How can you not like Snickers? There’s Reese’s PB Cups, Twix, Kit Cat and Snickers. Those are obviously the top four.
March 28, 2014 at 5:33pm
Where’s Rev. Al?
March 28, 2014 at 5:31pm
You nailed it. In a very roundabout way, it’s similar to flag burners. I think they’re complete A-holes, but I’ll fight for their right to do it.
March 28, 2014 at 5:29pm
Lighten up, Francis (that’s French for Hop Sing).
March 28, 2014 at 5:08pm
“Just two days after a U.S. district judge issued a preliminary injunction barring sectarian prayer”
It’s really becoming clear that most people, including most Americans, really have no idea what the Constitution protects. If you really get the Constitution, you understand that it protects your right to say that prayer. It’s not freedom from religion, it’s freedom of religion. Folks, the root of all our problems in today’s America is that most Americans are truly uneducated or incorrectly interpret the Constitution. And the sad thing is, that includes our judges.
Exactly right again. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Statue on Religious Freedom in Virginia, it is clear from his life that he favored freedom of religion and expression while in office, and this judge can kiss his job goodbye before we will back down do his tyrannical and anti-theist philosophy.
October 19, 2012 at 9:43am
O’Donnell (and most libs) are so mature, aren’t they?
By the way, O’Donnell would have a tough time getting through Maddow.
September 15, 2012 at 5:40am
September 15, 2012 at 5:38am
Archon, there’s one simple fact that blows away everything you’ve spewed on this page. They are there voluntarily. They are not captive. No one is requiring them to be there or to pray. During the prayer they could be playing video games on their iPhone. No one cares. Your whole argument is moot because the prayer is 100% voluntary to participate in.
This whole thing is an issue because a small minority don’t like to feel uncomfortable. Until recently (also known as the good old days of America), in a situation like this, if you weren’t religious you would have some respect for those that are and you would sit and wait out the prayer for the whole 32 seconds and then get on with your life after the prayer was over. In today’s America, when someone is a little uncomfortable they have to ruin it for the rest of us.
It’s not unconstitutional. Period.
September 12, 2012 at 9:17pm
Anyone besides me find it utterly idiotic when grown-ups dress up and play make believe – especially when they dress up like other real people? So stupid.
July 16, 2012 at 11:23am
Gee, I wonder where they put all the bottles and cans? I’m probably going out on a limb here, but I’m guessing they didn’t throw them in a garbage or recycling can.
I'm sure that what didn't float downriver is scattered on the banks. Maybe the Tea Party will go clean it up for them.
When I refreshed this page, I got a different lower video showing the occupants of a blue and white raft tossing what looked to be close to a dozen empty cans in the river.
May 3, 2012 at 3:08pm
Whatever happened to “live and let live”? Aren’t liberals all about “different strokes for different folks”? I guess not, when it comes to religion. For some reason, the right to practice one’s religion is a threat to them.
The gentleman with the sign that indicates “Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion” hits the nail on the head.
No one is forcing a specific religion on anyone. I don’t get it.
April 19, 2012 at 10:35pm
Wow, could she be any more annoying? She must be single, right?
April 17, 2012 at 2:48pm
Funny how when liberals are wrong about something and have nothing else to say they come up with a chant. As if chanting it makes it right.
March 30, 2012 at 1:57pm
What was he doing tweeting anyone’s address in the first place?
January 5, 2012 at 3:42pm
What has Ms. McCain ever done that would make her qualified to give her opinion on anything? Why does anyone care what she says?
December 22, 2011 at 1:15pm
There is not a lot in this world that I can think of that is dumber than a grown person dressing up and portraying another living human being. How one does that and doesn’t feel like a complete tool is beyond me. Right up there with it is creating a movie about something that happened a few years ago.
And as someone else said, why doesn’t Hollywood make stupid movies about liberal politicians? We all know that if McCain had chosen some non-controversial white guy, this movie would never have been made.
September 21, 2011 at 1:51pm
Weren’t we all created equal? Why, no matter how little or how much you make, don’t we have one rate for all? Personally, I think it should be capped at some point, but if it would shut the liberals up (fat chance I know) let’s go with one rate for all.
August 2, 2011 at 1:19pm
Rep. Cleaver, it’s not about you and your constituents getting their free stuff, it’s about what’s best for the survival of the country as a whole. That said, this bill does nothing but perpetuate our debt crisis and likely brings us closer to ruin.
July 27, 2011 at 3:30pm
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
It’s obvious that the atheists have no case, for two reasons.
First, this is not a government entity promoting a cross. Second the First Amendment says that free exercise of religion cannot be prohibited.
Atheists and liberals want to whine about their rights being infringed upon. What about the rights of those that want to freely exercise their religious beliefs?
November 2012 cannot come soon enough.
June 29, 2011 at 3:17pm
Could someone please give an example of hate speech or fascism from Glenn Beck? Where do these leftists come up with that? I just don’t get it. Is it because his views are different from theirs?
Glenn Beck is all about the freedom and liberty instituted by our founders? How is that hateful?
I would suggest to anyone that hates Glenn Beck, they need to really do a self-assessment and ask themselves if America is really the country the want to live in – and why do they feel so strongly about changing it from the founding principles that hundreds of thousands have died defending.
The progressive trolls who post here can't cite one instance of hate speech by Glenn Beck because he doesn't operate that way.Like you said Beck is about liberty & freedom and progressives are diametrically opposed to those principals,they're all about "central planning" where the federal government controls everything because after all they care so much about us.
Firstly, we can look at the sort of people Beck seems to attract to his site. A lot of people here operate on generalizations (i.e. "the left" this and "the left" that) as if "the left" is some monolithic entity that all thinks and feels the same way; and often downright hatred (wishing new york city would be attacked by terrorists per this thread).
We can also look at instances where Beck has wished death on Michael Moore (in detail and on air), made fun of President Obama's daughters, and hinted at poisoning Nancy Pelosi (in effigy). You can say it was all in good humor or sarcasm, but it lacks class regardless. If it was just a harmless joke (about killing someone in great detail or in effigy) then you wouldn't mind if someone on the left had made similar statements toward a conservative? I'm pretty sure if someone acted out killing Glenn Beck in effigy or ranting about killin him on air, you people would lose it, and rightly so.
Next, we can point to instances where Beck has used violent imagery or violent statements to build a straw man of the left. There's the case where he doused someone with "gasoline", stating that Obama's policies would be like "lighting a match." Then there's the statements where he kept saying, "shoot me in the head", obviously playing off of some sort of martyrdom scenerio. In fact, being hateful by insinuating the hate of the opposition is a brilliant tactic that Beck uses. With this tactic, he can villif
...With this tactic, he can villify people who disagree with him, calling them potentially or overty violent, or Nazis, or what-have-you, all while playing the part of the victim.
Lastly, there's cases where Beck has literally labeled the left as Nazis or working towards the same ends as the Nazis. Similarly, he has labeled the left as anti-semetic because they don't agree with Israel's policies on the occupied territories. One top of that, he has led witch-hunts against people such as Van Jones, George Soros, and Francis Fox-Piven: people no one had really ever heard of until Beck waged a crusade against them, leading to death threats in the case of Piven. Why were these people targeted? One is a Communist (something it is perfectly legal to be); one finances various liberal causes (something the right wing seems ok with so long as it's money towards conservative causes; and the other wrote an article in the Natio
@MAPROG And I will bite back. Short on time I will just take the last part of your post. HArdly a witch-hunt when all he does is expose what these people say and do, most of the time using their own words. Do you really believe that King Barry would have garnered as many votes as he did if people knew that he was going to bring Communists into the WH? During the campaign he took pains to show how centrist he was, and few listened to the voices in the wilderness, not even GB so much as Hannity , Limbaugh, Levin and Savage. And don't accuse them of lying, everything that they predicted happened, AND MORE! Re Spooky Dude, the left is always railing against rich donors financing and influencing the conservatives, all GB did was expose Soros doing it on steroids. And finally Fox-Piven, yes we were asleep at the wheel and ignored what she was spewing. Thanks to GB for bringing it to our attention. Unfortunately for progressives, sunlight is indeed the best disinfectant
@Patriot: Maybe you are short on time, but you didn't even scratch at 90% of my post, so maybe more of a scratch than a bite. I'll address what little bit you did respond to tho, even if using terms such as "King Barry" and "Spooky Dude" show your hand that you don't have even the slightest interestest in being objective.
Well, I'd certainly call it a witch hunt, considering the time and resources he's spent on villifying these people. Beck has managed to turn them into a secret cabal of evil proportions in the minds of his fans. I've read plenty of comments on this site concerning Jones, et al. that equate them to evil, demonic, and some blatantly wishing for their deaths. You don't just rile people up like that unless you put some effort into targeting them.
As for using their own words against them, I am familiar with Beck's tactics. You can take what someone says and make much more of it than it was meant to be. You can also take quote mines out of context and piece them together in ways that make people say things they never said. I remember one instance where Beck pulled a Soros quote from '06 (or thereabouts) and tied it with a quote he made from the mid-nineties, and made it seem as if it was one consistent statement. If you bothered to actually read the full statements made in their respective contexts, they had nothing to do with what Beck was trying to make them say.
Speaking of Soros, that's what he is, a rich doner and a philanthropist. It
...Speaking of Soros, that's what he is, a rich doner and a philanthropist. It isn't illegal to invenst your money into causes you support. It's usually the right that get such support, so when someone finances the left, it's evil or wrong? The guy becomes a "Spooky Dude?" Whether it's financing "on steriods" in comparisson to the massive financing right-wing groups receive is debatable and irrelevant to the argument. The point is what he does is legal and is exactly what people have done for right-wing causes for decades.