The Glenn Beck thread!!!

kokonut said:
Only if we have plenty of money to spread around except the problem is the fact that if we cannot even control the massive fraud and waste in Medicare that costs us taxpayers about $60 billion dollars a year then what make YOU think the govt can do this on a scale that's 10 times bigger? They are certainly not that efficient in doing those kinds of things. That should be readily apparent to you and anybody else. That alone certainly does not inspire confidence. And by doing so ensures greater and greater medical rationing. We don't even have enough doctors to over see "suddenly" an additional surge of 30 million people. Even this upcoming health bill does not cover every single person in the U.S. if you look at it closely again. There will be millions still not covered.
Again, which ones exactly are you in disagreement with Beck's?
Click to expand...

And that is why I would support a much stronger bill. Something that would turn our system completely public.
 
FJ, "completely public"...need to clarify your meaning on that one.
 
kokonut said:
Centralization is not the answer.
Click to expand...

That is where we disagree.

The police are goverment paid, the firefighters are as well. Why? Because it is a matter of life and death and you shouldn't be running those things for profit. And you shouldn't have to worry about if you will get help if you can't pay.

I believe that healthcare should be viewed the same way.
 
Okay...

Marriage-- Anyone who is not religious or don't adhere to the Christian church are still considered as married. Why should gay people be deprived of that? If it's so sacred, then we might as well revoke the atheists', the Buddhists', the Hindi's licences.

Debt-- It's a world-wide problem. Everyone in westernized world is facing this problem. We seriously need to forgive some debts, re-haul our economy and social system in order to get ourselves out of the quagmire because that what it took us to get out of our previous depressions-- a re-haul of our socio-economic system.

The Overton window discussion-- I don't even know why it was brought up. It shift from side to side to fit the needs of the people. They're acting like if it is in a static. Right now the family system is not the same as it used to be in the late 1700s to 1930s. They fail to consider that. It will shift back to the right, as soon people become more collectivist among themselves (ie. take care of family members, take care of church members, take care of club members)-- rather than being individualistic people (ie. living alone, keeping a loose social network without bonding to people closely and so on.)

On the issue of treatment of terrorists-- people deserve basic human rights. Otherwise we would be hypocrites. If you want other people to be waterboarded, be willing to accept it yourself.

Abortion issue-- Like I said... this is where we would have to become miniarchists in this regard. I don't agree with funding, however it kinda go back to my criticism of the overton topic, however... if you don't like abortions, group yourself with people don't believe in it and stick with them; let the ones that do support it do their own thing. It's the only solution to the damn debate. This is where "natural consequences" have to dictate who is right and who is wrong without anyone complaining.
 
souggy said:
Okay...
Debt-- It's a world-wide problem. Everyone in westernized world is facing this problem. We seriously need to forgive some debts, re-haul our economy and social system in order to get ourselves out of the quagmire because that what it took us to get out of our previous depressions-- a re-haul of our socio-economic system.
Click to expand...

Yet you want to debate, I don't mind, but to do this puerile face palm before elsewhere? Okayyy.

The U.S. is uno numero at the top of the debt ladder and is a source of concern for the rest of the nations around the globe. Why do you think China has berated, in a sense, Obama about the debt problem and the massive spending spree of which approx. $1 trillion dollars was borrowed from China? And Obama all of sudden turned around the next day and tell people that if we don't get a handle on the debt problem we'll face a "double dip recession." A poster boy for a two-faced hypocrite.

It's a simple process but it takes immense will power and common sense approach. Curb the spending. Pay off our more of our debts. Adhere to a specified budget each year and not get into any deficit spending. Get rid of porks and special interests. Set caps on lawsuits. Revamp the medicare system to make it more efficient and streamlined. Revamp the VA. Establish term limits for Senators and H.Rs so we don't have a state full of Senator Byrd memorial structures and buildings that dot all over the state of West. Va. Enough of the special interest, pork rinds.

Bottom line if you haven't realized already, it is UNSUSTAINABLE to continue spending like this. Unless you have some sort of odd philosophical belief that maxing out on 10 of your credit cards is good way to help solve your debt problems then you're sorely mistakened.
 
kokonut said:
Only if we have plenty of money to spread around except the problem is the fact that if we cannot even control the massive fraud and waste in Medicare that costs us taxpayers about $60 billion dollars a year then what make YOU think the govt can do this on a scale that's 10 times bigger? They are certainly not that efficient in doing those kinds of things. That should be readily apparent to you and anybody else. That alone certainly does not inspire confidence. And by doing so ensures greater and greater medical rationing. We don't even have enough doctors to over see "suddenly" an additional surge of 30 million people. Even this upcoming health bill does not cover every single person in the U.S. if you look at it closely again. There will be millions still not covered.

Again, which ones exactly are you in disagreement with Beck's?
Click to expand...

kokonut said:
Yet you want to debate, I don't mind, but to do this puerile face palm before elsewhere? Okayyy.

The U.S. is uno numero at the top of the debt ladder and is a source of concern for the rest of the nations around the globe. Why do you think China has berated, in a sense, Obama about the debt problem and the massive spending spree of which approx. $1 trillion dollars was borrowed from China? And Obama all of sudden turned around the next day and tell people that if we don't get a handle on the debt problem we'll face a "double dip recession." A poster boy for a two-faced hypocrite.

It's a simple process but it takes immense will power and common sense approach. Curb the spending. Pay off our more of our debts. Adhere to a specified budget each year and not get into any deficit spending. Get rid of porks and special interests. Set caps on lawsuits. Revamp the medicare system to make it more efficient and streamlined. Revamp the VA. Establish term limits for Senators and H.Rs so we don't have a state full of Senator Byrd memorial structures and buildings that dot all over the state of West. Va. Enough of the special interest, pork rinds.

Bottom line if you haven't realized already, it is UNSUSTAINABLE to continue spending like this. Unless you have some sort of odd philosophical belief that maxing out on 10 of your credit cards is good way to help solve your debt problems then you're sorely mistakened.
Click to expand...

:topic::topic::topic::topic:

I thought we're talking about Glenn Beck, not Obama's policy or national debt.
 
faire_jour said:
I'll just start at the top.

I do consider you a radical if you are opposed to the idea that all humans deserve medical treatment.

I do consider you a radical if you do not believe that all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, deserve the same rights.

I don't have shame for spending money on programs that help people.

I would gladly pay 50% in taxes if it meant that every child had health care, every child had preschool, the homeless had places to stay, and people had jobs.
Click to expand...

Right on girl! :thumb:
 
faire_jour said:
That is where we disagree.

The police are goverment paid, the firefighters are as well. Why? Because it is a matter of life and death and you shouldn't be running those things for profit. And you shouldn't have to worry about if you will get help if you can't pay.

I believe that healthcare should be viewed the same way.
Click to expand...

That's what I have been trying to explain to the conservatives...that healthcare should be a right, not a priviledge. Might as well make firefighting, public education and protection a priviledge so we can get ourselves out of the debt, heh?
 
souggy said:
Okay...

Marriage-- Anyone who is not religious or don't adhere to the Christian church are still considered as married. Why should gay people be deprived of that? If it's so sacred, then we might as well revoke the atheists', the Buddhists', the Hindi's licences.
Click to expand...

Deprived of what? To have the same legal rights as those who are married (man and woman)? That's fine with me. Even Obama supports civil unions but not marriage which is reserved between man and a woman as he has said.

OBAMA: Well, to answer the original question, I would love that child and seek to support them. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but I detest the bashing and vilifying of gays and lesbians. Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they’re not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people.
Click to expand...
Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes

It's still true today on what he said. Go criticize him instead.
 
kokonut said:
Deprived of what? To have the same legal rights as those who are married (man and woman)? That's fine with me. Even Obama supports civil unions but not marriage which is reserved between man and a woman as he has said.
Click to expand...

And it doesn't make him right.

Why are you always using appeal to authority fallacy? Just because an "expert" or "god" or "leader" says so does not automatically make it right.
 
Jiro said:
:topic::topic::topic::topic:

I thought we're talking about Glenn Beck, not Obama's policy or national debt.
Click to expand...

seems like kokonut constantly brings obama into everything, somehow.. how pathetic.
 
kokonut said:
Deprived of what? To have the same legal rights as those who are married (man and woman)? That's fine with me. Even Obama supports civil unions but not marriage which is reserved between man and a woman as he has said.


Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes

It's still true today on what he said. Go criticize him instead.
Click to expand...

Let keep it with Glenn Beck, shall we? Not Obama? As it is now, marriage is defined by the Christian majority. Not the act of the union, but rather the ownership of the word. If homosexuals are not allowed to use the term marriage, then why the hell people are getting married in courts instead of churches?

I never mentioned Obama or his Democrats anywhere.
 
souggy said:
On the issue of treatment of terrorists-- people deserve basic human rights. Otherwise we would be hypocrites. If you want other people to be waterboarded, be willing to accept it yourself.
Click to expand...

If the information a terrorist holds is seen as a potential value that could help protect our troops, the United States, other countries, our resources and what not then the U.S. has that right to try and extract that information. If that makes you uncomfortable. GOOD! Otherwise people will continue to have this 9/10 mentality over and over again. This isn't patty cake, son. This is serious business about helping ensure the safety and security of our nation. We already ensure that our enemies are taken care of when captured. Provide them meals to them that are agreeable and acceptable. Provide for their medical care and even life saving surgeries. Provide dental. Allow them certain religious freedom. And so on when. Certainly, there are some instances when we just don't want to know. We are well aware of the consequences on the war on terrorism, going to war and finding ways to help keep America safe. What we don't need is a bunch of namby, pamby pacifists who think by saying "Purty please" to the enemies will solve everything on a dime. We need to be firm, resolute and fair. And not be Mr. Gumby bowing and scraping the floor everywhere he goes.
 
souggy said:
Let keep it with Glenn Beck, shall we? Not Obama? As it is now, marriage is defined by the Christian majority. Not the act of the union, but rather the ownership of the word. If homosexuals are not allowed to use the term marriage, then why the hell people are getting married in courts instead of churches?

I never mentioned Obama or his Democrats anywhere.
Click to expand...

Obama believes that. So does Glenn Beck. And Cheney. That marriage is to be between a man and woman since it involves the church.
 
Back
Top