Glenn Beck has "had it up to here" with us (Ron Paul Supporters)

[TheGrinch]

If Beck wanted to see what kind of response we make, dont you think he'd actually look not only at these forums, but this thread? IE, its a perfect opportunity to tell him to go fuck himself.

He doesn't care what the truth is or about convincing us. They're just getting an early start on trying to blame us for Romney losing.

We combat that by talking about and showing all of the cheating to anyone who will listen, and then they'll understand why we're telling the establishment hacks to go fuck themselves.

 

[LibertyEagle]

He doesn't care what the truth is or about convincing us. They're just getting an early start on trying to blame us for Romney losing.

We combat that by talking about and showing all of the cheating to anyone who will listen, and then they'll understand why we're telling the establishment hacks to go fuck themselves.

Yeah, that is exactly what I thought when I saw the article.

 

[Spikender]

He doesn't care what the truth is or about convincing us. They're just getting an early start on trying to blame us for Romney losing.

We combat that by talking about and showing all of the cheating to anyone who will listen, and then they'll understand why we're telling the establishment hacks to go fuck themselves.

Well put, I think you're spot on with your assessment.

 

[georgiaboy]

Comments are worth a read. Here's a popular one:

Bill Zimmerly · Top Commenter · Hillsboro, Missouri
---
Romney? You mean the guy who supported
TARP (just like Obama), the NDAA (just like Obama),
the Patriot Act (just like Obama),
the Brady bill (just like Obama),
Massachusetts gun control laws (just like Obama),
Government-Run Healthcare (just like Obama),
making war with Iran without congressional approval (just like Obama), and
abortion on demand (just like Obama)?

The truth is, there isn’t a hill of beans difference between Romney and Obama, and it disgusts me to no end to see self-proclaimed “conservatives” compromise *EVERY CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLE THERE IS* to advance the GOP’s Obama clone over the only real Conservative in the race.

“According to a 1998 study published in the American Journal of Political Science, Paul has the most conservative voting record of any member of Congress since 1937.” –> http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/ron-paul#ixzz1phVlgRm0.

Hey Glen... we've had it "up to here" LONG before you.

Reply · 177 · 17 hours ago

Freedom Frank · Top Commenter
Bill you forgot one -- Romney will follow the same Keynsian economic policies (and monetary too) as Obama--you know the policies that will destroy this country faster that Obamacare.

Reply · 56 · · 17 hours ago

Mandy Graham
Oh poor glenn beck...his boxers are all in a bunch cause ron paul supporters vote on principle..sorry glenn...no to obama..no to romney...

Reply · 105 · · 17 hours ago

Kurt Fichtenberg · Top Commenter
Well said!

Reply · 15 · · 17 hours ago

Joshua Genkinger · Waco High School
Smart woman.

Reply · 15 hours ago

Jim Kaye · Top Commenter · Downers Grove South High School
Don't forget he is also supported by George Soros too!!!!

Reply · 1 · · 14 hours ago

 

[cajuncocoa]

Good to hear that. Persuasion is the key to a successful activist. That and having really comfortable shoes.

You know, thinking more about what you and LE are saying about persuading Beck's listeners....I think the only ones we'll be successful in persuading are the ones who are already having some doubts about what he says one day and who he supports the next (and the disconnect between the two). Those who follow him blindly, buy all of his books, attend all of his events, are probably not ready to hear what we have to say. To the ones who are ready, it won't make any difference if we insult Beck (or Limbaugh, or Hannity) because they're already starting to open their eyes anyway.

 

[cajuncocoa]

He doesn't care what the truth is or about convincing us. They're just getting an early start on trying to blame us for Romney losing.

We combat that by talking about and showing all of the cheating to anyone who will listen, and then they'll understand why we're telling the establishment hacks to go fuck themselves.

Why do you guys care if we're seen as responsible for Romney's loss??

I will wear that as a badge of honor after the way RP delegates were treated by Romney at the RNC.

 

[MadOdorMachine]

I remember listening to his show about during the primaries and him saying that he doesn't tell people who to vote for and that they should make their own decisions. What's ironic is that in 2008, he begged people on his radio show not to vote for Huckabee and to go with Romney during those primaries. Now he's doing it again. The guy is a liar and a fraud and I find it disgusting so many people believe him. Beck and Romney are both Mormons and it's quit obvious what his agenda is. May God have mercy on his soul for leading so many people astray.

 

[phill4paul]

He doesn't care what the truth is or about convincing us. They're just getting an early start on trying to blame us for Romney losing.

We combat that by talking about and showing all of the cheating to anyone who will listen, and then they'll understand why we're telling the establishment hacks to go fuck themselves.

I welcome it. In fact I hope they inflate our role in it.

 

[TheGrinch]

Why do you guys care if we're seen as responsible for Romney's loss??

I will wear that as a badge of honor after the way RP delegates were treated by Romney at the RNC.

I care why we're seen as responsible for Romney's loss, or rather why he's responsible for his own loss after they way they treated us.

I don't know where I implied anything different than what you're saying.

 

[TheGrinch]

I welcome it. In fact I hope they inflate our role in it.

I agree, they wanna play the blame game, then the facts will come out who is to blame.

I was just making the point that that's what they're doing, not that it intimidates me in the slightest.

 

[phill4paul]

I agree, they wanna play the blame game, then the facts will come out who is to blame.

I was just making the point that that's what they're doing, not that it intimidates me in the slightest.

Understood.

 

[coffeewithgames]

I agree, they wanna play the blame game, then the facts will come out who is to blame.

I was just making the point that that's what they're doing, not that it intimidates me in the slightest.

So, you take it the facts actually matter with the majority of people/voters? No. Not at all. 2008 and 2012 should show you that (and the majority of elections in the past).

The easiest response though, ask them why they sound like President Obama blaming somebody else for their own problems.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I welcome it. In fact I hope they inflate our role in it.

This.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I agree, they wanna play the blame game, then the facts will come out who is to blame.

I was just making the point that that's what they're doing, not that it intimidates me in the slightest.

And this.

 

[Lucille]

How can the GOP blame us when Mandate Mitt RomneyCare loses? Aren't there only a couple dozen of us Ron Paul supporters living our moms' basements, sucking on bongs, and banging away on our keyboards with our Cheetos-stained fingers?

When Romney loses, they can blame the Welfare-Warfare-Police Statist Neo-Trots running the GOP, the country, and the world (into the ground).

Mitt Romney: In Your Heart, You Know He’s A Loser

On the one hand, the GOP is telling us Obama is leading us down the road to "socialism," that he’s "appeasing" our enemies and stiffing our friends, and that he’s basically destroying the country. On the other hand, they haven’t put forth a candidate who has a chance in heck of beating him. The leading candidate for the party’s nomination is a caricature of everything voters are sick and tired of: he’s a phony, a spoiled rich guy, an automaton whose words and actions convey, above all, an almost comical impression of inauthenticity.
[...]
Romney isn’t so much a serious candidate for the presidency as he is a national joke: his record as a "flip-flopper," his inability to project anything remotely resembling sincerity, and his Richie Rich persona have all combined to turn him into a human piñata for both liberals and conservatives to pick apart. Which leads us back to the question I asked at the beginning: is the GOP deliberately throwing this election?

It makes sense if we take the economic critique proffered by anti-inflationists like Ron Paul and Gerald Celente seriously: would you want to be President if we’re on the brink of another Great Depression? As the American dollar is destroyed, and the buying power of the average American is about to become the equivalent of a consumer in, say, Zimbabwe, is it really in the GOP’s interest to take the White House this year?
[...]
Ron Paul isn’t the only one conjuring visions of America as Greece-times-ten, and it doesn’t take much imagination to see how the march to austerity will be met here in this country, where Americans’ sense of entitlement is almost as well-developed as their taste for vulgarity. What happens when the bread-and-circuses stop, and Americans are forced to confront the grim reality of being broke?
[...]
The strategic thinking behind this can be summed up in three words: After them – us! That was the slogan of Germany’s Communist party in the 1930s after the fateful election which brought the National Socialists to power. The Communists, having rejected an alliance with the German Social Democrats on orders from Moscow, were convinced they would be catapulted into power as a result of the backlash from Hitler’s victory at the polls – a strategic calculation that had "backfire" written all over it, as Trotsky pointed out at the time.

Before taking that historical note too far, however, I have to admit the idea of the Republican high mucka-mucks getting together and deciding it would be better for them to throw the election to Obama by putting up a loser like Romney does seem a bit far-fetched. Perhaps they’ve convinced themselves, on one level, that Romney can actually win, while – on quite another level – they don’t believe it for a minute. People usually have no trouble holding mutually exclusive beliefs in other areas, and politics is certainly no exception.

If we do cause Romney to lose, conservatives should thank us. Better a prog in a blue jersey be at the helm when the ship goes down rather than a "conservative," since Boobus will blame whichever team is in the WH. Let the progs own the fall of the American Empire. It is their baby after all (even though the progs in the red jerseys helped).

 

[phill4paul]

Aren't there only a couple dozen of us Ron Paul supporters living our moms' basements, sucking on bongs, and banging away on our keyboards with our Cheetos-stained fingers?

One can only dream. Damn bills. MMMMM-mmmm Cheetos.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

You know, thinking more about what you and LE are saying about persuading Beck's listeners....I think the only ones we'll be successful in persuading are the ones who are already having some doubts about what he says one day and who he supports the next (and the disconnect between the two). Those who follow him blindly, buy all of his books, attend all of his events, are probably not ready to hear what we have to say. To the ones who are ready, it won't make any difference if we insult Beck (or Limbaugh, or Hannity) because they're already starting to open their eyes anyway.

Not necessarily. From my experience the key to persuasion is first having some sort of relationship and/or credibility with the person you are trying to persuade. Then you begin with establishing the common ground that you have with the person - we agree on A, B, and C. Then you probe for their opinion on issue D where they may hold a different opinion. I always make it a point to validate their opinion, and never make them feel like they are wrong for holding that opinion, since I do not wish to put them on the defensive. I then will present my opinion on issue D, and show how the solution addresses the same concern, but provided a different solution to the concern.

This is the way I have done things for decades, and it seems to work in many cases. Where you have problems is with people who disagree with you on all issues, for example a socialist, because I would have few, if any areas to establish common ground with them.

One of the best examples from my memory was not with me, but was with a State Assembly candidate I saw speak back in the late 70's. It was not in my area, but I was upstate to help out a friend of mine who was the county coordinator for his campaign. Anyway this candidate was a rock solid conservative who was addressing a group at a union hall. All of the audience were blue collar union types. The candidate (and for the life of me I cannot remember his name), spent the first 10-15 minutes of the speech connecting with the audience on a variety of points. He then went on to share his own personal story of how he was a factory worker at a younger age, and then went into the most anti-union speech these folks probably ever heard, but all the while he empathized with the audience and showed them how he shared the same concerns, but had a much different solution. He got a standing ovation when it was all done.

 

[Lucille]

I finally RTFA.

“If you think he can win God bless you then vote for him. If you’re trying to make some point you’re out of your mind,” Glenn added.

I don't think he can win. A vote for Obamney is what is madness.

On Obama if he is reelected, Beck stated, “Obama’s going to be worse than he was in the first four years. What do you think when he says I’m going to get a little more latitude when I’m elected the second time? What do you think he’s going to do?”

Let him do his worst and bare his totalitarian teeth, I say. The sooner Leviathan collapses, the better. O Duce is just the man-child to do it.

 

[cajuncocoa]

I care why we're seen as responsible for Romney's loss, or rather why he's responsible for his own loss after they way they treated us.

I don't know where I implied anything different than what you're saying.

I agree, they wanna play the blame game, then the facts will come out who is to blame.

I was just making the point that that's what they're doing, not that it intimidates me in the slightest.

Alrighty then...we're on the same page.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Not necessarily. From my experience the key to persuasion is first having some sort of relationship and/or credibility with the person you are trying to persuade. Then you begin with establishing the common ground that you have with the person - we agree on A, B, and C. Then you probe for their opinion on issue D where they may hold a different opinion. I always make it a point to validate their opinion, and never make them feel like they are wrong for holding that opinion, since I do not wish to put them on the defensive. I then will present my opinion on issue D, and show how the solution addresses the same concern, but provided a different solution to the concern.

This is the way I have done things for decades, and it seems to work in many cases. Where you have problems is with people who disagree with you on all issues, for example a socialist, because I would have few, if any areas to establish common ground with them.

That's cool; I have no problem with your suggestions here.

Obviously, our common ground with Glenn Beck listeners is economic issues. But that is also true of just about every Republican running for anything at any point in time. GOP candidates always say they're for smaller government, reduced spending, yada yada. And when it's proven they didn't mean it, they can always find a Democrat to blame it on....and the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round.

Until and unless Glenn Beck listeners are ready to hear what we have to say about foreign policy, they will always gravitate to Romney, Bachmann, Santorum, etc. Neocon Beck will make sure of that.