Who Is Mark Lloyd?You should probably know.

[meesterperfect]

People do know that the term "Czar" is derived from the Latin word "Caesar" and is most commonly used to describe a supreme leader, Emperor or King of some sort (mainly in eastern Europe) and has nothing to do with socialism, don't they? No one can be that stupid. Unless of course they mean they and their group of rag-tag Marxist/socialist radicals is going to overthrow them in some fashion?

But that would be a reversal of roles now wouldn't it....

I know of its modern use but come on, if people are going to continue to push the "socialism" banner in everyone’s face it would be wise to not to continue to use a phrase which has historically the complete opposite meaning which contradicts their position.

Ok now that we know the history of the word czar, watch this vid again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw4zpVr3mls
This is the chairman of the FCC (the commision in which OBAMA created a very important or powerful position for Lloyd, just popped him in there), saying this guy is extreme and a concern.
He wants to know whats his deal, he's concerned over his new position and intentions based on his (lloyds) own words.
He wants to address him personally. To much to ask?
So its not just Beck.
Ofcourse the stuffed shirts defend him by talking in circles.

 

[Mrs Jolly]

Is this where some people are getting their political opinions?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJkxBLgd5Hs&feature=player_embedded



Fuck me fucking sideways.

 

[Facetious]

Good point. However, he's not in a position to make law and there's this little thing called the US Constitution along with his bosses who stand in his way.

This is silly, what Democratic party super majority is going to be mindful of the United States Constitution much less, the rule of law ? There are no checks and balances in place and there won't be any checks and balances for 14 more months ? There's still plenty of time for obama and all of his loser welfare state of affair bloggers (you know who you are) to turn this nation into something that the framers would never have envisioned in the worst of their nightmares !

Please be frank with us Mega, cease the straw men.

 

[Rey C.]

I used to watch him now and then when he was on Headline News. He was a little wacky then but he made some valid points. Now that he is at Fox News he just goes into histrionics the likes of which I have not seen since a retarded kid in my high school had a spaz attack during lunch in the mid '70's.

Wasn't Beck in high school in the mid 70's?
Hmm...

 

[Hot Mega]

This is silly, what Democratic party super majority is going to be mindful of the United States Constitution much less, the rule of law ? There are no checks and balances in place and there won't be any checks and balances for 14 more months ?

^^^No clue what "checks and balances" means. Certainly this is the first and only time in US history both houses of congress were of the same party as the POTUS

There's still plenty of time for obama and all of his loser welfare state of affair bloggers (you know who you are) to turn this nation into something that the framers would never have envisioned in the worst of their nightmares!

The nation is already something the Framers would have never envisioned in their worst nightmares.....You know, the government intruding into the personal affairs of it's citizenry and invading sovereign nations unprovoked but let's not get distracted by the real issues which affect the day to day lives of everyday Americans.

How could a military guy like yourself actually praise this passificistfreshman senator turned president ? :

:dunno: Hmmm, my head is not up my ass unlike those who sit around creating specious arguments full of holes and in some cases outright lies in order to attack the guy.

One political party ran the country for 6 years and they were afforded every opportunity to implement nearly every policy they wanted. THEY changed America and fucked it up.

Maybe some of you are suffering from short term memory loss or something but it's pretty hilarious on the heels of the previous administration hearing the lunacy and desperation in opposition to Obama now.

 

[Rey C.]

People do know that the term "Czar" is derived from the Latin word "Caesar" and is most commonly used to describe a supreme leader, Emperor or King of some sort (mainly in eastern Europe) and has nothing to do with socialism, don't they? No one can be that stupid. Unless of course they mean they and their group of rag-tag Marxist/socialist radicals is going to overthrow them in some fashion?

But that would be a reversal of roles now wouldn't it....

I know of its modern use but come on, if people are going to continue to push the "socialism" banner in everyone’s face it would be wise to not to continue to use a phrase which has historically the complete opposite meaning which contradicts their position.

Dude, a lot of the people who are doing this crazy dance in the U.S. are fundamentalist Evangelicals, who believe that the Earth is roughly 6,000 years old. I shit you not. The only thing they know about Caesar is what their preacher man told them on some Sunday morning... in between speaking in tongues and playing with rattle snakes to test his faith.

Czar sure sounds Russian to me. And what do we know about Ruskies? They is commies!!! And even though the term "czar" is not a title within the U.S. government, why accept the facts when fiction is so fucking juicy?

It may turn out that Obama is not the answer. But anyone who thinks that putting traitorous neocons and whacko fundamentialist Evangelicals back in power would be a good idea... please, shoot yourself. Seriously. Rest the barrel against your lower teeth, tilt the barrel at about a 45 degree angle... and squeeeeeze the trigger. I would recommend the use of a 12 gauge shotgun. :thumbsup:

 

[jasonk282]

Dude, a lot of the people who are doing this crazy dance in the U.S. are fundamentalist Evangelicals, who believe that the Earth is roughly 6,000 years old. I shit you not. The only thing they know about Caesar is what their preacher man told them on some Sunday morning... in between speaking in tongues and playing with rattle snakes to test his faith.

Czar sure sounds Russian to me. And what do we know about Ruskies? They is commies!!! And even though the term "czar" is not a title within the U.S. government, why accept the facts when fiction is so fucking juicy?

It may turn out that Obama is not the answer. But anyone who thinks that putting traitorous neocons and whacko fundamentialist Evangelicals back in power would be a good idea... please, shoot yourself. Seriously. Rest the barrel against your lower teeth, tilt the barrel at about a 45 degree angle... and squeeeeeze the trigger. I would recommend the use of a 12 gauge shotgun. :thumbsup:

There are more to Republicans than NeoCons and Evangelicals. Just like there is more to Democrats than Liberals and Progressives.

It just happens that these are the far right and far left of each political party and the media tends to focus on them as they are more sensenational and over the top.

 

[Rey C.]

^^^Yeah, but there were also more decent Germans than there were Nazis in Germany in the 1930's. It all comes down to who calls the shots. And right now, the neocons and Evangelicals call the shots in the GOP. The money and the organization is with the neocons and extremist bible thumpers. And IMO, they're dangerous people. I've walked among them - I know this from experience.

 

[jasonk282]

^^^Yeah, but there were also more decent Germans than there were Nazis in Germany in the 1930's. It all comes down to who calls the shots. And right now, the neocons and Evangelicals call the shots in the GOP. The money and the organization is with the neocons and extremist bible thumpers. And IMO, they're dangerous people. I've walked among them - I know this from experience.

Really becasue I am sure Michale Steel would think differently

Steele has stated that he "absolutely" believes there is room for a pro-abortion candidate in the GOP. In a March 2009 GQ interview, Steele called abortion an "individual choice" that should be decided by the states.

"It is imperative we improve conditions on the ground so we can bring our troops home as quickly as possible and have the Iraqi people take control of their own destiny. At the same time, we should not publicly state a timetable for implementation. I do not support a 'cut and run strategy.' Any politician out there talking about timetables and timelines is playing into the hands of our enemies who have an enormous capacity to wait. It would be a disaster for us to cut and run, as it would destroy our credibility in the region for at least a generation. At the same time, it is the Iraqi's themselves that will ultimately have to make democracy work in their country. We should stay there only long enough to give the Iraqi people the tools they need to secure the very democracy they voted for three times. After that, it's up to them."

"You can have all the gun control laws in the country, but if you don't enforce them, people are going to find a way to protect themselves. We need to recognize that bad people are doing bad things with these weapons. It's not the law-abiding citizens, it's not the person who uses it as a hobby...Society should draw lines. What do you need an assault weapon for, if you're going hunting? That's overkill. But I don't think that means you go to a total ban for those who want to use gun for skeet shooting or hunting or things like that. But what's the point of passing gun laws if we're not going to enforce them? If you want to talk about gun control, that's where you need to start. We've got 300 gun laws on the books right now. At the end of the day, it's about how we enforce the law

Secure our borders first. Let us know and let us make sure the American people know that we're taking care of the important business of dealing with the illegal immigration into this country. You cannot begin to address the concerns of the people who are already here unless and until you have made certain that no more are coming in behind them

 

[Galactic]

I used to watch him now and then when he was on Headline News. He was a little wacky then but he made some valid points. Now that he is at Fox News he just goes into histrionics the likes of which I have not seen since a retarded kid in my high school had a spaz attack during lunch in the mid '70's.

You obviously don't watch him now.

Remember this is the guy that though Hugo Chaves had a "glourious revolution"

Exactly.

So how come Obama would not go on Fox this past Sunday? Is he worried about them asking tough questions instead of asking about his White Sox and their chances of making the playoffs.

He is unable to answer difficult questions....he therefore sticks to people like Letterman, for Christs' sake.

I'm thinking he probably has better things to do for one. Secondly, if I'm Obama...fuck Fox. Why should he give them the time of day when their network is committed to undermining him at every turn??

He'd make a better, more productive use of his time convincing talking to Ahmadinejad about accepting Israel than trying get through to anyone at Fox or the yokels in their viewership.

Agree with it or not, he is alienating millions and millions of "yokels" by not appearing on the network....for a guy who originally claimed that he was going to end partisan politics, he has done more to divide this nation and those in government than anyone else in recent memory.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

What a maroon.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, even if it is dead wrong, and I would suggest that you actually watch/listen to his program in its entirety at least once before jumping on the bandwagon and calling names....oh wait.....that's what the left does. Never mind. Carry on!

 

[Hot Mega]

Agree with it or not, he is alienating millions and millions of "yokels" by not appearing on the network....for a guy who originally claimed that he was going to end partisan politics, he has done more to divide this nation and those in government than anyone else in recent memory.

Not. You can't alienate people who didn't vote for you, will never vote for you and show up religiously to watch a network's latest bash of you.

Obama has done everything within what's reasonable for being in an opposing party to bridge the political divide. Those who have met him with arrows instead of olive branches need to acknowledge their role in exacerbating and exploiting the political divide.

Why would Obama (himself) go on a network which has shown to be against him up and down and isn't interested in a honest debate on how to better the country but only to better position the GOP??

Until they show they can respect his candidacy, election and administration with the normal accord due a man in his position, he should say (figuratively) "fuck off Fox and grow the fuck up".

 

[Facetious]

One political party ran the country for 6 years and they were afforded every opportunity to implement nearly every policy they wanted. THEY changed America and fucked it up.

They sure did, in fact, most everything the so called republicans did wrong was a compliment to the democratic party.

Maybe some of you are suffering from short term memory loss or something but it's pretty hilarious on the heels of the previous administration hearing the lunacy and desperation in opposition to Obama now.

Yea, no shit ! obama is just a little further to left of jorge "w" booosh, what do you expect ?
The specious argument is that "w" was a model right winger,:1orglaugh again, if anything, the man was a credit to the democratic party, don't knock it !

^^^No clue what "checks and balances" means.

You selectively don't want to know.

Certainly this is the first and only time in US history both houses of congress were of the same party as the POTUS

Where did I make claim that it was ? ":spin:"

The nation is already something the Framers would have never envisioned in their worst nightmares

So how about a little restoration and recovery instead of pulling the nation further into the exact direction that "w" was headed ... debt oblivion?

You know, the government intruding into the personal affairs of it's citizenry

Isn't that among mark lloyd's duties via the imposition of "diversity" ?
thank you very much.

invading sovereign nations unprovoked

Who specifically invaded what sovereign nation ? If you're referring to Iraq, he did so with Congressional approval, besides, who else was gonna enforce the provisions of u.n. resolution 1441, the blue helmets ? I don't THINK so..

:dunno:

Hmmm, my head is not up my ass unlike those who sit around creating specious arguments full of holes and in some cases outright lies in order to attack the guy.

elaborate on the specifics so that we can evaluate better what the hell it is you're referring to ? :hatsoff:

 

[meesterperfect]

^^^Yeah, but there were also more decent Germans than there were Nazis in Germany in the 1930's. It all comes down to who calls the shots. And right now, the neocons and Evangelicals call the shots in the GOP. The money and the organization is with the neocons and extremist bible thumpers. And IMO, they're dangerous people. I've walked among them - I know this from experience.

i totally disagree.
trying not to create a pissing contest here but if it is how you say, and the gop ihas extremists calling the shots, than there would be much much more agression against what the democrats are doing these days.
I know the democrats like pelosi have gotten so desperate and out of touch with reality that they actually are trying to portray the average conservative as an extremist or militant or religious nut.
In reality the average conservative just wants to see a future for the generations yet to come and not see the country being changed into something t shouldn't or was never intended to be, like complete government control with huge spending and forever higher taxes.
The dem party on the other hand is filled with extremists, just take a look at each czar, rahm emmanuel,the leaders of congress, ect ect.
These people are in control, and they are extreme.
Face it.

 

[Hot Mega]

They sure did, in fact, most everything the so called republicans did wrong was a compliment to the democratic party.

Yea, no shit ! obama is just a little further to left of jorge "w" booosh, what do you expect ?
The specious argument is that "w" was a model right winger,:1orglaugh again, if anything, the man was a credit to the democratic party, don't knock it !

"...a compliment to the democratic party.." I guess that's suppose to be an empty reference to mythical notion of a republican who spends like a democrat???

If so, I see you buy that myth too. GOPers have ALWAYS spent and in the majority of cases more than Democrats....they just spend on shit like wars and excessive waste on military contractors.:2 cents:

Beyond that, where was GWB a leftist??? On abortion? On "gun control"? On military spending? On religion??? So called social values?? Where exactly was GWB "left"??? I think you get the picture, he wasn't....this is just another myth created by the right to explaining away all the money he borrowed and spent on phony stimuli and Iraq.

You selectively don't want to know.

"Checks and balances" doesn't mean one party in control of congress and another in control of the executive branch....which you seem to be implying.

If so, you need to take a refresher course on American Government. Checks and balances means among other things bills the legislature passes cannot become law without the POTUS signing them. And certain policies the POTUS wants to implement can not go forward without the advice and consent of congress. When that changes let us know.

Where did I make claim that it was ?

You didn't, you just implied that our country can't function on a system of "checks and balances" until 14 mos. from now. My question is how on earth did our country survive all the other times before if what you say constitutes no "checks and balances"???

Who specifically invaded what sovereign nation ? If you're referring to Iraq, he did so with Congressional approval, besides, who else was gonna enforce the provisions of u.n. resolution 1441, the blue helmets ? I don't THINK so..

The US led the invasion and unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation. That is in direct contravention to ANYTHING the Framers would expect of the nation they founded. Making some phony, trumped up case to congress members and the UN is no excuse.

:dunno: elaborate on the specifics so that we can evaluate better what the hell it is you're referring to ? :hatsoff:

That's your question to this statement??

"...it's pretty hilarious on the heels of the previous administration hearing the lunacy and desperation in opposition to Obama now."

Response: Birthers claiming Obama wasn't born in the US despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the irrelevant point of calling him a Muslim even though HE says he's a Christian, has been baptized and goes to a church and not a mosque, claiming a simple speech encouraging kids to work hard and stay in school amounts to some evil brainwashing, claiming he's going to take our "guns" when he's said time and time again the 2nd amendment confers and individual right to "gun" ownership, claiming his closing of GiTMO means he's releasing terrorists and on and on and on....:wave2:

 

[Galactic]

Not. You can't alienate people who didn't vote for you, will never vote for you and show up religiously to watch a network's latest bash of you.

Obama has done everything within what's reasonable for being in an opposing party to bridge the political divide. Those who have met him with arrows instead of olive branches need to acknowledge their role in exacerbating and exploiting the political divide.

Why would Obama (himself) go on a network which has shown to be against him up and down and isn't interested in a honest debate on how to better the country but only to better position the GOP??

Until they show they can respect his candidacy, election and administration with the normal accord due a man in his position, he should say (figuratively) "fuck off Fox and grow the fuck up".

Guess what? I voted for him......and I watch FOX......and not a day has passed recently that I have not fully regretted my vote. Of course all politicians lie......he's that in hyperspeed. I have a very difficult time believing I am the only one who voted for him, and now regrets what we have. He is alienating people who voted for him.....he has and is.

I think FOX is getting a lot of untrue bad press, of course from the floundering, failing, flailing "news" outlets......I watch regularly.....all they seem to do, in my opinion, and many others', is ask the questions that should be asked, but aren't.

Instead, we have "reporters" asking him about the White Sox.

He has been shown respect. If it is disrespectful to ask the man hard questions, then we have truly turned around backwards in this country in relation to what is important now and will be in the near future.

 

[Hot Mega]

Guess what? I voted for him......and I watch FOX......and not a day has passed recently that I have not fully regretted my vote. Of course all politicians lie......he's that in hyperspeed. I have a very difficult time believing I am the only one who voted for him, and now regrets what we have. He is alienating people who voted for him.....he has and is.

Well all I can say is you need to be a more informed voter the next time. Because I don't know WHAT you could have thought you were voting for in Obama if you get your interpretations of his policies from Fox. I highly doubt you voted for the man (on purpose) base on some of the specious, dumbfounding arguments you asserted on this forum. Policy-wise he's doing everything he ran on...the platform you claimed to have voted for.....What did you think you were voting for when he said he was closing GiTMO during the campaign??? What did you think you were voting for when he said he was going to seek universal health care for all Americans during the campaign is now doing that very thing?? What did you think you were voting for when he said he would cease the US's combat role in Iraq and remove our troops in 16 mos. during the campaign and is taking steps to do so now?? What did you think you were voting for when he said he would increase the number of troops in Afghanistan and escalate that effort during the campaign and is doing so now?? What did you think you were voting for when he ran on bipartisanship and added republicans to his administration??? What did you think you were voting for when he said he would attack Al Quaeda in Pakistan if necessary and he's doing that now?? What did you think you were voting for when he said on the campaign he would work to repair our national identity and reputation with our allies around the world and he did so after getting elected and he went around the world attempting to do so....I'm mean, honestly, what did you think you were voting for???

I think FOX is getting a lot of untrue bad press, of course from the floundering, failing, flailing "news" outlets......I watch regularly.....all they seem to do, in my opinion, and many others', is ask the questions that should be asked, but aren't.

Their reputation is well deserved. They mislead and in some cases outright lie to project a clear political agenda. They're a tabloid...and just because responsible news outlets are not uncouth enough to ask dumb shit like, "do you pal around with terrorists?" doesn't make Fox great news makers for asking dumb shit like that.

Instead, we have "reporters" asking him about the White Sox.

He has been shown respect. If it is disrespectful to ask the man hard questions, then we have truly turned around backwards in this country in relation to what is important now and will be in the near future.

I suppose asking Obama about the White Sox is worse than Hannity asking Wasilla Sarah how she liked doing SNL....:dunno:

 

[Galactic]

Well all I can say is you need to be a more informed voter the next time. Because I don't know WHAT you could have thought you were voting for in Obama if you get your interpretations of his policies from Fox. I highly doubt you voted for the man (on purpose) base on some of the specious, dumbfounding arguments you asserted on this forum. Policy-wise he's doing everything he ran on...the platform you claimed to have voted for.....What did you think you were voting for when he said he was closing GiTMO during the campaign??? What did you think you were voting for when he said he was going to seek universal health care for all Americans during the campaign is now doing that very thing?? What did you think you were voting for when he said he would cease the US's combat role in Iraq and remove our troops in 16 mos. during the campaign and is taking steps to do so now?? What did you think you were voting for when he said he would increase the number of troops in Afghanistan and escalate that effort during the campaign and is doing so now?? What did you think you were voting for when he ran on bipartisanship and added republicans to his administration??? What did you think you were voting for when he said he would attack Al Quaeda in Pakistan if necessary and he's doing that now?? What did you think you were voting for when he said on the campaign he would work to repair our national identity and reputation with our allies around the world and he did so after getting elected and he went around the world attempting to do so....I'm mean, honestly, what did you think you were voting for???



Their reputation is well deserved. They mislead and in some cases outright lie to project a clear political agenda. They're a tabloid...and just because responsible news outlets are not uncouth enough to ask dumb shit like, "do you pal around with terrorists?" doesn't make Fox great news makers for asking dumb shit like that.


I suppose asking Obama about the White Sox is worse than Hannity asking Wasilla Sarah how she liked doing SNL....:dunno:

OK. To begin. Universal health care...sounded great, and I still believe the system we have now does need to be fixed....that being said, I did not anticipate a massive price tag like the one that comes with his.....and he still has not announced how he is going to pay for it....where do you think $1,000,000,000,000 is going to come from?

I'm torn on the GITMO debate....I really am........

I have no problem withdrawing from Iraq if the country is stable enough to support and defend itself now. However, I am not sure that is the case......

I ABSOLUTELY agree with the sending of more troops to Afghanistan....I never said I was against that idea....in fact, I believe that we need to send MORE over there, and not run away like cowards.

You mentioned bipartisanship.....how has he done that? By surrounding himself with ULTRA liberals, like, oh, I don't know, people who founded the Weather Underground, you know, the very people who bombed the fucking Pentagon! Has he answered those claims, or explained his ties to those people? No, he has not.

Repair out national identity.....great. Pander and cry and look fucking WEAK and APOLOGIZE to fucking terrorist nations?! Not what I had in mind when I cast my vote that day. I am tired.....I am sick to death....of the Annoited One's apology tours and America bashing.....every time he goes overseas that is all I hear spout from his mouth......so no, I was happy to hear about repairing a possibly damaged opinion of America in the rest of the world's eyes, but I do NOT agree with him bowing down and kissing Chavez's ass to do it!

Outright lie? Serious claim. Care to back it up? Yes, I watch O'Reilly and Beck on a fairly regular basis......point out ONE specific time that either one has outright lied, and I will grant you that. But I bet you money you can't.

Dumbfounding arguments? Fair enough. I am entitled to my opinion, as you are to yours. But don't you fucking dare tell me I need to be more informed, my friend........I looked at the two candidates, listened to every debate......thought long and hard about my decision.....the man I voted for is NOT the same guy in the White House today.

You can attack FOX and my opinion all you want, but I will not sit back and let you attack my decision making process. THAT is where YOU lost respect in my eyes. :thefinger

 

[Mrs Jolly]

Outright lie? Serious claim. Care to back it up? Yes, I watch O'Reilly and Beck on a fairly regular basis......point out ONE specific time that either one has outright lied, and I will grant you that. But I bet you money you can't.


You can attack FOX and my opinion all you want, but I will not sit back and let you attack my decision making process. THAT is where YOU lost respect in my eyes. :thefinger

I believe that Al Franken wrote a whole book about lying. O'Reilly featured heavily in it. He was on the cover. He wanted to sue. His bosses told him not to. This was not because he would win, incase you are in any doubt.

There are numerous sources cross referenced throughout the book where O'Reilly was caught in outrageous lies. (I really do like the one where he claimed that the showbiz gossip show he did (Hard Copy?) was the recipient of a Peabody award - in the radio transcript of the interview with Tery Gross: (Again, it was years ago, so forgive me if I'm fuzzy on the detail) she is mighty quizzical when he mentions the peabody - mostly because it is so fucking ludicrous that his tinsel and tits show ever won one.

Regardless, there are tons of examples of O'Reilly lying in there - all in print and all referenced. If O'Reilly could have had him for libel he would have. So, how much money were you betting that O'Reilly never lied? I'll take it in unmarked used 100's. Thanks.

Honestly, the bit I don't get is that there are some fantastic right wing pundits in america (and the UK - especially in the UK - where thay don't have a dog inthe fight.) Why keep going to bat for knobs like Beck, who can barely time a knock knock joke, never mind explain diplomatic policy?

 

[Friday on my mind]

I believe that Al Franken wrote a whole book about lying. O'Reilly featured heavily in it. He was on the cover. He wanted to sue. His bosses told him not to. This was not because he would win, incase you are in any doubt.

There are numerous sources cross referenced throughout the book where O'Reilly was caught in outrageous lies. (I really do like the one where he claimed that the showbiz gossip show he did (Hard Copy?) was the recipient of a Peabody award - in the radio transcript of the interview with Tery Gross: (Again, it was years ago, so forgive me if I'm fuzzy on the detail) she is mighty quizzical when he mentions the peabody - mostly because it is so fucking ludicrous that his tinsel and tits show ever won one.

Regardless, there are tons of examples of O'Reilly lying in there - all in print and all referenced. If O'Reilly could have had him for libel he would have. So, how much money were you betting that O'Reilly never lied? I'll take it in unmarked used 100's. Thanks.

Honestly, the bit I don't get is that there are some fantastic right wing pundits in america (and the UK - especially in the UK - where thay don't have a dog inthe fight.) Why keep going to bat for knobs like Beck, who can barely time a knock knock joke, never mind explain diplomatic policy?

Whole documentary on how Fox lies called "outfoxed" from a few years ago.Much of it told by former employees of Fox news.Also you can go to google or Youtube and just put in "Fox lies" and get tons of examples.I think it's safe to say they lie or misrepresent the truth every day on their network.It's much worse than any other media I know of.

 

[meesterperfect]

Desperateness. Lameness.
Nothing Beck has shown has been lies
His opinion is one thing but of all the programs which he has focused on Obama appointed czars, its the czars own words, taken IN context and their past actions that tell the entire story.
Tells who they are and what they want to do.
Theyre racist, communist intentions.
I'm a conservative and like most can admit if a conservative is in the wrong.
Why can't you Obama followers do the same?
Is it pride? White guilt? Racism? Or do you really want to see the country be given to these people,the working class be obliviated and be thrown down the shitter?