Politics

archer, show me WHERE Mr. Beck, has used hate speech? & Please define "hate speech".
I've NEVER HEARD ANY from him...
I have heard the truth, (with sources).
Even if the leftist "ASSUME" Mr.Beck uses "hate speech" is that a reason to act like barbarians? Showing they're true colors.
If, a group of RIGHT-THINKERS would pull this crap, it would be a HUGE headline stories (It wouldn't happen, unless it was at a white supremacy meeting, they you would know what to except, and be on guard. Not trying to enjoy an evening out with your family, watching a movie under the stars.)
So, you will not see it, unless it's MADE-UP!!!
I started my post with "Remember that the LEFTIST are the most peaceful, loving, tolerant people on EARTH!" Thus proving what hypocrites the leftists are, and you also proved it by DEFENDING they're behavior.
Thank You!

Here's more proof... Defend this...

Palin Taken Aback at the Hate in Her Documentary’s Opening
When Sarah Palin showed up in Pella, IA to attend a screening of her own documentary, “The Undefeated,” she hadn’t seen all the footage beforehand. So when the film opened with people calling her “slutty,“ ”scary,“ and a ”bit**,” she was a little taken aback.

“This is the first that I’ve seen much of that. It kind of takes you back,” she told The Hollywood Reporter (THR). “It makes you want to reach out to some of these folks and say, What’s your problem? And what was the problem? And what is the problem?”

THR describes the graphic opening:
"The movie begins with Sen. John McCain introducing his running mate, then quickly cuts to the Hollywood sign, and the music turns ominous. A TV news anchor says, “Hollywood has a new favorite pastime: taking aim at Sarah Palin.”

Then the celebrity montage begins: Damon likens Palin to a “really bad Disney movie” and says she’s “really scary” and Letterman calls her ”slutty,” and the discourse descends in to the filthy from there. Maher calls her a “dumb t***” on his TV show, Madonna screams “Sarah [F***ing] Palin” while on stage, and comedians use graphic, severely bleeped language to describe how Palin gave birth to a “retard.” One entertainer after another calls Palin a “slut” or a “[bit**]” or describes the intensity with which they “hate her.”

When the montage is through, the screen goes dark and a Bible verse comes into focus: “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

Read the rest: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/palin-taken-aback-at-the-hate-in-her-documentarys-opening/

Loving and tolerant, my butt.

pineinthegrass wrote:

jmc wrote: I'd settle for competent. They are all, and will always be, flawed . Let's not forget that they are not King, they have limits.

I agree. There is no super hero. Everyone has flaws.

I like a lot about what George Washington stood for. He could of been King, and he was huge in creating our nation. Then again he was very harsh in war by today's standards and had slaves. But we tend to judge by today's standards.

Abraham Lincoln had issues too, but was a great president in most ways.

I grew up thinking Franklin Roosevelt was one of the greatest. Afterall, he got us out of the great depression, won WW II, and was voted in three times. Then I learn about the camps for US citizens of Japanese decent, and how he tried to take over the Supreme Court like a cheap dictator. But again, times were different.

I expected someone to mention Reagan. No surprise there.

If we talk about the last century, who were the most popular presidents? Is that the test? If so, Roosevelt and Reagan (not that he had times as bad as Roosevelt) would be right up there, but for different reasons.

Anyway, I vote "I don't know". lol

My take on your choices and I agree, is they are great and flawed. Is the common denominator , they all brought the country together and believe in our country in difficult and challenging times?

The Bear wrote: My take on your choices and I agree, is they are great and flawed. Is the common denominator , they all brought the country together and believe in our country in difficult and challenging times?

I think one common denominator is that they believed the people would pull the government out of trouble. Other administrations (like our current one and it's immediate predecessor) believe that the government needs to protect and shelter us while it pulls us out of trouble - effectively smothering any hope of progress.

A good president would make sure the government stays out of the way of the innovators and honest economic leaders, but cuts the dishonest off at the knees. Governing a free market is a very delicate balance.

I haven't seen the documentary yet. When does the first moose show up in the movie?

Nobody would have to move to No Name Co
then we would havd Nobody from No Name running.

Or Pergatory so we would all know where we are heading.

Liberals (socialists, communists, or AKA "lefites") are the most unsophisticated, least diversified, stuck in their heads- least able to take a joke people I know. These "citizens of the world" will use every tatic to avoid logical discussion when the facts point away from their position.

Look- the last thing I want in a president is someone who thinks they will representing all the people in this country. This is not possible to do no matter if you are from the left or the right. If you take a left position- the right view will not be represented. Same goes vice versa. It's simply not possible to be both white and black at the same time, and the last think I want is a president who is "grey" on all issues.

The best we can hope for is that when we elect a politician with our vote- he or she will represent our view- and push as hard for which ever side elected said politician.

When the guy I vote for wins- I don't want him representing the other side- I want him to represent me. I don;t want comprimise- I want him to push for policy that is in my interest. This is how both the left and right works.

The best we can hope for is that we convince a majority to vote our way- and steer policy in the direction we want. The left won last time- and we got more big government and socialist policy- maybe next time the right will win and we can get policy that steers us toward less government and free market policy.

The problem is that - as time goes on we get bigger and bigger government- more and more regulations, taxes, restrictions, laws etc. etc. Once enacted, this is 3 times harder to get rid of as it was to enact it- and so we all find ourselves with less freedom and liberty. It would take many years of backtracking to erase it now- which is why I am ever more pessimistic about the future of a free America.

But hey- that's politics.

Reagan was the closest to my idea of a good politician- best I have seen in my lifetime. At least he saw government for what it was- and he told it like he saw it.

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Ronald Reagan

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!
Ronald Reagan

The Bear wrote: AS I am new I am not sure this the right place to post this, but here it goes. With all the political views and discussions about TEA Party People vs Republicans vs Democrats. I would like to know what would the perfect President look and act Like if he or she existed?

Welcome to 285Bound The Bear .

Hope you like broad unfounded generalizations with your politics.

Like this...

If Theodore Roosevelt were running in the next election, I'd vote for him. He certainly didn't stand still if he thought something wasn't right.