Patriotic compound in Idaho

[racrguy]

Congratulations on you doing the same. AFterall, the only way you know you don't like him is if you listen to him.

The difference is, I realized I didn't like him years ago and haven't given him a second thought.

[Forever_frost]

The difference is, I realized I didn't like him years ago and haven't given him a second thought.

Seems you have. Or are you one to make a decision on something once and never reevaluate that decision? To never give him a second thought would mean that when he was mentioned here, you would treat it as I do Nay and ignore it

[svauto-erotic855]

I am having a hard time with this but I agree with racrguy about something; I don't like Glen Beck. His books are funny but I can not stand to listen to the man talk.

[racrguy]

Seems you have. Or are you one to make a decision on something once and never reevaluate that decision? To never give him a second thought would mean that when he was mentioned here, you would treat it as I do Nay and ignore it

You post enough of his stuff on here for me to form a valid opinion, without having to offer him any further revenue. Before you go on with any possible hypocrisy I'm showing, when I read his stuff you post, it's not with the mindset that maybe I am wrong of my opinion of the guy and looking to see if I am in fact wrong. I go into it thinking the guy is crazy and only having to read a few sentences in before having my opinion validated.

[Forever_frost]

You post enough of his stuff on here for me to form a valid opinion, without having to offer him any further revenue.

Not really. Especially since he doesnt' write what I post. And again, if you gave him no second thought, you would automatically ignore anything with his name, which you have failed to do

[likeitfast55]

I used to listen to Mr. Beck when he first got started in radio. As well as Rush. As these guys gained a following, their bank account gained as well.(nothing wrong with that)
However, somewhere in there they made the decision to be paid actors. They put on a show. Very simple. Any message they have that has meaning is lost in their theatrics.
It seems that they cater to the "not so smart" crowd these days. Nothing wrong with that as I said earlier. They are millionaires, I am not. So in my humble opinion you have to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I just can not bring myself to listen to either of them for more than 5 minutes. They make my head hurt.

[stevo]

I watched/listened to Beck in the beginning until he went a bit too far into the conspiracy deep end, and have never listed to Rush, not even once. My total hearing of Rush has been when someone quotes him. I seldom read or watch Fox News, I will watch The Five on occasionfor the laughs and because I have always had a SERIOUS thing for Dana Perino (even with her showing her age, I would plow that pussy like I had John Deere sticker on my ass).

I guess I am not the typical Conservative/Republican/Tea Party member that EVERY liberal parrots about constantly, even though they swear every person that disagrees with the 0bama regime does all of the above.

Stevo

[Sgt Beavis]

And yet look at the rules of engagement that it uses during it's police actions in other counties, you think that they would attempt worse on their own American citizens on American soil in the presence of American media? It would be suicide for the current happy happy joy joy touchy-feely regime.

Stevo

That current regime decided that too many civilians were being killed in drone strikes against terrorists. So what did they do about it? They changed the rules of engagement to count more civilians as terrorists.

Obama also GREATLY increased the use of drone strikes compared to GWB. GWB had only 44 strikes from 2004 on. There 260 by the Obama administration. There is all sorts of articles about civilian deaths by these strikes and it appears that the administration can't even agree with itself on how many people they are killing. The CIA's general council has even stated that the rules of war do not apply to these strikes.

My main point though is that this administration (and probably many past administrations) will do what ever the fuck they please.

[stevo]

That current regime decided that too many civilians were being killed in drone strikes against terrorists. So what did they do about it? They changed the rules of engagement to count more civilians as terrorists.

Obama also GREATLY increased the use of drone strikes compared to GWB. GWB had only 44 strikes from 2004 on. There 260 by the Obama administration. There is all sorts of articles about civilian deaths by these strikes and it appears that the administration can't even agree with itself on how many people they are killing. The CIA's general council has even stated that the rules of war do not apply to these strikes.

My main point though is that this administration (and probably many past administrations) will do what ever the fuck they please.

Where have those drone strikes taken place? How many have happened on US soil? And of those that have happened on US soil, how many have had direct coverage by US media? That is my point.

The current regime lives (and dies) through the media. Any hardcore direct bad press will damage it severely. Right now, it is profitable for mainstream media to continue to give it a positive spin, but one serious negative act and the media will turn on it with a quickness. The 0bama regime is dead WORRIED about the mass of sheeple seeing it in a negative light.

Just my opinion.

Stevo

[DallasSleeper]

The current regime lives (and dies) through the media. Any hardcore direct bad press will damage it severely. Right now, it is profitable for mainstream media to continue to give it a positive spin, but one serious negative act and the media will turn on it with a quickness. The 0bama regime is dead WORRIED about the mass of sheeple seeing it in a negative light

What bad press, the media falls all over itself to deflect and misdirect.