Thread: Glenn Beck offers "Ron Paul" 1 hour on show

I never knew just what to make of Glenn Beck. I listened but mostly turned him off.

There was never much substance in what he said and I didn't find him funny.

He is a "Johnny come lately" to everything he has been talking about recently. He used to call us the tin foil hat conspiracy nuts. He admits that a few years ago he didn't believed these things to be true.

Recently he has found out that what some of his callers have been saying are true and just so happens to have already written a book about it.

That was fast.

I stated in one of my posts, that the thought of him making money off of this new found knowledge really ticked me off. If I knew these things for the last couple of years and most others here did also. How come he was so ill informed, where did he have his head, in the bottle.

Or was he too afraid to talk about them until he signed his big contract.

He still makes snide remarks about Ron Paul and I don't blame RP for not going on his show. I think he could be really cruel at Ron's expense.

I think he is a shill, just like Hannity, Rush and O'Reilly. I guess everyone is entitled to a change of heart because they were the only one's I used to listen to. Now I can't stand the site of O'Reilly with his "I'm going to ruin your life because I don't like what you did or said" attitude.

Hannity can't stand the mention of Ron Paul and if anyone calls about him, he hangs up on them. Rush is just a Buffoon, but a shill none the less.

But hey! That's only my opinion.

There is going to be some animosity and disagreement about who our favorite candidate is, but let's not let a talk show host come between any of us.

95% of Americans know nothing at all about the North American Union and 99% of Canadians are unaware of it. There are alot of people who think we are nut cases, and the more anyone and everyone talks about it the better off America is for it, or people will never get educated.

Glenn Beck admitted that to Pat Buchannan who was on his show the other day, he said until he started investigating it he could not believe it, as is the same with most of the population, luckly Education does change peoples minds and wakes them up to facts.

But you are right we all don't need to like the same show hosts, I just don't think Glenn is out to get anyone.

I would like to here what Paul has to say in more than 2 second sound bites, especially because I am leary on his foriegn policy after a few quick statements he has made, I would not want to judge him on something he did not have time to explain.

Hunter and Tancredo both have been on Beck's show and they were great interviews, I would just think an hour of free time to answer questions honestly can not hurt you, or is there some subjects that are off limits to ask a Presidental canidate?

I agree with you about Hannity and O"Rielly although O'Rielly can be useful at times, as he has brought out stories we have sent him on Victims of crimes by illegals. But then we don't have to agree with them on everything 100% of the time, but we do need them to help us expose things to the public, and there are very few willing to do that.

Beck is finally willing, of course Lou (and there are people who don't like him ) O'Rielly and actually we have gotten Hannity to speak up for our side on Illegal immigration. I say use them them for what ever they are willing to do to expose the truth to educate the public, there are to few willing in the MSM.

I like the idea of using them to get the message out, but you have to wonder what took them so long. I think it was because at lest 80% of the country was taking a negative position on illegal immigration that Hannity thought he better get on board if he wanted some good ratings on his show. This is why I don't trust him. Rush gives it about two paragraphs when something is going down. If they really believed in the cause they would give it more time than they do.

Have you heard any mention of the NAU on Hannity or Rush yet? I couldn't say for sure because I have been tuning them out since the comprehensive immigration vote.
You have to be more than a two note Samba before you start loosing your listeners. The war and Hate Hillary was all Shawn could talk about and is still hammering away at daily. It gets monotonous and after a while you have to turn it off.

I have to give credit to Glenn that he is finally talking about the NAU, but what took him so long. You can not tell me he didn't know about it.
Like I said before, the book came out awfully fast after he first mentioned it.

It is what these talk show hosts don't talk about that makes them not trustworthy.

Hunter and Tancredo both have been on Beck's show and they were great interviews, I would just think an hour of free time to answer questions honestly can not hurt you, or is there some subjects that are off limits to ask a Presidental canidate?

No there should not be any limits to what you can ask a Presidential candidate.

As far as being gracious to Tancredo and Hunter, I think this is because they are not a threat to his masters, they might be against illegal immigration but not the Nation building and getting out of Iran. Ron Paul is a threat.

I realize that what little time Ron Paul gets to speak it is usually about the Constitution and our sovereignty and not illegal immigration, but I have see his answers on where he stands on his website and they are good enough for me. I have also seen his report card at NumbersUSA.

What good is making a major stand on illegal immigration if our borders are to be erased with the North American Union. One cancels out the other, so as important as illegal immigration is to me. Loosing our sovereignty and our Constitution with the North American Union is more important. Furthermore I don't expect to agree with the candidate I choose 100%, but I will not let wedge issues get in my way.

By the way I was for the war before I was against the war. That is because I believed what they told me that Saddam had WMD's.

I didn't want to go to war but I figured if he is working on them now, we better nip it in the bud or we will have to go in later when it is more dangerous for our troops.

Now I know the extent of their lies and their war mongering. They just want bases all over the ME. and their agenda for One World Government.

They are more rotten and corrupt than I first thought they were, and that was a lot.

The North American Union has been being put in place since way before daddy Bush......What took me until a year ago to believe it was happening?

I can answer that... I did not educate myself until then, I did not go looking for answers as is still the case with most of America, I said they were all a bunch of nuts . As far as Hannity goes on that issue he is probably a part of the problem, but as long as he is speaking against illegal immigration he is helping our side.

Wedge issues to me are issues like Health care, Education etc.

Paul has been my #1 choice and still is, but I would like to hear him speak in debth and with clairity on foriegn policy, You can not close literally every base we have in the world and protect America, I realize we have an enormous amount we don't need anymore, as Buchannan said on Becks show the other day, why are we still in Germany? close that base and bring them home, or Great Britain Why are we still there? they are a huge cost to Americans, we have alot of unnecessary basis but we do have some stratigic basis that are important to our security. This is a huge issue being used against him( by alot of the MSM) and it could easily be solved.

I would like to hear him in depth, so not only can I understand him better, but so other people will realize he is not a "nut" when he says we need to close down our military bases around the world and bring Americans home. Is he speaking of all basis or just a few? That scares people and I think it can be easily clarified and put to rest, if he had time to speak about it. Alot of Americans are wondering what is he talking about close all basis ,I don't believe he means ALL BASIS, but national secuity is really important, and not what I would call a wedge issue.

Maybe he has clairified his remarks and I missed it. Do you happen to know?

He is great on immigration, the constitutuion and most everything else, and I would not let it stop me from voting for him.

There are at this time only 3 canidates I would support...Hunter, Tancredo and Paul and sadly Hunter and Tancredo for some reason can not pull themselfs out of the gate.

But the decussion has been fun and thanks for your input we are at an impasse I want him to go on the show and you don't, I e-mailed him and you don't have to, if you believe it is wrong...what a great country huh Lets hope together we can help save it!!

Originally Posted by NOamNASTY

Glenn has had islam watch on this past week,

I wonder what kind of questions he would ask Ron on the CAIR, NOI and Saudi backing his campaign ?

Can you provide some links with the proof that Ron Paul is being backed by Saudi and the rest of the above mentioned groups? I have not seen this and need proof;as I am petrified of the Demoncrats and if necessary I am planning on voting for Ron Paul.

Thanks

SOSAD, as you know I do not support Ron Paul. I just think that Beck is an immature neocon, who puts neoconservative foreign policy above everything. He will support Giuliani along with O'Reilly and Hannity. IMO, these guys are far more interested in bombing Iran than doing anything about the border. Paul does not dicuss immigration in the debates. I do not think Glenn even knows Paul's postition on this. They might talk about the NAU. But Glenn's main reason for wanting Paul on his show is to duke it out over foreign policy -- it will be similar to Paul's appearance on O'Reilly, interviews with Hannity etc.

I saw Buchanan on yesterday, and yes Glenn was good with the questions about the border, globalism etc. He did argue with Pat about foreign policy, but the interview was mostly friendly. But Pat is rightly seen as a HUGE advocate of border security and saving this nation from the Third World take-over. So the interview had to go that way. I don't think the MSM sees Paul as tough on border security, which is one of the very few things I agree with them on. Immigration will be ignored in this interview, NAU touched on, and the Iraq War debated for 25 minutes.

Thanks for your opinion "Bearflag" I stated mine above so no reason to go into it again.

I will tell you most people I talk to are worried about his foreign policy (Mainly military basis around the world and our stratigic positioning for security purposes) because of a few small statements he made in the debates and of course the other canidates smirked at him like he was nuts, He also was boo'd for it, so I think This can be rectified if he would elaborate on the subject, and probably pick up alot of voters.

Ignoreing something will not make it go away.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLEASE TAKE ACTION!!!! 12/3
HELP STOP "NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGES" FROM ADMITTING ILLEGALS !!(This could come to your community college next)
WATCH VIDEO!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zxJZBecp_0
ACTION THREAD( CONTACT INFORMATION)
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-92278.html
WHAT WOULD WE DO WITHOUT ALIPAC Please Contribute!!
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=C ... page&pid=9

bttt