Ion01 2 #1 October 30, 2009 A clip that illustrates the differences: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3aiIKQvDr4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 October 30, 2009 Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about and distorts the meanings. If one really wanted to go back nd follow exactly what the founding fathers said, women would not have a vote and slavery would still be legal. Beck needs to get with the times and be a whole lot more honest about history.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #3 October 30, 2009 We've been watching (slowly on dvd) the HBO mini-series adaptation of David McCullough's biography John Adams. If McCullough's version contains any truth, the Revolutionary-era Continental Congress shared a lot in common with today. I think the mini-series does an excellent job of showing the debates and disagreements regarding things that are often (& sometimes a-historically) assigned as consensus to the "Founding Fathers," especially between Adams and Jefferson. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #4 October 30, 2009 I have that on my Netflix list. So many titles to watch and so little time.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #5 October 30, 2009 I liked Beck a lot more when he was on CNN. Now he seems crazy.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #6 October 30, 2009 QuoteI liked Beck a lot more when he was on CNN. Now he seems crazy. He's a showman, just like Rush or Stern. He's got more fans now than he did before, so he'll continue the routine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #7 October 30, 2009 QuoteI liked Beck a lot more when he was on CNN. Now he seems crazy. I wasn't a huge fan of him even in his CNN days, but at least then he was only a little crazy. Now, he's full on bat shit crazy.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #8 October 30, 2009 now back to the thread title - I think we are more like the founding fathers than ever before they all used to slander and lie about each other, get into fights, and pretty much try to take each other down, ruin each other (pick a side if you can't stomach the fact it's both) all for partisan politics I'm thinking the trend back to sword fights in Congress over the last 20 years is moving along nicely pretty soon, we'll be no different than any other 3rd world society in terms of unreasonable political chicanery, er....hijinx, er.....shenanigans ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #9 October 31, 2009 Quote Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about As do you and everbody else. Most praise MLK but dont talk about how he cheated on his wife. In my book that make's him a POS! No question's asked. Hell that wife cheating SOB got his own holidayNothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #10 October 31, 2009 Quote Quote Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about As do you and everbody else. Most praise MLK but dont talk about how he cheated on his wife. In my book that make's him a POS! No question's asked. Hell that wife cheating SOB got his own holiday That explains why the righties impeached Clinton. Of course what explains not even the slightest discipline for Lott and gay BF, Larry "wide stance" Craig shopping for cock in an airport shitter, or a bevy of other Republicans who have been so-called immoral? Exactly, which is why you've lost some of your fundamental base. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 October 31, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about As do you and everbody else. Most praise MLK but dont talk about how he cheated on his wife. In my book that make's him a POS! No question's asked. Hell that wife cheating SOB got his own holiday That explains why the righties impeached Clinton. Of course what explains not even the slightest discipline for Lott and gay BF, Larry "wide stance" Craig shopping for cock in an airport shitter, or a bevy of other Republicans who have been so-called immoral? Exactly, which is why you've lost some of your fundamental base. No, Clinton was impeached for perjury, not adultery - sorry to bust your bubble.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #12 October 31, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about As do you and everbody else. Most praise MLK but dont talk about how he cheated on his wife. In my book that make's him a POS! No question's asked. Hell that wife cheating SOB got his own holiday That explains why the righties impeached Clinton. Of course what explains not even the slightest discipline for Lott and gay BF, Larry "wide stance" Craig shopping for cock in an airport shitter, or a bevy of other Republicans who have been so-called immoral? Exactly, which is why you've lost some of your fundamental base. No, Clinton was impeached for perjury, not adultery - sorry to bust your bubble. Actually perjury and obstruction, but it was based upon a sex-based investigation. Just as your boy LIbby and his perjury/obstruction that your favorite guy commuted him for, that started with an investigation over Valerie Plame CIA agent and the disclosure of her identity. Even tho both were for the same charges, the origin is what drove it. Whereas Lott and gay BF, Larry "wide stance" Craig shopping for cock in an airport shitter draws no investigation; that's my point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #13 October 31, 2009 Quote Quote Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about As do you and everbody else. Most praise MLK but dont talk about how he cheated on his wife. In my book that make's him a POS! No question's asked. Hell that wife cheating SOB got his own holiday He got his brains blown out at age 39 while putting his neck repeatedly on the line. It's not like he got through life scot-free. Adultery is an equal-opportunity activity. Eisenhower was probably having an affair with Kay Summersby when he was Supreme Commander in WWII. Reagan was probably having an affair with (then) Nancy Davis while he was still married to Jane Wyman. The examples of Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole aren't very laudable, either. So perhaps we should use a different metric, or at least more than just one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #14 October 31, 2009 Bringing it back on topic...what parts of the video do you disagree with?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #15 October 31, 2009 QuoteBringing it back on topic...what parts of the video do you disagree with? See Quade's post #2. It's Sat. morn. & I gotta scoot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #16 October 31, 2009 ditto on that - everyone forgets the stupid things that the 'founding fathers' forgot. All these groups that are organizing for the conservative lobby (which is fine) based on the "what the constitution was really supposed to be about" and "Getting the country back on track" bullshit. Slavery and women's voting are two perfect examples of where the Constitution failed. And what about the 25+ amendments SINCE the Constitution was written? If it was so fucking good back in 1776, then why are you driving a car? Why do you go to a store to buy meat when you could slaughter your own? The Constitution is a document that started the country, it, like every other piece of legislation, needs to be carefully monitored and updated as needed to keep with the times. Nothing is perfect and no rule applies for all of eternity. If that were the case, the Roman Empire would still be in power. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #17 October 31, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Among the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about As do you and everbody else. Most praise MLK but dont talk about how he cheated on his wife. In my book that make's him a POS! No question's asked. Hell that wife cheating SOB got his own holiday He got his brains blown out at age 39 while putting his neck repeatedly on the line. It's not like he got through life scot-free. Adultery is an equal-opportunity activity. Eisenhower was probably having an affair with Kay Summersby when he was Supreme Commander in WWII. Reagan was probably having an affair with (then) Nancy Davis while he was still married to Jane Wyman. The examples of Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole aren't very laudable, either. So perhaps we should use a different metric, or at least more than just one. Not to mention Thomas Jefferson bonking his slave. Wasn't he a Founding Father?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #18 October 31, 2009 QuoteAmong the issues I have with Beck is he cherry picks which parts of history he cares about and distorts the meanings. If one really wanted to go back nd follow exactly what the founding fathers said, women would not have a vote and slavery would still be legal. Beck needs to get with the times and be a whole lot more honest about history. so we should ignore ALL that they said? Yes, times have changed. Yes we've changed a lot since the founding fathers. So when it doesn't agree with you, call it cherry picking. I'll do the same. This actually the first Glenn Beck I've watched. I'd rather read local editorials. Same amount of opinion.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #19 October 31, 2009 Quoteditto on that - everyone forgets the stupid things that the 'founding fathers' forgot. All these groups that are organizing for the conservative lobby (which is fine) based on the "what the constitution was really supposed to be about" and "Getting the country back on track" bullshit. Slavery and women's voting are two perfect examples of where the Constitution failed. And what about the 25+ amendments SINCE the Constitution was written? If it was so fucking good back in 1776, then why are you driving a car? Why do you go to a store to buy meat when you could slaughter your own? The Constitution is a document that started the country, it, like every other piece of legislation, needs to be carefully monitored and updated as needed to keep with the times. .... well I actually think that we SHOULD be slaughtering our own meat. We'd get fresher meat, local meat, and people might be a little more self sufficient. and while I agree with updating of the constitution, there is a process in place to do that, and it does not happen here, or on TV. If we as a people think there should be an update, then amend. I think first we should understand and remember. Then look at amendments. We're moving closer and closer to a single point of governance. What happened to the state's rights to govern themselves?-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #20 October 31, 2009 QuoteBringing it back on topic...what parts of the video do you disagree with? The parts that don't actually have anything to do with our Constitution that Beck claims does. It would be a little like people pulling out side comments 200 years from now made by any current person in our government today. Unless those words actually came from our Constitution and laws, then they are only the thoughts and comments of a single person that were probably debated by many and ultimately not incorporated into actual law. Imagine if some of the nuttier words of say, John Kerry or Maxine Waters, were quoted 200 years from now. Do you really think that would be a legitimate basis for "taking back America"? If Beck wants to actually quote the US Constitution and show how some individual is trying to corrupt that, fine. I'd say he not only has a right, but a duty as a journalist to do so, but that's NOT what he's doing. He's creating a side show and he's even admitted to that, but people continue to prop him up as some sort of scholar. Clearly he's not. Half the time I wonder if he even understands what he's attempting to say and the other half I'm damn near certain he doesn't.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #21 October 31, 2009 QuoteWe're moving closer and closer to a single point of governance. What happened to the state's rights to govern themselves? maybe that is one of the amendments that is needed. At what level does the state get to run itself? We also all believe in equal rights, but ideologically, that is not possible if the states have full reign to govern themselves. There obviously is some level of governance, laws, equalities and rights that are needed to be mandated at a federal level. Health care is a good example of something moving in that direction - just like public education, Medicare, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #22 October 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteWe're moving closer and closer to a single point of governance. What happened to the state's rights to govern themselves? maybe that is one of the amendments that is needed. At what level does the state get to run itself? agreed... how about something along the lines of "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Quote We also all believe in equal rights, but ideologically, that is not possible if the states have full reign to govern themselves. full reign withing the bounds of the constitution (which defines the rights of the states to govern themselves). so I don't see how equal rights aren't possible if states govern themselves withing the reigns of the constitution.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
