PDA

View Full Version : Glenn Beck -The Revolutionary Holocaust



PoliCon
01-24-2010, 01:08 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNrfY4U9WYM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw7DtjO4V6c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XLKNUJzMQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMPWIqHli00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzWLkzcnwp4

Rockntractor
01-24-2010, 01:14 AM
I have it on TVO and will probably watch it tomorrow.

PoliCon
01-24-2010, 01:14 AM
I have it on TVO and will probably watch it tomorrow.

not all of us have TVs let alone TIVO :p

Rockntractor
01-24-2010, 01:19 AM
not all of us have TVs let alone TIVO :p

It didn't cost me anything. I called Directv a year ago and told them if they didn't give me an HD TIVO I would sign up with dish network. I blackmail them every two years. Next time I'll ask for all the premium channels free for 4 months, I've done that before and gotten it!

Bleda
01-24-2010, 02:43 AM
You can watch it all for free at The Right Scoop. (http://www.therightscoop.com/category/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-tv/)

obx
01-24-2010, 09:19 AM
It's really good. I watched it friday.
________
Fetish Rubber (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/528/rubber/videos/1)

PoliCon
01-24-2010, 09:19 AM
It's really good. I watched it friday.

I watched it last night :cool:

hampshirebrit
01-24-2010, 09:45 AM
Excellent viewing. Good find, Poli.

PoliCon
01-24-2010, 06:48 PM
Excellent viewing. Good find, Poli.

:mad: all my finds are good. Even the breast feeding dog was good!!:p

Constitutionally Speaking
01-24-2010, 07:32 PM
I sure hope he develops this further.


I.E. John Dewey, the ACLU, Margaret Sanger etc.

patriot45
01-24-2010, 08:35 PM
:mad: all my finds are good. Even the breast feeding dog was good!!:p

You sound like a DUmmie! An insecure one at that!!! :D

PoliCon
01-24-2010, 09:08 PM
You sound like a DUmmie! An insecure one at that!!! :D

Oh go shave your back :p

Rockntractor
01-24-2010, 09:08 PM
You sound like a DUmmie! An insecure one at that!!! :D

She is just sensitive! Where is your compassion you brute?:rolleyes:

PoliCon
01-24-2010, 09:12 PM
She is just sensitive! Where is your compassion you brute?:rolleyes:

Go play with your pigs . . . .
http://www.zonicweb.net/badalbmcvrs/handsomebeasts.jpg

Rockntractor
01-24-2010, 09:14 PM
And this is the thanks I get for being empathetic?:rolleyes:

patriot45
01-24-2010, 09:26 PM
Oh go shave your back :p

Oh shut up and sit down!

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i230/patriot45270/633778791937086585-midgets.jpg

PoliCon
01-24-2010, 11:03 PM
Oh shut up and sit down!

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i230/patriot45270/633778791937086585-midgets.jpg

clearly someone isn't getting porked enough . . . :p

AlmostThere
01-25-2010, 12:08 AM
I have to admit to being taken aback when Beck revealed Shaw's background. I had no idea. I wondered if this clip was something taken completely out of context, almost like a goof on eugenics. I discovered it wasn't. I also discovered that H.G. Wells was a socialist and a believer in eugenics along with Shaw. His book,"The Time Machine" is believed to directly address his beliefs. This was a completely new revelation to me. :o

PoliCon
01-25-2010, 12:41 AM
I have to admit to being taken aback when Beck revealed Shaw's background. I had no idea. I wondered if this clip was something taken completely out of context, almost like a goof on eugenics. I discovered it wasn't. I also discovered that H.G. Wells was a socialist and a believer in eugenics along with Shaw. His book,"The Time Machine" is believed to directly address his beliefs. This was a completely new revelation to me. :o

Don't be surprised - most everyone believed in eugenics back then - kinda like how AGW today.

noonwitch
01-25-2010, 09:43 AM
I have to admit to being taken aback when Beck revealed Shaw's background. I had no idea. I wondered if this clip was something taken completely out of context, almost like a goof on eugenics. I discovered it wasn't. I also discovered that H.G. Wells was a socialist and a believer in eugenics along with Shaw. His book,"The Time Machine" is believed to directly address his beliefs. This was a completely new revelation to me. :o


I never really thought of Shaw as a liberal or a progressive. I don't know much about him, but I am familiar with a couple of his plays from college lit classes. After reading Major Barbara, I always thought of him as a conservative-after all, the liberal (by the standards of Victorian England) Salvation Army volunteer, Barbara Underschaft loses all her arguments with her weapons-manufacturing father about who does more for the advancement of society!

I always thought of Shaw as a bitter man who thought he was a better playright than Shakespeare, and just couldn't understand how the rest of the world didn't see it that way, too.


I don't think Beck is being fair to all liberals with the way he is painting a broad stroke. I saw some of his "documentary" on Friday. I'm a liberal who is not a communist. I don't like to see the argument against communism made without putting the situations that led to communist upsrisings in context. The Romanovs were dictators who lived a life of luxury, while much of the rest of Russia was starving and cold. Baptista was a dictator, so was Samoza. I won't even get into the right-wing excesses of Juan Peron or Pinochet, who made so many of their enemies and other innocents "disappear". I'm not justifying communism nor am I justifying bloody uprisings and the slaughter of millions, but these things did not happen without a history behind them. The leaders of these uprisings used the atrocities of the facist/royalist dictators before them to justify their own atrocities. It would have been difficult for the likes of Lenin to sway enough people to his side to win the russian revolution if the Romanovs had been better leaders, or if they had allowed more democratic reforms that led to peasants having better conditions for employment or commerce. Communist ideology mostly appeals to people who feel as if they've been left out of the economic system in their nation, or people who think they speak for those who have been left out.

AlmostThere
01-25-2010, 11:34 AM
I never really thought of Shaw as a liberal or a progressive. I don't know much about him, but I am familiar with a couple of his plays from college lit classes. After reading Major Barbara, I always thought of him as a conservative-after all, the liberal (by the standards of Victorian England) Salvation Army volunteer, Barbara Underschaft loses all her arguments with her weapons-manufacturing father about who does more for the advancement of society!

I always thought of Shaw as a bitter man who thought he was a better playright than Shakespeare, and just couldn't understand how the rest of the world didn't see it that way, too.


I don't think Beck is being fair to all liberals with the way he is painting a broad stroke. I saw some of his "documentary" on Friday. I'm a liberal who is not a communist. I don't like to see the argument against communism made without putting the situations that led to communist upsrisings in context. The Romanovs were dictators who lived a life of luxury, while much of the rest of Russia was starving and cold. Baptista was a dictator, so was Samoza. I won't even get into the right-wing excesses of Juan Peron or Pinochet, who made so many of their enemies and other innocents "disappear". I'm not justifying communism nor am I justifying bloody uprisings and the slaughter of millions, but these things did not happen without a history behind them. The leaders of these uprisings used the atrocities of the facist/royalist dictators before them to justify their own atrocities. It would have been difficult for the likes of Lenin to sway enough people to his side to win the russian revolution if the Romanovs had been better leaders, or if they had allowed more democratic reforms that led to peasants having better conditions for employment or commerce. Communist ideology mostly appeals to people who feel as if they've been left out of the economic system in their nation, or people who think they speak for those who have been left out.

I think you have painted the Romanovs with a broad brush as well. Their demise was attributable to a number of events of which they had no control. Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese war contributed to the Russian Revolution of 1905. This revolution damaged the concept of Czarism. Rasputin's influence on the Romanovs did nothing to help them with the general population. And then comes WWI. WWI was devastating to Russia, really catastrophic. It was on the verge of complete collapse. Russia was easy pickings for Lenin and the Bolsheviks by this point.

I'm pretty sure it was much more involved than some elitists not giving a damn about the peasant class. :)

PoliCon
01-25-2010, 12:41 PM
I don't think Beck is being fair to all liberals with the way he is painting a broad stroke. Watch it. he's not talking about liberals - he's talking about progressives - this administration in particular.

noonwitch
01-25-2010, 12:46 PM
I think you have painted the Romanovs with a broad brush as well. Their demise was attributable to a number of events of which they had no control. Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese war contributed to the Russian Revolution of 1905. This revolution damaged the concept of Czarism. Rasputin's influence on the Romanovs did nothing to help them with the general population. And then comes WWI. WWI was devastating to Russia, really catastrophic. It was on the verge of complete collapse. Russia was easy pickings for Lenin and the Bolsheviks by this point.

I'm pretty sure it was much more involved than some elitists not giving a damn about the peasant class. :)



1. Nicholas married a woman (Alexandra) who the russian people considered their enemy, because she was from Germany (even if she was also related to Quenn Victoria).
2. The Romanovs allowed Rasputin to influence them, and didn't listen to any of their family and friends who were warning them not to.
3. WWI was badly mishandled by Nicholas. When he didn't like what his generals had to say, he took over control of the troops. Big mistake. The losses of troops in such large numbers make the people grieve and mistrust the leadership, especially considering the incestuous ties of the Romanovs, the British royal family and the Kaiser's family.
4. Nicholas completely bowed to the wishes of Rasputin and put unqualified and dangerous people in positions of power over the people, which those unqualified people abused.


Raputin is one of my favorite despotic historical figures. He would have never gotten anywhere if the Romanovs didn't fall for his con. Unlike so many people destroyed in the revolution, his daughter got out (and became a lion tamer!) because the whole time he was scamming the aristocracy, he was also sending money back home to his family in Siberia. He was a fascinating character. Alan Rickman played him in an HBO movie, he was great.

AlmostThere
01-25-2010, 08:30 PM
1. Nicholas married a woman (Alexandra) who the russian people considered their enemy, because she was from Germany (even if she was also related to Quenn Victoria).
2. The Romanovs allowed Rasputin to influence them, and didn't listen to any of their family and friends who were warning them not to.
3. WWI was badly mishandled by Nicholas. When he didn't like what his generals had to say, he took over control of the troops. Big mistake. The losses of troops in such large numbers make the people grieve and mistrust the leadership, especially considering the incestuous ties of the Romanovs, the British royal family and the Kaiser's family.
4. Nicholas completely bowed to the wishes of Rasputin and put unqualified and dangerous people in positions of power over the people, which those unqualified people abused.


Raputin is one of my favorite despotic historical figures. He would have never gotten anywhere if the Romanovs didn't fall for his con. Unlike so many people destroyed in the revolution, his daughter got out (and became a lion tamer!) because the whole time he was scamming the aristocracy, he was also sending money back home to his family in Siberia. He was a fascinating character. Alan Rickman played him in an HBO movie, he was great.

I saw a set of programs recently that explored all the czars from the very beginning through the murder of the Romanovs. I wish I had recorded it, it was really fascinating.

If I recall, Rasputin's influence stemmed from the fact he had given Alexandra some instructions in caring for Alexis's hemophilia and it seemed to work even though no one knew what the hell was wrong with him. If that is historically accurate, it's no surprise Rasputin had so much influence. It's kind of hard to fault a mother for wanting to save her child at whatever cost.

Now if you wanted to bad-mouth Vlad the Impaler, we could talk. :eek:

Rockntractor
01-25-2010, 11:30 PM
I saw a set of programs recently that explored all the czars from the very beginning through the murder of the Romanovs. I wish I had recorded it, it was really fascinating.

If I recall, Rasputin's influence stemmed from the fact he had given Alexandra some instructions in caring for Alexis's hemophilia and it seemed to work even though no one knew what the hell was wrong with him. If that is historically accurate, it's no surprise Rasputin had so much influence. It's kind of hard to fault a mother for wanting to save her child at whatever cost.

Now if you wanted to bad-mouth Vlad the Impaler, we could talk. :eek:
Vlad was misunderstood! If they would have had anger management and antidepressants who knows how different history might have been!

AlmostThere
01-26-2010, 12:07 AM
Vlad was misunderstood! If they would have had anger management and antidepressants who knows how different history might have been!

Well one thing is for sure; no one would know who Bela Lugosi was. :rolleyes:

noonwitch
01-26-2010, 09:01 AM
I saw a set of programs recently that explored all the czars from the very beginning through the murder of the Romanovs. I wish I had recorded it, it was really fascinating.

If I recall, Rasputin's influence stemmed from the fact he had given Alexandra some instructions in caring for Alexis's hemophilia and it seemed to work even though no one knew what the hell was wrong with him. If that is historically accurate, it's no surprise Rasputin had so much influence. It's kind of hard to fault a mother for wanting to save her child at whatever cost.

Now if you wanted to bad-mouth Vlad the Impaler, we could talk. :eek:



The doctors who treated the child said that Rasputin could stop his bleeding by praying for him-he could allegedly even do it over the phone. It drove the doctors crazy because they couldn't find an explaination for this.

The family was very secretive about Alexis' disease, and the public wasn't aware of it at all. They could have gotten some public sympathy if they had been more public, but Nicholas felt that if they revealed the fact that the heir was facing a short life, the people would have demanded a different Romanov be declared Nicholas' heir. Because of primogeniture, the daughters could not inherit the throne. The emperor Paul arranged that because he had some mommy issues about Catherine the Great, who did, after all , have her lover kill her husband so she could be empress.

Rasputin probably used a form of hypnosis on the child, to stop his bleeding. Other people in the family's circle could see this-the archduke (the giant guy from some of the WWI photos), for one, and obviously, the Yusopovs.

megimoo
01-27-2010, 12:39 PM
This is a rush transcript from "Glenn Beck," January 22, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GLENN BECK, HOST: Welcome to a special edition of "The Glenn Beck Program."

The story of America is really one of self-reliance and optimism, and profound faith. Not only in the context of religious freedom, but also in the unprecedented faith in the ability of human beings to control their own destiny.

And while the spirit of personal responsibility was extraordinarily strong with our founders, great patriots like Thomas Paine, he argued for redistribution of wealth right off the bat. Alexander Hamilton, he wanted a central bank. Well, they wound up losing those battles but there were plenty who kept can on fighting.

The Constitution kept those dogs at bay for better part of 200 years. But, eventually, those seeking a different path than the ones the founders settled on realized the only way to really defeat the Constitution was for the people to stop reading it. Progressives realized victory required changing history. To defeat them, we have to correct that.

Progressives know how powerful history is. When these truths get told and the lies get corrected, the game is going to be on. It's pulling the mask off the monster.

Next week, we'll dive deeper in to the progressive script. But today, we dismantle the first act.

We've always been told that genocidal dictators of the world oh, they're just manifestations of the hateful right, that the left wing icons like Che and Mao and Stalin need to be understood in context.

Tonight, we set the record straight.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583732,00.html

PoliCon
01-27-2010, 02:01 PM
well moo now proves that no only does he not read the things he posts here - he doesn't read what other people post here either.

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=24376

PoliCon
01-27-2010, 02:03 PM
BUMP for moo since he doesn't seem to understand how the forum SEARCH feature works.

FlaGator
01-27-2010, 07:29 PM
BUMP for moo since he doesn't seem to understand how the forum SEARCH feature works.

Careful dude, don't get on his bad side. He'll quit talking to you. It worked for him in the 2nd grade so he's carried it on into his adult life :D

PoliCon
01-27-2010, 07:43 PM
Careful dude, don't get on his bad side. He'll quit talking to you. It worked for him in the 2nd grade so he's carried it on into his adult life :D

TOO LATE lol :D