• 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 rally will be a measure of the tea party's strength

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ockham said:
Only if inflation has increased 320% since 1980, and it has not, it's increased approximately 164% since 1980. What is the attribute then for the remaining 156%?
Click to expand...

Cost of living increases, increase in population, increase in program overhead.



First, I'll say not all vote Democrate soley because they are social program dependent - but I would say some do, just as some abuse the system and fraud is rampant. Democrats policies however do extend a bribe to those just hanging on to - just hang on longer. And when voting time comes along, vote for the guy or gal who will continue to allow you to hang on. If you had to choose between a Democrat who supports the extension (as is) of Food Stamps versus a Democrat who advocates the removal of the Food Stamp program, which would you (who use food stamps) vote for? Second, you set up a false choice in that without welfare people will starve and or become homeless. That's not necessarily true. If welfare was replaced, or phased out people would have to take care of each other or the welfare participants would be highly motivated to sign on to new programs created to increase their job skills instead of being paid to just stay on the cusp of homelessness. Some people actually have family as well, or could rely on Church or charity. Granted, those organization don't spend $400 billion dollars a year on Federal Welfare ... that's a lot of welfare. Third, not every Democrat is in your unique situation, so the implication that most people are like you is not true, therefore the implication is misleading.
Click to expand...

That depends, would the guy wanting to get rid of the program, also want to reform welfare to what I think the program should be? If so I would vote for that candidate. If they wanted to just get rid of the program, without offering any alternative solutions I would vote for the person keeping the program. Even if I wasn't on food stamps, I don't plan to be on them when I move out.(It's my parents getting them, not me) Like I said, this program, is better than no program. It atleast gives them a chance to get back on their feet. Being homeless instantly makes it harder to get a job.
And private charities, and churches do great work, and are helpful, but they can't possibly have the same reach, effectiveness, or reliability as government programs have.


Children always pay for parents mistakes and no amount of social programs will change that. How are children who's parents use welfare money to create more children, or who use that money for drugs or alcohol avoid making their children suffer? They do not.
Click to expand...

Not every situation is ideal, but atleast with these programs, they will have a chance, being in a house, having food, and going to school. It won't prevent them from being affected, but it will lessen the impact, and give them a chance to live their own life.

You have not addressed 30 years worth of dependence other than saying it IS dependence ... just enough to keep them from being homeless. THAT is the epitome of dependence. That is what Democrats want to keep going and that is what they've co-opted groups like the Black Caucus, NAACP and former Civil Rights leaders into buying into politically. That keeps these groups in power, that keeps Democrats in power through votes. In 25 years as an adult - all one has to do is look around and see this happening year after year. I just don't get why intelligent and moral Democrats ignore it - maybe they don't and that's why they become Independents. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Like Mega said, what you see as some scheme to get votes, I see as idealism. I don't think Democrats are voting for these welfare programs to get votes, I just think they don't want to see people be homeless, and starving. I don't think anyone believes that someone should be on these programs forever. It's just a temporary crutch for people going through hard times.
Also you're assuming that people want to stay on these programs. It's not an easy life, and most people really want to get off of these programs. Though they may not have the opportunity too, which is why I support an education, and work program to go along with welfare. Though I'm sure some republicans would call that socialist. :shrug:
 
megaprogman said:
You seem to have more faith in Beck than most people. We will see if he can truly avoid attacking those whom he disagrees with.
Click to expand...

If the man says his rally is about bringing people together, non political, no signs, bring your kids, and to help a charity,
Why would anyone say things "Oh that hateful Glenn Beck is holding a tea party rally. They'll be bashing Obama and they want to do away with the Civil Rights act. It's going to be fill with hate. Don't tell ME it won't be political. he's just in it for the money.."

I have more faith that Glenn knows more about what his rally is for , than hate filled liberals know what will happen on that day.
 
We've been talking about this one program (and a little about a 2nd) welfare and Food Stamps. Now let's broaden the scope a bit and look at the rest of the social programs.

Supplemental Security Income
Temporary Assistance for the Needy Families
Food Stamp Program
WIC
National Lunch Program
School Breakfast Program
Housing Assistance
General Assistance
Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Social Welfare


Now I've seen Democrats do the same things basically for the last 25 years of my adult life. When you see that happening, you here the rhetoric but don't see the actions. You see costs increasing, you see social programs increasing, you see more programs created but no reforms. And then you broaden he scope out to include multiple programs (and this is only at the Federal Level, there are yet more at the State and Local level), you may start to see what I'm talking about. I don't doubt that good intentions were used - however over time those intentions are corrupted. Were truly, the political spin of Democrats to be helping people - they'd do it. They're not and they haven't. One could argue that giving food, giving money, giving more money and homes, and assistance are all helping --- over time it's not helping, it's hurting. And yes, I add a devious intent to that as well. What was a good intention has turned into a dependence, one that many rely on, live on and die on. That's not help, that's a form of enslavement.

How different then are drug dealers giving free samples, who now have regular customers any different? Drug dealers need addicts to stay in business. The government needs the poor and downtrodden to keep wanting and needing handouts. The more the better because that, as you stated, would almost assure a vote for their position to extend such benefits to the downtrodden vs. another who would want to remove it. Of course you'd vote for the person advocating extending food stamps! If I were on food stamps or welfare and I didn't have the skills or opportunity to better myself and I felt stuck here with no way out, welfare and food stamps are my lifeline... I'd never vote to get rid of them were I in their shoes. I think the Democratic leadership knows that, counts on it, and perpetuates that situation to assure their power base in politics. They've corrupted good intentions for their own use. You may not see it now, hopefully you'll see it after experiencing more of it.

That's one of the reasons I could never be a Democrat. I want to teach people to fish, not be dependent on what I give them.
 
Barbbtx said:
If the man says his rally is about bringing people together, non political, no signs, bring your kids, and to help a charity,
Why would anyone say things "Oh that hateful Glenn Beck is holding a tea party rally. They'll be bashing Obama and they want to do away with the Civil Rights act. It's going to be fill with hate. Don't tell ME it won't be political. he's just in it for the money.."

I have more faith that Glenn knows more about what his rally is for , than hate filled liberals know what will happen on that day.
Click to expand...

Past behavior is a legitimate indicator of future behavior. Glenn Beck has been shown to not always be honest, fair, and especially nonpolitical. I will be happy to be proven wrong, but until I am, I will remain skeptical.
 
Ockham said:
Now I've seen Democrats do the same things basically for the last 25 years of my adult life. When you see that happening, you here the rhetoric but don't see the actions. You see costs increasing, you see social programs increasing, you see more programs created but no reforms. And then you broaden he scope out to include multiple programs (and this is only at the Federal Level, there are yet more at the State and Local level), you may start to see what I'm talking about. I don't doubt that good intentions were used - however over time those intentions are corrupted. Were truly, the political spin of Democrats to be helping people - they'd do it. They're not and they haven't. One could argue that giving food, giving money, giving more money and homes, and assistance are all helping --- over time it's not helping, it's hurting. And yes, I add a devious intent to that as well. What was a good intention has turned into a dependence, one that many rely on, live on and die on. That's not help, that's a form of enslavement.

How different then are drug dealers giving free samples, who now have regular customers any different? Drug dealers need addicts to stay in business. The government needs the poor and downtrodden to keep wanting and needing handouts. The more the better because that, as you stated, would almost assure a vote for their position to extend such benefits to the downtrodden vs. another who would want to remove it. Of course you'd vote for the person advocating extending food stamps! If I were on food stamps or welfare and I didn't have the skills or opportunity to better myself and I felt stuck here with no way out, welfare and food stamps are my lifeline... I'd never vote to get rid of them were I in their shoes. I think the Democratic leadership knows that, counts on it, and perpetuates that situation to assure their power base in politics. They've corrupted good intentions for their own use. You may not see it now, hopefully you'll see it after experiencing more of it.

That's one of the reasons I could never be a Democrat. I want to teach people to fish, not be dependent on what I give them.
Click to expand...

First off, I still think it's a big leap to think that because democrats support all these welfare programs just to get votes, and keep people downtrodden is just wrong. You assume that the majority of people in these programs never get off of them, and stay on them for the rest of their lives. Which, they don't, these programs do help people, they do get off of these programs, and have a successful life, because these programs helped them out. I know these programs have helped my family. Are these programs perfect? No. Do we need to reform them? Yes. But to say they don't help people out is quite a stretch. Also you're assuming that they are not reforming these programs because of this evil plot to get votes, and stay in power. Which, like I said I think it's a stretch. It's either they think that these programs are effective, there is not enough voter demand to reform these programs, or there just incompetent in getting things done. And to even remotely prove this assertion, you would have to prove that the majority of people on these social programs vote democrat. Also you would have to prove that these votes are a big enough advantage to keep this 30 year policy of evil dependence going. At the most it's good intentions without having effective policy, but it's nothing evil.
 
Ockham said:
We've been talking about this one program (and a little about a 2nd) welfare and Food Stamps. Now let's broaden the scope a bit and look at the rest of the social programs.

Supplemental Security Income
Temporary Assistance for the Needy Families
Food Stamp Program
WIC
National Lunch Program
School Breakfast Program
Housing Assistance
General Assistance
Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Social Welfare


Now I've seen Democrats do the same things basically for the last 25 years of my adult life. When you see that happening, you here the rhetoric but don't see the actions. You see costs increasing, you see social programs increasing, you see more programs created but no reforms. And then you broaden he scope out to include multiple programs (and this is only at the Federal Level, there are yet more at the State and Local level), you may start to see what I'm talking about. I don't doubt that good intentions were used - however over time those intentions are corrupted. Were truly, the political spin of Democrats to be helping people - they'd do it. They're not and they haven't. One could argue that giving food, giving money, giving more money and homes, and assistance are all helping --- over time it's not helping, it's hurting. And yes, I add a devious intent to that as well. What was a good intention has turned into a dependence, one that many rely on, live on and die on. That's not help, that's a form of enslavement.

How different then are drug dealers giving free samples, who now have regular customers any different? Drug dealers need addicts to stay in business. The government needs the poor and downtrodden to keep wanting and needing handouts. The more the better because that, as you stated, would almost assure a vote for their position to extend such benefits to the downtrodden vs. another who would want to remove it. Of course you'd vote for the person advocating extending food stamps! If I were on food stamps or welfare and I didn't have the skills or opportunity to better myself and I felt stuck here with no way out, welfare and food stamps are my lifeline... I'd never vote to get rid of them were I in their shoes. I think the Democratic leadership knows that, counts on it, and perpetuates that situation to assure their power base in politics. They've corrupted good intentions for their own use. You may not see it now, hopefully you'll see it after experiencing more of it.

That's one of the reasons I could never be a Democrat. I want to teach people to fish, not be dependent on what I give them.
Click to expand...

You disappointment me Ockham. I thought you were better than this.
 
Last edited:
Why do you libs work so hard to tear Glen Beck down? I watch his show as often as possible and all I see is a patriot with true love of country in his heart telling the truth to the American people. He fights for YOUR rights, tries to save YOUR country and all he gets is snide coments from you poor ignorant saps for everything that he says. Find ONE thing that he has said about our economy, our borders, our national security or ourconstitution that is untrue. I'm waiting...
 
AmericanSon316 said:
Why do you libs work so hard to tear Glen Beck down? I watch his show as often as possible and all I see is a patriot with true love of country in his heart telling the truth to the American people. He fights for YOUR rights, tries to save YOUR country and all he gets is snide coments from you poor ignorant saps for everything that he says. Find ONE thing that he has said about our economy, our borders, our national security or ourconstitution that is untrue. I'm waiting...
Click to expand...

Glenn Beck is an idiot rodeo clown who pour red kool-aide in the ear of those who lack the education and/or critical thinking abilities to know better... What he says is paranoid crap, not worth your time.
 
hazlnut said:
Glenn Beck is an idiot rodeo clown who pour red kool-aide in the ear of those who lack the education and/or critical thinking abilities to know better... What he says is paranoid crap, not worth your time.
Click to expand...

Still waiting
 
megaprogman said:
You disappointment me Ockham. I thought you were better than this.
Click to expand...

What is disappointing? Seeing reality for what it is? In this particular aspect I do not agree. I've seen enough to know better and once my eyes are opened I can't just close them again and convince myself it doesn't exist. I don't attribute this devious behavior to you or individual democrats. I attribute it to an overall policy that, whether intentional or unintention - is doing just what I say it is. There are very smart people in the Democratic leadership who know better. The bottom line if you write off anything else that I've said so far is: If Democrats wanted to lift people up out of poverty, out of depression and better themselves - they could have and would have done it. They have not.

That reality in and of itself is enough and as I said - I've seen enough to know better. To quote Pete Stark - Government can do most anything. So when are we going to ask ourselves, "Why aren't they?" And if they aren't doing something that will obviously help more people than the Health Care reform bill that just passed, that would help more than any Medicare or Medicaid subsidy in that it would help people live better lives... why aren't they doing it? Sorry dude... time to open your eyes too.
 
Your Star said:
First off, I still think it's a big leap to think that because democrats support all these welfare programs just to get votes, and keep people downtrodden is just wrong. You assume that the majority of people in these programs never get off of them, and stay on them for the rest of their lives. Which, they don't, these programs do help people, they do get off of these programs, and have a successful life, because these programs helped them out. I know these programs have helped my family. Are these programs perfect? No. Do we need to reform them? Yes. But to say they don't help people out is quite a stretch. Also you're assuming that they are not reforming these programs because of this evil plot to get votes, and stay in power. Which, like I said I think it's a stretch. It's either they think that these programs are effective, there is not enough voter demand to reform these programs, or there just incompetent in getting things done. And to even remotely prove this assertion, you would have to prove that the majority of people on these social programs vote democrat. Also you would have to prove that these votes are a big enough advantage to keep this 30 year policy of evil dependence going. At the most it's good intentions without having effective policy, but it's nothing evil.
Click to expand...

Fair enough - we won't agree on this but good discussion anyway's. :wink:
 
jallman said:
Umm, yeah. Of the candidates she stumped for, I think the last count was 16-10, Sarah's favor. You do know that the senate run off in Alaska has all but been won by Sarah's endorsed candidate, too?

So yeah, you can try to paint Palin as a liability, but numbers don't lie, chick.
Click to expand...

20-10 last I looked.... They are calling the "King Maker" now.
 
Ockham said:
What is disappointing? Seeing reality for what it is?
Click to expand...

My disappointment lies in the fact that your persist in your claims based only on speculation and no evidence. Usually you are more logical, even when we disagree, you often make good points or at least points that make sense.

Ockham said:
In this particular aspect I do not agree. I've seen enough to know better and once my eyes are opened I can't just close them again and convince myself it doesn't exist. I don't attribute this devious behavior to you or individual democrats. I attribute it to an overall policy that, whether intentional or unintention - is doing just what I say it is. There are very smart people in the Democratic leadership who know better. The bottom line if you write off anything else that I've said so far is: If Democrats wanted to lift people up out of poverty, out of depression and better themselves - they could have and would have done it. They have not.
Click to expand...

This is the speculation I was referring to.

Ockham said:
That reality in and of itself is enough and as I said - I've seen enough to know better. To quote Pete Stark - Government can do most anything. So when are we going to ask ourselves, "Why aren't they?" And if they aren't doing something that will obviously help more people than the Health Care reform bill that just passed, that would help more than any Medicare or Medicaid subsidy in that it would help people live better lives... why aren't they doing it? Sorry dude... time to open your eyes too.
Click to expand...

I believe you are confusing the fact that you would approach the problem differently and your conclusions about the effects of the legislation with malice. Not all people come to the same conclusions about things and reasonable people often disagree, yet are still reasonable.
 
megaprogman said:
Past behavior is a legitimate indicator of future behavior. Glenn Beck has been shown to not always be honest, fair, and especially nonpolitical. I will be happy to be proven wrong, but until I am, I will remain skeptical.
Click to expand...
That past behavior would be.....?
Something other than Media Matters or from anyone who got such information from Media Matters.
Beck is political, but if he says this is a non political rally, why think it would be political?
If it is going to be political, why wouldn't he just say so? Would it be a crime to have a political rally? I think they happen quite often.
 
j-mac said:
Boy, oh boy....Can you feel the contempt in Amy Gardner's words here from the Washington 'Com'Post....Let me ask, when demo's use activism as a blunt tool for their message, are they expected to pull it off in a non political way? Are they expected to not offend anyone? I would say hell no, in fact their purpose is often to offend. But now at least in Ms. Gardner's mind it has to be non offensive....


j-mac
Click to expand...

Beck does this **** for the money, he just happened to hop on the bandwagon to increase his visibility and marketing strength.

I wish people would stop circling around hyperbolic, disingenuous douches.
 
Barbbtx said:
That past behavior would be.....?
Something other than Media Matters or from anyone who got such information from Media Matters.
Click to expand...

Such as the deliberate fake crying that he often does. Or perhaps his constant hyperbole, such as the doom room.

Barbbtx said:
Beck is political, but if he says this is a non political rally, why think it would be political?
Click to expand...

He also said the 9/12 project was not political, if I recall. It pretty obviously was.

Barbbtx said:
If it is going to be political, why wouldn't he just say so? Would it be a crime to have a political rally? I think they happen quite often.
Click to expand...

Wtf are you talking about a crime?
 
hazlnut said:
Glenn Beck is an idiot rodeo clown who pour red kool-aide in the ear of those who lack the education and/or critical thinking abilities to know better... What he says is paranoid crap, not worth your time.
Click to expand...

I agree on your assessment of Beck. But Beck is not the Tea Party. He is an idiot, whose agenda is not what he thinks is best for America, but what he thinks is best for his own shameless self promotion.

Here is the way I see it this year - It is all going to be determined by the Independents. The Tea Party, Coffee Party, and all the other parties, cater to the ideologues on either side. However, the Indenpendents have no political axe to grind. They are going to call it as they see it, and vote accordingly. In 2008, they threw the Bushneviks out of power. Since then, Obama has not kept his promises, so this year, they are going to be throwing Democrats out of power. Whichever side you are on, you are going to have to convince the Independents or you are toast. Obama has not convinced the Independents, and so, even if some of the Tea Partiers are a bit extreme, the Independents will vote for them anyways, because Democrats simply have not delivered.

In the end, I like it. A "throw out the bums and keep throwing them out" mindset is the only thing that will eventually restore honesty to government. It does not matter what Republicans and Democrats do. It will be the Independents that determine what this fall's final outcome will be. Democrats are losing them, not because the Tea Party is converting them, but because the Democrats are simply not doing their job. THEY are the ones in power, and THEIR heads are going to be the ones that roll this time.
 
hazlnut said:
Glenn Beck is an idiot rodeo clown who pour red kool-aide in the ear of those who lack the education and/or critical thinking abilities to know better... What he says is paranoid crap, not worth your time.
Click to expand...
What's not true about the "paranoid crap". Please be specific.
 
megaprogman said:
Such as the deliberate fake crying that he often does. Or perhaps his constant hyperbole, such as the doom room.



He also said the 9/12 project was not political, if I recall. It pretty obviously was.



Wtf are you talking about a crime?
Click to expand...
Fake crying.....You don't think it's possible for a grown man to cry real tears? I don't think they are fake.
Doom room...enlighten me please
9/12 project, I don't recall him saying it wasn't or never would be political. I believe he started it but it is now in the hands of the American people. I'm not a member. You may be right...or not.
 
megaprogman said:
My disappointment lies in the fact that your persist in your claims based only on speculation and no evidence. Usually you are more logical, even when we disagree, you often make good points or at least points that make sense.
Click to expand...
I base it not on speculation but 25 years of observation. You'll remember parts of science is based on observation as well.

megaprogman said:
I believe you are confusing the fact that you would approach the problem differently and your conclusions about the effects of the legislation with malice. Not all people come to the same conclusions about things and reasonable people often disagree, yet are still reasonable.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying my observations are true for all people - I'm actually saying this is either intentional or un-intentional. If intentional - then it's as bad as I think it is. If un-intentional, it's simply being ignored due to the political benefits. I used to doubt, to think it couldn't be possible... that's now passed. If Democrats wanted it to change, they'd change it. Why haven't they changed it Mega? Government created the problem and government has to fix it - and it's not being fixed. If the DNC leadership over the past 30 years has been what they say they are - we wouldn't be having this conversation.
 
Barbbtx said:
Fake crying.....You don't think it's possible for a grown man to cry real tears? I don't think they are fake.
Doom room...enlighten me please
9/12 project, I don't recall him saying it wasn't or never would be political. I believe he started it but it is now in the hands of the American people. I'm not a member. You may be right...or not.
Click to expand...

Fake crying ... is that worse than the fake outrage of an Olbermann? Seems the same to me... How about the fake shock value of a Rep. Grayson ... :shrug:
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Beck does this **** for the money, he just happened to hop on the bandwagon to increase his visibility and marketing strength.

I wish people would stop circling around hyperbolic, disingenuous douches.
Click to expand...

You scared of something? What if he is (he's not) doing it for the money. Anything wrong with being successful? Why do you desire to stop an American from making a good living? Is he picking your pocket somehow?
What's it your concern if people want to circle a douche?
Do you complain when they circle Jon Stewart or Chris Mathews? They are douches in my opinion but anyone is welcome to circle them. I wouldn't waste a wish on getting them to stop.
 
Ockham said:
I base it not on speculation but 25 years of observation. You'll remember parts of science is based on observation as well.
Click to expand...

True.

Ockham said:
I'm not saying my observations are true for all people - I'm actually saying this is either intentional or un-intentional. If intentional - then it's as bad as I think it is. If un-intentional, it's simply being ignored due to the political benefits. I used to doubt, to think it couldn't be possible... that's now passed. If Democrats wanted it to change, they'd change it. Why haven't they changed it Mega? Government created the problem and government has to fix it - and it's not being fixed. If the DNC leadership over the past 30 years has been what they say they are - we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Click to expand...

It is possible that this may be unintentional, as Star brought up, people are going to vote in their interest. However, I have trouble with the idea that the system was designed for power over an attempt to help people. Also, I have trouble with the idea that government created the problem of poor people, they have been around for thousands of years. Personally, my suspician is that the attempt to help the poor was genuine, but it does not get to the root of the problem, which is often the people themselves. If you never change that, than you are never going to truly lift people out of poverty. This is why I think that people on welfare should have certain requirements they must meet, such as getting an education, both professionally and how to manage their personal lives. I also think a job should be assigned to them if they cannot find one. My ideas on this have been attacked from both the right and the left for various reasons. Because of this attack, it reinforces my belief that many want to take care of the poor rather than give them the tools to take care of themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom