Who read Glenn Beck's "The Real America "?

“psst, Gremlin, Bush is gone....move on dot org bruh”

“Yeah, move on to ranting and raving paranoia about how the govt.'s sole missions is to destroy your life.

How's the Branch Dividian Compound, Take II coming along?”

“Creating a sense of fear and panic is the best selling tool the right wingers have come up with.

Screw the facts, just hype it enough and someone will buy in.”

“chili36, you feel that the facts show that you have no less freedoms? that the country is no less financially in trouble? that we aren't moving further and further away from a free society to one of socialized (fill in the blank)?”

“Chili, the F-22 can't get there in time to save you. Damn Byrds.”

“I firmly feel the country is in financial trouble.

However, I feel that standing around whining and doing nothing won't work.

Less freedoms? I don't have less freedom. In fact, some recent Supreme Court rulings make me feel like I may have more. However, if I were being held and tortured at Gizmo, I probably wouldn't feel that way.

I don't think we are moving toward socialism. I feel that is part of the hype the right wants people to buy into, much like the NRA wants it rank and file to believe there is a movement "to take guns". I am still looking for this "movement". Where does it exist?

I am a firm believer in the Keynes theory of macro economics. There are times the government needs to be more engaged and then there are times when it needs to pay the debt and stockpile for the next calamity.

Our problem in this country is that after it comes time to pony up following lean times, we just can't stand the thought of putting money back in the bank or paying off the debt. Run any surplus and people just howl for a tax cut.

Are we any more socialized now than we were 70+ years ago during the New Deal Programs? Are we any more socialized than we were during WWII when the most restrictive government programs known were in place? (i.e. Price Control, wage caps, etc)?

I don't see it. Look, it is great in theory to state, "we can all just take care of ourselves. We don't need government."

The problem is, that it just won't work that way. Unfortunately, there has to be some control for the public good. How much is too much? That will always be debatable. Again, I will use the analogy with gun laws. Do we have too many restrictions on guns? How much is too much? Would we be better off to have none?

To me, the answer is no, we wouldn't. Governmental oversight is necessary in a free market society. Take the Sarbane/Oxley Act for example. It became necessary to prevent the massive types of scams pulled by corporate giants like WorldCom and Enron. How do you think companies would react with no restrictions? Think "Anti Trust" while you ponder that.

So, no, I don't feel like I have less freedom. I do feel like we are in a world of financial crap, but I don't hear the right coming up with a solution. Ron Paul advances some great material, but it is a mile wide and an inch deep. I haven't seen him or anyone else get to the nitty gritty on how it would work. And, no, I don't see us moving more toward socialism. Comparitively, I see us moving less toward socialism than we have been in the past.

Like gun laws, there are some things that are necessary for the public good. Some will argue for total ban, some for no restrictions. For the rest of us, it is the degree of restriction that is the salient point.
last edited: 7/22/09 9:34:35 AM”

“However, I feel that standing around whining and doing nothing won't work.

Doing nothing??

I feel that is part of the hype the right wants people to buy into, much like the NRA wants it rank and file to believe there is a movement "to take guns". I am still looking for this "movement". Where does it exist?

The Supreme Court recently overturned a longstanding law in DC that guns were not permitted. Was that a mirage?

Our problem in this country is that after it comes time to pony up following lean times, we just can't stand the thought of putting money back in the bank or paying off the debt. Run any surplus and people just howl for a tax cut.

Sounds like you're a Glenn Beck spokesman.

Unfortunately, there has to be some control for the public good.

“America's abundance was not created by public sacrifices to "the common good", but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes” - Ahn Rand

I think she was right.

Are we any more socialized now than we were 70+ years ago during the New Deal Programs? Are we any more socialized than we were during WWII when the most restrictive government programs known were in place? (i.e. Price Control, wage caps, etc)?

I don't see it.

We are at a minimum, as socialized as during the New Deal, and that didn't work out too well. - again, read that book I mentioned before. At least get that perspective.

Ron Paul advances some great material, but it is a mile wide and an inch deep. I haven't seen him or anyone else get to the nitty gritty on how it would work.

Then you haven't read his books or listened to his speeches to Congress or read his bills.

I find it baffling that so many on "the left" think that government programs are more successful than private entrepreneurship. I have yet to see any evidence of that.”

“The Supreme Court recently overturned a longstanding law in DC that guns were not permitted. Was that a mirage?

well of course. theres some legislation that you dont agree with, so there must be a massive clandestine movement against all that is good and right”

“I think you have misconstrued my points, so for clarification, I will just point out where I think that happened using each of your bold font quotes of my position as a point.

1. All I hear is criticism of the Obama actions. What is it the right wing would have us do?

2. A classic example of how you truly do have "more freedom". The Supreme Court ensured that your liberties under the Second Amendment were EXPANDED, not CONSTRICTED.

3. Your right, that is Beck's position. I am not agreeing with it. What I was inferring was that it is flawed. (Study the Keyenes economic model to fully understand my position).

4. Beautiful. I am guessing you believe script in the coal mines was perfect. After all, treating miners like slaves was strictly for the generation of "private fortune". I just use that example as one of a whole slew that I can come up with. But each has an indelible stamp of greed associated with it. You still think we don't need to protect the public good? That is exactly what the Chinese think. Sweat shops will create a lot of "private fortune". Labor Laws were enacted for a reason and the reason was the private sector was making Ann proud by maximizing profits.

5. The New Deal didn't work out well? I will read the book and I fully realize minds will differ. I don't expect all of America to come to the same conclusion on that subject, but coming to a well informed opinion is a good thing. It sure beats the alternative.

6. I have never advocated that the private sector needs to be replaced with government programs. In fact, so that you don't misconstrue me, I will clearly state that in a perfect scenario, you wouldn't need interaction. However, see all of the above as to how "imperfect" the private sector is. Let's get rid of the word "program" and use the word "regulation" as that is clearly what I was talking about.
last edited: 7/22/09 10:02:53 AM”

“oh, and

hi sarge”

“crash bang - I was addressing that one issue that chili36 brought up. I wasn't trying to make a case.

chili36 -

1. There are plenty of solutions out there form the "right wing". I honestly believe so many on the left (not necessarily you) get their news about "the right" from liberal sources without going straight to them and seeing what they are actually saying. You may not agree with their solutions, but they are definitely there.

2. In a 5-4 ruling mind you. The point was that there is enough of a "movement" as you called it, to make it law in DC. You claimed there was no such movement.

3. We'll have to agree to disagree, but thank you for your clarification.

4. Pointing to extreme cases of physical abuse does not justify a socialized makeover in my opinion.

5. a-men

6. I'm not sure I'm following you on this one (that last sentence).”

“When the gig at Fox peters out he should do a fishing show.....”

“chili36 - contrast your discussion about this with Tilt's.

Obviously you're the better educated. Thank you for sharing your ideas.”

“No, he simply has time to waste on you.”

“LMAO @ tilt. I was thinking the same thing.”

“ (i.e. Price Control, wage caps, etc)?

Nixon tried that in the early '70s and when the controls came off in '73-'74 inflation went ape shjt with some food products doubling in price and real estate went through the roof.”

“government causes inflation”

“The government held off the inevitable inflation that was caused by the Brokebank Spending on southeast Asia and everything else.

When the chickens came home to roost the price of chicken feed doubled.”

“Inflation is out of control, for one, because the government prints so much money. It also does it when it demands artificially inflated prices (including excessive taxes). Their excess borrowing (and spending) also causes it.”

“Yup, bombing the crap out of all those rice paddies was not a good investment.”

“agreed”

“But I'm not going to let that mistake excuse all the other mistakes. Are you?”

“HPD, I think your arguement is valid in that excess borrowing and spending CONTRIBUTES to inflation. I think it is a stretch to claim it is the sole cause.”

“I think all THREE (3) of the things I mentioned taken together are the main cause. They also all happen to fall under the umbrella of causes due to government action.

emphasize: "all"
last edited: 7/22/09 12:53:19 PM”

“hilarious... sarge and strat have a lot of surrounding to do”

“How else can we suck on the import oil hose year after year without pricing the dollars lower and lower as we pay back debt. Maybe we could sell the socialist military to pay off another few tankers full. sell congress, no equity in them, they're already bought and paid for.”

“chili36, re: I feel that is part of the hype the right wants people to buy into, much like the NRA wants it rank and file to believe there is a movement "to take guns". I am still looking for this "movement". Where does it exist?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/22/senate-vote-controversial-concealed-weapons-measure/”

“pepsiformosa - watch/listen to any Glenn Beck today?”

“Good try HPD, but read my statement more closely.

Where is the "movement" to "take away" your guns?

There is a lot of legislation out there to control gun ownership, but your link has nothing to do with taking them away.
last edited: 7/22/09 12:59:37 PM”

“no, I have my own thoughts and opinions and don't need anybody else telling me what they are.”

“Are they weaving a web, pepsis? 'lot of surrounding to do'. LMAO”

“The teabag war will prevail against tyranny. Just keep up the good work!”

“I'll admit, HPD, that I may have over-generalized Glenn Beck. He appears to be a bipartisan hack, as opposed to a partisan hack. So you get some points there.

As much of a hoot as this is turning into, though, sadly, I have to get back to work.

Luckily I have my Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn books on CD to listen to and get me through the rest of the day with their brilliance and wisdom.

just in case I need to say it: j/k”

“Actually Chili there are several organizations whose ultimate goal is to remove firearms from the general public.

The largest is probably the Coalition to prevent handgun violence. That one is made up of 48 different organizations. Another would be the Brady campaign and its associated organizations.

You will have to do some looking to find the "ban handguns" language on any official publications these days. They removed all that in the late 80's early 90's in an attempt to appear less extreme. Mostly because they realized that they don't/won't have enough support to repeal/modify the second amendment. That coalition I mentioned? It used to be called the National Coalition to Ban Handguns. They changed their name in 89.

Lately their efforts have revolved around making the legal operation and ownership of a firearm by law abiding citizens difficult.

Granted I'm perfectly fine with there being restrictions on ownership and operation. There should be, that's perfectly reasonable but that is not what those groups are after.
last edited: 7/22/09 1:49:36 PM”

“pepsi - all I'm asking is that before you call him a "hack", maybe you should listen to him enough that you know what he is and is not saying? Hey! Listen to who you want to, but I wouldn't dismiss him out of hand simply because you're a "free-thinker". Got news for you .. you're not the first free-thinker to come along.”

“Glenn Beck is on!!!

YES!!!

He'll be talking about the new regulation czar.”