Guessing Game...

[Guest]

OK, here's a guessing game...

Who said: "I could give a flying crap about the political process. Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is it's own coinage. We're an entertainment company. If you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot".



ANSWER: Glenn Beck, April 8th, Forbes Magazine


Birds of a feather peeps, birds of a feather. :loco:

[Guest]

OK, here's a guessing game...

Who said: "I could give a flying crap about the political process. Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is it's own coinage. We're an entertainment company. If you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot".



ANSWER: Glenn Beck, April 8th, Forbes Magazine


Birds of a feather peeps, birds of a feather. :loco:

Glenn Beck responds:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,591268,00.html

[Guest]

OK, here's a guessing game...

Who said: "I could give a flying crap about the political process. Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is it's own coinage. We're an entertainment company. If you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot".



ANSWER: Glenn Beck, April 8th, Forbes Magazine


Birds of a feather peeps, birds of a feather. :loco:

Taken out of context. There should have been a quotation mark after process. The next two sentences was the author of the magazine article. The quote then starts again with "We're an entertainment...."

You can get in trouble with these miss-quotes.

With a deadpan, Beck insists that he is not political: "I could give a flying crap about the political process." Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is its own coinage. "We're an entertainment company," Beck says. He has managed to monetize virtually everything that comes out of his mouth. He gets $13 million a year from print (books plus the ten-issue-a-year magazine Fusion). Radio brings in $10 million. Digital (including a newsletter, the ad-supported Glennbeck.com and merchandise) pulls in $4 million. Speaking and events are good for $3 million and television for $2 million. Over several days in mid-March Beck allowed a reporter to follow him through his multimedia incarnations, with one exception, his 5 p.m. daily show on Fox News, which attracts just under 3 million viewers. (FORBES has a relationship with that channel via Forbes on Fox.)

[Guest]

Taken out of context. There should have been a quotation mark after process. The next two sentences was the author of the magazine article. The quote then starts again with "We're an entertainment...."

You can get in trouble with these miss-quotes.

Liberals do this all the time. When the truth bothers them they twist it til it hurts someone and then they are happy.


Most Liberals avoid the issues by using mean and lying comments about the messengers of facts, truths. and issues.

[Guest]

OK, here's a guessing game...

Who said: "I could give a flying crap about the political process. Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is it's own coinage. We're an entertainment company. If you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot".



ANSWER: Glenn Beck, April 8th, Forbes Magazine


Birds of a feather peeps, birds of a feather. :loco:


Please cite a link to validate this post ?

[Guest]

OK, here's a guessing game...

Who said: "I could give a flying crap about the political process. Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is it's own coinage. We're an entertainment company. If you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot".



ANSWER: Glenn Beck, April 8th, Forbes Magazine


Birds of a feather peeps, birds of a feather. :loco:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0426/entertainment-fox-news-simon-schuster-glenn-beck-inc.html

I don't think that entire statement was a quote and there is a context.
JJ

[Guest]

Having forced myself to watch Mr. Beck from time to time, I will say this in his defense. I very often hear him challenge his readers/viewers/listeners to go look something up for themselves. I believe one of the exact phrases I've heard was "don't take my word for it, go look it up!".

Now, one can argue about the motivations behind it but at least at face value he's right out there telling people to do their own research.

[Guest]

Having forced myself to watch Mr. Beck from time to time, I will say this in his defense. I very often hear him challenge his readers/viewers/listeners to go look something up for themselves. I believe one of the exact phrases I've heard was "don't take my word for it, go look it up!".

Now, one can argue about the motivations behind it but at least at face value he's right out there telling people to do their own research.

:agree::agree:

Yoda

[Guest]

I do believe I hear a trolling motor.

btk

[Guest]

I do believe I hear a trolling motor.

btk

I think she was just mistaken.
Right Chelsea?

[Guest]

I do believe I hear a trolling motor.

btk

Bingo. Drive by moonbat.

[Guest]

Bingo. Drive by moonbat.

Excuse me? Moonbat? Really? hahahahah! I've been a member of this forum since 2007. I'd hardly call that a "drive-by".

As for the quote, when I'm wrong, I'm wrong. (Or partially.) It was sent to me from a friend and didn't actually look it up myself. However, I stand by my opinion of Beck. I do think he's an idiot. Now, I know many of you don't like Jon Stewart because he get's to the meat of things, but I watched Beck on his show when Beck literally admitted, he was a commentator, not a journalist and didn't have to have facts to back up his statements. The scary part to me is that many people don't see through him and take his ramblings as fact. It's sad really. :ohdear:

Moonbat signing out..... for now..... :)

[Guest]

Quote:
Originally Posted by billethkid
I do believe I hear a trolling motor.

btk

Bingo. Drive by moonbat. (From Villa2)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bille, you might want to check the definition of a troll. Chels, with 3,747 posts to her credit, doesn't qualify for troll status! She certainly doesn't deserve to be called "Moonbat" by Villa2.

[Guest]

Chelsea is without a doubt NOT a drive by or troll.

However, using the definition supplied by Wikipedia...."Moonbat is a term used in United States politics as a political epithet referring to social liberals or leftists." then I am sorry...she is a moonbat :) What I dont like about that definition is the word EPITHET...but a social liberal and a leftist...oh yeah !!

[Guest]

Chelsea is without a doubt NOT a drive by or troll.

However, using the definition supplied by Wikipedia...."Moonbat is a term used in United States politics as a political epithet referring to social liberals or leftists." then I am sorry...she is a moonbat :) What I dont like about that definition is the word EPITHET...but a social liberal and a leftist...oh yeah !!

Epithet .. An abusive or contemptuous word or phrase. IMHO, name calling is just downright hurtful and unproductive.

[Guest]

Knowing she has been here longer than most, my comment was purely sarcasm on my part for my interpretation (with a humorous intent) of the post....more so actually for the replies.


troll
1    /troʊl/ Show Spelled[trohl] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)

3.
to fish for or in with a moving line, working the line up or down with a rod, as in fishing for pike, or trailing the line behind a slow-moving boat.

btk

[Guest]

I happened to watch an old episode of West Wing yesterday and it could of been written today. Basically it covered a debate between Jimmy Smits (Dem) and Alan Alda (Repub) during a Presidential campaign. It was spot on.

Jimmy Smits, the lefty or moobat, as you would call him says something like "The conservatives have turned the word "liberal" into a bad word and thrown it to the ground. But, if wanting jobs, fair wages, health care, higher education, peace, true equality and a better life for ALL people is liberal, I will pick that label up and wear it with honor and dignity."

That was paraphrased, but I think you get my drift... :)

[Guest]

Epithet .. An abusive or contemptuous word or phrase. IMHO, name calling is just downright hurtful and unproductive.

Ok. Maybe drive-by was wrong but I have checked the archives and found that Chelsea was not immune from throwing epithets around.;)

(which is to be expected in a political forum)

[Guest]

That is the problem with moonbats. They never get the whole story because they only get their info 3rd and 4th hand. Even Glenn Beck tells his audience to verify what he says on their own. They do that.

Yoda

[Guest]

I happened to watch an old episode of West Wing yesterday and it could of been written today. Basically it covered a debate between Jimmy Smits (Dem) and Alan Alda (Repub) during a Presidential campaign. It was spot on.

Jimmy Smits, the lefty or moobat, as you would call him says something like "The conservatives have turned the word "liberal" into a bad word and thrown it to the ground. But, if wanting jobs, fair wages, health care, higher education, peace, true equality and a better life for ALL people is liberal, I will pick that label up and wear it with honor and dignity."

That was paraphrased, but I think you get my drift... :)


Got it,but as always I ask the question....where do you get the...well, let me rephrase...how can you say what you say...ie., your implication is that someone who is not liberal is AGAINST "jobs, fair wages, health care, higher education, peace, true equality and a better life for ALL people"...and that is where we separate because I KNOW what you say or imply is simply not true..and in fact is simply a bunch of political verbage.

If you honestly think that only liberals are for those things, you have truely gone over the edge much much too far !!

[Guest]

Got it,but as always I ask the question....where do you get the...well, let me rephrase...how can you say what you say...ie., your implication is that someone who is not liberal is AGAINST "jobs, fair wages, health care, higher education, peace, true equality and a better life for ALL people"...and that is where we separate because I KNOW what you say or imply is simply not true..and in fact is simply a bunch of political verbage.

If you honestly think that only liberals are for those things, you have truely gone over the edge much much too far !!

Thanks, you saved me some typing.

[Guest]

Epithet .. An abusive or contemptuous word or phrase. IMHO, name calling is just downright hurtful and unproductive.

I could not agree more with you, and that is why I said what I said in my post about the word EPTITHET !

Now, if you review posts made during the campaign, you will find that Chels had no problem with judgement, condemnation or lets say...the use of names to describe folks, thus while I agree with you, I am not sure she does !

[Guest]

Got it,but as always I ask the question....where do you get the...well, let me rephrase...how can you say what you say...ie., your implication is that someone who is not liberal is AGAINST "jobs, fair wages, health care, higher education, peace, true equality and a better life for ALL people"...and that is where we separate because I KNOW what you say or imply is simply not true..and in fact is simply a bunch of political verbage.

If you honestly think that only liberals are for those things, you have truely gone over the edge much much too far !!

I think you have that backwards Bucco. The word "liberal" was turned into a bad thing, because conservatives believe or believed that only "THEY" are for all of those things and only "THEY" are patriot. (Remember when the conservatives were in a tizzy over Obama not wearing a flag pin???) Conservatives love to talk about what shouldn't be done as a solution to a problem, as opposed to what should be done as a solution.

I watched David Gregory on Meet the Press ask John Boehner 4 times, 4 times how the Republicans would pay for tax cuts. No answer. It was interesting that in this particular episode of West Wing, written years ago, the same question came up in the debate. Again, no answer from the Republican candidate. Some things never change. :read:

[Guest]

No problem, we have "Hope and Change." Can you believe that voters fell for that revival-tent drivel?:ohdear:

[Guest]

I think you have that backwards Bucco. The word "liberal" was turned into a bad thing, because conservatives believe or believed that only "THEY" are for all of those things and only "THEY" are patriot. (Remember when the conservatives were in a tizzy over Obama not wearing a flag pin???) Conservatives love to talk about what shouldn't be done as a solution to a problem, as opposed to what should be done as a solution.

I watched David Gregory on Meet the Press ask John Boehner 4 times, 4 times how the Republicans would pay for tax cuts. No answer. It was interesting that in this particular episode of West Wing, written years ago, the same question came up in the debate. Again, no answer from the Republican candidate. Some things never change. :read:

Chelsea, The question of how you pay for tax cuts assumes an unchanging economy. The same factories will produce the same good at the same price. There will be no increase or decrease in economic activity. I think we can all agree that the idea of an unchanging economy makes no sense. To understand the impact of tax cuts, you have to realize that we have a dynamic and changing economy.

During our lifetime we have seen three major Federal tax cuts. The first and most radical was done during the JFK administration. It did result in economic and tax collection growth. That income growth was lost when LBJ pursued a policy of 'guns and butter'. We could fund the Vietnam war AND the Great Society programs without any corresponding sacrifice on the part of the American people - we needed to stop entitlement growth and did not.

The second tax cut came during the Reagan administration. It brought us out of the highest interest rates and highest unemployment since the great depression. Revenues skyrocketed and the nation was prosperous until late in the Clinton administration. Unfortunate, we once again made the mistake of thinking we could fight a war/wars while increasing entitlements.

The third taz cut under the Bush administration. At the time, the economy was contracting and the situation was seriously exacerbated by the events of 9/11. Despite this, Federal government income again grew. Once again the opportunity to put our country on a sound fiscal footing was thrown away by spending on a war and concurrently increasing entitlements. We spent like drunken sailors and grew the Federal Government at a time we needed to shrink it.

This has been a bipartisan exercise in stupidity. Both parties competed in seeing how much they could promise the voters so they could come to power in the next election. They did this knowing that the entitlements promised (including bloated government pensions) could never be met.

Right now we are looking at a significant tax increase - the end of the Bush tax cuts. The easily foreseen result of this action will be the opposite of the results of the previous tax cuts - our Federal Government income will fall and our deficits will continue to explode.

Putting our economy right will require both maintaining the Bush tax cuts and serious reduction in government expenditures at all levels. I hope we can find leaders with the courage to do what needs to be done.

[Guest]

No problem, we have "Hope and Change." Can you believe that voters fell for that revival-tent drivel?:ohdear:

It was many years ago, but I do believe the phrase "Hope & Change" was the campaign slogan for one of my former elementary students running for class president!!!

Cute for a 6th grader.....but a Harvard graduate???