Glenn Beck Sarah Palin Rally to celebrate the Military, Patriotism, and America

I'm impressed by the professionalism in that video. Not much in the way of bias, and im impressed more by the fact that he showed such restraint, and avoided egging people on. Some actual reporting for once.
 
Krynn72 said:
Is it because your country was specifically denied the title of "last bastion of hope"?
Click to expand...

You'll see....

YOU'LL ALL SEE!!!

plankton.jpg
 
Ridge said:
Despite the obvious political slant of the video (Uploaded by NewLeftMedia), there are idiots and bad metaphores in every gathering.
Click to expand...

So I guess this means you disagree 100% with everyone in that video?
 
Ridge said:
Its about as unbiased as Jay Leno's sidewalk interviews
Click to expand...

Never seen, but the only bias really was in the people they interviewed and put in that piece. Its not like the questions were leading, and the only time he had any input was when there was factual information to add.
 
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
 
The republican party has three primary constituents. The first and smallest is the high class rich. They embrace conservatism in order to minimize taxes and maximize free trade and limit government business limitations.

The second is a moderate group of middle class that believe in smaller government and generally have adopted the views of their family without question. "My father was a Republican so I'm a Republican" kind of thing. Some of these people are the extremists that you see in these types of rallies, but not many. The people that watch Glenn Beck with reverence and ignore other views. Some of them are fairly well educated and usually older.

Finally there are the lower class poorer people who are generally less educated. Some of these people are family political adopters but often have no basis beyond that. Others become part of this simply because they believe the first extreme statement they're told and live with it like there's no tomorrow - "Obama is a Muslim. Muslims are terrorists. Obama is a terrorist." - and things of that nature. They're the people who end up at these rallies and say the crazy ass things that you wonder "How the hell did they come up with that?" They are the primary targets of the small number of weathly Republicans who basically use them as voting machines to advance their agenda. These people rarely understand or could even properly recite to you the political agendas of their representatives, but they would rather die than change their mind about it - even when faced with cold hard facts.

You can't argue with the third type because there's no margin for success. It's like arguing with a dog or something - the only response you'll get is barking. The second type is somewhat of a minority when compared to the third, but they can generally tell you what they're going for. The first type are the people you'll never see in a place like this. They're the people that might go to a fund raising dinner for a republican candidate or donate generous amounts to the GOP or some conservative promotion device. Even if you wanted to debate their ideals, it's never really about the issues, it's about what makes their pockets stay full.

I think if we focused on more education, this mass of easily manipulated lower class republican would start to wane and ridiculous rallies like this will stop being newsworthy and be more of a quick blurb on a web site.
 
StarBob said:
I think if we focused on more education, this mass of easily manipulated lower class republican would start to wane and ridiculous rallies like this will stop being newsworthy and be more of a quick blurb on a web site.
Click to expand...

Those people will cry "reeducation", then Fox News will report about how [strike]Democrats[/strike] [strike]Liberals[/strike] [strike]Socialists[/strike] Nazi Communist Homosexual Black Panthers are trying to brainwash their kids and the next thing you know the Democrats will apologize, fire a black person and cut Rupert Murdoch's taxes.
 
StarBob said:
Even if you wanted to debate their ideals, it's never really about the issues, it's about what makes their pockets stay full.
Click to expand...

And this is where people see fiscal liberals as often extremist and not willing to debate. Anti government intrusion becomes being called "selfish" or "wallstreet fatcat" etc etc.

BTW: You could say I'm a social liberal and strict fiscal conservative. A "small L" libertarian if you will- not a Republican. I can just point out why people see those views as extreme.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
And this is where people see fiscal liberals as often extremist and not willing to debate. Anti government intrusion becomes being called "selfish" or "wallstreet fatcat" etc etc.

BTW: You could say I'm a social liberal and strict fiscal conservative. A "small L" libertarian if you will- not a Republican. I can just point out why people see those views as extreme.
Click to expand...

Anti government intrusion is a bumper sticker, not an argument. I saw this video today, you should watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTd4gc6STFs
 
No Limit said:
Anti government intrusion is a bumper sticker, not an argument. I saw this video today, you should watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTd4gc6STFs
Click to expand...

I am not against ALL regulation. Like I said, a "small l libertarian" as in not a member of that party.

There is over regulation PARTICULARLY in the energy sector. My family has suffered as a result of that, such as the bias against coal fired plants.

I'll never support Kyoto or anything similar.

I'm mostly against government intrusion in the private lives of citizens. Whether thats in drug prohibition or compulsory insurance enrollment. It's all bad, but both conservatives and liberals support those. There is no party to support the freedoms of the individual.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
I am not against ALL regulation. Like I said, a "small l libertarian" as in not a member of that party.

There is over regulation PARTICULARLY in the energy sector. My family has suffered as a result of that, such as the bias against coal fired plants.

I'll never support Kyoto or anything similar.

I'm mostly against government intrusion in the private lives of citizens. Whether thats in drug prohibition or compulsory insurance enrollment. It's all bad, but both conservatives and liberals support those. There is no party to support the freedoms of the individual.
Click to expand...

So you are only for regulation that doesn't affect your wallet? Do you believe in global warming? If you do how could you not support regulation on how much CO2 we can put out? Coal fired plants produce more pollution than all of the cars on our roads.

Ridge said:
No, there are many dumbasses in that video that have a twisted idea of reality.
Click to expand...

So which people in that video do you agree with?
 
No Limit said:
So you are only for regulation that doesn't affect your wallet? Do you believe in global warming? If you do how could you not support regulation on how much CO2 we can put out? Coal fired plants produce more pollution than all of the cars on our roads.



So which people in that video do you agree with?
Click to expand...

I only watched about 90 seconds of it, and the only opinion I agreed with is that I think we should try to move the country closer to how we see it as it used to be.
 
So all this time you've been talking about how unfair that video is and you only watched 90 seconds out of 13 minutes?

So you want to take your country back. From what?
 
No Limit said:
So all this time you've been talking about how unfair that video is and you only watched 90 seconds out of 13 minutes?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm one of those people that Obama took credit for getting a job. I had to go make some money to get the deadbeat at the freeway offramp his food stamps.

So you want to take your country back. From what?
Click to expand...

Who said from anybody? We liked the way things were working back then, and want to bring it back to something similar.
 
Ridge said:
Sorry, I'm one of those people that Obama took credit for getting a job. I had to go make some money to get the deadbeat at the freeway offramp his food stamps.



Who said from anybody? We liked the way things were working back then, and want to bring it back to something similar.
Click to expand...

Back when?
 
No Limit said:
So you are only for regulation that doesn't affect your wallet? Do you believe in global warming? If you do how could you not support regulation on how much CO2 we can put out? Coal fired plants produce more pollution than all of the cars on our roads.
Click to expand...

Don't get me started on CO2. CO2 rising and falling is not a CAUSE of global warming.

I'm for common sense regulation like child labor laws, basic consumer safety, etc. Tax law and other business regulation needs MAJOR overhaul.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
Don't get me started on CO2. CO2 rising and falling is not a CAUSE of global warming.

I'm for common sense regulation like child labor laws, basic consumer safety, etc. Tax law and other business regulation needs MAJOR overhaul.
Click to expand...

Ah I see, another person who likes to dismiss science because it has inconvenient implications for his political philosophy.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
Don't get me started on CO2. CO2 rising and falling is not a CAUSE of global warming.
Click to expand...

I bow down to your scientific knowledge.

CO2 IN THE ATMOSPHERE DOES NOT INDIRECTLY CAUSE THE MELTING OF DRY WATER!
 
That volcano earlier this year released more CO2 per second than all of mankind does in a year.

Yet the Earth seems to have survived volcanic activity for, ohh, ever?
 
Ridge said:
That volcano earlier this year released more CO2 per second than all of mankind does in a year.

Yet the Earth seems to have survived volcanic activity for, ohh, ever?
Click to expand...

No it didn't. What do you base this shit on?

That's grade A bullshit right there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauna_Loa#Observatories

20100904125312capture.png


The CO2 levels in the world are rising sharply, and it's not the volcanoes to blame. As you said, volcanoes have been around forever. But the level of regular volcanic emission isn't having anywhere near the effect as the simple progression of the human species in the last hundred years.
 
Raziaar said:
No it didn't. What do you base this shit on?

That's grade A bullshit right there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauna_Loa#Observatories

20100904125312capture.png


The CO2 levels in the world are rising sharply, and it's not the volcanoes to blame. As you said, volcanoes have been around forever. But the level of regular volcanic emission isn't having anywhere near the effect as the simple progression of the human species in the last hundred years.
Click to expand...

That is Mauna Loa in Hawaii. I'm referring to the unpronouncable volcano in Europe.
 
The Eyjafjallajokull eruptions actually lowered net CO2 output because it grounded so many flights...
 
I call bullshit on that. Look at the sheer amount of crap spewing out of that hole. No way is it causing a net drop in co2.
 
Ridge said:
I call bullshit on that. Look at the sheer amount of crap spewing out of that hole. No way is it causing a net drop in co2.
Click to expand...

You are why we can't have nice things.
 
Ridge said:
I call bullshit on that. Look at the sheer amount of crap spewing out of that hole. No way is it causing a net drop in co2.
Click to expand...

You do realize that the amount of sheer crap spewing out of that hole doesn't match up at all to the sheer amount of crap, whether visible in smoke stacks, or mostly invisible in the form of airplanes or cars and other ways we create CO2.

I mean, if you could somehow make a visible pillar of pollution that mankind produces and compare it side by side with the volcanic emissions, you would be amazed.

I can't believe you're basing what you're saying simply on "Look at the sheer amount of crap spewing out of that hole!"
 
If it lowered the net emissions because planes couldn't fly, did they take cars into their equation? Buses? Trains?
 
Ridge said:
If it lowered the net emissions because planes couldn't fly, did they take cars into their equation? Buses? Trains?
Click to expand...

Nope, that would be far more complicated the data isn't readily available. Why does it matter? Can't you just admit you were talking complete bollocks when you said the volcano produced more CO2 per second than the entirety of mankind does in a year?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CptStern
Glenn Beck: Assasination attempt on sarah palin would "bring down the republic"
Replies
32
Views
3K
Sheepo
Sheepo
Sulkdodds
Engineering Dissent: The Rise of the Political Commentator
Replies
14
Views
2K
Absinthe
Absinthe
Back
Top