• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Glenn Beck Distorted Barack Obama's Views On The U.S. Constitution In Video

Yeah, I see that you've edited my words to change the context of my point.

My original point being that I saw nothing in the Beck edit, which changed the context of the BOY King's comments. Editing out his thoughts on Colonial Homies, doesn't change the relevance of his point regarding the US Constitution.

Thus your argument here; wherein you overtly distort my position, to diamterically alter my stated position; claiming that this is exactly what Beck did, is a argument which serves no purpose beyond DECEIT. Which is to say that your argument represents a FRAUD... Which some would argue constitutes a lie, with many believing such to represent a lie of the D A M N A B L E variety.

Editing out verbal stumbling, dissemblence... or other such irrelevancies is not deceptiv; unless and until the edit CHANGES THE CONTEXT OR CAUSES THE LISTENER TO BE MISGUIDED INTO BELIEVING THAT THE SPEAKER INTENDED TO CONVEY SOMETHING WHICH THE SPEAKER DID NOT INTEND, editing a speaker's comments is a perfectly valid technique... it simply saves room for more content within the scope of the project... Beck's edit did not change the point or the context of Hussein's statement. Period.

Now I've challenged those who claim that Beck's edit did so, to SPECIFICALLY QUOTE THE EDITED PORTIONS OF HOMIES COMMENTS AND SHOW WHERE THE EDIT CHANGED THE COMMENT OR HIS POINT. You chose instead to edit my comments, flipping the statement entirely and deceitfully imply that this is what Beck did. And you did so because you desperately want to maintain this fraud, and cannot do so using Barry's actual statement.

But I gotta say, as FAILS go... THIS was a BEAUTY!

"Boy king?" "Homie?" :roll:

Congratulations. You've just won the newbie-poster FAIL award. Your prize is a shiny new ignore. :2wave:
 
The Contra's opposed the Communists... Communism is oppression, thus where one fights oppression, one fights for Freedom; ergo the Contras were Freedom Fighters...

Secondly, thank you for citing COMEDY CENTRAL as your source... I believe that this, in and of itself, ALONE, effectively establishes the information necessary to accurately judge the veracity at the core of your argument.

Nice work...

You realize that just because one fights communism does not make that person a freedom fighter. The U.S. has a history of putting up rulers that were anti-communist and they were anything but free.

Secondly while it maybe Comedy Central, Stewart is at times more creditable than Beck is. Stewart called Beck out on what he said about him being the only one to show the video and proved Beck was wrong.
 
The Contra's opposed the Communists... Communism is oppression, thus where one fights oppression, one fights for Freedom; ergo the Contras were Freedom Fighters...

Military left over from a brutal dictatorship fighting to get back into power does not make them "Freedom Fighters."

Secondly, thank you for citing COMEDY CENTRAL as your source... I believe that this, in and of itself, ALONE, effectively establishes the information necessary to accurately judge the veracity at the core of your argument.

Let's go to the video that proves Beck is a liar:

[video]http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-3-2010/glenn-beck-airs-israeli-raid-footage[/video]

Outed by a comedian. He should feel foolish.

Nice work...

I know. Thanks!
 
Yeah, I see that you've edited my words to change the context of my point.

My original point being that I saw nothing in the Beck edit, which changed the context of the BOY King's comments. Editing out his thoughts on Colonial Homies, doesn't change the relevance of his point regarding the US Constitution.

Thus your argument here; wherein you overtly distort my position, to diamterically alter my stated position; claiming that this is exactly what Beck did, is a argument which serves no purpose beyond DECEIT. Which is to say that your argument represents a FRAUD... Which some would argue constitutes a lie, with many believing such to represent a lie of the D A M N A B L E variety.

Editing out verbal stumbling, dissemblence... or other such irrelevancies is not deceptiv; unless and until the edit CHANGES THE CONTEXT OR CAUSES THE LISTENER TO BE MISGUIDED INTO BELIEVING THAT THE SPEAKER INTENDED TO CONVEY SOMETHING WHICH THE SPEAKER DID NOT INTEND, editing a speaker's comments is a perfectly valid technique... it simply saves room for more content within the scope of the project... Beck's edit did not change the point or the context of Hussein's statement. Period.

Now I've challenged those who claim that Beck's edit did so, to SPECIFICALLY QUOTE THE EDITED PORTIONS OF HOMIES COMMENTS AND SHOW WHERE THE EDIT CHANGED THE COMMENT OR HIS POINT. You chose instead to edit my comments, flipping the statement entirely and deceitfully imply that this is what Beck did. And you did so because you desperately want to maintain this fraud, and cannot do so using Barry's actual statement.

But I gotta say, as FAILS go... THIS was a BEAUTY!

You do realize that capital letters on a forum represent shouting, don't you? Why are you shouting? Do you think it makes your argument more valid? Oh, and your colored letters are absolute genius.:roll:
 
Ah *giggle*
Good ole Glenn . . . always twisting things up.

that's not shocking - but what is is people's shocked reactions to it.
 
Ah *giggle*
Good ole Glenn . . . always twisting things up.

that's not shocking - but what is is people's shocked reactions to it.

I agree. I mean the videos pretty much speak for themselves on what Beck did.
 
Maybe you should understand The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution before you make a claim to it's imperfections.
For starters, pursuit to happiness is a substitution for property. Why is that? Because the founders knew that if Americans were given the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and property, slavery would have never been abolished. Knowing that, Obama's views on either document is just another opportunity to race pimp his way into buying votes.

The Constitution was most definitely an imperfect document.

Otherwise, it wouldn't have required, you know, amendments.

Like the one that repealed the 3/5ths compromise.

:lol:
 
If I were Beck, I would have left more of the quote in or at least stated the reasons behind the words he left in the quote. Now I don't generally watch Beck or listen to his talk show, so I hope this gives me some credibility when I say that I don't see how the meaning was changed behind what Obama was saying. He was clearly stating that he thought the constitution was flawed.

Now here is where I may be wrong. Doesn't he have a history of 'slamming' the constitution? I though his college thesis was basically a paper shredding it.
 
I'm starting to think Glenn Beck has a really bad case of **** Envy... ;)
 
"Boy king?" "Homie?" :roll:

Congratulations. You've just won the newbie-poster FAIL award. Your prize is a shiny new ignore. :2wave:

ROFLMNAO! Nothing says CONCEDE! like a shiny new IGNORE!

And THAT friends is the inevitable reaction of the common Leftist... the simple fact is that Left-think cannot compete with logically valid, intellectually sound reasoning. PERIOD!

Thus the need for these little rants, the obfuscation, the chronic obscurance... and the never ending dissemblence.

Recall that the ONLY issue which is presently on the table, is for SOMEONE to simply show where the Beck edits changed the context or the point which the BOY King intended... a dozen or two posts later... NOT ONE PERSON, Leftist, Progressive, Independent or otherwise can produce any evidence that such actually occurred; but there is NO END to these flaccid little attempts to CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

But hey... of you were pushing this straw-dog, you'd probably turn to deceit and fraud too... assuming of course that you're a Leftist.
 
ROFLMNAO! Nothing says CONCEDE! like a shiny new IGNORE!

And THAT friends is the inevitable reaction of the common Leftist... the simple fact is that Left-think cannot compete with logically valid, intellectually sound reasoning. PERIOD!

Thus the need for these little rants, the obfuscation, the chronic obscurance... and the never ending dissemblence.

Recall that the ONLY issue which is presently on the table, is for SOMEONE to simply show where the Beck edits changed the context or the point which the BOY King intended... a dozen or two posts later... NOT ONE PERSON, Leftist, Progressive, Independent or otherwise can produce any evidence that such actually occurred; but there is NO END to these flaccid little attempts to CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

But hey... of you were pushing this straw-dog, you'd probably turn to deceit and fraud too... assuming of course that you're a Leftist.

All you have to do is watch both videos to see how the context is changed. Beck left out the part the President said it was a remarkable document as well as leaving out what the President thought was imperfect about it. Plus in this very thread you have loyal Beck viewers that say he screwed up. So why is so hard for you to accept this? You are the one that keeps changing the subject to talking about a poster's political lean. Everyone else was talking about the videos and how Beck edited something and got called on it.
 
You realize that just because one fights communism does not make that person a freedom fighter.
That's true if one is a communist. No evidence of such being the case with regard to the Contras..

The U.S. has a history of putting up rulers that were anti-communist and they were anything but free.

The US doesn't have such a history... And 'being free' doesn't include tolerating communist insurgencies... Just as Ebola has no right to consume it's host, viable cultures are not obligated to tolerate fatal infections of communism. Thus regimes which take fatal measures on such insurgencies were duty bound by the responsibilities inherent in their natural rights to do so.

[/quote]Secondly while it maybe Comedy Central, Stewart is at times more creditable than Beck is.[/quote]

LOL... Stewart's an imbecile... but that has been the highlight of the Jester's resume for centuries...

[quite]Stewart called Beck out on what he said about him being the only one to show the video and proved Beck was wrong.[/QUOTE]

ROFLMNAO!

Like I said, Stewart's an imbecile... and only an imbecile would take a statement which implies concerted effort to discuss the issue give it focessed attention... and claim that blurbs and blips and mouthing of the issue elsewhere disproves or discredits the statement.
 
It has already been shown but if you can not understand it there is no way to convince you. Some people see and believe only what they want to see and hear. You are in denial.

if it's already been shown then it should be the easiest thing in the world to copy/paste.
 
That's true if one is a communist. No evidence of such being the case with regard to the Contras..

I never said that it was the case in Contras, but rather it was a general statement.

The US doesn't have such a history... And 'being free' doesn't include tolerating communist insurgencies... Just as Ebola has no right to consume it's host, viable cultures are not obligated to tolerate fatal infections of communism. Thus regimes which take fatal measures on such insurgencies were duty bound by the responsibilities inherent in their natural rights to do so.

For the love of God read a history book. The Shah of Iran was anti-Communist and was very anti-freedom in Iran. The same can be said about the leaders in both South Korea and South Vietnam. It maybe a part of U.S. history that you may not proud of, but it doesn't change the fact that it indeed happen.

LOL... Stewart's an imbecile... but that has been the highlight of the Jester's resume for centuries...

OK doesn't change that fact that at times Stewart still has more creditability than Beck does.

ROFLMNAO!

Like I said, Stewart's an imbecile... and only an imbecile would take a statement which implies concerted effort to discuss the issue give it focessed attention... and claim that blurbs and blips and mouthing of the issue elsewhere disproves or discredits the statement.

Your personal feelings about Stewart doesn't change the fact that Beck said something that Stewart proved was untrue.
 
Last edited:
Military left over from a brutal dictatorship fighting to get back into power does not make them "Freedom Fighters."

Well, let's look at it from this perspective; if one is a burglar breaking into my home, the last thought flittering through one's resin depository would likely be what a brutally extreme defender of my home I am...

The truth is, like Communists, there is no right to be a burglar and where one who disagrees usurps my rights in being such, it is my duty, born of my responsibility to defend my divinely endowed, inalienable rights... to destroy such threats. My guess is that you're confusing the brital deaths of 'innocent civilians' with the perfectly justified deaths of Leftist insurgents.

Not to worry, it's a common misnomer; happens all the time.



Let's go to the video that proves Beck is a liar:

[video]http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-3-2010/glenn-beck-airs-israeli-raid-footage[/video]

Outed by a comedian. He should feel foolish.

Oh! I see the problem; you erroneously feel that the issue here is this nonsense regarding the Cable Jesters on COMEDY CENTRAL.


Let me make this clear...

The ONLY ISSUE on the table in this discussion, RELEVANT TO THE OP, is the standing and thus far UNANSWERED CHALLENGE FOR SOMEONE TO POST WHERE THE BECK EDIT CHANGED THE CONTEXT OR THE POINT OF THE BOY King's STATEMENT

Jon Stewart... is IRRELEVANT TO THIS THREAD. If you would like to discuss COMEDY CENTRAL... start a thread and maybe you and the other 7 or 8 adults that watch it can release your impotent rage.

Hope it works out for ya.
 
All you have to do is watch both videos to see how the context is changed. Beck left out the part the President said it was a remarkable document as well as leaving out what the President thought was imperfect about it. Plus in this very thread you have loyal Beck viewers that say he screwed up. So why is so hard for you to accept this? You are the one that keeps changing the subject to talking about a poster's political lean. Everyone else was talking about the videos and how Beck edited something and got called on it.

Let me requote myself in cause Publius missed this one. But yes Stewart became relevant to this thread because it was another example of Beck caught lying.
 
I never said that it was the case in Contras, but rather it was a general statement.

To which I rejoined with a specific response... which of course, as is often the case, trumped your generality, discrediting it, in it's entirety...


PubliusInfinitum said:
The US doesn't have such a history... And 'being free' doesn't include tolerating communist insurgencies... Just as Ebola has no right to consume it's host, viable cultures are not obligated to tolerate fatal infections of communism. Thus regimes which take fatal measures on such insurgencies were duty bound by the responsibilities inherent in their natural rights to do so.


For the love of God read a history book. The Shah of Iran was anti-Communist and was very anti-freedom in Iran.


No, the Shah was very Pro-freedom... You're problem is that you feel that there's a right to promote communism and in so doing subvert the culture in which the Ideological Ebola is being spread. You're mistaken... The Shah felt pretty much the same as I did... as did the American founders.

The same can be said about the leaders in both South Korea and South Vietnam.

ROFLMNAO... Really? Because South Korea is SO similar to South Vietnam... Except where South Korea successfully rejected Left-think and is one of the most prosperous nations on earth... and where South Vietnam succumbed to Left-think and is one of the most impoverished nations on earth...

It maybe a part of U.S. history that you may not proud of, but it doesn't change the fact that it indeed happen.

There's no potential shame in the killing of communists and destroying thier culture crippling insurgencies; and not a thing you've asserted in this entire exchange is even remotely true; thus it did NOT HAPPEN.

But hey... don't sweat it; that's the nature of lies and d a m n-l i e s... and the Progressive movement across the board, so it's not like ya really had a shot.
 
All you have to do is watch both videos to see how the context is changed.

Well good, then you should have no problem showing that the edit changed the context of the statement...

Beck left out the part the President said it was a remarkable document as well as leaving out what the President thought was imperfect about it.

The Soviet Constitution was a remarkable document... proven by the fact that I just remarked on that waste of paper.

Again, that's the nature of editing; one removes irrelevance. The US Constitution was written to define the composition and scope of the US Federal government... so as that government would not gain sufficient power to infringe upon the liberty of the INDIVIDUAL... That the Constitution didn't mention the Colonial Homies is as irrelevant as it not mentioning the plight of the lowly Irish... Beck's point was to highlight Hussein's Marxist intent to subvert the PURPOSE of the US Constitution... which Hussein made clear in the long and short versions.


Plus in this very thread you have loyal Beck viewers that say he screwed up. So why is so hard for you to accept this?

Well without accepting the premise in the slightest, I suppose the reason I don't 'accept this' is because I don't lend credence to invalid reasoning, even when it's being advanced by would-be 'loyal Beck listeners'...

You are the one that keeps changing the subject to talking about a poster's political lean. Everyone else was talking about the videos and how Beck edited something and got called on it.

ROFLMNAO...

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


Leftists...
 
Let me requote myself in cause Publius missed this one. But yes Stewart became relevant to this thread because it was another example of Beck caught lying.

There are no such examples on the record... Beck's not been caught lying.

But it always HILARIOUS to have a Progressive lament deception... CLASSIC IRONY~!
 
No, the Shah was very Pro-freedom... You're problem is that you feel that there's a right to promote communism and in so doing subvert the culture in which the Ideological Ebola is being spread. You're mistaken... The Shah felt pretty much the same as I did... as did the American founders.

The Shah was an oppresive man, who silenced any political disent with a strong arm. He is about as bad, if not worse, then Iran's current leadership. The man was a dictator and was very anti-freedom.





ROFLMNAO... Really? Because South Korea is SO similar to South Vietnam... Except where South Korea successfully rejected Left-think and is one of the most prosperous nations on earth... and where South Vietnam succumbed to Left-think and is one of the most impoverished nations on earth...

South Korea when it first started out brutally repressed anything that looked even a little like communism or socialism. It killed or imprisoned most political desenters.

In South Vietnam, the leader we propped up to oppose the communists to the north was very corrupt. He canceled predetermined elections to keep his power, and his most powerful right-hand man was a Nazi sympathizer. He was authoritarian to the end.

Also, Vietnam has had a Market Economy since the 1990's.


There's no potential shame in the killing of communists and destroying thier culture crippling insurgencies; and not a thing you've asserted in this entire exchange is even remotely true; thus it did NOT HAPPEN.

But hey... don't sweat it; that's the nature of lies and d a m n-l i e s... and the Progressive movement across the board, so it's not like ya really had a shot.
You are ignoring though that you are the wrong one in this argument, not him. America has propped up leaders to combat communism or other political ideologies that we did not like, and almost all of those propped leaders have been corrupt and/or oppressive.
 
There are no such examples on the record... Beck's not been caught lying.

But it always HILARIOUS to have a Progressive lament deception... CLASSIC IRONY~!

OK now I know you are just screwing with all of us.
 
The Shah was an oppresive man, who silenced any political disent with a strong arm. He is about as bad, if not worse, then Iran's current leadership. The man was a dictator and was very anti-freedom.







South Korea when it first started out brutally repressed anything that looked even a little like communism or socialism. It killed or imprisoned most political desenters.

In South Vietnam, the leader we propped up to oppose the communists to the north was very corrupt. He canceled predetermined elections to keep his power, and his most powerful right-hand man was a Nazi sympathizer. He was authoritarian to the end.

Also, Vietnam has had a Market Economy since the 1990's.



You are ignoring though that you are the wrong one in this argument, not him. America has propped up leaders to combat communism or other political ideologies that we did not like, and almost all of those propped leaders have been corrupt and/or oppressive.

Even though you are completely right somehow he will say you are wrong.
 
I agree that Beck misrepresented what Obama was saying, but I don't agree with Obama.

Our founding fathers only included the 3/5 clause in the constitution to appease the southern states. It wasn't done out of racism, otherwise they would have stated it applied to "Black" or "African" people, rather than "slaves". That's why after the civil war, the 3/5 clause was stricken from the constitution, and Black men were given the right to vote.

Thanks to Glenn Beck, I have learned that black men served side by side with white men in the war of independence, and many received medals and were buried with full military honors. It wasn't until Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who fully supported Jim Crow laws, ordered the segregation of the federal Civil Service, that our military became segregated.

.

And how exactly were women equal in the first draft of the Constitution?
 
Back
Top Bottom