Notice how he moves on with the false comparisons:
Beck said:
4. Uh, wrong. Karl Marx wouldn't be better than Bush. Neither would Vladimir Lenin.
Boo Radley said:
Obama had some experience. I wouldn't discount comminty organizing too much. It gives him grassroots experience and something outside Washingtion mainstream, someting twea party types give lip service to but seldom really value. And while many people may have been more experienced, they either didn't run, or fell apart due to partisan concerns like McCain did.
Community organizing? Are you serious? More like Community agitating if you ask me. So are you now willing to admit that sitting in Rev Wright's 'church' did have an impact on Obama? Grassroots, true grassroots movements are genuine, something liberal movements like ACORN and SEIU backed astro turf know little about.
And once again you leave out the substance of the paragraph and will not address it. It says.
Beck said:
Let's not forget his quote from the front page of the Wall Street Journal a few months ago: "Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers," he said, and a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably. Equitable distribution of wealth talk should frighten to the core all American citizens who love life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The one big bill to Barack Obama's credit right now is another of his proposals to redistribute wealth. It's called the World Poverty Act. If passed into law, it would take $845 billion from U.S. taxpayers, and redistribute that money to other nations through the UN.
Boo Radley said:
But I hope you see the point about how dishonest Beck wa in this. Somehow I fear you won't. But I'll read and address your response.
Sure, Beck can and often does use hyperbolic rhetoric to make his points, but it seems that is all you, and other liberals focus on, almost like thin skinned whiners. Look, I watch Stewart every night, some of the things he focuses on are quite funny, and some, those times when you can tell he is trying to be an actual interviewer in a serious tone, are absolutely absurd the stances he takes. Same with Mahr. But if you really think you have addressed anything of substance with your dismissive response, you haven't. You have only shown that I was right, and outside pure dismissal, you have no argument.
j-mac