"The only chance we have...is for bin Laden to detonate a major weapon in the U.S."

[mookiemookie]

This is the kind of crap that makes it on Glenn Beck these days. Michael Scheuer wishing for another terrorist attack on the United States:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HtSb7kwTFE

Why do conservatives hate America?

[Buddahaid]

Hopefully it would go off underneath him. :down: The man wants a police state.

Buddahaid

[Max2147]

Even though I'm liberal, I'm not going to saddle conservatives with Michael Scheuer. He's not really conservative or liberal, he's just insanely focused on one issue (Al Qaeda) and totally blind to everything else that happens in the world.

Every once in a while he makes a good point, but it's always in support of downright scary conclusions.

[SUBMAN1]

Did anyone actually watch it? Glenn Beck wasn't the one that suggested it, nor did he actually agree to it.

-S

[SteamWake]

Why do conservatives hate America?


:har:

Why do people jump to conclusion.

I did not see the episode but I assure you Mr. Beck does not hate America. Quite the contrary.

"He wants a police state" thats even more laughable. What a tilted perspective can be drawn from a little bit of knowledge.

In fact perhaps you should pick up his new book "Common Sense" perhaps it may enlighten you.

[mookiemookie]

The best way I saw this summed up:

If a major US city isn't destroyed, then the liberals will stay in charge, which could lead to another 9/11, so everyone pray for an attack, so conservatives can get back in charge, so that way their won't be an attack. Pray hard now, because even though the whole basis for this reasoning is that liberals make a terror attack inevitable, we have to be very scared of the consequences if there isn't one.

Oh, and at the end of this segment, Beck suggests that if Bin Ladin doesn't attack, its proof that he wants to keep the Democrats in power and neo-cons out.

So you see? If there's an attack, its proof Democrats are weak against Al-Qaeda. If there isn't an attack, its proof they're on the same side as Al-Qaeda.

[SteamWake]

I really wish I had seen this in context.

I think its called trying to make a point.

[SUBMAN1]

The best way I saw this summed up:

If a major US city isn't destroyed, then the liberals will stay in charge, which could lead to another 9/11, so everyone pray for an attack, so conservatives can get back in charge, so that way their won't be an attack. Pray hard now, because even though the whole basis for this reasoning is that liberals make a terror attack inevitable, we have to be very scared of the consequences if there isn't one.

Oh, and at the end of this segment, Beck suggests that if Bin Ladin doesn't attack, its proof that he wants to keep the Democrats in power and neo-cons out.

So you see? If there's an attack, its proof Democrats are weak against Al-Qaeda. If there isn't an attack, its proof they're on the same side as Al-Qaeda.

You are drawing a lot of incorrect conclusions from that video. Beck made no such statements and was careful not to side with this guys ideas.

-S

[SteamWake]

So you see? If there's an attack, its proof Democrats are weak against Al-Qaeda. If there isn't an attack, its proof they're on the same side as Al-Qaeda.

I believe the quote from Mr. Beck was "If I were him [Obama] that would be the last thing I would do right now".

Mr. Beck is not hoping for an attack nor does he infer that it would be 'proof' that the dems are on the same side as Al-Qaeda.

I think the point is that unless the american pepole wake the hell up were in deep trouble and Al-Qaeda wouldent want to wake them up.

Stunning simply stunning how this is taken out of context and spun to make Beck look like an anti american nut job.

[Buddahaid]

:har:

Why do people jump to conclusion.

I did not see the episode but I assure you Mr. Beck does not hate America. Quite the contrary.

"He wants a police state" thats even more laughable. What a tilted perspective can be drawn from a little bit of knowledge.

In fact perhaps you should pick up his new book "Common Sense" perhaps it may enlighten you.

Agreed, but it may not be the enlightenment you seek. :arrgh!:

Buddahaid

[SteamWake]

Agreed, but it may not be the enlightenment you seek. :arrgh!:

Buddahaid

Its the enlightenment I wish others would seek.

[mookiemookie]

Its the enlightenment I wish others would seek.

:O: My best friend and drinking buddy is so far right that he makes Rush Limbaugh look liberal. I get all the enlightenment I need from him. We're like the odd couple.

Stunning simply stunning how this is taken out of context and spun to make Beck look like an anti american nut job.

Context? What other context does there need to be. Glenn Beck has this guy on his show, gives him a forum to spout his trash that American civilians need to die because he's upset how the politics of the country are going, and Beck says nothing. Tacitly agrees with him by not calling him out on that statement. You can be sure that if it were my show, I'd stop the guy and say "....the HELL did you just say?" But no, Beck let's it go like it's a valid point.

[Buddahaid]

SteamWake, that's something we probably all could agree on here.

Buddahaid

[Onkel Neal]

This is the kind of crap that makes it on Glenn Beck these days. Michael Scheuer wishing for another terrorist attack on the United States:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HtSb7kwTFE

Why do conservatives hate America?


Not all of them, just the loudest, the ones who make their living on talk radio.

[Buddahaid]

Context? What other context does there need to be. Glenn Beck has this guy on his show, gives him a forum to spout his trash that American civilians need to die because he's upset how the politics of the country are going, and Beck says nothing. Tacitly agrees with him by not calling him out on that statement. You can be sure that if it were my show, I'd stop the guy and say "....the HELL did you just say?" But no, Beck let's it go like it's a valid point.

At least he let him speak his point without shouting him out. Let them hang themselves and then give your rebuttal. I hate when the guest is just meat to jump all over, and not allowed their point.

Buddahaid

[Onkel Neal]

You know, one more thing I'd like to add, I really have a problem with liberals like Acorn, PETA, Pelosi and Frank, but I also turn my nose up at Limbaugh, that crazy blonde chick Ann whats-her-name, and the conservative talk radio yahoos. Why is it people have to choose between one extreme or the other? I am conservative, I believe personal responsibility and minimal govt is the way to go, but I think we can compromise. That's how this country was founded--through a lot of political compromise.

Hell, I'm not losing any sleep over the country's recent turn to the left. So what if we end up like California (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31693419/ns/travel-news/)? Maybe we'll learn something from that mess.

[SteamWake]

As california goes so goes the nation :oops:

[Buddahaid]

You know, one more thing I'd like to add, I really have a problem with liberals like Acorn, PETA, Pelosi and Frank, but I also turn my nose up at Limbaugh, that crazy blonde chick Ann whats-her-name, and the conservative talk radio yahoos. Why is it people have to choose between one extreme or the other? I am conservative, I believe personal responsibility and minimal govt is the way to go, but I think we can compromise. That's how this country was founded--through a lot of political compromise.

Hell, I'm not losing any sleep over the country's recent turn to the left. So what if we end up like California (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31693419/ns/travel-news/)? Maybe we'll learn something from that mess.

Hey! I resemble that! If you don't know, California is only liberal in the major coastal cities, and pretty conservative everywhere else as a rule.

Buddahaid

[SteamWake]

Hey! I resemble that! If you don't know, California is only liberal in the major coastal cities, and pretty conservative everywhere else as a rule.

Buddahaid

The most curious thing is that the vast majority of the country is center / right.

Yet the folks on capitol hill are decidely left borderline socialist.

How did this happen?

[mookiemookie]

The most curious thing is that the vast majority of the country is center / right.

Yet the folks on capitol hill are decidely left borderline socialist.

How did this happen?

Because you've bought into story GOP has sold you. And apparently the country ain't center right if an overwhelming majority of the voters put a "liberal socialist terrorist palling around with terrorist redistributor of wealth" into the Presidency.

One of my favorite commentators said it best:

We're impatient, yes, yes, we are. The deluded who thought they were getting beautiful Barack to ride in on a giant stallion and slay the big, bad Bush machine are impatient. The realists who knew they were getting a really damn smart, slightly left of center guy in Obama and not an avenging liberal, they're impatient, too.

...

So the Rude Pundit wasn't naive when he voted for Obama, either. He never expected everything to be solved. And if you ever thought Obama was some bleeding heart liberal, then you were just a pawn of the right's remarkable ability to define the terms of the argument. You bought into their bullsh*t line. He is more liberal, yes, than anyone in a long, long time, But Obama's heart ain't draining.

[August]

And apparently the country ain't center right if an overwhelming majority of the voters put a "liberal socialist terrorist palling around with terrorist redistributor of wealth" into the Presidency

52% is an "overwhelming majority"?

[Aramike]

Personally I find Glen Beck to be a tad bit of an alarmist loon, although he does make some good points. But, I do think that mookiex2 has a point: If a major US city isn't destroyed, then the liberals will stay in charge, which could lead to another 9/11, so everyone pray for an attack, so conservatives can get back in charge, so that way their won't be an attack. Pray hard now, because even though the whole basis for this reasoning is that liberals make a terror attack inevitable, we have to be very scared of the consequences if there isn't one.

Oh, and at the end of this segment, Beck suggests that if Bin Ladin doesn't attack, its proof that he wants to keep the Democrats in power and neo-cons out.

So you see? If there's an attack, its proof Democrats are weak against Al-Qaeda. If there isn't an attack, its proof they're on the same side as Al-Qaeda.I've noticed this line of reasoning before. While I do believe that Democrats are substantially weaker on the homeland security front, I do not believe that giving them no logical means of success helps anyone's argument. Also, the belief that the enemies of America care what political party is in power is silly, and shows a dramatic misunderstanding of the enemy. They don't hate us for that. Oddly enough, I'd argue that the only reason Al Qaeda would want Democrats in power is because they feel that makes us more vulnerable.

Ultimately though, the idea that a major US attack would help the US defend itself is self-defeating.

[August]

Ultimately though, the idea that a major US attack would help the US defend itself is self-defeating.

Agree 100% Aramike.

I have little patience for those who would wish harm to our country in order to prove some political point. It is no more tolerable than the Democrat pundits who hoped for failure in Iraq to score points against the Bush administration.

I believe such people on either side of the American political spectrum are our true enemies because they choose party loyalty over national loyalty.

[Onkel Neal]

.

I believe such people on either side of the American political spectrum are our true enemies because they choose party loyalty over national loyalty.

August for the win! :up:

[Task Force]

This guy sounds like a real nut...:hmmm:

[Skybird]

Is the guy just arguing like that a desaster seems to be needed to make people aware of somethign and make them act on something, or is he really ecstatic over the prospect, and really wishes it to take place to please his desire? I do not know that guy and do not know his usual opinions, that's what makes it a bit difficult for me to see through him. All I realise so far is that he is a lefty and that he has a high opinion of europeans. :D

[Max2147]

Agree 100% Aramike.

I have little patience for those who would wish harm to our country in order to prove some political point. It is no more tolerable than the Democrat pundits who hoped for failure in Iraq to score points against the Bush administration.

I believe such people on either side of the American political spectrum are our true enemies because they choose party loyalty over national loyalty.
Agreed, although I should point out that there's a difference between predicting failure and hoping for failure.

For example, in 2003 I thought that the Iraq invasion was a bad idea that was doomed to failure. To a certain degree I still think that today. But that doesn't mean I want it to be a failure. I would be absolutely thrilled if I was proven wrong.

On the other side of the political spectrum, I'm sure there are a lot of people who think Obama's election made the US less safe. However, that doesn't mean they want an attack to happen - I'd like to think that they'd be quite happy in 4/8 years if Obama's presidency ended without a major attack on the United States or our allies.

Of course, as you say there are egotistical nutjobs on both sides who think it's more important for themselves to be right than it is for their country to be safe. I don't have much time for them.

[Buddahaid]

The nut jobs, if you will, usually stand out and can be cracked. It's the uneducated idiots that buy into it that worry me. Ever watch any of Leno's jaywalking? My cats look like geniuses and these people CAN vote!

Buddahaid

[Onkel Neal]

Is the guy just arguing like that a desaster seems to be needed to make people aware of somethign and make them act on something, or is he really ecstatic over the prospect, and really wishes it to take place to please his desire? I do not know that guy and do not know his usual opinions, that's what makes it a bit difficult for me to see through him. All I realise so far is that he is a lefty and that he has a high opinion of europeans. :D


I think his point is that we need a major terrorist attack to dislodge Obama and the Democrats. I say, no thanks, I prefer Obama to Osama.

Yeah, Beck should have called him on that BS immediately. I imagine Beck was too busy thinking, "Oooh, did you hear what this idiot just said? My rating$ are going to go way up now!"

[Skybird]

I think his point is that we need a major terrorist attack to dislodge Obama and the Democrats.
I see. What a noble-minded gentleman. :dead:

[UnderseaLcpl]

I see. What a noble-minded gentleman. :dead:

Neal may have worded that poorly. What the gentleman really means is that the inevitable march towards socialism can only be reversed by the pro-American sentiment that the Republican party(though the Dems have done so as well) thrives on, generally brought on by international crisis.

I disagree with his statement. If history is any example, the majority party's dominance will only be reinforced by crisis, but I suspect that he has fallen prey to the belief that only Republicans( or more specifically, moral conservatives amongst the Republican party) love America and will defend it. I love the predictability of Academia. It's no wonder that they teach, rather than work:rotfl:

As far as Glenn Beck is concerned,I kind of like him because of his anti-socialist rhetoric, but I find him hard to tolerate when he launches into moral sermons. Make no mistake, I'd be the first to participate in a church outreach program or something. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Protestant, and I'll readily offer the Presbyterian interpretation of the gospel to anyone who will listen, but I wouldn't broadcast my message on national TV. To me, such a medium cheapens the faith, reducing it to the standard of oft-despised televangelism. What place does a mass-marketed approach have in a faith that believes in a personal God?

[Skybird]

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Protestant, and I'll readily offer the Presbyterian interpretation of the gospel to anyone who will listen, but I wouldn't broadcast my message on national TV. To me, such a medium cheapens the faith, reducing it to the standard of oft-despised televangelism. What place does a mass-marketed approach have in a faith that believes in a personal God?

Wise. One of the reasons why you and me come along even when wearing different team colours.

Haven't forgotten a reply to your long answers some days back, though. Need to do some additions and corrections, 1 or 2 days.

[Frame57]

Hey! Beck is named after one of my favorite beers...He cannot be a bad guy...:woot: