Glenn becks "e4"

ah, beck. what a two-faced...

an example. here are the 5 steps to take power that he accuses soros of using.

1. set up shadow gov
2. control the media
3. build anti-gov attitude
4. provoke an election crisis
5. stage massive demonstrations

how many of these does beck follow? dont know if he has a shadow gov, so ill say no on that. control the media? well, hes on radio for 3 hours, tv for one, and has a website called the blaze that purports to be news (even fox runs their stories). step three there is no denying that one. step 4, anybody remember the "voter intimidation" (2 guys at one site that scared no one away is not a scandal) "acorn voter fraud" (most reported by acorn themselves), etc. step 5 is obvious, remember "rally for honor", and fox's campaign for the tea party.

beck, time and again, has been shown to distort the truth and crop it to fit his narrative. 3 months before joining fox, beck decried the medical system and wanted single-payer. then he goes to fox and does a 180. btw, has anyone else noticed that beck becomes more and more pastor as his show continues? 2 years ago, almost no mention of god, now its nearly none stop.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

Do you expect the man to put in all this time researching for the shows he hosts without being paid?

I sure wouldn't...My guess is, neither would you.

just pointing out the hypocrisy in your thinking...

you moderate these forums and i take it you dont get payed for it, yet you prolly do more work than he does..lol

all he does is "distort" the truth ..he shouldnt be gettin payed millions!..btw a few posts back some other poster pretty much b/slapped you with the truth all you did was either agree with him or you didnt care..or offer no substantial rebuttal. admit to being wrong once in a while.., the world isnt going to end
+ im glad A LOT of people are finding becks rhetoric bad for this country

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by beezzer

 

Taking out of context quips, spinning them, and then calling it the absolute truth seems to be the MO.

YOU JUST DESCRIBED FOX NEWS! hurray!

more hipocrasy...yay!

reply to post by whoocares



What hypocrisy?

I'm not ashamed of making money. And you know what? If ATS paid me to moderate I be around even more. Why? because money is an incentive.

More speech man, not less.

If I were payed enough to get rich off of what I say....HELL YEAH I would hire a huge group of researchers of like mind, and I, plus the people I PAY to WORK for me would talk about the issues I care about the most...People, places, and things.

And you'll be here on ATS talking about what a paid shill I am and how horrible it is to get paid for work.

reply to post by projectvxn


you misunderstood, im not against making money...more power to ya...its the fact that he gets away with distorting truths and making up lies in order to advance his own personal agenda (or fox's/extreme conservative moment). someone with his kind of power shouldn't be allowed to fog up the airwaves/tv with bull# and lies. yes, he also says many truths...but those are few and far between..

i challenge you to go to the mediamatters website and find one lie that they are pushing..
do it...

reply to post by whoocares


The great thing about the free market of ideas is that you can challenge those lies and if your assertions pan out...Well, you'll know. It's really that simple. If Beck's assertions don't pan out we'll all know.

The good thing about a Constitutional Republic is that not even the people can just violate the constitution and vote away someone's rights when they disagree with a certain viewpoint. And thank God for it.

More speech not less. That's how you fight speech you don't like. The second you start talking about shutting others up you start down a very dangerous road.

reply to post by whoocares


Beck Dubiously Claims Federal Reserve's Actions Are Driving Up Food Prices -With video clip

Glenn Beck claimed the Federal Reserve is driving up food prices by "printing too much money" and "devaluing our own currency." In fact, U.S. food prices are forecast to rise by only 2-3 percent in 2011, and according to Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, U.S. grocery prices have actually decreased over the last two years.

Oh really?

Let's look at some facts shall we?

This is what happens when the Fed engages in policies like QE1 and 2

LONDON - The Food and Agricultural Organization said Wednesday that the world faces a "food price shock" after the agency's benchmark index of farm commodities prices shot up last month, exceeding the levels of the 2007-08 food crisis.

The warning from the U.N. body comes as inflation is becoming an increasing economic and political challenge in developing countries, including China and India, and is starting to emerge as a potential problem in developed nations.

Oops....They followed THE VERY SAME MODEL of Bailout, and stimulus until the people of Britain kicked out the Labour Party and formed a coalition government.

All commodities are priced in dollars dude. We're printing money or as the Fed would say "Injecting Liquidity Into the Capital Markets" or "QE2" those commodities will go up in price. Since we've followed a policy of exporting our inflation to other countries through the issuance of debt the rest of the world will feel it first. And they already have. Google is your friend sir.

Why would anyone knowing the FACTS take this asinine position on an OBVIOUS monetary policy move by the Fed? Beck said it so it must be wrong?

Who else is saying it then...Oh yeah, CNBC. Why aren't they wrong?

That and Paul Krugman is the worst economist I've ever had the misfortune of being exposed to. I've read the work this man did that got him the Nobel prize.

From Wiki

According to the Nobel Prize Committee, the prize was given for Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic concentration of wealth, by examining the impact of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.[6] Krugman is known in academia for his work on international economics (including trade theory, economic geography, and international finance),[7][8] liquidity traps and currency crises. According to the IDEAS/RePEc rankings, he is the twelfth most widely cited economist in the world today.[9]

Oh? Then why does he continue to support policies that have brought us 2 liquidity traps in Bush's administration?

And Bernanke is supposed to be a scholar on the Great Depression and apparently has no freakin' clue what margin collapse is and how that relates to his policies.

I mean really. If this isn't propaganda aimed squarely at anything Beck says TRUE OR NOT(In this case very true) I don't know what is.



ETA:

Food inflation threat moves to top of Asia policy

SINGAPORE, Jan. 6, 2011 (Reuters) — Record high food prices are moving to the top of the agenda for many Asian policymakers as the prospect of higher inflation in 2011 poses a major threat to the region's strong revival from the global financial crisis.

The United Nations' food agency (FAO) said on Wednesday that food prices hit a record high last month, moving beyond the levels that prompted riots in 2008 in countries as far afield as Egypt, Cameroon and Haiti.

Food inflation in many Asian countries, including China and India, is already in double digits, raising fears that the price pressures could spread more broadly to other sectors and pose a threat to both economic and social stability as millions of Asians live in poverty.

Naw, no inflation going on anywhere. Competitive devaluation is working..

reply to post by 46ACE

Whether he's a just, honest man or a money hungry boogie man I believe what he says couldn't be truer... for me at least.

We should change ourselves for the better and other people around us will start to, at least, think of changing themselves for what we all know is "good" in our hearts.

We shouldn't look to others for answers and hope they will make our lives better.

WE need to do that AND take responsibility for what comes our way.
In my country (and in many others imho), I think the problem isn't above all the government, but the people who stand by and wait for "superior" authorities to make all the problems go away! well, guess what? they're human too, like you and me, and they aren't ALL "good people". (thou some actually care about what happens to others, again, they either do nothing or end up standing alone when defending what they think is right... eventually getting their heads banged in the process.

We shouldn't blame our governments, if anything, we should blame ourselves for just rambling how much we hate them in the net (I personally never did that thou) and just go on with our daily lives just waiting for someone to take the lead, whether from the gov. or not, and guide us to a better tomorrow.

And another thing I wanted to ad was to, please, try and listen to what he says and make a judgement of that and not how much he earns and stands for. Even if he was the worse kind of guy I had ever met, if he said something like this to me I would think he was right. If that's a bit to hard for some of you, try to "forget" who is talking. Many important messages were lost because people paid more importance to the "image" they had of the speaker (true or not) and ended up wasting invaluable information.

Glenn Beck kinda reminds me US manufacturing nowadays. A lot of vapour talk, and gas-bagging, while the real job is done by other people somewhere else. Nice slogans don`t build tractors, nor do they consolidate nations for definite actions as to how exactly and what to execute. Pun intended.

What is it with Beck, What happened to the "9/12 Project" or "Restoring Honor", now we have the more catchy "e4". Just catchy buzz words that dont really mean anything or do anything other than spout the usual patriotic rhetoric.

Remember this guy is employed by Rupert Murdoch and not the maverick in the media he portrays himself to be.

reply to post by kinda kurious

Beck simply stuck a big fat bulls-eye label on the Government as the sole source of the misery and ills of the disgruntled masses.

Ya? Exactly! Who do YOU think is responsible? And don't say corporate cuz they're all in this together.

In short, he is bringing people back to the values so long forgotten, on which this country was founded.

Uh oh when I hear that type of nostalgic longing for "the way things were" I smell the scent of neocon codespeak. You know a predominantly white and segregated America. Just sayin'. BTW, here is a surgical instrument from the pre Civil War era:

So typical of the left! I allude to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, core (family) values, free market capitalism and suddenly I am a fascist hooded nazi.

Why are lefties and libs so afraid of constitutionalists, federalists, freedom? Is it because they'll eventually have to work for a living?

Beck, right or wrong, real or fake, is making an impact. WHAT ARE YOU (anyone) DOING TO PROMOTE YOUR BELIEFS?

reply to post by 46ACE


Right or Wrong, he always comes across as a Nut Job in search of listeners.

Glenn Beck used to be a zookeeper on the radio and never received higher education... I'll use another outlet to gather intelligence on political matters.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by whoocares

 

The great thing about the free market of ideas is that you can challenge those lies and if your assertions pan out...Well, you'll know. It's really that simple. If Beck's assertions don't pan out we'll all know.

The good thing about a Constitutional Republic is that not even the people can just violate the constitution and vote away someone's rights when they disagree with a certain viewpoint. And thank God for it.

More speech not less. That's how you fight speech you don't like. The second you start talking about shutting others up you start down a very dangerous road.

Which is exactly what Beck is doing by being against net neutrality

reply to post by MrXYZ


Stop using buzz words and address the technical impositions made by this policy on whole networks and the overall health of the Internet.

The policy, as written, is preempting a problem NO ONE is having. No company I have ever used for access to the Internet has EVER restricted my access before. Nor would they profit if they tried. They know this. This is not a new argument.

The motive here is government control of the flow of information. Why the hell would "Net Neutrality" include a clause to eliminate network management and resource allocation if this is all really about freedom?

reply to post by projectvxn


The speed issue is a technology issue...so far technology always kept up. There is NO WAY you can justify giving companies the right to regulate the Internet, just look at how much companies are already screwing us over...hell, just look at what the financial industry did.

Companies only care about one thing: MONEY!! That's not a bad thing, but it's very clear that ethics and free speech will take a backseat.

This isn't "buzz words", don't downplay this issue just because your hero has the wrong viewpoint on the issue!!

And your whole "no company has restricted my access" argument is complete hogwash as they weren't allowed to do so in the past unless you were using mobile Internet. So of course they didn't restrict your access!!

Originally posted by 46ACE
What's your problem? I don't see where anything I said conflicts, I think you've beat up on me( inseveral different replies) enough for one thread. That's enough.

As author of this thread I feel it is incumbent upon you to defend your claims/stance. I have always felt the truth can withstand great scrutiny. If you cannot muster worthy argument, then perhaps on-line DISCUSSION forums aren't for you.

Geez, I never took you for the sensitive type. Bitter and angry yes but not sensitive. There is an old thread by the owner of this site regarding back bone. I suggest you read it.

reply to post by MrXYZ


Companies don't regulate the internet. They manage network traffic. If they can't managed their network traffic their network will collapse. This has actually happened before in localized events where the network became overwhelmed due to a bug in the code that distributes bandwidth.

The FCC has removed the capability for ISP to manage traffic and distribute bandwidth according to demand. "Tech will catch up" is a BS argument. Apparently you don't understand how big these networks are and just how much information passes through them.

You can bring up straw men all you want(Like my appreciation for Beck) but that doesn't change the facts man. If ISPs can't manage their network traffic the NETWORKS WILL CRASH. It is a BAD regulatory move on the part of the FCC. They don't even have the authority to do this as they are under a court order NOT to do this...

There is no political will in Congress, there wasn't in the 111th and there isn't' any in the 112th. This is law by decree and it is unconstitutional on top of the technical problems it forces on a free internet.

Only Congress can pass laws. Not politically motivated agency heads.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Companies don't regulate the internet. They manage network traffic. If they can't managed their network traffic their network will collapse. This has actually happened before in localized events where the network became overwhelmed due to a bug in the code that distributes bandwidth.

The FCC has removed the capability for ISP to manage traffic and distribute bandwidth according to demand. "Tech will catch up" is a BS argument. Apparently you don't understand how big these networks are and just how much information passes through them.

You can bring up straw men all you want(Like my appreciation for Beck) but that doesn't change the facts man. If ISPs can't manage their network traffic the NETWORKS WILL CRASH. It is a BAD regulatory move on the part of the FCC. They don't even have the authority to do this as they are under a court order NOT to do this...

There is no political will in Congress, there wasn't in the 111th and there isn't' any in the 112th. This is law by decree and it is unconstitutional on top of the technical problems it forces on a free internet.

Only Congress can pass laws. Not politically motivated agency heads.

edit on 6-1-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

Look, reality is, if companies can regulate network traffic, they can give more bandwidth to sites they like, and less to sites they don't like. This is a FACT. Now ask yourself, if the ultimate goal of companies is to make money, do you think they will give a crap about free speech??

Just look at what the financial industry did to us (party by infiltrating the government)!! For crying out loud, if you give them free reign, they will piss on the people...they've done it before, and they will do it again.

Right now, everyone has equal rights...but according to your logic, that's not important and some people should have more rights than others on the Internet. That's what it comes down to, there's on way to "pretty talk" it!