RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


cuckoldmepls -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:13:16 AM)

You people seem to forget a little thing called the 1st Amendment. That means you can say whatever you want in private, and you can say whatever you want in the public media as long as you believe it to be true. If it is later proven to be false beyond the shadow of a doubt then you must publicly retract it or face a lawsuit. It's called market driven economics. If a person has a large enough audience, then they can draw enough advertisers to support their program. This is the way America works it's called capitalism.

Even one of the news documentary shows like 60 minutes admitted that Glenn Beck is non partisan, unlike Rush Limbaugh. Since he is non partisan, that means he will go after any politician who isn't using common sense. These are the kinds of political commentators we should be supporting since it's obvious that neither party has your best interest in mind.

Whether you will admit it or not, conservative government is the only answer. A true conservative like Ron Paul will not spend more money than they take in, and they will shut down any redundant federal agencies that are reserved to the states by the 10th amendment. They will also protect your right to defend yourself, your family, your property, and society in general by guaranteeing your right to own a gun. Police protection is an oxymoron. The police are almost never there to prevent a crime. They usually arrive after the fact to clean up the mess.

Conan  made an interesting joke about California's budget crisis the other night that was created by big spending liberals including republicans. He said the Governator announced he had found the solution to the budget crisis. Conan said "Fresno is now part of China." This may not be far from the truth in the near future.

As California goes, so will the rest of the nation eventually.




SpinnerofTales -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:15:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Like I said before, Obama's henchmen really are going after Beck, and Obama really did personally go after Limbaugh. This kind of despicable behavior is something we might expect to see in a tiny Banana Republic somewhere, but this is a whole new low for a politician here.





He personally went after Limbaugh? He said, and I quote "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done." This is not a fierce governmental attack on personal freedoms.

My suggestion is you put on your big boy pants and get over it.




rulemylife -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:17:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie

RML, when is the time to praise the bravery of Alqueda fighters? Didn't he call American Soldiers "Cowards" also?


No, he was referring to our military tactics in general.

And I'm not saying I agreed with him, I was just using that as an example to refute the claim that the Obama administration is stifling free speech.

No one in this administration has made any remark even close to the outrageous comment made by Bush's lap dog.




SpinnerofTales -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:21:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

You people seem to forget a little thing called the 1st Amendment. That means you can say whatever you want in private, and you can say whatever you want in the public media as long as you believe it to be true. If it is later proven to be false beyond the shadow of a doubt then you must publicly retract it or face a lawsuit. It's called market driven economics. If a person has a large enough audience, then they can draw enough advertisers to support their program. This is the way America works it's called capitalism.


I don't see what you're complaining about here. I am in full agreement that under the first amendment, one can say whatever one wants in public or private (with the exception of shouting fire in a crowded theater, of course. Shouting theater in a crowded fire is perfectly legal). But that right extends to those who say "I do not like what this person has said, and I will not purchase goods or services from those who support him." Those business concerns who pay for advertising to sell their goods and services then have the right to decide that they do not wish to associate with that person and withdraw their advertising dollars. The government has nothing to do with it and THAT is how America works.

What would you prefer? Legislation that mandates that advertisers do not pull their dollars from those they or their customers find offensive? Perhaps you would rather that the general public not have the right to petition business concerns over their advertising policies?

In short, what are you compaining about. This is free speech being exercised on both sides and capatilism at its finest. What is the problem?




SilverMark -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:23:42 AM)

What a waste of concern....Beck, Limbaugh Hannity....all have their core supporters and are unable to see past their own views or ever consider any other point of view.
I hope sooner or later they all die of lonliness.....sitting waiting for the phone to ring because they have alienated so many....but, not likely to happen. Those of extreme opinions will always have an audience and Beck's statements although reprehensible and skewed to the high heavens are an example of the whys and wherefores that elected President Obama. Hatred will always sell to some and it becomes what makes others look more appealing.Keep spewing Mr. Beck, you are doing a wonderful job of convincing the rest of us just how poorly managed your "side" is. Rush for RNC chairman....GO RUsh Go!!!!!....




mnottertail -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:26:35 AM)

To be fair; Spinner, it is unclear whether or not the sponsors found it offensive, it can only be surmised that they looked at the popularity of Obama, and the popularity of Beck and ran the numbers and said, I believe I will pass.......

And that of course could be construed to be a stretch, but not an impossible one. And I know that is a little caviling but..........before the mote becomes a Mohammaden if you catch my drift.

LOL,

Revolution!!!Revolution!!!!Give me a reason!!!!Give me a cause!!!!Let's burn this motherfucker down!!!!!!

Ron




SpinnerofTales -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:27:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie

RML, when is the time to praise the bravery of Alqueda fighters? Didn't he call American Soldiers "Cowards" also?


Once again, RWH, it is lovely to see how you don't let facts get anywhere close enough to your comments to contaminate them.

What Bill Mhar said was that it was hard to call the terrorists who perpetrated the World Trade Center bombers cowards because they were engaged in a suicide mission. They knew they were going to crash and burn and die in the act. He also suggested it takes less courage to bomb someone from a mile up in the air than it did to go into an attack knowing one will die. This was, ironicly enough said on a show called "Politically Incorrect".

I like Disneyworld as much as the next guy...but can we at least TRY to keep these discussions out of fantasyland?




rightwinghippie -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:42:48 AM)

I am not seeing anything outrageous about saying it is not the time to be saying that Al Queda fighters are braver than US Pilots.

I understand that Lefties think it was outrageous, but I don't see it and agree.

I don't see the 911 bombers as brave. They were losers programed for years to committ an attrocity, that they would not have to face the aftermath. Our pilots often struggle over the innocents they kill, while going after the combatants. The cowardly suicide bomber doesn't have to face that.

I imagine people are checking, and not one penny of gov $, Gov time, or Gov equipment had better not have been used for or by the COC.

And why is "special advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality" a part time gig?




SpinnerofTales -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:50:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie

I imagine people are checking, and not one penny of gov $, Gov time, or Gov equipment had better not have been used for or by the COC.

And why is "special advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality" a part time gig?



When in doubt: hijack the thread




rulemylife -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 9:58:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie

I am not seeing anything outrageous about saying it is not the time to be saying that Al Queda fighters are braver than US Pilots.

I understand that Lefties think it was outrageous, but I don't see it and agree.



You don't see it because Maher never said it.




Sanity -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 10:19:13 AM)


I forgot to mention that other Nixonian thing that Obama is doing - adding Conservative groups such as Veterans and Gun Rights Activists, to the Department of Homeland Security terrorist Watch List.

What else am I forgetting?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

When government comes after its citizens for expressing dissent or free speech, it should be troubling to everyone witnessing it, including you. Organizing For America and SEIU are hitting town halls to try to intimidate anyone expressing dissent against this White House, and now we have the president's associates organizing boycotts of Glenn Beck.

Stay tuned for new FCC rules and regulations as well, coming to a radio station near you. The fairness doctrine isn't dead, its just been renamed "localization".

Interesting times.






mnottertail -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 10:21:20 AM)

the bill he signed that let gunowners take their firearms into federal parks where there was no law against it at the state level. a right that great freedom fighter ronnie rottencrotch took away from us law abiding gunowners.

(FFL here)

Ron




rightwinghippie -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 10:28:57 AM)

How's that a Hijack SOT? We are talking about a boycott led by a group run by the "special advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality". And he better not have used one penny of gov funds, property, or time to do it. This is a point directly related to the boycots, this thread is about. It's not like I am trying to change the subject to gun laws passed by the Democratic house in the 1980s.

I guess we have different definitions of what "hijack" means.




Sanity -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 10:34:14 AM)


From your link:

quote:


QUESTION:
As commander-in-chief what was the president's reaction to television's Bill Maher and his announcement that members of our armed forces who deal with missiles are cowards while the armed terrorists who killed 6,000 unarmed are not cowards, for which Maher was briefly moved off a Washington television station.





mnottertail -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 10:43:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie
It's not like I am trying to change the subject to gun laws passed by the Democratic house in the 1980s.


Or the Republican controlled senate.

My reply was to Sanity.

Why are you pretending that you are not hijacking the thread talking about 'better not be any money spent by the government'?

How are we talking anymore about boycotts than we are politely answering invitational queries regarding what others may have forgot from a long laundry list?





Sanity -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 10:52:08 AM)


He's a White House Czar who answers only to the president, but I guess we pay him.

I wonder what he's making, if there's any way to find out.



quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie

How's that a Hijack SOT? We are talking about a boycott led by a group run by the "special advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality". And he better not have used one penny of gov funds, property, or time to do it. This is a point directly related to the boycots, this thread is about. It's not like I am trying to change the subject to gun laws passed by the Democratic house in the 1980s.

I guess we have different definitions of what "hijack" means.




rulemylife -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 11:06:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie

How's that a Hijack SOT? We are talking about a boycott led by a group run by the "special advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality". And he better not have used one penny of gov funds, property, or time to do it. This is a point directly related to the boycots, this thread is about.



Courtesy of Sanity's link:

Glenn Beck goes after Color of Change co-founder Van Jones

“Glenn Beck is trying to change the subject,” said James Rucker, executive director of Color of Change, who noted that Jones has not been active with the group in almost two years. “The issue is his baseless fear mongering.”






rulemylife -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 11:07:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


He's a White House Czar who answers only to the president, but I guess we pay him.

I wonder what he's making, if there's any way to find out.



You could start by reading your own link.





rulemylife -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 11:09:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


From your link:

quote:


QUESTION:
As commander-in-chief what was the president's reaction to television's Bill Maher and his announcement that members of our armed forces who deal with missiles are cowards while the armed terrorists who killed 6,000 unarmed are not cowards, for which Maher was briefly moved off a Washington television station.




And????????????




Sanity -> RE: Attack on Obama riles Glenn Beck's advertisers (8/25/2009 11:18:07 AM)


And why the hell do we have Czars in this nation?


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife


And????????????





Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875