear Pants;466305 wrote: Olbermann just misguides people with a thesaurus and a fast tongue.

That's a visual I DIDN'T need.

Thanks Pants! :mad:

hahaha!

I knew it would be taken that way.

RedRider1;465706 wrote:Yea...wanting America to reconnect to our founding principles is scary.

Raising over $5 million for wounded soliders is scary.

Did I say I have a problem with those things?? No...I was talking about people handing out fliers depicting Obama with a Hitler mustache. I was talking about Beck comparing these Tea Partiers to Civil Rights workers who fought against injustice,while these Tea Partiers are yelling and screaming because they don't like policy. Please don't compare this "movement" to something where people were beaten and killed for protesting

CenterBHSFan;465699 wrote:I have no beef and/or problems with the tea party people.

Neither do I

Ty Webb;466430 wrote:Did I say I have a problem with those things?? No...I was talking about people handing out fliers depicting Obama with a Hitler mustache. I was talking about Beck comparing these Tea Partiers to Civil Rights workers who fought against injustice,while these Tea Partiers are yelling and screaming because they don't like policy. Please don't compare this "movement" to something where people were beaten and killed for protesting



Neither do I

I would say the slanderous way the tea partiers are treated is comparable to the civil rights movements. I am in no way saying it is the same thing, but to listen to the way these people are portrayed, for instance you citing the handful of people portraying Obama as Hitler with intent on portraying it as view that all tea partiers hold, does as much damage to the movement as spraying people with a fire hose.

I Wear Pants;466305 wrote:By the way, at least Beck tries to misguide us with neat little skits and funny voices/chalkboard drawings.

IWP - Clearly you don't watch much of the Beck show. He is constantly asking for the viewers to do their homework. To read. To understand. To ask bold questions. To not take explanations at face value. To do the work necessary. If you would do the things he asks, then how in the hell can he misguide you? Isn't he indeed asking you to GUIDE YOURSELF?

You come across as a Beck hater because you don't understand, only react to what your echo chamber tells you. Too bad. Try watching for 2 weeks and see if he doesn't make you think for yourself. Yes....there are theatrics. Yes he cries. Yes...he uses chalkboards. Yes he hates communism. Yes he has skits. Yes....he has funny voices used typically as sarcasm or as voices of the other side so that even the feeblest among us can understand what he believes vs. what he says others believe.

BG: Most likely one of the most thought-out and well phrased posts I've read in a while. I would suggest, if you haven't already, doing the same for people like Keith O., Steph Miller, Al Frankin and the Rev. Al Sharpton.

I tried once. Some are easier to read than others. And some are easier to listen to than others. For the most part I disagree with their starting point, which leads to a difference in implementaion and application of how to resolve conflicts. But, just as you suggested, reading opposing sides to get their perspective is enlightening. Maybe not convicing, but certainly worth the time.

Ty Webb;466430 wrote:No...I was talking about people handing out fliers depicting Obama with a Hitler mustache. I was talking about Beck comparing these Tea Partiers to Civil Rights workers who fought against injustice,while these Tea Partiers are yelling and screaming because they don't like policy.

You will convince me of your hatred of the Hitler reference if you answer the following truthfully:

1. When Bush was depicted as Hitler, the Joker, and the devil incarnate on multitudes of occasions, were you on OC or other sites lambasting this with the same fervor?
2. When Sarah Palin was hung in effigy in California during the election cycle in 2008, were you condemning those that did it? Were you on the OC or some other site proclaiming your opposition to this act?

I'm not condoning Obama as Hitler, but you seem to be incensed by it, so are you as incensed when others are portrayed the same way? Be honest.

]

queencitybuckeye;465829 wrote:We all have, and in the several years before that.

Please please tell me what rights you have had taken away in the past 20 months?

Little Danny;465991 wrote:Just because you don't agree with people in their movement, does not mean their concerns are not valid.

Not saying their concerns aren't vaild

BGFalcons82;466450 wrote:You will convince me of your hatred of the Hitler reference if you answer the following truthfully:

1. When Bush was depicted as Hitler, the Joker, and the devil incarnate on multitudes of occasions, were you on OC or other sites lambasting this with the same fervor?
2. When Sarah Palin was hung in effigy in California during the election cycle in 2008, were you condemning those that did it? Were you on the OC or some other site proclaiming your opposition to this act?

I'm not condoning Obama as Hitler, but you seem to be incensed by it, so are you as incensed when others are portrayed the same way? Be honest.

Yes I was.....It's completely and totally disgusting and wrong for someone to do that. Disagree with the person and their views,but this kind of stuff is just plain wrong and these people should be ashamed of themselves

I Wear Pants;466299 wrote:A couple of things. Limbaugh is very likely a racist. At the very least he portrays one on the air.

Can't articulate a thought = bad at speaking and getting your point across. Which Palin is. She likely sounds much dumber than she truely is (you do have to be at least reasonably intelligent to be a governor. Even of Alaska). Beck is an insane person or like Limbaugh, plays one on the network. I disliked many of G.W.'s policies and he couldn't speak all that well (though I really enjoyed listening to him speak because I liked his weird ways of saying some things) but he definitely isn't stupid despite what many who are much more left than me will say. Not stupid, just disagree.

So now apparently I'm not allowed to think someone is stupid without being an elitist taking the country down the drain I guess. Maybe crying about everything being elitist is part of the problem too no?

My point went straight over your head. No matter, you aren't the first person to put down all those folks and fail to see the irony of the elitist mentality.

As for Palin, I saw one time where she fumbled an interview (the Couric question about what she read). Other than that, I've seen NOTHING that says to me this woman is dumb. Nothing.

That doesn't matter, though. Once you're labeled by the media elite in this country -- that's it. Remember poor Dan Quayle and his spelling of potato? It was the exact same situation. The media elites decided he was simply stupid and that was the mantra they drummed on from then until now. First the media and political pundits weight in, then the comedians take over to ingrain it as part of the pop culture. But it begins and ends with those elite who sit at desks in front of cameras or computers and tell us what we should think.

Am I the only one that has heard Obama try to answer a question he isn't prepared for? Talk about stumbling over ones words.

They've all done it to one degree or another. You can't spend any amount of time in public life without such a moment happening. That's just how life works. The difference is Palin was on the campaign, relatively new to national politics and was facing a media that was hell-bent on tripping her up or discrediting her in some way. I'm sure that pressure played a major role in why she stumbled over a very simple question.

Anyone who faces a media as hostile as the one Palin faced (and still faces) would probably have at least one "oh shit" moment. If not, I'd question whether they were human.

Jason Bourne;466447 wrote:BG: Most likely one of the most thought-out and well phrased posts I've read in a while. I would suggest, if you haven't already, doing the same for people like Keith O., Steph Miller, Al Frankin and the Rev. Al Sharpton.

I tried once. Some are easier to read than others. And some are easier to listen to than others. For the most part I disagree with their starting point, which leads to a difference in implementaion and application of how to resolve conflicts. But, just as you suggested, reading opposing sides to get their perspective is enlightening. Maybe not convicing, but certainly worth the time.

Jason - My liberal reading/viewing:
1. I read the Krugman articles as he is the heart and soul of the Obama/socialist economic thought. He tells us what the administration is thinking.
2. I read Thomas Friedman until my blood pressure gets to the point I am arguing with the paper in front of me. He paints with a 12" wide brush.
3. Al Franken makes me ill because he is so unqualified to be anything other than a 2 bit comedian. Isn't that what he was before he launched a failed radio network?
4. I'll watch Maddow or Olberman once a week for about 5 minutes. Really. That's all I can take.
5. I check out Matthews once a week or so. I think he's more of an instigator for ratings than someone that hosts a show. He doesn't make me think, he makes me laugh. He's also very talented at twisting words.
6. I love the Sunday roundtable on ABC's this week with Jake Tapper (he needs to replace the helpless wench soon....very soon). They usually have 3 libs and George Will and that's almost even, as George verbally shoots them like fish in a barrell.

Writer....I don't agree with how she was treated by the media...but even you have to agree that she was completely and totally unprepared for what she was going to face. I put alot of the blame on McCain and his team for not preparing her more

Writerbuckeye;466498 wrote:My point went straight over your head. No matter, you aren't the first person to put down all those folks and fail to see the irony of the elitist mentality.

As for Palin, I saw one time where she fumbled an interview (the Couric question about what she read). Other than that, I've seen NOTHING that says to me this woman is dumb. Nothing.

That doesn't matter, though. Once you're labeled by the media elite in this country -- that's it. Remember poor Dan Quayle and his spelling of potato? It was the exact same situation. The media elites decided he was simply stupid and that was the mantra they drummed on from then until now. First the media and political pundits weight in, then the comedians take over to ingrain it as part of the pop culture. But it begins and ends with those elite who sit at desks in front of cameras or computers and tell us what we should think.

Very much agree. In regards to Palin, there were a lot of people in this country who confuse things she said/did with what Tina Fey said on SNL. SNL has a long history of doing political satire/impersonations, but the Palin sketches were over the top and were done in a manner to harm the McCain/Palin ticket. Fey was not even still with the show yet the second Palin ran she rushed back to the cheers to the folks of the left. Whenever Fey performed her skits she had that twinkle in her eye as to say "See what kind of moron she is". As I said, SNL had a long history of satire/impressions of political figures, but for the most part skits involving other politicians were performed with a little more balance.

Finally, to show another example of the hypocrisy of the left, they proclaim to be the champion of "Women's Issues", yet the second a woman because a threat to them they cause her stupid, make comments about her pregnant teenage daughter and leave no stone unturned in an effort to discredit her. How would the left react if a male conservative politician treated one of their own women in this manner?

Two things.
1. I appreciate the Tea Party. I really do. We need someone who speaks about reigning in spending. But, there are some complete idiots out there that drag the groups down. Also, the group is so fractured when it goes to foreign policy (from Palin=neocon to Ron Paul=old school conservative) and I really disagree with many of them in that aspect.
2. I've watched Beck a few times, and got sick of his delivery and his linkages that make no sense some time. I actually can't stand all pundits, Beck, Hannity, Maddow, Obermann, O'Reilly, Greta, etc. They are all awful and I think do the American public a disservice by not looking into the nuts and bolts of issues, but instead relying on politics. But, that is the nature of 24 hour news. I usually only watch 1 hour of network news a day, Morning Joe as I am getting ready in the morning. Joe is as moderate as they come as does not give a shit about political points. Plus, his show allows time for explanation of views.

Ty Webb;465500 wrote:http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/29/beck-says-rally-wanted-to-reclaim-civil-rights-from-politics/



Did anyone read about this..some scary stuff coming out of it.

Beck had the gaull to to compare these Tea-Party people to the people who fought for civil rights in the 1960's. Claims that our "civil rights" are being taken away. He can't be serious can he? I haven't had any of my rights taken away in the last 20 months,have any of you?

Ty Webb;466484 wrote:]



Please please tell me what rights you have had taken away in the past 20 months?

Have you not seen or read what the 9th Circuit has ruled recently concerning our 4th amendment rights? To believe that we have had no rights taken away is to be blind to what is occuring in this country.

I Wear Pants;466282 wrote:Palin can't articulate a thought and Beck has no means to tell anyone what they can or should do or think. Yet he does daily on his show and in his books and speeches. "We need to x or you/america will die" "you need to x to restore honor to america". Who the fuck is this guy to tell anyone that?

He is an American citizen that has the right under the first amendment to speak freely and attempt to coerce any American to follow his political ideology. That being said I rarely listen to Beck. His delivery annoys me. On some points of his I may agree others I do not.

Your attitude towards Beck and others like him is what those that seek to stifle free speech feed upon. History is full of instances using anger or disgust with an opposing political opinion to garner support to use political power to stifle a political opponent's attempts to coerce the people. Who the fuck did Sam Adams think he was attempting to foment rebellion against the British. I am sure the loyalists during the times leading up to the revolution thought and said the same things.

From you previous posts I know that is not your intention. I understand the disgust and anger felt towards a perceived charlatan deceiving the people. I have felt it many times watching left wing nut bags spew the bullshit faster than a manure spreader. Anyone on both sides can get caught up in it. The thing you must realize is if free speech is to continue to be free. You will have to allow for the fact that those that are less educated in the arena of politics may at times follow a political wind that blows in opposition of your own.

As long as the political playing field is free and I can attempt to coerce a few leftist drones to abandon the dark side all is well. And vice versa you leftist can attempt to convert a few right wing mind numbed robots.

I Wear Pants;466299 wrote:A couple of things. Limbaugh is very likely a racist. At the very least he portrays one on the air

Please provide some proof. Otherwise you are just spewing what you have heard in the media. You can disagree with Rush, as I do many times, but if you are going to label him a racist have the balls to provide some solid proof.

Because of my political ideology a select few on this site have labeled me a racist, bigot, homophobe, sexist, and whatever else they can cook up when their arguments fall short. One of those posters I might add you are quite familiar with. He falsely maligned you in a similar way. Give Rush the same deference you would expect be given you and provide some solid proof.

I have no intentions of silencing Glenn Beck. He has the right to say whatever the hell he wants.

Doesn't mean I can't say that I don't think he is particularly qualified to be the defacto leader of a political movement and giving what appears to be life, economics, political, and general morality instructions to many many people (dude does get fantastic ratings).
I don't just mean qualified in that he isn't college educated either. I just mean that I feel that he or whomever writes for him is disingenuine at best. Yell about a mosque in NY while your party tries to block veteran funding (which I believe did pass with both sides) just like the left yells about how we need to pass these health care bills or bailouts or whatever while the dudes in charge of them get insane bonuses. I'm simply sick of it all. They are all puppets. They are all charlatans. Not one of the political commentary people on either side has had even one show where they didn't embelish or purposely take out of context their opponents. It's disgusting.

There are very few people in the news that I feel actually do their jobs anymore and I'm not going to name them because it'll just be used against me after you google their name with "scam" or "controversy".

I'm allowed to be angry and disgusted at what people say without wanting them silenced. I think for instance that Rush is a monster that should never be listened to by anyone. And that Olbermann is a shell of a person, someone who has the tools to do great things (he's obviously able to articulate things very well) but decides instead to take things out of context and tries to use big words so that people think he is smarter than them. And is thus able to be trusted. I don't like any of them.

You'll call me out for enjoying and agreeing with Stewart and Colbert but I honestly think they're right much of the time. They point out the absurdities that the networks and politicians either miss or purposefully glass over. And they do it while being entertaining. I wish there were some shows that legitimately did it with a slant to the right because satire is an important thing.

I don't want to convert anyone. Evangelicism whether it be of political or religious motivations is maybe my most hated thing.

I like the tea party, what they stand for, and, crazy as it might be, given my political leanings, i agree with them on many issues.

I appreciate and respect the actual members of this movement, not the likes of Beck et. al. who don't even deserve to be in the same room as many of the regular Americans who are part of the movement.

All the pundits can go to hell, for all i care, along with most of the worthless politicians in Washington.

^^^

What he said. Though I agree with them on fewer issues than he most likely I can relate to them. I can't relate to Beck, Olbermann, Palin, etc.

majorspark;466732 wrote:Please provide some proof. Otherwise you are just spewing what you have heard in the media. You can disagree with Rush, as I do many times, but if you are going to label him a racist have the balls to provide some solid proof.

Because of my political ideology a select few on this site have labeled me a racist, bigot, homophobe, sexist, and whatever else they can cook up when their arguments fall short. One of those posters I might add you are quite familiar with. He falsely maligned you in a similar way. Give Rush the same deference you would expect be given you and provide some solid proof.

Well said.

I wanted to post something similar to this earlier but when the lefties start spewing their "Rush is a racist and bigot" crap I shut down because the absurdity of it gets my undies in a bunch. I'm not defending Limbaugh but I have reasonable suspicion that the liberals who spew this bullshit have never, ever actually tuned in to a Rush Limbaugh radio program or any other top rated conservative talk radio program for that matter.

They listen to the mainstream media bobble heads who disdain the "new media" and then assume they can make informed opinions of conservative talk radio in general. It's conservative so it's automatically bigoted, racist, sexist, and homophobic.