Glenn Beck – 15 Days of Economic Collapse!

[Deega]

Hi All Avalonians, Visitors,

Hmm!, less interesting scenario waiting to take hold, hopefully, it won't...!

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=7626

All my blessings.

Deega

[ascendingstarseed]

I'm sorry Deega, can't hang with this one. I'm starting to see so many fear mongering posts based on information from the least credible news sources in mass media that I can't hold back any longer. Beck is the absolute worst source and should be taken off the air because of the damage he's doing to this country.

This is something I'm really passionate about because my background is in broadcasting and entertainment, some of my best friends are award winning journalists going back to the mid-80's. Since this is my area of expertise, I have an insiders perspective that gives me a better understanding of how entertainment news and the media works. It's a small industry and word gets around, so I'm all to familiar with Beck's off camera exploits and his lack of journalistic professionalism, objectivity and integrity. He is the least respected individual in entertainment news by his own peers and is a known sociopath; he doesn't even do his own reporting, treats his staff like cr*p and he's known for not checking facts - why check facts when it's easier to make things up, especially if its something that impacts people on an emotional level? His show is strictly based on entertainment value, meaning ratings and audience size, he will say or do ANYTHING it takes to increase the numbers, which means sensationalizing information... even lying.

All of his crying is fake, have you seen the video of Beck using Vicks-Vapo-Rub under his eyes while at a GQ photo shoot to get the tears flowing for the camera? It's quite apparent he has a lot of experience using the old vapo-rub. If you haven't seen the video, here you go...what a phony:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka_UWyZ9xf4

When are people going to see through his act and realize he's nothing more than a pathological liar, a sociopath and a fear mongerer? All he does is promote fear, hate, racism and project negative future scenarios in the minds of his audience. He does it for ratings, as a narcissistic way to get attention. He helps to keep people in a lower vibratory state of energy by worrying about not having enough food stored, or the money to prepare for the impending doom and gloom.

Can we hear just one positive message of hope and higher consciousness for humanity come from Beck? Honestly, in real life he's the type that won't be happy until he sees blood flowing down the Main streets of America, while knowing that he played a part inciting enough hate to push unstable people towards violence. There are already several cases where wackos who have committed acts of violence and it was later learned that they were loyal Beck fans, like the guy in Seattle who was on his way to the Tides foundation to kill a bunch of people.

Becks salary is over $18 million a year, he's a power hungry multi-millionaire who rides in limousines and has body guards that make sure there's always a safe zone between Beck and you and me, the ordinary folk. If you think he cares about the middle class or that he's concerned about what's happening with the corporate fascist take over of government in America, your kidding yourself.

This video is LOL!!!...This is the second website I've seen it on today, Beck is just plagiarizing all of the on-going doomsday predictions circulating on the internet, he's not even original. Doesn't this ring a bell??? People have been talking this stuff for weeks now...

Deega...if your going to give your attention to anything mainstream to get your political information, please try listening to a lady named Randi Rhodes on Progressive talk radio. She's working very hard to help people understand why news is dead and why we can't rely on what we hear on mass media TV stations anymore. You know she's honest with the audience because she's attempting to help people sort thru the confusion and to understand by giving out facts and figures, real verifiable information. She's been around for a long time, lives in Washington DC, knows ALL of the political characters and really understands the ins and outs of how the system works. Including the corruption on "both" sides. I guarantee if you give her two weeks you will have a much better understanding of what's going on with media, we all want to believe that the people we invite into our living rooms are telling the truth, not lying to us. TV is an extremely convincing tool for the PTB and they pay people like Beck very well for their loyalty and to do their bidding. Unlike many others, Randy has left good paying radio jobs because she refused to compromise her integrity.

And she's entertaining too, kind of like Howard Stern meets Joan Rivers. But most of all what I love about her is her honesty and her passion. She has no problem admitting it when she's wrong...but you'll also find she's rarely wrong. She's an absolutely brilliant individual who sees that most of us really want the same things in life, its the PTB and the corporate mas media machine that has divided the country by with the Us vs Them dichotomy.

Beck's the worst with the "Us and Them" the "They did it to Ya" and "It's the immigrant, the welfare mom, the muslims, the terrorists are the problem" theme that has divided us. He NEVER points out the corruption on the right, or inherent in the system...everything is the Obama and the Democrats fault. When the truth is, that transnational corporations, banks, insurance company's and politicians that answer to the bribes and campaign donations, that are the ones behind the loss of much of our freedoms. NO ONE has mentioned Citizens United ruling that literally allowed the completion of the corporate fascist takeover of our democracy. Neither Beck nor Limbaugh ever talk about that....Rhodes and other Progressives do.

So please don't take this long rant personal Deega, I really enjoy your posts and know your hearts in the right place. As someone who understands how the lame-stream mass media has people confused and misinformed I also try to assist people towards healthier, balanced, more informative news outlets that have maintained some journalistic integrity and haven't completely sold out to advertisers that control news content because they "invest" so much money in advertising on the station.

Reporters are very limited in what they can report anymore...most of it is what is fed to them from the Associated Press AP wire, they re-write it and make it sound like their story. When in reality the AP is nothing more than an extension of the Illuminati. People like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Drudge, O'Rielly etc literally get their "talking points" handed to them on a daily basis from the GOP and their corporate masters. If you listen to Progressive talk radio throughout the day that's not the case, unless there's something major making headlines you will hear a variety of topics from the different hosts - not different people saying the same hate filled, fear mongering lies over and over again. There is no one on the left handing down talking points because mass media is owned by neo-fascist conservatives.

As a former student of broadcast journalism back in the 80's when there were still a few honest investigative reporters, it was a time when there were over 1000 independent broadcast stations nationwide - now all the TV and radio stations are owned by the same 6 transnational corporations. I have to laugh when I hear the term "liberal media", that's propaganda from the right when all the mass media outlets are owned by neo-facsist, right wing Republican conservatives who have managed to move the entire nation slowly to the right over a 20yr period - so slow most never even noticed.

The fact is there are only about 50 progressive talk stations left across the country, whereas in comparison there are over 500 conservative, right wing stations. Progressive talk is a relatively new format that I think a lot of people here on the forum would appreciate. I even heard a listener on KTPK talking about the Illuminati and NWO yesterday, all the jocks are for legalizing medical marijuana, they think 9/11 was an inside job, the system is corrupt etc. And they don't all walk in lockstep either...

Here's a link to an entertaining, informative forum that KTPK presented last August with all the hosts, it's a great way to get to know the different host's personality's and where they each stand on the issues.

http://kptk.cbslocal.com/2010/08/20/am1090-forum-part-1/

Here's Randi's website, she even has a homework section where people can go to learn more how government works and the issues that concern us.
http://www.randirhodes.com/main.html

Here's a link to the Seattle station KTPK's radio player
http://player.radio.com/player/RadioPlayer.php?version=1.2.10286&station=86

And a link to the station...
http://kptk.cbslocal.com/

One year ago I was the typical TV news junkie, for years I always had TV news & information programs on in the background while I was on the computer doing research. Now, I watch absolutely NO TV at all and get most of my news online from a couple of independent news sources. And, I listen to Progressive talk radio, including Coast-to-Coast to get more well rounded, in-depth information on the issues and a better feel of what average Americans are thinking and feeling about whats going on. Now I feel like I have a much better idea of what's "really" happening more than ever before...so give it a try, you might really enjoy listening to Progressive.

It took me awhile, bit once I got away from TV news it was so much easier to see how it's the perfect tool for mind control and programming the brain. Why else would it put people into a hypnotic state almost instantly? You can't get good, in depth information in 30, 60 or 90 second segments, or even 30 or 60 minute talk shows that are highly scripted and produced. Especially from puppets like Beck - in the last year or so he has lost over 100 sponsors, paid advertisers - that's unprecedented!. If he weren't performing a darn good job of spreading disinformation to create fear, keeping people confused and using hate to incite violence for the PTB, he wouldn't even have a job. He's one of the most dangerous men in America because he's one of the most convincing disinformation agent provocateurs of our time. Unbelievable...

Once again I really enjoy your posts, so keep up the good work, please give Randi a try...she's really a breathe of fresh, honest air!!

btw...I don't agree with her on quite everything, but at least you know you can trust what she says and to give you intel you that's verifiable....not something she pulled out of thin air. She probably hasn't been as far down the rabbit hole as most of us, but her hearts in the right place.

As well as the other hosts on KTPK too...

[Deega]

Thanks Ascendingstarseed, don't feel sorry, I’m appreciative that you come and make an interesting statement here!, and you took the time to tell, add references, suggest other authors, great of you, all my respect!, you have something important to tell!

Unfortunately, I don't always know the credibility of journalists making stand. And thanks, if this guy has lost his credibility over time, it's necessary that one tell of it, and it is all in your merit.

I’m from the East Coast Canada (not a good excuse though), so, journalists, phoney journalists or show man (from West Coast) are not always known…!, for me anyway! The two journalists (reps of PTB, Illiminati, Financial Elites, etc.) that I knew were Limbaugh, O'Rielly.

In reading you, I thought, Ascendingstarseed has seen, heard things to qualified Beck professionalism!, and he feels to tell!

Hmm!, Beck has personality, professional traits that get to you.

First time that I saw someone used Vicks to help in crying unvoluntary…!, he could of used onions anyway…!

And he is well paid, secured, protected to do his job…!, and from what you're saying, he seems to have a popularity over credible journalists, I hope that the majority of Americans are not in to this type of show….?

I thank you to suggest Randi Rhodes, as a credible journalist, I will go and have a look (and hear) at what she does.

I don’t take your post as a “long rant personal”, I read, you are really sick and tired of this type of journalist. And thanks on your compliment.

“Reporters are very limited in what they can report anymore...”, how unfortunate!

“I have to laugh when I hear the term "liberal media", that's propaganda from the right when all the mass media outlets are owned by neo-facsist, right wing Republican conservatives who have managed to move the entire nation slowly to the right over a 20yr period - so slow most never even noticed”. May we dream, hoping that it could changed someday….?

Thanks for the links, I will look and listen.
http://kptk.cbslocal.com/2010/08/20/am1090-forum-part-1/
http://www.randirhodes.com/main.html
http://kptk.cbslocal.com/

I have been listening to many Coast to Coast Talk Shows by George Rooney, loved it, and keep at it!

All my blessings.

Deega

[Ahkenaten]

Glen Beck is a cynical, self-serving hypocritical panderer or the worst sort. Sorry but I really hate it when men cry crocodile tears it really is a sign of selfish insincerity and turns me right off. And the purpose of all the fear-mongering is so obvious: TPTB are desperatly trying to freak the people out to distract, divide and conquer. We must stand firm and not be disturbed. All we need to do is to simply withdraw our consent. No tyrant in all of human history has been able to prevail without the tacit consent and support of the people. The paradigm is falling. Be not disturbed.

[ascendingstarseed]

Thanks Ascendingstarseed, don't feel sorry, I’m appreciative that you come and make an interesting statement here!, and you took the time to tell, add references, suggest other authors, great of you, all my respect!, you have something important to tell!

Unfortunately, I don't always know the credibility of journalists making stand. And thanks, if this guy has lost his credibility over time, it's necessary that one tell of it, and it is all in your merit.

Hmm!, Beck has personality, professional traits that get to you.

First time that I saw someone used Vicks to help in crying unvoluntary…!, he could of used onions anyway…!

I thank you to suggest Randi Rhodes, as a credible journalist, I will go and have a look (and hear) at what she does.

“I have to laugh when I hear the term "liberal media", that's propaganda from the right when all the mass media outlets are owned by neo-facsist, right wing Republican conservatives who have managed to move the entire nation slowly to the right over a 20yr period - so slow most never even noticed”. May we dream, hoping that it could changed someday….?

I have been listening to many Coast to Coast Talk Shows by George Rooney, loved it, and keep at it!

All my blessings.

Deega

Aloha Deega!

I'm so relieved that you didn't take my reply personal, so many people here in the US drink the Beck Koolaid and take it very personal when you try to make them aware that he's a sociopath, a textbook case. What's scary about sociopaths is they can be very likable, even charismatic people and can look you in the eye while lying through their teeth. Much of the time they're very believable, because they are so delusional they tend to believe their own lies.

Fox News has about 92 million viewers so they have a lot of people bamboozled, living complete lies because they have no idea how much their party is about to betray them. Now that Republicans have taken over the House they plan on slashing social programs and are going to make a run for the Social Security and Medicare funds. States that elected Republicans or Teabaggers will really be sorry because that means food stamps, unemployment and other programs will be cutback and many people will lose their benefits. People like Beck and Limbaugh have been conning the people to believe that the GOP has their best interests in mind, when this last election was only a ploy to usher in the completion of a fascist corporate takeover of America.

I heard Rush talking about the riots in England which are over raising the cost of college tuition by 300%! He had the nerve to call it a bunch of "Long haired, dope smoking, maggot filled hippies who want a free ride, who don't want to work and want someone else to pay their way!" I was dumbfounded! I honestly couldn't believe that ANYONE could be so cold and unsympathetic. Then I realized that's how millions of people here think, they actually believe that line of thought because they've been listening to the Beck's, O'Rielly's and Limabaugh's on the air.

I was listening to Randi today and she was in rare form, she clearly sees the fascist trends and read a long article on the air today that brilliantly spelled out what's happening with corporate fascism in American politics. There are few people left on the air that really care, are honest and who have a way of helping people understand what's going on with government today and how we got to where we're at today. The other Progressive radio host's are all equally as good in their own right and all bring a different perspective to the table, it's a great new format that really seems to be catching on as people learn that there are radio personality's on the air who actually tell the truth and haven't sold their soul to PTB. So yes, there is hope that if we all work together we can pull the country back to the center...as a matter of fact, the SEattle station KTPK is the only station that shows up in the ratings from people listening on the internet across the country. And it happened organically, they haven't done any advertising...it's just such a good format and hosts like Randi have been around long enough to have a very loyal fans who follow them wherever they go.

At one time Randi was Limbaughs nemesis, she came on the air right after him and beat him in the ratings! Her show also just got picked up in the New York city market, so right now she's kicking b**t and taking names! Give her a listen and let me know what you think...k

She's really taught me a lot...

And don't feel bad about not knowing who's credible and who's not, it's not easy to tell...TV is so convincing, whats really weird about it is that you can hear something on TV news and even if you know it's wrong, if you hear it enough from someone that you believe in you will begin to doubt what you know as a fact to be true!! Unless you've worked behind the scenes, or know people who do...then you really have no way of knowing what goes on and who's who unless you're told.

[Deega]

Aloha Deega!

I'm so relieved that you didn't take my reply personal, so many people here in the US drink the Beck Koolaid and take it very personal when you try to make them aware that he's a sociopath, a textbook case. What's scary about sociopaths is they can be very likable, even charismatic people and can look you in the eye while lying through their teeth. Much of the time they're very believable, because they are so delusional they tend to believe their own lies.

Fox News has about 92 million viewers so they have a lot of people bamboozled, living complete lies because they have no idea how much their party is about to betray them. Now that Republicans have taken over the House they plan on slashing social programs and are going to make a run for the Social Security and Medicare funds. States that elected Republicans or Teabaggers will really be sorry because that means food stamps, unemployment and other programs will be cutback and many people will lose their benefits. People like Beck and Limbaugh have been conning the people to believe that the GOP has their best interests in mind, when this last election was only a ploy to usher in the completion of a fascist corporate takeover of America.

I heard Rush talking about the riots in England which are over raising the cost of college tuition by 300%! He had the nerve to call it a bunch of "Long haired, dope smoking, maggot filled hippies who want a free ride, who don't want to work and want someone else to pay their way!" I was dumbfounded! I honestly couldn't believe that ANYONE could be so cold and unsympathetic. Then I realized that's how millions of people here think, they actually believe that line of thought because they've been listening to the Beck's, O'Rielly's and Limabaugh's on the air.

I was listening to Randi today and she was in rare form, she clearly sees the fascist trends and read a long article on the air today that brilliantly spelled out what's happening with corporate fascism in American politics. There are few people left on the air that really care, are honest and who have a way of helping people understand what's going on with government today and how we got to where we're at today. The other Progressive radio host's are all equally as good in their own right and all bring a different perspective to the table, it's a great new format that really seems to be catching on as people learn that there are radio personality's on the air who actually tell the truth and haven't sold their soul to PTB. So yes, there is hope that if we all work together we can pull the country back to the center...as a matter of fact, the SEattle station KTPK is the only station that shows up in the ratings from people listening on the internet across the country. And it happened organically, they haven't done any advertising...it's just such a good format and hosts like Randi have been around long enough to have a very loyal fans who follow them wherever they go.

At one time Randi was Limbaughs nemesis, she came on the air right after him and beat him in the ratings! Her show also just got picked up in the New York city market, so right now she's kicking b**t and taking names! Give her a listen and let me know what you think...k

She's really taught me a lot...

And don't feel bad about not knowing who's credible and who's not, it's not easy to tell...TV is so convincing, whats really weird about it is that you can hear something on TV news and even if you know it's wrong, if you hear it enough from someone that you believe in you will begin to doubt what you know as a fact to be true!! Unless you've worked behind the scenes, or know people who do...then you really have no way of knowing what goes on and who's who unless you're told.

Thanks Ascendingstarseed,

May you tell, from your saying, these guys are paid to represent Corporate Interests whatever the absence of truth, then lies, hmm!, we are not out of the wood…!

I think that your post, at least, will be read by Avalon members and visitors, hopefully, it will help somehow, to tell who they should listen to, at the news and reporting.

Some may say that it’s the price to pay to have a democracy, well, it (democracy) doesn’t stand on solid ground! That way, democracy is in danger…!, may we say…!, what type of event may change the way (these reporters) news, reporting are carried…? Is the Corporate financing advertisements have anything to do with what, how it is reported….?, or it is more something that is inherent to the system…?

To bad if the newly elects American legislators start backward moves on Social Security and Medicare, all these efforts (Public Forums, bureaucracy work, etc) for nothing, and lesser support (if implemented) for the poor…!

Last night, I started to listen to panel of guests on sustainable development in Seattle, very interesting, I will have to get at it tonight also.


“At one time Randi was Limbaughs nemesis, she came on the air right after him and beat him in the ratings! Her show also just got picked up in the New York city market, so right now she's kicking b**t and taking names! Give her a listen and let me know what you think...k”. That must have been something else, was Rush getting back at her the night after, was he trying to discredit her…?

On the credibility side of journalists, what they are taught in University, Colleges, or others don’t stand to reality…? Doesn’t ? From the little that I know, journalist were taught to bring in socio-econo-political events as they occurred…!, am I right? From your saying, some twist the event to promote the sytem , am I exaggerating here…?

Thanks again for your continue follow-up.

All my blessings.

Deega

[ascendingstarseed]

Hi Deega,

Unfortunately what it all boils down to is the mass media has become part of the corporate machine running the government, because our democracy has turned into a fascist state. Through the predations of corporate capitalism all of the independent media outlets have been gobbled up by just a few transnational corporations, the same ones that have influence over our government, the entire education system, medicine, energy and transportation so they have virtually total control over the masses. I'm sure what's being taught now in the colleges and university's is different than it was two decades ago when we were taught about the period in history 100 years ago when yellow journalism ran rampant. Lying, exaggeration and propaganda was rule of thumb in the news, it was so bad readers didn't know what to believe. In time media became regulated, now people can get sued and in all kinds of trouble for saying the wrong thing. Codes of ethics and morality are supposed to be followed, but it seems that now that these media giants can afford to pay attorneys to litigate none of that matters anymore.

Right now transnational corporations have total control over the US government and media, reporters have boundaries they work in and they know what they can, and can not report on. So to keep their job, they comply.

Schools aren't what they used to be. I'm not sure whats going on whether the new journalists have been dumbed down due to a lack of ethics being taught in college, vaccines or if it's something in the food, who knows...reporters just don't seem as bright as they used to be; they don't ask follow-up questions and they don't probe for the truth when they know someone's lying.

It's been so long since Americans have experienced real investigative reporting and news anchors, that they've forgotten what "real news" is supposed to look, sound like or consist of anymore. Unfortunately I don't think any of this is going to change without a complete paradigm shift, not until people wake up to the false reality on TV and awaken to the fascist reality that's taken over our democracy. The PTB are in control of the media and until that changes, the news is officially pronounced dead, DOA.

Just like us, as people begin to awaken they will turn to the internet more for their information and as they learn what's going on, with any luck paradigms will shift and as people come together as one a peaceful revolution will bring about change. It's kind of happening with Progressive Talk radio as people who are used to listening to the same old right wing-nut hate talk, the lying and same old rhetoric everyday catch on to the format. They appreciate people who are voicing their feelings, who do their homework and are telling the truth. They don't insult your intelligence and don't represent the corporate interests, they represent our interests.

And your right, many journalists sensationalize stories to boost their ratings, they omit stories because it would have negative consequences for station sponsors and right now were seeing a horrible attack on the President and everything Democrats do because the media is owned by Republican conservatives. We hardly ever hear about the good things that the administration has accomplished. In the last week everyone in the media has their knickers in a twist about Obama's trip to India...first it was 2000 people, then it was 3000 people going with him. No one has mentioned the fact that he's going over there for a G20 summit TOO! All they talk about is his dancing, the cost and exaggerated figures on how many people went with him. I'm not a big Obama fan, but it's really hard to believe much that comes from the media because the lies have literally been over the top and unprecedented in American history with a President. This country is still dealing with deep seated racism...

Anyway, all we can do is use our own judgment and not believe everything we see and hear. As we all come together and visualize a new reality, maybe after the cleansing we can build better ways of communicating current events and issues that affect our lives. How can we be well informed when what's being presented to us is false? Somethings very wrong in Oz...

Kindest regards,
Annette / AscendiingStarseed

[Humble Janitor]

I wish I had seen ascendingstarseed's post earlier. It hits the nail on the head and says it better than I could. Beck is practically worshipped on ATS and obviously, he's a paid disinfo agent with a hatred for George Soros and other things.

Beck is the problem only because when people take his words at face value, as it was said, it lowers their frequencies. It promotes negative energy.

[ascendingstarseed]

I wish I had seen ascendingstarseed's post earlier. It hits the nail on the head and says it better than I could. Beck is practically worshipped on ATS and obviously, he's a paid disinfo agent with a hatred for George Soros and other things.

Beck is the problem only because when people take his words at face value, as it was said, it lowers their frequencies. It promotes negative energy.

Thanks HJ...I've watched my step mother turn from a fairly enlightened individual at one point to someone who lives in fear of the terrorist under the bed and the big bad government that wants to take all of her money, and she's completely out of touch with what's going on in the government and the virtual takeover by transnational corporations. She gets that from watching Beck and Fox News 24/7...she's drinking the Koolaid and is totally out of touch with reality. She used to be a very positive, open minded and aware individual and is the one I credit for turning me on to metaphysics and spirituality when I was a teenager.

Her energy has been completely turned inside out from listening to the negative diatribe day in a day out, she hardly speaks to me anymore because I'm....well, I'm one of "them" :suspicious: People like Beck are tools to keep the sheople in fear, dumbed down and divided. They use the "Us vs Them" tactic to keep us divided and fighting amongst each other while their corporate masters steal from us and turn America in to a third world country...literally.

[ascendingstarseed]

I hope anyone reading this thread gives Rhandi Rhodes a chance, today she's been talking about the very thing we're discussing here and doing an amazing job at helping people understand the problems with the news and mass media. And why it's gotten to the point people don't know what or who to believe anymore.

There's absolutely no one on the air who can hold a candle to her honesty and her knowledge of the industry, she knows the players and why the "facts" are non-existent in newscasts. They've been traded in for entertainment value...She's live on the air if Seattle from 6p-9p, I know she's on the air in other markets and you can find that information on her website. Also, if time is an issue you can buy a months worth of podcasts for only $6.95 and listen at your leisure - I guarantee she's worth every dime! I'm unemployed, but managed to come up with $30 for six months awhile back and am glad I made the investment.

If you listen to right wing radio, PLEASE give Progressive a two week trial run because there are nothing but lies, propaganda and rhetoric aimed at getting people to support the best interests of the corporations - not your best interests. I listen to it for balance and perspective, I'm absolutely appalled at the level of dishonesty and deceit. If you give Progressive talk a chance, it might open your eyes We're all sick of being lied to and on the right, it's the same thing day in and day out. This is a very serious time in the history of America and without credible information we aren't empowered to make the right decisions. Please open your mind and take the time to listen to another voice...and a new talk format, it's not the same old talk radio..

Lately I'm seeing a lot of serious misinformation and fear mongering on this forum, blatant lies coming from media sources completely lacking credibility. Some members either have forgotten, or have no idea how to determine the credibility levels of their news sources and do nothing but a disservice to everyone reading your threads.

When Jon Stewart from The Daily Show is being held up as a news standard, there's something seriously wrong with the news industry. He's a comedian, not a news reporter...Beck, is an entertainer, not a journalist or news reporter. The lines have blurred...

Randi's website:
http://randirhodes.com

KTPK-Am Seattle:
http://ktpk.com

[Deega]

Hi Deega,

Unfortunately what it all boils down to is the mass media has become part of the corporate machine running the government, because our democracy has turned into a fascist state. Through the predations of corporate capitalism all of the independent media outlets have been gobbled up by just a few transnational corporations, the same ones that have influence over our government, the entire education system, medicine, energy and transportation so they have virtually total control over the masses. I'm sure what's being taught now in the colleges and university's is different than it was two decades ago when we were taught about the period in history 100 years ago when yellow journalism ran rampant. Lying, exaggeration and propaganda was rule of thumb in the news, it was so bad readers didn't know what to believe. In time media became regulated, now people can get sued and in all kinds of trouble for saying the wrong thing. Codes of ethics and morality are supposed to be followed, but it seems that now that these media giants can afford to pay attorneys to litigate none of that matters anymore.

Right now transnational corporations have total control over the US government and media, reporters have boundaries they work in and they know what they can, and can not report on. So to keep their job, they comply.

Schools aren't what they used to be. I'm not sure whats going on whether the new journalists have been dumbed down due to a lack of ethics being taught in college, vaccines or if it's something in the food, who knows...reporters just don't seem as bright as they used to be; they don't ask follow-up questions and they don't probe for the truth when they know someone's lying.

It's been so long since Americans have experienced real investigative reporting and news anchors, that they've forgotten what "real news" is supposed to look, sound like or consist of anymore. Unfortunately I don't think any of this is going to change without a complete paradigm shift, not until people wake up to the false reality on TV and awaken to the fascist reality that's taken over our democracy. The PTB are in control of the media and until that changes, the news is officially pronounced dead, DOA.

Just like us, as people begin to awaken they will turn to the internet more for their information and as they learn what's going on, with any luck paradigms will shift and as people come together as one a peaceful revolution will bring about change. It's kind of happening with Progressive Talk radio as people who are used to listening to the same old right wing-nut hate talk, the lying and same old rhetoric everyday catch on to the format. They appreciate people who are voicing their feelings, who do their homework and are telling the truth. They don't insult your intelligence and don't represent the corporate interests, they represent our interests.

And your right, many journalists sensationalize stories to boost their ratings, they omit stories because it would have negative consequences for station sponsors and right now were seeing a horrible attack on the President and everything Democrats do because the media is owned by Republican conservatives. We hardly ever hear about the good things that the administration has accomplished. In the last week everyone in the media has their knickers in a twist about Obama's trip to India...first it was 2000 people, then it was 3000 people going with him. No one has mentioned the fact that he's going over there for a G20 summit TOO! All they talk about is his dancing, the cost and exaggerated figures on how many people went with him. I'm not a big Obama fan, but it's really hard to believe much that comes from the media because the lies have literally been over the top and unprecedented in American history with a President. This country is still dealing with deep seated racism...

Anyway, all we can do is use our own judgment and not believe everything we see and hear. As we all come together and visualize a new reality, maybe after the cleansing we can build better ways of communicating current events and issues that affect our lives. How can we be well informed when what's being presented to us is false? Somethings very wrong in Oz...

Kindest regards,
Annette / AscendiingStarseed

Thanks Ascendingstarseed,

Mass media has become part of the corporate machine...!, to bad for the people...!

I would concur with you that it may change the political world. And it takes a few transnational corporations to change the world and control the masses, do you see a way out of this, or the masses contemplate themselves in what the're living.

May you tell what is “yellow journalism”?

Hmm!, the transnational corporations have it, control the media, reporters comply, scary!, seems like we’re going down the ladder as truth has no place to be.

As you say, paragraphing here, transnational corporations have long arms, there already in reaching the youth, in school, education, well, they want to strive, may it last long…?, is there a way to bring a renewal toward truth, honesty…?
What do you see as a paradigm shift in the media, reporting….?, to get out of the control of the transnational corporations….?

Yes!, I guess you’re right, more and more people used the Internet, at lease, when (as you have done) you know of a good reporter, at least, you may tune in to her/him.

Well, if like you say the media is own by the Republican, no wonder, if they used it to further their agenda. And as we know, who among us, have the time, means to tell what is really going around the world…!

Thanks for sharing your knowledge on this important subject.

All my blessings.

Deega

[ascendingstarseed]

Hi Deega,

Yellow Journalism was a term coined back in the late 1800's for reporters who wrote stories that were full of lies, exaggerations that served corporate or political interests. At one point the people got so sick and tired of being lied to that there was a big backlash towards news reporters and newspapers (this was before radio and tv), so rules and standards were set for the industry based on certain codes of ethics that kept the news honest. How can people function in reality when the information they get from news sources lacks credibility? This is a very serious issue that's come full circle again, people need to know their history...if we don't we're bound to repeat it.

A real good movie to watch that exemplifies what's happened to the news was made in 1976, it's called "Network". It shows what happens when the news is handed over to the Programming department, which is exactly what happened when the time came when the news had to make a profit - when it's no longer there for the strict purpose of informing us what we need to know, it becomes entertainment. Instead of giving us the information we "must" know, now the news tells us what we "want" to know. News should be boring, not something to placate the masses.

Corporate interests control content of the news too. For example, we wouldn't be at war if camera's and independent journalists conducting serious investigative reporting were allowed to cover the wars on the ground in Afghanistan or Iraq. Once people witness the reality of the horrors of war with the blood, death and even the horrific birth defects from depleted uranium showing up in babies they would demand an end to the wars.

The war ended once the camera's rolled in Vietnam and the public saw the flesh burning off of victims skins as they ran from the napalm burning down their homes. When Americans actually witnessed what was really happening there was a shift in consciousness and the public began massive protests that eventually ended the war. So at the start of the Iraqi and Afghan wars our leaders were all to quick to remember how the press exposed their dirty deeds, so the press coverage has been has been highly controlled because military defense contractors have trillions in profits they're making on these wars, so no press is allowed in to blow their cover this time. And the wars continue to be sanitized for public consumption by Fox fake news and friends throughout the mass media/

When people start to hold Jon Stewart up to the same standards as Tim Russert, Dan Rather or Keith Olberman then something as gone terribly awry with the news media. People don't even know what a real newscast should look like or consist of any more, the younger generation think it's something that should be entertaining, funny or exciting.

With so many right wing talk radio stations dominating the airwaves people are constantly being fed lies, misinformation and constant hate talk about Obama - repeatedly, the same thing over and over again until they begin to believe the hogwash they're being fed. And that's probably not going to change until people call, or write their local news stations and tell them the news and talk radio should be something that serves the community - not the special interests of one segment of society. It's all about hating Obama and serving the interests of the corporations and big business - not about making the community better for the citizens.

Conservatives use the excuse that when big business does well economically, so does everyone else. Which is a load of cr*p, the stock market is over 11,000 again so the fat cats are sure doing well - they're making a killing! While 60 million Americans are on food stamps, the real unemployment rate is around 20% and one in four kids goes to school hungry. So that's a lie, right now big business is hoarding the cash and not hiring or investing in the community.

People need to call their radio stations and tell them they're sick of hearing the same thing day in and day out, that they're not serving the community with fair and balanced programing, and if they don't change they'll inform the FCC. If people took action things might change...the AM radio frequency is the peoples airwaves and is reserved for community information purposes. So it's our legal right to demand a change in programming if it's not serving the community's best interests. People have more power than they know, they need to exercise it. That's how we change things...from the bottom and work our way up.

Anyway, when you get a chance watch the movie Network it was an amazingly prophetic movie with a great line up of actors and was also nominated for several academy awards. It really spoke volumes about where the industry was headed...lots of foreshadowing going on there. Also do tune into both Randi and KTPK she's on fire lately, and there's a great roster of very talented radio hosts all doing a great job helping people understand whats going on...much better than the news anyway.

Namaste!

~A~}

[Deega]

Hi Deega,

Yellow Journalism was a term coined back in the late 1800's for reporters who wrote stories that were full of lies, exaggerations that served corporate or political interests. At one point the people got so sick and tired of being lied to that there was a big backlash towards news reporters and newspapers (this was before radio and tv), so rules and standards were set for the industry based on certain codes of ethics that kept the news honest. How can people function in reality when the information they get from news sources lacks credibility? This is a very serious issue that's come full circle again, people need to know their history...if we don't we're bound to repeat it.

A real good movie to watch that exemplifies what's happened to the news was made in 1976, it's called "Network". It shows what happens when the news is handed over to the Programming department, which is exactly what happened when the time came when the news had to make a profit - when it's no longer there for the strict purpose of informing us what we need to know, it becomes entertainment. Instead of giving us the information we "must" know, now the news tells us what we "want" to know. News should be boring, not something to placate the masses.

Corporate interests control content of the news too. For example, we wouldn't be at war if camera's and independent journalists conducting serious investigative reporting were allowed to cover the wars on the ground in Afghanistan or Iraq. Once people witness the reality of the horrors of war with the blood, death and even the horrific birth defects from depleted uranium showing up in babies they would demand an end to the wars.

The war ended once the camera's rolled in Vietnam and the public saw the flesh burning off of victims skins as they ran from the napalm burning down their homes. When Americans actually witnessed what was really happening there was a shift in consciousness and the public began massive protests that eventually ended the war. So at the start of the Iraqi and Afghan wars our leaders were all to quick to remember how the press exposed their dirty deeds, so the press coverage has been has been highly controlled because military defense contractors have trillions in profits they're making on these wars, so no press is allowed in to blow their cover this time. And the wars continue to be sanitized for public consumption by Fox fake news and friends throughout the mass media/

When people start to hold Jon Stewart up to the same standards as Tim Russert, Dan Rather or Keith Olberman then something as gone terribly awry with the news media. People don't even know what a real newscast should look like or consist of any more, the younger generation think it's something that should be entertaining, funny or exciting.

With so many right wing talk radio stations dominating the airwaves people are constantly being fed lies, misinformation and constant hate talk about Obama - repeatedly, the same thing over and over again until they begin to believe the hogwash they're being fed. And that's probably not going to change until people call, or write their local news stations and tell them the news and talk radio should be something that serves the community - not the special interests of one segment of society. It's all about hating Obama and serving the interests of the corporations and big business - not about making the community better for the citizens.

Conservatives use the excuse that when big business does well economically, so does everyone else. Which is a load of cr*p, the stock market is over 11,000 again so the fat cats are sure doing well - they're making a killing! While 60 million Americans are on food stamps, the real unemployment rate is around 20% and one in four kids goes to school hungry. So that's a lie, right now big business is hoarding the cash and not hiring or investing in the community.

People need to call their radio stations and tell them they're sick of hearing the same thing day in and day out, that they're not serving the community with fair and balanced programing, and if they don't change they'll inform the FCC. If people took action things might change...the AM radio frequency is the peoples airwaves and is reserved for community information purposes. So it's our legal right to demand a change in programming if it's not serving the community's best interests. People have more power than they know, they need to exercise it. That's how we change things...from the bottom and work our way up.

Anyway, when you get a chance watch the movie Network it was an amazingly prophetic movie with a great line up of actors and was also nominated for several academy awards. It really spoke volumes about where the industry was headed...lots of foreshadowing going on there. Also do tune into both Randi and KTPK she's on fire lately, and there's a great roster of very talented radio hosts all doing a great job helping people understand whats going on...much better than the news anyway.

Namaste!

~A~}

Thanks Ascendingstarseed,

Hmm!, yellow journalism, thanks to informed on part of journalism history. I guess, it was part of the show at the time…!, well today, the show must end, as you said, we need to know the truth behind events!


“Network” movie I will have a look at my local Video Show to see if the movie is available.


“Corporate interests control content of the news” you’re right!, we wouldn’t be at war if the horror were on night news. And the Corporate Financiers doesn’t want the masses to be aware of massacres going on. For the masses, if the unacceptable is reach, the masses will force the government to stop…!, how far (Government and Corporate Financiers) may they go….?, before the majority of people act...!


“Military defense contractors have trillions in profits they're making on these wars, so no press is allowed in to blow their cover this time. And the wars continue to be sanitized for public consumption by Fox fake news and friends throughout the mass media”. How unfortunate it is that way! What is it that we don’t have the leverage to do differently, the private interests are overwhelming, and the system motivates it...!, is it a lost cause...?


“ The younger generation think it's something that should be entertaining, funny or exciting”. This is quite frightening, where are we heading…..?


“Conservatives use the excuse that when big business does well economically, so does everyone else”. How true!, the Corporate Financiers have established rules, had legislators enact laws to run the people always in line for the wealthiest continued striving, whatever, the situation of the rest of the population, how may we do differently…?


“People need to call their radio stations and tell them they're sick of hearing the same thing day in and day out, that they're not serving the community with fair and balanced programming, and if they don't change they'll inform the FCC. If people took action things might change...the AM radio frequency is the peoples airwaves and is reserved for community information purposes. So it's our legal right to demand a change in programming if it's not serving the community's best interests. People have more power than they know, they need to exercise it. That's how we change things...from the bottom and work our way up”. Left the paragraph in, I thought that this is the key...!

I will be listening to KPTK radio next week to have a glimpse of how reporting done.

All my blessings.

Deega

[Ahkenaten]

Jon Stewart really isn't that funny............neither is Colbert.

[ascendingstarseed]

Jon Stewart really isn't that funny............neither is Colbert.

It's not about being funny, nearly an entire generation is getting their news from comedians...they are entertainers, not broadcast journalists. Unfortunately Jon happens to be the only ones out there presenting the FACTS. The newscasters are all prostituting out to their corporate masters who pull the purse strings...when the news dept had to begin to make a profit investigative journalism went out the window. News no longer serves the community, it's purpose.

[Ty]

Annette,

Your original post was pretty long, fairly detailed and offered some useful links. It's the reason I decided to join this forum so I could reply. I'm not trying to start a war of words as that doesn't seem to be the nature of this forum but do feel the need to add a different perspective on Glenn Beck since so far no one else has. I tried not to make this reply personal. Where I failed, I apologize in advance, also for the length. This would have been shorter if I hadn't messed up my application and taken longer than usual to get activated.

The original post...

The post that Deega shared actually has little to do with Glenn Beck. It's just him presenting analysis by two authors, Damon Vickers and Brad Thor, though this wasn't obvious in the link. Damon Vickers manages a fund that returned 63% in 2008 (http://pragcap.com/damon-vickers-time-to-get-aggressively-short). Brad Thor, according to Wikipedia... "is a member of The Heritage Foundation and has spoken at their national headquarters on the need for robust missile defense.[7] Thor has served as a member of the United States Department of Homeland Security's Analytic Red Cell Unit,[8] is a Fellow of the Alexandrian Defense Group"

So, whatever your feelings about Glenn and the 15 day scenario he presented, his guests and other economists concur ... "Both of Glenn’s guests, authors Damon Vickers and Brad Thorn agree that the scenario is a very possible one. Beck said that during the course of researching his latest book, “BROKE”, some of the 30+ economists he talked with think that even 15 days may be optimistic. A sudden crash could happen in 3 days from an event such as China ending it’s purchase of U.S. bonds."

About the video you posted...

This video is preparation for a photo-shoot. Clearly GQ wanted to capture the teary-eyed Glenn. To do so they applied Vapor-rub under his eyes. You conclude from this that his tears are fake. I concur - for that photo shoot. But that has nothing to do with the occasional tears he emits on his show. These may or may not be real, I don't know. But if anything, the video provides evidence that when he tears up on his show, it is genuine, not fake.

Consider... if GB could produce tears on demand, they wouldn't have needed the Vapor-rub. When he tears up on the show, it's usually near the end of one of his rather long monologues. If he was using Vapor-rub, as he did for the photo-shoot, he would be teary-eyed through the whole monologue. He isn't. He occasionally gets very emotional. After watching him for 18 months or so I am pretty certain that when he does tear up it is genuine, born of true emotion, not of charlatanism or for ratings.

Posting that video as evidence of something it clearly isn't, would seem to put you in the same category as those folks you diminish with your post - those 92 million bamboozled Fox viewers who don't think for themselves, and let their existing worldview dictate how all information is processed. You accuse Glenn Beck's viewers of that and fall into the same trap yourself. Rather than see it for what it is, you embrace it as a chance to reinforce a pre-conceived opinion of GB.

Now let's look at some of your claims...

"I'm starting to see so many fear mongering posts based on information from the least credible news sources in mass media that I can't hold back any longer. Beck is the absolute worst source and should be taken off the air because of the damage he's doing to this country" ... "he's known for not checking facts - why check facts when it's easier to make things up, especially if it's something that impacts people on an emotional level?"..."he will say or do ANYTHING it takes to increase the numbers, which means sensationalizing information... even lying"..."he's nothing more than a pathological liar"

I'm sure Glenn has made mistakes. Being on air 20 hours a week for several years now and 15 hours a week before that, it would be unimaginable that he hasn't. But that doesn't make him a liar, let alone a pathological liar. If you have evidence of him making stuff up I'd like to see it. As for sensationalizing information, if you watch him for any length of time you'll see that the most sensational information on his show are video clips of some on the far left and the things that come out of their mouths. Such as their need to dismantle capitalism brick by brick and collapse our government in order to create a new one. These are their words, on video, not mine or Glenn's. You may call his commentary on their ideas fear-mongering. I call it a cautionary alarm and am thankful to him for airing it.

"He NEVER points out the corruption on the right, or inherent in the system...everything is the Obama and the Democrats fault."

Glenn Beck believes in constitutionally limited government. So he naturally attacks the ideology and practices of the left more than the right, but that shouldn't really surprise anyone. Since Obama is a leftist, implementing leftist policies, it's natural that he will likewise get a good degree of criticism. Much of it originating with Obama's own words (you'd know this if you watched).

As to your opinion (or someone's, presented here as fact) about corruption, where corruption is concerned, he exposes the right as much as the left. Maybe you should take your own advice and actually watch him for a couple weeks before you form such rock-solid, utterly wrong opinions about him that you then share and present as if gospel. I'm sure Randi Rhodes would want you to form your own opinions, not just parrot those of others, right? (Actually after looking at her site, I' not so sure.)

"in the last year or so he has lost over 100 sponsors, paid advertisers - that's unprecedented!"

According to StopBeck.com (just one of the sites dedicated to having him and Fox News removed from the air) 141 advertisers have dropped their ads. I'm not sure what your point is, though. Unprecendeted? Maybe. But so is the boycott effort behind it. Why debate or discuss when you can instead get viewpoints you disagree with silenced by brute force?

I could go on, but suspect there is little point. The real issue is that GB is actually waking people up to the vision shared by many on the left and making it harder for them, be they socialist, communists, liberals or progressives, to continue steering the country away from its constitutional, small government roots. I agree, he should avoid exaggeration and mistakes in that process, and certainly lying, though I've seen no evidence of that yet.

Hopefully, for the sake of those of us who want to live in a country that resembles the one our founders created, GB will continue to have greater influence and those 20% or so who want to move it to a more progressive agenda will continue to lose influence. And if he makes mistakes while drawing attention to the bigger picture, as I suppose is unavoidable, it doesn't negate his larger point - that Obama and the left, are intent on "radically transforming" (Obama's words, not Glenn's) this nation.

In closing...

"Fox News has about 92 million viewers so they have a lot of people bamboozled, living complete lies because they have no idea how much their party is about to betray them. Now that Republicans have taken over the House they plan on slashing social programs and are going to make a run for the Social Security and Medicare funds. States that elected Republicans or Teabaggers will really be sorry because that means food stamps, unemployment and other programs will be cutback and many people will lose their benefits. People like Beck and Limbaugh have been conning the people to believe that the GOP has their best interests in mind, when this last election was only a ploy to usher in the completion of a fascist corporate takeover of America. "

First, they are Tea Partyers, not Teabaggers, and in my experience a very congenial group of folks, far more tolerant than many I have encountered on the left.

Second - do you have any idea how ludicrous your analysis sounds? Make a run for the Social Security funds? There are no SS funds. The SS funds have been systematically raided by both parties over the years to pay for programs we couldn't otherwise afford. Programs that probably wouldn't have come into existence if they had been paid for with budgetted dollars instead of the SS slush fund. The only thing in the SS fund is IOUs from the government. And GB dutifully blames both parties for this.

This country is broke. And yes, all of those programs you mention and more will likely be on the chopping block sooner or later. But if you think it's because of a fascist corporate takeover of America, you need to re-visit your dot-connecting. It's because we're broke from all the big government programs that create the wrong incentives. These programs are unsustainable.

We're almost $14 trillion in debt and it looks to be growing about $100k every 7 seconds or so (http://www.uwsa.com/us-national-debt.html). If you're math-challenged, that's almost a million dollars a minute. Our debt today is a greater percentage of GDP than it was in 1929 (http://www.alkalizeforhealth.net/Ldebtclock.htm). And the left wants to keep spending and piling on the debt, accusing those opposed as racists and fear-mongers. We can't spend our way out of this problem. It didn't work in the 30s and it won't work now.

With a major war, the creation of Homeland Security and other responses to 911, Bush added about 4.9 trillion to the debt in 8 years. And GB has criticized him for this. By contrast, Obama has added over 3.2 trillion in under 2 years. Those are facts, right from the treasury (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway). If Obama continues at this rate he would add 12.8 trillion in 8 years compared to Bush's 4.9. Fortunately, he no longer has a congress that will write him a blank check so this won't happen.

Even if the debt doesn't grow another dime, our debt problem isn't going to have a happy ending. Recent events make this a pipe dream, though - an $850 billion tax/stimulus bill and a $1.1 trillion 1,924 page budget with over 6,400 earmarks - $575 million per page. GB is alerting people to the size of the problem and steps to prepare for it. You may want to call it fear mongering. I call it a reality check.

As for lying, when the budget gets to him, if it still has earmarks in it, let's see if Obama signs it. You do remember, he pledged that he wouldn't sign anything that had earmarks in it, right? Of course, he also promised the most transparent administration in history and that all bills would be available on-line for at least 5 days I think it was, for the public to review before being voted on. Maybe you should be more concerned with the way Obama has bamboozled people than the way GB and Fox News have.

At the risk of generalizing, it seems the left are more prone to propose solutions based on emotion than on incentive based cause and effect. People need help so we should create a program that channels money their way. It's the decent thing to do, of course and if you don't agree with that you're just heartless.

This approach is OK when dealing with family, friends and neighbors on a personal level. It is disastrous when implementing policy for a nation. Emotion driven solutions don't usually provide a foundation for long term correction. They just don't scale up well. Incentives get reversed. Thus we have so many "unintended consequences," most of which were easily predicted if rationally thought through from the perspective of incentives.

Our war on poverty is a good example. When poverty is more tolerable (less miserable) fewer people will bother to work their way out of it. Nothing complicated there, or new, for that matter. Ben Franklin I think said it first. Yet policy after policy, emanating from our "war on poverty" has done just that - made poverty more accomodating. And, surprise!! Not only have we not managed to eradicate poverty in 45 years, but by all accounts we haven't made much, if any, progress at all. Rather than actually help people get out of poverty, we've condemed generations of people to dependence on governement programs. An easily predicatable outcome when considered realistically instead of idealistically. Europe has finally reached the point where they can't afford the outcome anymore and is now scaling back. Obama and the left just want to keep going down a road that has been shown to lead to bankruptcy.

And finally...

Glenn Beck does not claim to be a journalist. He calls himself an opinion-maker. I happen to think he and his team are good investigative researchers. They have uncovered and presented clips not shown anywhere else. His TV show is a mix of fact and opinion and he generally does a good job of distinguishing between the two. When presenting facts, he always sources them, usually as video or audio clips or quotes.

These form the foundation of his commentary and he goes to great lengths to explain how and why he reaches his opinions. He connects the dots between the facts and his conclusions.

Does he make mistakes and sometimes get it wrong? I'm sure he does. It's bound to happen with anyone on-air as many hours a week as he is. Is it intentional, like whichever major network it was that faked a car explosion to illustrate how dangerous the car was. Or like Dan Rather desperately clinging to a story after the docs supporting it were found to be fake? Or like HIllary being shot at when she landed in Bosnia? or... or.... or... I'm sure I could fill a book if I had time to go gather them. Is it as contrived or as damaging as the lies I cited about Obama above? Or Barney Frank assuring us that there was nothing wrong with Fannie and Freddie? Or the Climate Gate deception? Or Al Gore's movie? Or Michael Mann's Hockey Stick fraud? Or the IPCC's selective distortions? Naturaly, the answer depends on which side of the political pond you swim in. But you don't have to watch GB or Fox News to encounter lies and distortions. You just have to be honest with yourself and question everything, instead of giving what you agree with a free pass.

I suspect Glenn is despised by the left not so much because of the claimed lies and distortions, but because of the larger picture he draws. The exposure he gives to the radical words from the radical left coming out of their own mouths

It's fair game to disagree with GB's conclusions and opinions. It is unfortunate that the left opts instead to mount massive efforts to have him removed from the air-waves. Free speech is one of the founding principles of this country. Why is the left always so eager to squash it?

Since you didn't provide any links, I took the liberty to look around on Media Matters a bit. Boy do they have a lot of selective stuff on there. If this, or sites like it, are your primary source of GB information, it's no wonder you view him with such venom. The clips they have that I looked at make him look paranoid and conspiratorial. Funny how taking things out of context can do that. Their motto is clever, though - "We watch Fox News so you don't have to." It would be more accurate I think, though, if it were "We watch Fox News so we can cherry pick what we provide to you without the underlying research hoping you won't bother watching and actually get the full story."

On Randi Rhodes...

Thought I was done but checked out one of your links. Randi Rhodes, in her own words...

On the tax deal: "Essentially, Obama agreed to give a lot of money to people who don’t deserve it, in exchange for being able to give a lot more money to people who really need it. "

Language is very telling. Randi clearly thinks it's the government's money to hand out. Where does she think it comes from? The government has no money it doesn't confiscate, print or borrow. It creates no wealth. The tax deal is not going to "give a lot of money to people who don’t deserve it," it's going to allow people to keep more of what they earned. This seems to be a foreign concept to a lot on the left.

On Republicans: "Remember, the Republicans didn’t get everything they wanted in this deal. But then the Republicans want everything."..." But if Obama’s twin goals are to find agreement with Republicans and to look reasonable, is it even possible to agree with Republicans and look reasonable at the same time?"..."Obama is trying to make the best of a bad situation. And Republicans are trying to make a bad situation. "..."Remember, in any negotiation, Republicans have a huge bargaining chip in the fact that they’re perfectly willing to let the country go to hell."

You say "please give Randi a try...she's really a breathe of fresh, honest air!!" Yes, and such penetrating insights. Apparently "a breathe of fresh, honest air" means "I agree with her", not "truthful and enlightening."

I know just about everything I need to know about Randi Rhodes now. Lies, distortions, misinformation, fear-mongering and hate-mongering. Everything you find despicable with Glenn Beck, right here in plain view with Randi.

Question everything, even Randi.

[ascendingstarseed]

Annette,

Your original post was pretty long, fairly detailed and offered some useful links. It's the reason I decided to join this forum so I could reply. I'm not trying to start a war of words as that doesn't seem to be the nature of this forum but do feel the need to add a different perspective on Glenn Beck since so far no one else has. I tried not to make this reply personal. Where I failed, I apologize in advance, also for the length. This would have been shorter if I hadn't messed up my application and taken longer than usual to get activated.

The original post...

The post that Deega shared actually has little to do with Glenn Beck. It's just him presenting analysis by two authors, Damon Vickers and Brad Thor, though this wasn't obvious in the link. Damon Vickers manages a fund that returned 63% in 2008 (http://pragcap.com/damon-vickers-time-to-get-aggressively-short). Brad Thor, according to Wikipedia... "is a member of The Heritage Foundation and has spoken at their national headquarters on the need for robust missile defense.[7] Thor has served as a member of the United States Department of Homeland Security's Analytic Red Cell Unit,[8] is a Fellow of the Alexandrian Defense Group"

So, whatever your feelings about Glenn and the 15 day scenario he presented, his guests and other economists concur ... "Both of Glenn’s guests, authors Damon Vickers and Brad Thorn agree that the scenario is a very possible one. Beck said that during the course of researching his latest book, “BROKE”, some of the 30+ economists he talked with think that even 15 days may be optimistic. A sudden crash could happen in 3 days from an event such as China ending it’s purchase of U.S. bonds."

About the video you posted...

This video is preparation for a photo-shoot. Clearly GQ wanted to capture the teary-eyed Glenn. To do so they applied Vapor-rub under his eyes. You conclude from this that his tears are fake. I concur - for that photo shoot. But that has nothing to do with the occasional tears he emits on his show. These may or may not be real, I don't know. But if anything, the video provides evidence that when he tears up on his show, it is genuine, not fake.

Consider... if GB could produce tears on demand, they wouldn't have needed the Vapor-rub. When he tears up on the show, it's usually near the end of one of his rather long monologues. If he was using Vapor-rub, as he did for the photo-shoot, he would be teary-eyed through the whole monologue. He isn't. He occasionally gets very emotional. After watching him for 18 months or so I am pretty certain that when he does tear up it is genuine, born of true emotion, not of charlatanism or for ratings.

Posting that video as evidence of something it clearly isn't, would seem to put you in the same category as those folks you diminish with your post - those 92 million bamboozled Fox viewers who don't think for themselves, and let their existing worldview dictate how all information is processed. You accuse Glenn Beck's viewers of that and fall into the same trap yourself. Rather than see it for what it is, you embrace it as a chance to reinforce a pre-conceived opinion of GB.

Now let's look at some of your claims...

"I'm starting to see so many fear mongering posts based on information from the least credible news sources in mass media that I can't hold back any longer. Beck is the absolute worst source and should be taken off the air because of the damage he's doing to this country" ... "he's known for not checking facts - why check facts when it's easier to make things up, especially if it's something that impacts people on an emotional level?"..."he will say or do ANYTHING it takes to increase the numbers, which means sensationalizing information... even lying"..."he's nothing more than a pathological liar"

I'm sure Glenn has made mistakes. Being on air 20 hours a week for several years now and 15 hours a week before that, it would be unimaginable that he hasn't. But that doesn't make him a liar, let alone a pathological liar. If you have evidence of him making stuff up I'd like to see it. As for sensationalizing information, if you watch him for any length of time you'll see that the most sensational information on his show are video clips of some on the far left and the things that come out of their mouths. Such as their need to dismantle capitalism brick by brick and collapse our government in order to create a new one. These are their words, on video, not mine or Glenn's. You may call his commentary on their ideas fear-mongering. I call it a cautionary alarm and am thankful to him for airing it.

"He NEVER points out the corruption on the right, or inherent in the system...everything is the Obama and the Democrats fault."

Glenn Beck believes in constitutionally limited government. So he naturally attacks the ideology and practices of the left more than the right, but that shouldn't really surprise anyone. Since Obama is a leftist, implementing leftist policies, it's natural that he will likewise get a good degree of criticism. Much of it originating with Obama's own words (you'd know this if you watched).

As to your opinion (or someone's, presented here as fact) about corruption, where corruption is concerned, he exposes the right as much as the left. Maybe you should take your own advice and actually watch him for a couple weeks before you form such rock-solid, utterly wrong opinions about him that you then share and present as if gospel. I'm sure Randi Rhodes would want you to form your own opinions, not just parrot those of others, right? (Actually after looking at her site, I' not so sure.)

"in the last year or so he has lost over 100 sponsors, paid advertisers - that's unprecedented!"

According to StopBeck.com (just one of the sites dedicated to having him and Fox News removed from the air) 141 advertisers have dropped their ads. I'm not sure what your point is, though. Unprecendeted? Maybe. But so is the boycott effort behind it. Why debate or discuss when you can instead get viewpoints you disagree with silenced by brute force?

I could go on, but suspect there is little point. The real issue is that GB is actually waking people up to the vision shared by many on the left and making it harder for them, be they socialist, communists, liberals or progressives, to continue steering the country away from its constitutional, small government roots. I agree, he should avoid exaggeration and mistakes in that process, and certainly lying, though I've seen no evidence of that yet.

Hopefully, for the sake of those of us who want to live in a country that resembles the one our founders created, GB will continue to have greater influence and those 20% or so who want to move it to a more progressive agenda will continue to lose influence. And if he makes mistakes while drawing attention to the bigger picture, as I suppose is unavoidable, it doesn't negate his larger point - that Obama and the left, are intent on "radically transforming" (Obama's words, not Glenn's) this nation.

In closing...

"Fox News has about 92 million viewers so they have a lot of people bamboozled, living complete lies because they have no idea how much their party is about to betray them. Now that Republicans have taken over the House they plan on slashing social programs and are going to make a run for the Social Security and Medicare funds. States that elected Republicans or Teabaggers will really be sorry because that means food stamps, unemployment and other programs will be cutback and many people will lose their benefits. People like Beck and Limbaugh have been conning the people to believe that the GOP has their best interests in mind, when this last election was only a ploy to usher in the completion of a fascist corporate takeover of America. "

First, they are Tea Partyers, not Teabaggers, and in my experience a very congenial group of folks, far more tolerant than many I have encountered on the left.

Second - do you have any idea how ludicrous your analysis sounds? Make a run for the Social Security funds? There are no SS funds. The SS funds have been systematically raided by both parties over the years to pay for programs we couldn't otherwise afford. Programs that probably wouldn't have come into existence if they had been paid for with budgetted dollars instead of the SS slush fund. The only thing in the SS fund is IOUs from the government. And GB dutifully blames both parties for this.

This country is broke. And yes, all of those programs you mention and more will likely be on the chopping block sooner or later. But if you think it's because of a fascist corporate takeover of America, you need to re-visit your dot-connecting. It's because we're broke from all the big government programs that create the wrong incentives. These programs are unsustainable.

We're almost $14 trillion in debt and it looks to be growing about $100k every 7 seconds or so (http://www.uwsa.com/us-national-debt.html). If you're math-challenged, that's almost a million dollars a minute. Our debt today is a greater percentage of GDP than it was in 1929 (http://www.alkalizeforhealth.net/Ldebtclock.htm). And the left wants to keep spending and piling on the debt, accusing those opposed as racists and fear-mongers. We can't spend our way out of this problem. It didn't work in the 30s and it won't work now.

With a major war, the creation of Homeland Security and other responses to 911, Bush added about 4.9 trillion to the debt in 8 years. And GB has criticized him for this. By contrast, Obama has added over 3.2 trillion in under 2 years. Those are facts, right from the treasury (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway). If Obama continues at this rate he would add 12.8 trillion in 8 years compared to Bush's 4.9. Fortunately, he no longer has a congress that will write him a blank check so this won't happen.

Even if the debt doesn't grow another dime, our debt problem isn't going to have a happy ending. Recent events make this a pipe dream, though - an $850 billion tax/stimulus bill and a $1.1 trillion 1,924 page budget with over 6,400 earmarks - $575 million per page. GB is alerting people to the size of the problem and steps to prepare for it. You may want to call it fear mongering. I call it a reality check.

As for lying, when the budget gets to him, if it still has earmarks in it, let's see if Obama signs it. You do remember, he pledged that he wouldn't sign anything that had earmarks in it, right? Of course, he also promised the most transparent administration in history and that all bills would be available on-line for at least 5 days I think it was, for the public to review before being voted on. Maybe you should be more concerned with the way Obama has bamboozled people than the way GB and Fox News have.

At the risk of generalizing, it seems the left are more prone to propose solutions based on emotion than on incentive based cause and effect. People need help so we should create a program that channels money their way. It's the decent thing to do, of course and if you don't agree with that you're just heartless.

This approach is OK when dealing with family, friends and neighbors on a personal level. It is disastrous when implementing policy for a nation. Emotion driven solutions don't usually provide a foundation for long term correction. They just don't scale up well. Incentives get reversed. Thus we have so many "unintended consequences," most of which were easily predicted if rationally thought through from the perspective of incentives.

Our war on poverty is a good example. When poverty is more tolerable (less miserable) fewer people will bother to work their way out of it. Nothing complicated there, or new, for that matter. Ben Franklin I think said it first. Yet policy after policy, emanating from our "war on poverty" has done just that - made poverty more accomodating. And, surprise!! Not only have we not managed to eradicate poverty in 45 years, but by all accounts we haven't made much, if any, progress at all. Rather than actually help people get out of poverty, we've condemed generations of people to dependence on governement programs. An easily predicatable outcome when considered realistically instead of idealistically. Europe has finally reached the point where they can't afford the outcome anymore and is now scaling back. Obama and the left just want to keep going down a road that has been shown to lead to bankruptcy.

And finally...

Glenn Beck does not claim to be a journalist. He calls himself an opinion-maker. I happen to think he and his team are good investigative researchers. They have uncovered and presented clips not shown anywhere else. His TV show is a mix of fact and opinion and he generally does a good job of distinguishing between the two. When presenting facts, he always sources them, usually as video or audio clips or quotes.

These form the foundation of his commentary and he goes to great lengths to explain how and why he reaches his opinions. He connects the dots between the facts and his conclusions.

Does he make mistakes and sometimes get it wrong? I'm sure he does. It's bound to happen with anyone on-air as many hours a week as he is. Is it intentional, like whichever major network it was that faked a car explosion to illustrate how dangerous the car was. Or like Dan Rather desperately clinging to a story after the docs supporting it were found to be fake? Or like HIllary being shot at when she landed in Bosnia? or... or.... or... I'm sure I could fill a book if I had time to go gather them. Is it as contrived or as damaging as the lies I cited about Obama above? Or Barney Frank assuring us that there was nothing wrong with Fannie and Freddie? Or the Climate Gate deception? Or Al Gore's movie? Or Michael Mann's Hockey Stick fraud? Or the IPCC's selective distortions? Naturaly, the answer depends on which side of the political pond you swim in. But you don't have to watch GB or Fox News to encounter lies and distortions. You just have to be honest with yourself and question everything, instead of giving what you agree with a free pass.

I suspect Glenn is despised by the left not so much because of the claimed lies and distortions, but because of the larger picture he draws. The exposure he gives to the radical words from the radical left coming out of their own mouths

It's fair game to disagree with GB's conclusions and opinions. It is unfortunate that the left opts instead to mount massive efforts to have him removed from the air-waves. Free speech is one of the founding principles of this country. Why is the left always so eager to squash it?

Since you didn't provide any links, I took the liberty to look around on Media Matters a bit. Boy do they have a lot of selective stuff on there. If this, or sites like it, are your primary source of GB information, it's no wonder you view him with such venom. The clips they have that I looked at make him look paranoid and conspiratorial. Funny how taking things out of context can do that. Their motto is clever, though - "We watch Fox News so you don't have to." It would be more accurate I think, though, if it were "We watch Fox News so we can cherry pick what we provide to you without the underlying research hoping you won't bother watching and actually get the full story."

On Randi Rhodes...

Thought I was done but checked out one of your links. Randi Rhodes, in her own words...

On the tax deal: "Essentially, Obama agreed to give a lot of money to people who don’t deserve it, in exchange for being able to give a lot more money to people who really need it. "

Language is very telling. Randi clearly thinks it's the government's money to hand out. Where does she think it comes from? The government has no money it doesn't confiscate, print or borrow. It creates no wealth. The tax deal is not going to "give a lot of money to people who don’t deserve it," it's going to allow people to keep more of what they earned. This seems to be a foreign concept to a lot on the left.

On Republicans: "Remember, the Republicans didn’t get everything they wanted in this deal. But then the Republicans want everything."..." But if Obama’s twin goals are to find agreement with Republicans and to look reasonable, is it even possible to agree with Republicans and look reasonable at the same time?"..."Obama is trying to make the best of a bad situation. And Republicans are trying to make a bad situation. "..."Remember, in any negotiation, Republicans have a huge bargaining chip in the fact that they’re perfectly willing to let the country go to hell."

You say "please give Randi a try...she's really a breathe of fresh, honest air!!" Yes, and such penetrating insights. Apparently "a breathe of fresh, honest air" means "I agree with her", not "truthful and enlightening."

I know just about everything I need to know about Randi Rhodes now. Lies, distortions, misinformation, fear-mongering and hate-mongering. Everything you find despicable with Glenn Beck, right here in plain view with Randi.

Question everything, even Randi.

You are brainwashed and completely unreachable....what are you people doing here, you are so out of touch with reality it's pathetic? You are the one who needs to start questioning things because you have been listening to the wrong people for too long if thats what you believe. You're a perfect example of what the mass media propaganda machine has done to permanently scramble the brains of average Americans.

Give Randi and others on Progressive radio a couple of weeks to unscramble your brains with FACTS instead of rhetoric, I don't have the time for this ignorant, mislead nonsense anymore.

[Ty]

"You're a perfect example of what the mass media propaganda machine has done to permanently scramble the brains of average Americans."

The majority of the "mass media propaganda machine" is on yours and Randi's side of the political divide, scrambling those brains with shallow analysis. That's I think why so many political discussions degenerate into hyperbole and name calling from the left. By the way, I did, completely by accident, happen to catch 30 minutes or so of Randi's show yesterday and she and her callers did clarify a few things for me. Everything is the fault of mean-spirited, evil and careless Republicans. Whew!! Imagine my surprise.

[Ahkenaten]

How silly and what a complete waste of time..................there IS no ideological divide between "Liberal" and "Conservative" - this is an illusion created to spin the panopticon and ensnare silly twits in ridiculous arguments and fake ideological disputes. The political system is run by ONE force and the so-called liberals and conservatives ALL TAKE MONEY FROM AND WORK FOR THE SAME PEOPLE. Getting caught up in these fake disputes is exactly what our overlords intend. It serves the purpose of distracting us from looking upward toward the seeing eye at the top of the pyramid, and focusing on who and what are causing all of our problems. It serves the ancient purpose of "divide and conquer" directing us to pointless, energy-consuming mud-wrestling matches amongst ourselves. THERE IS NO LEFT/RIGHT, LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE dichotomy people! WAKE UP! This entire dualistic spectacle is a deliberately created FAKE drama designed to ensnare us and prevent us from taking any meaningful action whatsoever. WAKE UP PEOPLE.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

How silly and what a complete waste of time..................there IS no ideological divide between "Liberal" and "Conservative" - this is an illusion created to spin the panopticon and ensnare silly twits in ridiculous arguments and fake ideological disputes. The political system is run by ONE force and the so-called liberals and conservatives ALL TAKE MONEY FROM AND WORK FOR THE SAME PEOPLE. Getting caught up in these fake disputes is exactly what our overlords intend. It serves the purpose of distracting us from looking upward toward the seeing eye at the top of the pyramid, and focusing on who and what are causing all of our problems. It serves the ancient purpose of "divide and conquer" directing us to pointless, energy-consuming mud-wrestling matches amongst ourselves. THERE IS NO LEFT/RIGHT, LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE dichotomy people! WAKE UP! This entire dualistic spectacle is a deliberately created FAKE drama designed to ensnare us and prevent us from taking any meaningful action whatsoever. WAKE UP PEOPLE.

I couldn't agree more. We have to stop fighting among ourselves and unite. Begin looking for the similarities instead of the differences. The thing that makes TPTB so powerful, is they are focused and united on 2 things: They want all the money and power.

Can we focus on what "we" all want? Don't we all want:
* Clean air and water
* Free or affordable health care
* Educations where we are taught critical thinking rather than "what to think"
*Employment with a wage where we can support ourselves/families

I can't help but notice that all the cuts coming out of the politicians mouths are cuts to us. They keep saying "we" have to pull in our belts. What about "their" belts. "They" voted themselves a cost of living raise, but voted not to give one to SS recipients.

Can we agree on these 3 simple things to start? That politicians: (1) loose their pensions & put all of the monies from the pension plan into Social Security and "they" get the same retirement as we do. (2) Have the same healthcare options that we do. (3) Can not vote themselves raises.

Or choose any one of the three to focus on. Unfortunately I see "us" as all across the board. We jump from one issue to another (mostly because MSN purposely directs us that way) always fighting amongst ourselves, while they laugh behind the curtain pulling our strings and pulling in all the money. Can we put our heads, hearts and energy together and organize on anyone of the above? Where better to begin this than on a website such as this!!!!!

[NoTingles]

In January of '99, I fired Time/Warner, ending my cable subscription. I haven't watched tv since. That means, if I want to know what's going on in the world, I've got to look for it. I don't know anything about Glen Beck, except for watching a few videos of him on youtube. Would it be fair then, for me to surmise that he's a stuntman for FOX? Probably not, but it just seems to me, he's saying things that are inflammatory, but getting away with it, and since I know that MSM has been controlled as a propaganda organ for as long as I've been alive...and maybe longer, that means that he's not being muzzled because he is serving a purpose, and I think it's safe to say that it's for more reasons than getting viewership or ratings. Not long ago, I found a youtube video of the Jesse Ventura conspiracy theories show (TruTV) about police state tactics, and I was amazed that it was actually aired. Sometime later, I heard that after that episode made its debut, TruTV was strongarmed by the gubbermint to pull it and not air it again. In my short life-time, we have come a long way. Oddly enough, it was only back in the mid-'70's that Gary Allen was considered to be an unAmerican kook for writing None Dare Call it Conspiracy.

[Ty]

Ahkenaten:

"there IS no ideological divide between "Liberal" and "Conservative" - this is an illusion..." ..."The political system is run by ONE force"..."THERE IS NO LEFT/RIGHT, LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE dichotomy "

Well I must admit I didn't see that coming. I don't know about this ONE force idea but would like to hear more about it.

As for the lack of an ideological split I couldn't disagree more. At the risk of generalizing and over-simplifying a bit...

Conservatives believe in and push for a country closer to that framed by our founders - minimum government and maximum personal responsibility, freedom and liberty.

Liberals believe in and push for government regulation everywhere they see inequity or "need".

Whether there is ONE force at the eye of the pyramid or not there is a very real ideological divide down here in the base of the pyramid. It is anything but an illusion. Legislation has consequences. Sometimes benign but all to often it filters down into individual lives and decisions and affects our everyday lives, all the way down to which light bulbs we'll be allowed to buy. Perhaps in a dream world, that's an illusion. Where I live, it's all too real.

Ba-ba-Ra:

The best way to strip TPTB of their money and power is to stop sending so much of our money to Washington. The more of your own money you keep, the more control you have over how it's spent. The more of it you send to Washington, the more of it will make it's way up the pyramid.

And that's the driving force in the ideological divide. If you're really worried about TPTB then you should be lobbying for minimum taxes and minimum government.

Nations need governance. Ours was founded uniquely. Not by decree or lineage but by a group of revolutionaries who risked their lives and freedom. They debated for months to put together a framework specifically targetted to prevent the growth of power and corruption. Three branches, checks and balances, a very short list of federal authorities. They knew the nature of those in power was to accumulate more of it. And in spite of their best efforts, a mere 250 years or so later, many of the checks and balances and restrictions are now just ignored by our elected officials, actually laughed at in some cases.

I applaud your three starting points, but none of them strip away power, just priviledge.

TPTB, whoever that might be, have grown, because we strayed from the plan 100 years or so ago when the income tax was implemented and began sending large portions of our income to Washington. The best, if not only way back, is if we shrink government back down to something close to how it was originally framed. And the easiest way to do that is to de-fund it.

I believe this will happen. Not systematically and voluntarily, but catastrophically.

[Ahkenaten]

Ahkenaten:

"there IS no ideological divide between "Liberal" and "Conservative" - this is an illusion..." ..."The political system is run by ONE force"..."THERE IS NO LEFT/RIGHT, LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE dichotomy "

Well I must admit I didn't see that coming. I don't know about this ONE force idea but would like to hear more about it.

As for the lack of an ideological split I couldn't disagree more. At the risk of generalizing and over-simplifying a bit...

Conservatives believe in and push for a country closer to that framed by our founders - minimum government and maximum personal responsibility, freedom and liberty.

Liberals believe in and push for government regulation everywhere they see inequity or "need".

Whether there is ONE force at the eye of the pyramid or not there is a very real ideological divide down here in the base of the pyramid. It is anything but an illusion. Legislation has consequences. Sometimes benign but all to often it filters down into individual lives and decisions and affects our everyday lives, all the way down to which light bulbs we'll be allowed to buy. Perhaps in a dream world, that's an illusion. Where I live, it's all too real.

Ba-ba-Ra:

The best way to strip TPTB of their money and power is to stop sending so much of our money to Washington. The more of your own money you keep, the more control you have over how it's spent. The more of it you send to Washington, the more of it will make it's way up the pyramid.

And that's the driving force in the ideological divide. If you're really worried about TPTB then you should be lobbying for minimum taxes and minimum government.

Nations need governance. Ours was founded uniquely. Not by decree or lineage but by a group of revolutionaries who risked their lives and freedom. They debated for months to put together a framework specifically targetted to prevent the growth of power and corruption. Three branches, checks and balances, a very short list of federal authorities. They knew the nature of those in power was to accumulate more of it. And in spite of their best efforts, a mere 250 years or so later, many of the checks and balances and restrictions are now just ignored by our elected officials, actually laughed at in some cases.

I applaud your three starting points, but none of them strip away power, just priviledge.

TPTB, whoever that might be, have grown, because we strayed from the plan 100 years or so ago when the income tax was implemented and began sending large portions of our income to Washington. The best, if not only way back, is if we shrink government back down to something close to how it was originally framed. And the easiest way to do that is to de-fund it.

I believe this will happen. Not systematically and voluntarily, but catastrophically.

Hi Ty - I hate to alarm you but contrary to your assumptions, this nation WAS NOT founded on any belief in equality the pronouncements in the declaration of independence and Constitution notwithstanding. The American Revolution was heavily influenced by the French Revolution, that showed that aristocrats could be usurped by force, however those who were behind the US revolutionary war were mainly the landed upper classes and merchants who wanted freedom from the British Crown, but who were terrified of the excesses of the French Revolution - they did not want their heads to be chopped off by the masses! Thus they devised a strategy to foment a revolution enlisting the masses by talk of "freedom" and "personal liberties" while at the same time when it came to the actual struggle to set up the framework for the new government, the informed discussion was focused not on liberty for the masses who fought the war but rather on important issues such as how the power of the masses was to be tempered and tamped down by the institutions of representative legislature, and executive and judicial authority. And so, the system we have today is NOT based on any notion of "equality" whatsoever...............rather it is a system designed to reign in the frightening power of the masses by enlisting their support for and entrainment by a system of control under the Rule of Law.

[Ty]

Hi Ty - I hate to alarm you but contrary to your assumptions, this nation WAS NOT founded on any belief in equality the pronouncements in the declaration of independence and Constitution notwithstanding. The American Revolution was heavily influenced by the French Revolution, that showed that aristocrats could be usurped by force, however those who were behind the US revolutionary war were mainly the landed upper classes and merchants who wanted freedom from the British Crown, but who were terrified of the excesses of the French Revolution - they did not want their heads to be chopped off by the masses! Thus they devised a strategy to foment a revolution enlisting the masses by talk of "freedom" and "personal liberties" while at the same time when it came to the actual struggle to set up the framework for the new government, the informed discussion was focused not on liberty for the masses who fought the war but rather on important issues such as how the power of the masses was to be tempered and tamped down by the institutions of representative legislature, and executive and judicial authority. And so, the system we have today is NOT based on any notion of "equality" whatsoever...............rather it is a system designed to reign in the frightening power of the masses by enlisting their support for and entrainment by a system of control under the Rule of Law.

Hi Ahkenaten,

I enjoy a good back and forth. Some points of clarity...

Can you show me where in my post I mentioned or alluded to a belief in equality being central to the founding of the country? I said minimum government, and maximum personal responsibility, freedom and liberty. There is no assumption of equality in that beyond everyone being equally free of the tyranny of oppressive government.

Maybe you can provide some evidence for the rest of your comment, the gist of which is that the framework we have is the result of our founders trying to find a way to control the masses without having their heads handed to them.

I offer the following as evidence of the complete opposite, all from Wikipedia.

The 2nd Amendment, in it's entirety:



"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

If the founders were concerned about having their heads handed to them, why would they embody in the Bill of Rights the right of the people to privately bear arms?

Over the years it has been argued that this amendment was solely for the purpose of raising an army, but there is no historical basis for this argument. James Madison created the draft of the Bill of Rights and to flush out the contents of it from his proposal a committee was formed. Numerous versions of the 2nd amendment were proposed by this committee for debate and deliberation in the Senate and House. Just prior to adopting the final wording above, the committee proposed adding "for the common defence" next to the words "bear arms" and this was defeated.

And further...

Patrick Henry believed that a citizenry trained in arms was the only sure guarantor of liberty while Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 29 that "little more can be reasonably aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed..."

Doesn't sound to me like they were too worried about having their heads handed to them by the masses, but were instead making a serious attempt to provide the masses with a way to fight back against government run-amuck, to fight for the liberties and freedoms being granted in our founding documents.

Whatcha got to support your view?

And please elaborate on the ONE force for me.

Ty

[Ahkenaten]

What would be the purpose of the founders under the system you described other than achieving equality among citizens? And this was not, nor was anything like it, the goal of the founding fathers. Again, the French Revolution showed the world that violent revolution of the masses could successfully topple monarchs. This was intriguing to influential classes in America due to the severe constraints placed on business by the predations of the British Crown which they wished to throw over. Popular resentment against the overweening crown was stoked amongst the lower classes to use them as an armed inflamed revolutionary force against the Crown, thereby ejecting the King from business and public affairs. When the government was being debated, the considerable intellectual energies of the Founding Fathers went into the structure of government. The result was neither minimum government nor maximum personal liberty - rather it was a system modeled on British Government institutions with the Executive replacing the Crown (whose powers were ostensibly limited by the legislature), the bicameral legislature replacing the House of Lords and the House of Commons, and a Judiciary. The main differences were in the powers delegated to the Executive mitigated by the powers of Congress (purse, etc.) and the further brake on Federal power provided by robust state's rights. Traditionally in the US, from its inception, the seats in the Executive, Legislative (especially the Senate) and Judiciary branches have been occupied by people of the upper classes. The elaborate pains that went into the careful design of the nation's capital, Washington D.C. reveals the concerns the Founding Fathers had about violent revolution decapitating the government: the wheel shape with outgoing spokes was created to enable the government to spot groups gathering in the streets and thus, break up mobs intent upon rebellion. I will not debate this particular point further with you other than to say that fast-forward to where we are today and it was inevitable, in fact even foretold by members of the English House of Lords that the type of system we have would fall into decay due to the fact that vested interests would naturally come to dominate the legislature thus driving policies to their advantage. While this decay has occurred over a long time, inevitably, the true power and force behind what appears to be disputing ideologies in fact place their money on both sides of the fake ideological divide, controlling all sides of any debate - and in fact this has been the case from the beginning. This is what I mean by one power, one system. The very same people who controlled this system in its inception, i.e. dominated the system here due to class, birth, wealth, and connections, control it today. And - if you look further into it, they are interconnected by birth and marriage to others who have thus controlled systems both governmental and economic, to their advantage for thousands of years.

The reality is not what most think. The present charade of Rep/Dem, Right/Left is only surface turbulence. Just beneath that surface turbulence rule the same folks who have always ruled. And you can bet they didn't want their heads chopped off then, and they certainly do not want them chopped off now - which leads us to the police state we have today.

I will not debate these issues further. What I am saying is the truth. Believe it, or not. It is the truth I speak to you.

WAKE UP

[shybastid]

What a GREAT thread of open idea's and fair debate. Thank you all. I have watched Mr. Becks rise to Stardom...Valid,Invalid, Too Much Shmaltz,You decide hehe.

Fox News has very inconsistant News as well as MSNBC. They pretend to cover the News,but it's always with a Republican slant. (Fox)

I'm an information Geek.. I read and look at everything..Come back to Avalon for an Anchor from the Heart..and go back out there and hear more opinions from a multitude of sources,and the news as it's happening and developing. Politics(hate anyones slant,know MSM is corrupting the interpretation to B.S. me) Social Uproars Worldwide, Climatic Tradegy's(Where's Shuan Penn Now?) ANYthing I think is relevent to Human Concioussness and our future I watch how it is unfolded and presented. My job or hobby? Dunno.. My kids always come to me with what THEY think is happening,only to have me show them other idea's,opinions and FACTS when I can.Not to trick them..to keep their eyes open..whether I agree with additional information from my point of view or not.
My Point?
Say what you want about Beck being a headline stealing fearmonger for ratings.
I agree..and he drives me NUTS. Really can't stand him.
But? I'll tell you THIS.. When he did those expose's on the Obama's admistrations inner circle? I learned something. Did he exaggerate their communistic approach to the world and an "evil" direction they were trying to take our country?
Was the information he provided about Soro's valid or a smear campaign ?
Where else could we have hear about ALL those people hired as "Czars?"
Wiki?
I'm just saying if your a journalist, and you don't like a presenter of information because they sleep with prostitutes,manipulate people for personal gain,does that make their information less valuable?
Credibility? Yep..
Integrity? Heck Yeah..
ALL information is B.S.?

Hehehehe. We can start here on Avalon to ask those pertinent questions.

Beck may be a geek and jerk on TV and in his persoanl life..and may be a disinfo adgent.. Compared to WHAT? So is he a double disinfo adgent?
MSM is just a one sided disinfo group?
All I'm saying in my humble opinion.


I'm the LAST person you ever want to make a prediction to,even though I moved to higher ground,have a food backup,and wanted to buy gold when I was broke.
Just sayin.. I listen to everybody..:peep:

[sjkted]

"there IS no ideological divide between "Liberal" and "Conservative" - this is an illusion..." ..."The political system is run by ONE force"..."THERE IS NO LEFT/RIGHT, LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE dichotomy "

Well I must admit I didn't see that coming. I don't know about this ONE force idea but would like to hear more about it.


Akhentaten is right. You need to do more research. There is no difference between the political parties -- it's just a big racket.

--sjkted

[Ty]

Ahkenaten & sjkted

I know you don't want to debate this any longer so don't feel obliged. But I would like both of you to answer two specific questions below. Should only take a minute or so if that.

I still want to address some of your points...


What would be the purpose of the founders under the system you described other than achieving equality among citizens?

To empower the masses with liberty and freedom. To create an equal playing field so no-one is penalized for the circumstances they are born into. Not to guarantee equal outcomes, as your question implies. The content of our founding documents supports this.


...in fact even foretold by members of the English House of Lords that the type of system we have would fall into decay due to the fact that vested interests would naturally come to dominate the legislature thus driving policies to their advantage.

Agreed. And the founders knew this. No form of government is immune from this. It isn't entirely lack of foresight or a hidden agenda on their part that resulted in this though. By all accounts, they made an honest and sincere effort to structure a government to minimize that. Franklin himself, I believe it was, when asked what sort of government they had created by a passerby, responded, "A Republic, ma'am if you can keep it."


...inevitably, the true power and force behind what appears to be disputing ideologies in fact place their money on both sides of the fake ideological divide, controlling all sides of any debate

When you say "fake ideological divide" I think you've confused Democrats and Republicans with Liberals and Conservatives. The difference between the former I agree is often slight. In January it will be a bit sharper. The difference between the latter is pointed and irreconcilable and I pointed it out a couple of posts ago. To say there is no disputing ideology is delusional.

If this forum is representative of the country as a whole, it will be easy to confirm the presence or lack of an ideological divide. Just start a post discussing the benefits (or lack therof) of tax cuts for the wealthy or extending unemployment insurance without it being paid for or whether Obamacare should be repealed. If you're right, and there is no divide, there won't be any disgreement. But I'm sure you'll find the opposite because liberals and conservatives don't agree on these and many other issues and vote accordingly. That matters.


This is what I mean by one power, one system. The very same people who controlled this system in its inception, i.e. dominated the system here due to class, birth, wealth, and connections, control it today. And - if you look further into it, they are interconnected by birth and marriage to others who have thus controlled systems both governmental and economic, to their advantage for thousands of years.

Thousands of years? Really? So these folks and their direct ancestors helped orchestrate the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, brought on the Dark Ages (for whose benefit?), transformed that into 1500 or so sovereignties in the middle ages and collapsed that into today's nation states? All by the same bloodlines?


The present charade of Rep/Dem, Right/Left is only surface turbulence.

Perhaps, but the surface is where we live and policies enacted there affect our lives.


You need to do more research. There is no difference between the political parties -- it's just a big racket.

Again, I'm not talking about political parties, I'm talking about liberal vs conservative ideologies.

At any rate, I did do some research.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/illuminati_and_cfr.htm

I assume that's an adequate introduction to the Illuminati, the CFR, the FED, Woodrow Wilson and his failure to get congress to sign on to "The League of Nations," the United Nations and their plan for one world government. It starts with its inception in the 1760s by Adam Weishaupt and Rothschild. Not quite thousands of years, but hundreds to be sure. And it is an interesting read.

Previous reading I have done allowed me to confirm two points in it - (1) that George Washington was aware of and leery of the Illuminati and (2) that Rothschild did short the market after one of Napoleon's battles to drive down prices then bought it all up for pennies on the dollar.

At this point I view all the rest as unsubstantiated claims. I'll conceded that it's all possible but I like to form my opinions on more solid evidence than provided there. I'm not denying it could be true, I'm just not ready to embrace it, and may never be, for two primary reasons:

1) I don't have the time to independently confirm enough of the story to satisfy me that it is real. On the surface I find it unlikely that any plan could survive over 12 generations involving dozens of families from different countries and requiring thousands of knowing and willing stooges in place in the US alone, since WIlson's "League of Nations" flop so they could permeate and control both parties (prior to that, according to what I read, they were focused entirely on the Democrats).

2) Also from what I read, it doesn't matter much to me if they exist or not.

Putting the debate aside, let me ask both of you a couple of questions. You both have the knowledge and belief that there is ONE overriding power pulling the strings.

1) What do you plan to do about it?

2) Has this at any point since you acquired the knowledge and belief, caused you to do "A" instead of "B"? In other words, has it changed how you live your life?

From my perspective, if they exist they are untouchable so there is no direct way to counter them. The best way to thwart them, it would seem, is what I advocated above - return to limited government. To do this, we need to elect people of character. Some may come from the ranks of one or the other party; others may be obvious outliers like Ron and Rand Paul. Which interestingly, ties this back into the original subject of Glenn Beck, who advocates exactly that - there are progressives in both parties. Don't vote for them.

So for me it comes back down to the ideological divide that you deny exists. Since liberal = conservative, I suppose for you guys tall=short, thin=fat and up=down. The contrasts are equally profound. And the history of the Illuminati confirms that even they saw two sides.



"The enemy, meaning the one-world conspirators, have seized upon that word "liberal" as a cover-up for their activities."

According to this, a "liberal" is someone possibly/probably/likely sympathetic to the same ends as TPTB.

As individuals, we can choose to vote for people more inclined to want a one-world government, which tend to be progressives, largely liberals, who also tend to think that government is the answer to everything and want more of it. Or we can vote for people who don't.

That's why the existence of the ONE overriding power is irrelevant to me, because I'm going to do the same things and vote the same way whether they exist or not. If you really believe in this and deny there is an ideological divide, you play right into their hands every time you vote for someone likely to be more sympathetic to their ends, who in general would also be inclined towards big government.

Consider… we didn't end up in "The League of Nations" largely because of one man - Henry Cabot Lodge. Had someone besides him been elected we may very well have been in "TLON" and that much closer to, or by now in the throes of, TPTB's plan for one-world-government. How people voted kept us out.

Unless you have a secret plan in the works to thwart TPTB, how we vote is our best defense. Equating left to right and liberal to conservative muddies the best defense we have.

[Ahkenaten]

Ty - Thanks for your detailed and well-thought out response. I suggest you read up on the Hegelian Dialectic in order to understand the dynamics and function of the deliberately created artificial social/political bubble we live in and why some think that all the dichotomies presented to us only represent a false reality that spins of its own accord, conveniently ensnaring the minds and bodies of those entrapped. By the way, lest you failed to note - the last so-called "election" being illustrative of this point, your vote is not your best defense - you voted inside the paradigm in which the Overlords control all sides of the discussion. In order to get a glimpse of the reality individuals must step outside the Panopticon. This is a requirement in order to WAKE UP. No one is saying black=white, or left=right, rather that both sides of the dialectic are required in order for the whole instrument to take on the spin and velocity required to entrap people's energy, effectively harnessing all of it to serve our Betters. If offered the choice, I would suggest taking the Red Pill - NOW

[Ty]

Ahkenaten,

I looked up the Hegelian Dialectic... http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm

Much of what I read would require more though, introspection and effort than I can muster at the moment. This passage seemed relevant to our current dialog though:


Hegel's dialectic is the tool which manipulates us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. Every time we fight for or defend against an ideology we are playing a necessary role in Marx and Engels' grand design to advance humanity into a dictatorship of the proletariat. The synthetic Hegelian solution to all these conflicts can't be introduced unless we all take a side that will advance the agenda. The Marxist's global agenda is moving along at breakneck speed. The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought.

However I didn't see any suggestions as to exactly what is meant by "step outside the dialectic," very similar to your suggestion to "step outside the Panopticon."

Whatever that means, I don't agree that doing so will release us from controlled and guided thought, which presumes to understand the origin of thought. I doubt that any of us do. Everyone reading this just had a thought in reaction to that statement. Why did you have it? Where did it come from? How did it originate? Why did you think A instead of B? Could you have thought B instead of A or are you locked in to A? A thoroughly interesting tangent to this but I don't want to go down that road here and now. It leads ultimately to the question of free will and whether or not it exists. Would love to explore this in another thread with you and others as time allows though.

But to get back on track. Thought without action accomplishes nothing. I beleive it was Einstein who said "Nothing happens until something moves." So I'm back to some core questions:

1) Presumably you have stepped outside of the box, the dialectic, the Panopticon. What are you doing (not thinking) differently than before you did so?

2) You said "the last so-called "election" being illustrative of this point, your vote is not your best defense - you voted inside the paradigm in which the Overlords control all sides of the discussion." What was my other choice? Not to vote?

[Fred Steeves]

I'm going to have to step up here for Beck. Just so it's known I don't think either party gives a rat's ass about We The People. I find it amusing when I hear talk about Glenn Beck wanting the streets to run with blood. Anyone who has listened to or watched his show more than a few times would know better. He constantly warns AGAINST violence, and points to the French Revolution as an example. He also talks about keeping the faith and to expect geat miracles.

Many in the Tea Party may be misguded in some areas, aka Sarah Palin and such, but overall they just want to be left alone by Big brother, and get some semblence of the constitution back. I'm all with that. According to people like my dad, who bow low to the power of The State, that automatically puts me into the category of being a dangerous gun nut, a racist, and a completely uninformed idiot...........Nothing could be more ABSURD...........

Now, I think Beck puts out an awful lot of valuable and verifiable information. He does his homework. What makes me wonder about him is how, with all the research they do, he buys the official line on 9/11. Seems rather implausable. He jokes about things like Aspartame and Flouride. Ridiculous! How could he not know? I don't know what's going on there, maybe he's there to catch awakening people, give them a good deal of the "good stuff", and then lead them off the reservation at the last minute by ridiculing things like questioning 9/11. Otherwise he'd be Alex Jones. Personally, I just learn about, and investigate the "good stuff", and toss the rest in the rubbish bin.


Cheers,
Fred S.

[Ahkenaten]

My personal belief is that Glen Beck is a created phenomena to attract people who are dissatisfied and disgruntled and capture them in one place. As usual with propaganda mechanisms there is an admixture of truth and falsehood but the purpose is to attract the insects with honey and capture their attention. Once you have attracted them, then you spin the old salad spinner as fast as you can to befuddle, mesmerize, confuse, dispirit, and exhaust them. Most importantly, once you have tapped their energy, they will be so de-energized that they will be incapable of meaningful action ON ANY LEVEL. This is deliberate and resembles the Rush Limbaugh phenomenon. Similarly, the so-called Tea Party movement. It is a deliberate creation to attract the disgruntled and dissatisfied and once they are engaged, again - spin the salad spinner madly to confuse the insects and TOTALLY NEUTRALIZE ANY POSSIBLE COHERENT POLITICAL ACTION WHATSOEVER. That is the purpose of these kinds of phenomenon. The fact that a little truth is mixed in with all the rest is not all that meaningful, except insofar as their might be unanticipated results (i.e. BLOW BACK) as the masses collectively begin to read between the lines and arrive at an underlying consensus about what is going on, who is behind it, what the plans are for all us insects, etc. Now that part of the unintended consequences of these kinds of propaganda techniques is, for me, the most interesting of all!

[Ty]

...It [the Tea Party movement] is a deliberate creation to attract the disgruntled and dissatisfied and once they are engaged, again - spin the salad spinner madly to confuse the insects and TOTALLY NEUTRALIZE ANY POSSIBLE COHERENT POLITICAL ACTION WHATSOEVER.

The Tea Party movement is a grass-roots movement of individual organizations across the nation. While no group of people agree on everything, their underlying glue is what Fred indicated - a desire to return to a government more in line with that framed by our founders. You may be right in terms of what happens in the future, but so far they have had a pretty clear and meaningful political impact. We can only hope that glue is a strong enough bond to continue to keep them relevant.


as the masses collectively begin to read between the lines and arrive at an underlying consensus about what is going on

Ahkenaten...

Man, what have you been smoking? I think you took the wrong color pill. What masses are you referring to? 60% of ours are too disengaged to even bother to vote. Large percentages of them can't even identify who we fought our war of independence against, name the Speaker of the House or any other noteworthy political figures besides the President. They are more interested in American Idol and who got voted off the island than they are in our political process. The masses will NEVER "begin to read between the lines and arrive at an underlying consensus about what is going on." They don't even read THE LINES, let alone read between them.

Not that I suspect there is much disagreement on this, but here is an eye-openeing article on the extent of it: How Stupid Are We? (http://www.alternet.org/news/90161/?page=1)

I've asked you twice now how your belief has altered what you do and what better defense we have than voting for those least likely to be sympathetic to big government. Since you've chosen not to answer, I'm left to assume that you aren't doing anything different that you care to share which leaves me with voting as our best defense. I would add to that, watch Glenn Beck, where you'll see things you won't see anywhere else and join a Tea Party or equivalent to help organize and support worthwhile candidates so they rise to the point where they can get elected and provide a defense against our creep towards one-world government. Whether because of the Illuminati or not, we have been moving in that direction for quite a while.

If you have other ideas, please share,
Ty

By the way, there is a show now on the History channel called Brad Meltzer's Decoded. Each episode investigates some historical mystery. The 2nd episode dealt with the missing cornerstones of the White House and Capital buildings and involved the Masons. The 3rd episode dealt with hidden messages around and behind the Statue of Liberty and dealt again with the Masons and the Illuminati.