Glenn Beck Suspended Over Trump Comments

[B-Man]

 

The differences between the Republican and Democratic parties are purely theater at this stage and are only visible during campaign cycles and rhetoric. How each party governs once in office is largely the same (i.e. not in the best interest of the people) because both parties are owned by the same big moneyed interests who are actually dictating policy -- and those interests have no party affiliation or loyalty despite the hype.

 

Keep everyone fighting with one another, keep everyone distracted with the banal and the frivolous, do that loudly enough and no one notices the emperor has no clothes until it's too late.

 

Presidential Candidate Lies About Everything

by Jim Treacher

 

Today, in an unprecedented turn of events, the presumptive nominee of a major political party made several assertions of fact that were obviously untrue to all but the most ignorant and/or partisan of observers.

 

“No, I never said what everybody is claiming I said,” the candidate began.

 

“I said this instead,” the candidate continued, and went on to describe previous statements that the candidate had not, in fact, ever made. Even a cursory Google search resulted in audiovisual evidence of the candidate’s own words from previous [months/weeks/days/hours/minutes/seconds], directly contradicting the candidate’s latest claims.

 

When the existence of this conclusive evidence was pointed out, the candidate denied it as well.

 

“That’s not true,” the candidate lied.

 

“And another thing,” the candidate went on, changing the subject to misstate the truth about another point of controversy that had dogged the campaign. In the same fashion as the candidate’s previous assertions, this ludicrous utterance had no basis in fact whatsoever, barring the scientific discovery of alternate universes. “I have never said otherwise,” claimed the candidate, who had publicly and repeatedly said otherwise.

 

“In conclusion,” blurted the candidate, before making several other outrageous declarations utterly devoid of any logic, reason, or sense of shame.

 

Later that day, the candidate’s opponent did precisely the same thing.

 

This was followed by several days of heated debate online, at various news outlets, and in private conversations across the country, during which the supporters of each candidate pretended to believe brazen untruths and maligned the motives, ancestry, and sexual habits of anyone who refused to deny reality itself.

 

This cycle was repeated, ad infinitum, until one day a massive meteor struck the Earth and mercifully ended all life on the planet. The venue for the depressingly pointless debate was then moved to the fiery wastes of Hell, where it continued for all eternity.

 

And it was good.

 

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/01/presidential-candidate-lies-about-everything/#ixzz4ALd6s6KO

 

 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Do you have proof of this? Please explain how the coal and oil & gas industries have dictated policies over the last 7 years. Please explain how the financial industry dictated their fate. Then you can let me know if the insurance industry is having buyers' remorse after folding on ACA. Maybe you can shed the light about cable companies and telcos embrace of net neutrality.

 

It's not a secret that lobbyists use leverage to gain a favorable position for their industries. But that's a far cry from saying they control the outcome no matter who sits in the big chair.

 

How deep down the rabbit hole do you really want to go with this conversation? Based on what I know of your politics, I'm assuming you aren't willing to entertain much of this discussion which, due to the nature of the phenomenon we're really talking about, lives in the shadows. That's not intended to be a put down at all, just an observation.

 

The country is broken. We can quibble over the identities and motives of those who broke it, but the proof of its malfunctioning has been clearer than ever before during this election cycle; that is if you're willing to look at the evidence objectively. We are five months away from a third consecutive authoritarian administration, one that will further consolidate federal power in the executive at the expense of individual liberty.

 

History has shown this path only leads to one conclusion. And it ain't pretty.

[ALF]

Not at all. Let's be clear. I don't like Trump. Stephen Hawking is a loser.

 

I don't see how a genius, highly respected theoretical physicist could be a loser ?

 

I don't like Trump or Clinton . I would have voted for Kasich or Bush before either of them.

 

Republican voters blew a golden opportunity to have the White House , Congress and Supreme Court.

[DC Tom]

 

How deep down the rabbit hole do you really want to go with this conversation? Based on what I know of your politics, I'm assuming you aren't willing to entertain much of this discussion which, due to the nature of the phenomenon we're really talking about, lives in the shadows. That's not intended to be a put down at all, just an observation.

 

The country is broken. We can quibble over the identities and motives of those who broke it, but the proof of its malfunctioning has been clearer than ever before during this election cycle; that is if you're willing to look at the evidence objectively. We are five months away from a third consecutive authoritarian administration, one that will further consolidate federal power in the executive at the expense of individual liberty.

 

History has shown this path only leads to one conclusion. And it ain't pretty.

 

This is why Trump is the best candidate.

 

Clinton will perpetuate the whole "authoritarianism is acceptable as long as my person is in power" myth. Trump is far more likely to conclusively illustrate that the problem is authoritarianism in general, and not the (*^*&%^$^#wielding it.

[GG]

 

How deep down the rabbit hole do you really want to go with this conversation? Based on what I know of your politics, I'm assuming you aren't willing to entertain much of this discussion which, due to the nature of the phenomenon we're really talking about, lives in the shadows. That's not intended to be a put down at all, just an observation.

 

The country is broken. We can quibble over the identities and motives of those who broke it, but the proof of its malfunctioning has been clearer than ever before during this election cycle; that is if you're willing to look at the evidence objectively. We are five months away from a third consecutive authoritarian administration, one that will further consolidate federal power in the executive at the expense of individual liberty.

 

History has shown this path only leads to one conclusion. And it ain't pretty.

 

I'll go down as far as you want as long as you're willing to provide logically rational responses.

 

But so far, I'm getting the view that the US is dissolving into a massive authoritarian state that's been predetermined by the corporate illuminati from Bohemian Grove.

[Nanker]

Glenn Beck should switch to decaf.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

This is why Trump is the best candidate.

 

Clinton will perpetuate the whole "authoritarianism is acceptable as long as my person is in power" myth. Trump is far more likely to conclusively illustrate that the problem is authoritarianism in general, and not the (*^*&%^$^#wielding it.

 

True.

 

 

I'll go down as far as you want as long as you're willing to provide logically rational responses.

 

But so far, I'm getting the view that the US is dissolving into a massive authoritarian state that's been predetermined by the corporate illuminati from Bohemian Grove.

 

I'm choosing not to use specific trigger words like the bolded when discussing this topic for two reasons: 1) Most importantly: I'm not convinced it's predetermined or if it's just the unintended consequences of unchecked power grabs and 2) the mere mention of the term "illuminati" makes it easy for 90% of the audience (for a lack of a better term) to tune out anything that's said after it.

 

What we're really talking about is the Deep State, however you wish to define it.

 

Some people believe, and I'm not necessarily one of them, that this Deep State has been playing chess for 70 years, pitting Communism against Capitalism while fomenting corporate fascism as the third alternative to these two diametrically opposed philosophies. There's a treasure trove of evidence that can be found that makes this case quite compellingly, though it quite often veers off into disinformation and blatant sensationalism in an effort to sell a book/movie/conference so it requires a great deal of discernment to determine the wheat from the chafe.

 

Others believe the Deep State came about through the compartmentalization of the MiC in post war America. Outsourcing advanced research projects, some of... let's just say exotic origin , to private corporations who are immune from the transparency our democratic republic is supposed to exude. This compartmentalization, fueled initially by the Faustian deal made with the Nazis at the end of WWII in an effort to thwart the Soviets, reshuffled the true power players from governmental institutions to private corporations whose reach would become multi-national with the unchecked power of the US economy behind them in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

 

To what end is this Deep State working towards? That requires a great deal of speculation -- which is why I cannot say with any conviction that it's premeditated. But that doesn't mean you can't see the results of this phenomenon in action: we currently are living in a state of near constant surveillance -- in a country which was formed upon the notion of personal freedom and liberty and likes to call itself the "free world" -- where corporations view themselves as above the law (see the TTIP/TTP for proof of this, as well as every campaign finance law) and use their media arms to sell their products rather than inform the electorate while they legally bribe elected officials to do their bidding.

 

It's entirely antithetical to how this country operated in the last century (and the two before that). Is it just an overreaction to the war on terror? Possibly, but that's highly suspect. Though, that's a useful way to sell the "reality" we're confronted with on a daily basis. We're sliding down the slippery slope of totalitarianism, and the Deep State is hoping we just keep blaming one another for it rather than seeing the strings. Because whether or not it's premeditated, the winners in that end game won't be us, or the United States.

[DC Tom]

 

True.

 

 

I'm choosing not to use specific trigger words like the bolded when discussing this topic for two reasons: 1) Most importantly: I'm not convinced it's predetermined or if it's just the unintended consequences of unchecked power grabs and 2) the mere mention of the term "illuminati" makes it easy for 90% of the audience (for a lack of a better term) to tune out anything that's said after it.

 

What we're really talking about is the Deep State, however you wish to define it.

 

Some people believe, and I'm not necessarily one of them, that this Deep State has been playing chess for 70 years, pitting Communism against Capitalism while fomenting corporate fascism as the third alternative to these two diametrically opposed philosophies. There's a treasure trove of evidence that can be found that makes this case quite compellingly, though it quite often veers off into disinformation and blatant sensationalism in an effort to sell a book/movie/conference so it requires a great deal of discernment to determine the wheat from the chafe.

 

Others believe the Deep State came about through the compartmentalization of the MiC in post war America. Outsourcing advanced research projects, some of... let's just say exotic origin , to private corporations who are immune from the transparency our democratic republic is supposed to exude. This compartmentalization, fueled initially by the Faustian deal made with the Nazis at the end of WWII in an effort to thwart the Soviets, reshuffled the true power players from governmental institutions to private corporations whose reach would become multi-national with the unchecked power of the US economy behind them in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

 

To what end is this Deep State working towards? That requires a great deal of speculation -- which is why I cannot say with any conviction that it's premeditated. But that doesn't mean you can't see the results of this phenomenon in action: we currently are living in a state of near constant surveillance -- in a country which was formed upon the notion of personal freedom and liberty and likes to call itself the "free world" -- where corporations view themselves as above the law (see the TTIP/TTP for proof of this, as well as every campaign finance law) and use their media arms to sell their products rather than inform the electorate while they legally bribe elected officials to do their bidding.

 

It's entirely antithetical to how this country operated in the last century (and the two before that). Is it just an overreaction to the war on terror? Possibly, but that's highly suspect. Though, that's a useful way to sell the "reality" we're confronted with on a daily basis. We're sliding down the slippery slope of totalitarianism, and the Deep State is hoping we just keep blaming one another for it rather than seeing the strings. Because whether or not it's premeditated, the winners in that end game won't be us, or the United States.

 

And you couldn't work MKUltra and chemtrails into that? What kind of a writer are you?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

And you couldn't work MKUltra and chemtrails into that? What kind of a writer are you?

 

That comes later.

[boyst]

 

 

 

Interesting answers, I disagree with them, but interesting nonetheless. Thanks for sharing.

he frequents sex clubs and buys hookers, too. did ya know that?

[GG]

 

True.

 

 

I'm choosing not to use specific trigger words like the bolded when discussing this topic for two reasons: 1) Most importantly: I'm not convinced it's predetermined or if it's just the unintended consequences of unchecked power grabs and 2) the mere mention of the term "illuminati" makes it easy for 90% of the audience (for a lack of a better term) to tune out anything that's said after it.

 

What we're really talking about is the Deep State, however you wish to define it.

 

Some people believe, and I'm not necessarily one of them, that this Deep State has been playing chess for 70 years, pitting Communism against Capitalism while fomenting corporate fascism as the third alternative to these two diametrically opposed philosophies. There's a treasure trove of evidence that can be found that makes this case quite compellingly, though it quite often veers off into disinformation and blatant sensationalism in an effort to sell a book/movie/conference so it requires a great deal of discernment to determine the wheat from the chafe.

 

Others believe the Deep State came about through the compartmentalization of the MiC in post war America. Outsourcing advanced research projects, some of... let's just say exotic origin , to private corporations who are immune from the transparency our democratic republic is supposed to exude. This compartmentalization, fueled initially by the Faustian deal made with the Nazis at the end of WWII in an effort to thwart the Soviets, reshuffled the true power players from governmental institutions to private corporations whose reach would become multi-national with the unchecked power of the US economy behind them in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

 

To what end is this Deep State working towards? That requires a great deal of speculation -- which is why I cannot say with any conviction that it's premeditated. But that doesn't mean you can't see the results of this phenomenon in action: we currently are living in a state of near constant surveillance -- in a country which was formed upon the notion of personal freedom and liberty and likes to call itself the "free world" -- where corporations view themselves as above the law (see the TTIP/TTP for proof of this, as well as every campaign finance law) and use their media arms to sell their products rather than inform the electorate while they legally bribe elected officials to do their bidding.

 

It's entirely antithetical to how this country operated in the last century (and the two before that). Is it just an overreaction to the war on terror? Possibly, but that's highly suspect. Though, that's a useful way to sell the "reality" we're confronted with on a daily basis. We're sliding down the slippery slope of totalitarianism, and the Deep State is hoping we just keep blaming one another for it rather than seeing the strings. Because whether or not it's premeditated, the winners in that end game won't be us, or the United States.

 

So to recap, Soviet Union and the Cold War was a construct of the Deep State, and the grand plan was finally culminated with the collapse of the Berlin Wall, then aided by the rise of Muslim extremists, which of course were funded by the Deep State, which further embedded the Deep State in our lives with Silicon Valley prepared to implant chips in every newborn.

 

Makes perfect sense, when you consider that Sergei Brin was born a Soviet.

[OCinBuffalo]

 

Interesting interview I would not have heard , thanks for the link Tiberius.

 

London (CNN)As one of the world's most renowned scientists, Stephen Hawking is regularly called on to help explain the universe's more mysterious phenomena.

But asked to account for Donald Trump's political rise Tuesday, the British theoretical physicist was stumped.

"I can't," Hawking told CNN affiliate ITV's "Good Morning Britain" program.

"He is a demagogue, who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator."

The Trump campaign did not immediately reply to a message requesting comment.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/31/politics/stephen-hawking-donald-trump-demagogue/

demagogue : a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

 

Heh.

 

Asking Steven Hawking to explain Trump's "phenomena" :: asking Steven Spielberg to explain Keynesian economics, and when and where to use it properly. No one would deny that both men are experts in their field, and certainly entitled to have the word "genius" applied to them. But, lets face it: neither are renaissance men. Hawking is no student, or teacher, of human factors engineering/psychology of perception. And that's the discipline that is most instructive wrt Trump.

 

It's not like Hawking is in a position, never mind being willing, to understand human interaction on such a granular level. The guy thinks in terms of light years, not the individual voter, and since these two graduations of measurement have almost nothing in common, of course he's going to give us a simplistic answer like LCD.

 

Hell, you can't even get most physicists to agree that medicine is science. Now you expect one to apply himself to political science and human factors engineering?

 

As for you, ALF: the nly interesting thing here is that you decided to post an example of some idiot trying to make Trump look bad, by asking the opinion of somebody who is functionally incapable of rendering an educated, objective, or even rational one.

 

Is this going to change...anything? No. Rather, this a fresh new take on the argument to authority logical fallacy. That's what makes it interesting.

 

Truly, if you shot Steven Spielberg up with sodium pentathol, thus forcing him to be objective, and generally honest, then asked him to explain Trump's rise, THEN, and only then, would you get an opinion that was worth consideration. Speilberg knows how to create cultural icons. He knows damn well what Trump has done, and why, and how, but he'll never be honest about it. His leftist derangement syndrome means he will even lie about it to himself.

Edited June 2, 2016 by OCinBuffalo

[4merper4mer]

So to recap, Soviet Union and the Cold War was a construct of the Deep State, and the grand plan was finally culminated with the collapse of the Berlin Wall, then aided by the rise of Muslim extremists, which of course were funded by the Deep State, which further embedded the Deep State in our lives with Silicon Valley prepared to implant chips in every newborn.

 

Makes perfect sense, when you consider that Sergei Brin was born a Soviet.

In reading all of this crap I think you are probably right but I have to confess I am intrigued by the thought of this grove. What kind of fruit do they grow there? If it is apricots I'm in because it is hard to find a really good apricot but always worth the wait. No way do these illuminates go to all this trouble and grow bad apricots. I just can't see that happening.

[4merper4mer]

 

I don't see how a genius, highly respected theoretical physicist could be a loser ?

 

I don't like Trump or Clinton . I would have voted for Kasich or Bush before either of them.

 

Republican voters blew a golden opportunity to have the White House , Congress and Supreme Court.

 

 

He's a commie. He either:

 

A - Can't absorb the facts right in front of his eyes that for centuries capitalism has built the world and done much for him and everyone else. This includes him not being able to see the irony in saying he fears capitalism and not robots....when without capitalism those robots could never exist.

 

or

 

B - Embraces a system that he knows is doomed to failure because it has failed time and time and time again. He may embrace it because he feels he'll be viewed as better than most, or because he feels unwanted pressure to perform under capitalism, or because he'll be part of the power elite with more undeserved control even though he probably won't.

 

A would make him an idiot. B would make him...well.....I'm sure there are a lot of clinical/psych terms for it....but I'll go with loser.

 

I don't think he is an idiot.

[Dorkington]

he frequents sex clubs and buys hookers, too. did ya know that?

I actually support legalizing and regulating prostitution, for similar reasons I support legalizing and regulating some lower end drugs. Fact is, prostitution isn't going away anytime soon, keeping it illegal maintains a range of associated crime and dangers that'd largely go away if legalized. Yes, sex is involved, and that goes against some people's morals, but so do a lot of goods and services that are plenty legal.

[Azalin]

I actually support legalizing and regulating prostitution, for similar reasons I support legalizing and regulating some lower end drugs. Fact is, prostitution isn't going away anytime soon, keeping it illegal maintains a range of associated crime and dangers that'd largely go away if legalized. Yes, sex is involved, and that goes against some people's morals, but so do a lot of goods and services that are plenty legal.

 

Just out of curiosity, how would anyone "regulate" prostitution?

[Nanker]

 

Just out of curiosity, how would anyone "regulate" prostitution?

WWII style ration cards?

[DC Tom]

Just out of curiosity, how would anyone "regulate" prostitution?

Campaign finance reform and voter ID requirements.

[Azalin]

WWII style ration cards?

 

 

Campaign finance reform and voter ID requirements.

 

That one took a second to register.

 

Actually, I was hoping that Dorkington would reply, but he never replies to me any time I have a question regarding one of his posts.

[4merper4mer]

 

Just out of curiosity, how would anyone "regulate" prostitution?

 

 

Withdrawal method.