patrick.net

I find it amazing that people would actually try to sabotage Glenn Beck. He legitimately calls out one of Obama's czars (Anthony "Van" Jones for those that only watch mainstream media,) and leftist nuts try to link him to a rape. Show proof. Glenn Beck did of "Van" Jones and he tried to quietly resign on the weekend. I enjoy the site for info on the housing market, but you, Patrick, are showing a particularly high level of ignorance if you are labeling "most" of Glenn Beck's viewers as racist. I'm quite tired of Obama and the Democrats labeling people as racist if they disagree with Obama. The word is losing its meaning thanks to people like you. BTW, Obama's czar Van Jones has said
“The white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially steering poison into the people of color communities because they don’t have a racial justice frame.”
Sounds kind of "racial," doesn't it? Talking about being accused of "rape?" If I discussed everyone that disparaged me or sued me, I would be giving them a platform they do not deserve. Let's all try to be a bit more even-handed.
Wen

"Generally Glen provides plenty of independently verifiable evidence."

HA HA, HA HA HA HA HA!

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1924348,00.html

Glenn Beck is laughing all the way to the bank, $23 million dollars last year (and that's what's been reported) - with much more to line his pockets this year. Meanwhile, people who swallow his bitter medicine are panhandling to make enough money to show up to his rallies (and no doubt buy his t-shirts and other official propaganda).

The article also discusses that he's made pro-Obama statements, but that doesn't make him enough money so he's resorting to the fearmongering now.
"The inevitable question is, How much of this industry is sincere? Last year, shortly after the election, Beck spoke with TIME's Kate Pickert, and he didn't sound very scared back then. Of Obama's early personnel decisions, he said, "I think so far he's chosen wisely." Of his feelings about the President: "I am not an Obama fan, but I am a fan of our country ... He is my President, and we must have him succeed. If he fails, we all fail." Of the Democratic Party: "I don't know personally a single Democrat who is a dope-smoking hippie that wants to turn us into Soviet Russia." Of the civic duty to trust: "We've got to pull together, because we are facing dark, dark times. I don't trust a single weasel in Washington. I don't care what party they're from. But unless we trust each other, we're not going to make it."

It appears that he changes his message to line his pockets. And he still hasn't responded to the question: Did he rape & murder a girl in 1990? An innocent man would proclaim his innocence, no matter the cost.

The link to this web site is juvenile as is most of this conversation.

Beck is a blowhard in many ways but, there are plenty on the left too. I listen to them all and maintain my objectivity. I firmly believe there is far too much group think. People should actively seek out those with differing opinions and views and process their message without labeling them nuts because they happen to not support your view of things. Beck has had some decent segments on peak oil and was ahead of the housing and financial crises. Some of us believe he is ahead of the Fed funding bubble now.

"The link to this web site is juvenile as is most of this conversation."

I'm telling my mommy you said that! I don't think she'll let us play together any more!

Patrick

I really enjoy your forum on the housing crisis. But I am very surprised that you've chosen to become so politically opinionated and thus why your donations have been decreasing lately and I'm sure your stats tells the same story as well. I was going to donate, but now I do not want to donate because of your strong bias towards one side.

Housing crisis affects all kinds of folks, both liberal and conservative, you've just managed to alienate about 1/2 of your audience.

I thought you were smarter than that.....remember keep religion, and politics out of this forum, only if it references specific legislation, policies or rulings that would affect the housing crisis.

I couldn't point to Glenn Beck in a line-up.. nor have I ever heard or read anything from him. From the general controversy I've heard about him I assume (perhaps wrongly) that he and anyone who pays attention to him are over-the-edge ignorant fools. I need to move out of this ridiculous country. "Give me you tired, your poor" .. that's bullshit, Western European countries are waaaayyyy nicer to the tired and poor... way nicer. We just poop on 'em here. (and it's worth noting I am neither tired or poor.. I'd be very willing to pay even HIGHER taxes for things like single payer health care -- and I'd vote out at least 80 percent of military spending -- and before any wannabes respond to that.. you'd better be a veteran -- I am)

afghanmaker says

remember keep religion, and politics out of this forum

It's all political. Why should you pay your irresponsible neighbor's mortgage? That's a political question.

The answer to that question, and to our military spending, and to the bank bailouts, and to why our health care system makes little Bobby's parents choose between his chemotherapy or their retirement funds: corporate involvement in government.

Corporations play us and our representatives like a master musician, getting just the right notes to come out to block the public's best interest, and to protect the corporate best interest. Beck is one more instrument in their orchestra.

So, Patrick, do you deny that I had an affair with George Clooney? 'cause I did, I really did. Last night.

And then I woke up.

I wonder if George dreamed of me last night?

And now that I read this article http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2009/09/17/onthejob091709.DTL
I see the guy is right.

The debate is really going on at gut level and insurance reform advocates fail at that level. So... where can we find little Bobby, preferably blond and blue eyed, no, better, a girl, sweet and innocent and very very sick, and her bankrupted parents whose insurance won't cover the treatments? Or who can't get insurance.

That one girl could save Americans from themselves.

elliemae says

So, Patrick, do you deny that I had an affair with George Clooney? ’cause I did, I really did. Last night.

I don't deny it.

Patrick, I agree with afghanmaker. You do seem biased to the left. It seems to me that real estate is in the mess it is in because of leftist gov't policies and programs. Now it is being made worse by more gov't subsidies. Just like FDR made the depression much worse with his Communist programs. It's all about control and it looks like the one worlder's have won. Very soon we will have a new global currency and B.O. has signed a new agreement with the UN. B.O. will be the 1st U.S. President to sit on the UN Security Council. Amazing! It was Johann Wolfgang Goethe who said, “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Our liberty and freedom are gone because of the Democrat Party and their leftist/Communist agenda. We are serfs who are manipulated by a gov't tax code that taxes our labor and all we like sheep are led away to ...

Patrick,

What you don't understand is you cannot "project" all of the problems on Beck and others. You list about 5 to 10% of your posts on Beck and others. You are specifically targeting Beck, which is unfair and shows your true identity.

NO ONE can point to one political party and say they are the cause of health care issues, bank bailouts, etc. This is a losing argument if you are going to blame one party or another. What we have is a huge GREED and FEAR issue going on in this country and it is systemic.

I'm a physician and I can tell you that ALL of my colleagues oppose the ObamaCare bill. Yes, we want reform and not some behemoth (~1 Trillion dollars) of a pseudo-socialized medicine that gains very little. I will (and some of my colleagues) re-evaluate my role in medicine should this pass and many will simply retire since they will see more patients, less pay and more taxes, which will make it harder for us to pay our mortgages.

I just wished (and so many others that enjoy your housing posts) that you stop with your one sided political views. I never posted on this forum, but I joined today, because I thought you are wrong and so does other folks, which won't even both posting and worse, take you off their daily visits.

Just for sh*ts and grins, what is the traffic on the Beck links versus the other links you post daily? What has been your traffic lately? This should tell you something - (of course, hoping that I'm correct)

well I just love a guy who can cry on television.

wait, I take back everything I said.. Glenn Beck cries on TV? .. I'm hooking my cable back up.

few points Patrick,
about Obama and his pastor Wright and "How do you know Obama agreed with any of that?"
You don't bring your wife and kids to listen to someone lecture every Sunday that you disagree with.
As a physician, I can tell you that the government has not been successful in its role of quality care at a good price; the private companies have done it better. That said, you want health care costs to go down... tort reform might help. It's been $80,000/year for me before a single settlement against me and you can expect it influences doctor's decisions when they order tests. The government has been happy to give trillions to banks and certain large businesses, but they are cutting payments to nursing homes. As far as nationalized health care, Medicare is bankrupt and Medicaid doesn't even cover billing costs (paperwork) at the last hospital I was at. Have you been to a VA hospital lately? Why are we creating another nationalized healthcare bill when we can't afford what we have now? If you want "free" health care, I can tell you that you will get what you pay for. I wonder if people in other fields would be concerned if the government was going to take over their field. As far as "entitlement," you can get food stamps or go to a soup kitchen and the government won't let you starve, but the government won't pay for you to eat at steakhouses. Lowered expectations from patients will have to accompany any more nationalization of health care.
Wen

I think Glenn Beck is a paranoid schizophrenic and a fear monger. There's only one thing I like about him: He brings up a point of view and some material facts that many media outlets do not. For example: His coverage of Acorn. Acorn is corrupt.

Personally, I'd like to see him cover Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, and their connections to the Federal Reserve. Of course, he probably won't do that. The way that the system is set up now, investment banks get to engineer a financial bubble--an economic boom--and then when it's no longer sustainable shove the losses on the taxpayers.

The housing debacle is largely the government's fault. I say this because ultimately it was the government who established the Federal Reserve in 1913. True, it was drafted by bankers, but it was shoved through congress by a bureaucrat. Bankers only exploit the system because they know that the Federal Reserve will be there to take on all of their losses when the game is over. Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan seem to be mostly responsible. They own the U.S. Government.

In order for the media to do its job, it can't be politically motivated. The purpose of the media is to act as a unit of surveillance--to expose fraud and injustice and look out for citizens. The problem is that often the media turns a blind eye to issues that are politically damning for their corporate thugocracy. Perhaps this is why it is important to have different options: CNN--my favorite--NBC, ABC, FOX, etc. If there was only one outlet, we'd be screwed because we would hear only what the corporate controlled media want us to hear. This already happens now, but it would be far worse.

This debate is why I'm a registered Libertarian. Too many people are just partisan stooges getting played. There's no difference between a Republican and a Democrat, unless, of course, you're a politician. Then the only difference is whom your constituents are and whom you take rent from.

Erickk Hoogenbaum says

Personally, I’d like to see (Beck) cover Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, and their connections to the Federal Reserve. Of course, he probably won’t do that.

Yes, that would do wonders to rehabilitate Beck if he showed he was not purely 100% corporate-owned.

When the government is acting badly (as in creating the Fed, or Fannie and Freddie) it's doing it to benefit corporate interests, mostly banks it seems.

Glenn Beck's silence on this accusation condems him.

afganmaker, bwen,

Good comments.
I come to this site because it has a Libertarian bend that I find appealing. I'm objective enough to know that the liberal "low income housing" and neo-con "ownership society" are the same thing. I was always puzzled by the democrats dislike of Bush since he co-opted much of their platform. He reminded me of a 60's democrat.

Beck is a tool but, so are Bill Maher and Kieth Olberman. Surprising, to some degree that he is being bashed here since he was one of the few that called the financial crisis. He has done some decent segments on energy and I believe is one of the few talking about the federal deficit bubble. I haven't watched him since his move to fox though.

At first, I was a bit disturbed when this website began posting links regarding healthcare reform, but after a little thinking I realized it doesn't matter. Nothing Patrick posts will have any effect because this is the internet, and people here have already formulated their opinions and are not actually willing (most the time) to honestly evaluate them. Thus, pro-Reform people will click on each of these links and devour the information, anti-Reformers will probably just ignore them, especially the links to sites such as Huffington Post. And sadly, both sides are correct to do so, because the vast majority of information on the internet is presented with a bias (as is most the information on the nightly news). And one of the great things about people is that many of us are unable to see our own biases. So, Democrats don't understand how Republicans can consider Fox News fair and balanced, and Republicans don't understand how Democrats fail to see the bias in the so-called Mainstream Media. Thus, we simply circle each other and get nowhere, because we don't trust each other to be honest. A conservative on this site is apt to believe Patrick's links lead to unsubstantiated information or to a biased presentation of information, just as liberals are apt to assume any story about Obama's past associations is a smear campaign and has no credibility. Neither side often bothers to fact-check the other, assuming the worst. As a question to Patrick: how many of the articles linked to on this site have been fact-checked? Probably none, and yet we all agree to believe the information on the housing market, because it conforms to our bias, while letting our bias dictate our opinion on the other information.

If this self-described parody site cannot be commentary for Beck's endless rumormongering...then, wow--heap irony onto humor. Man, the false sincerity of the birthers, and that whole "Obama is evil" crowd is just too much. What a waste of oxygen...all for naught. LMAO.

I'm so glad to be an expat. Surf's up got to go.

"Beck is a tool but, so are Bill Maher and Kieth Olberman"

These

ahasuerus99,

That is one of the best posts I have read in a very long while.

I agree. We are now at a point where group think rules. Both sides generally want to hear only what reaffirms their believes. Any disagreement is immediately discarded as wrong. It's little wonder we can have back-to-back-to-back bubbles in our economy. We don't know any better and end up with childish web sites accusing a man of raping and killing a girl. It's a sad state we're in.

I am very glad that KurtS so eloquently proved my point. The Obama is evil crowd is in keeping with the Bush is evil crowd, the two go hand in hand. There was a Clinton is evil is crowd, a Bush the First is evil crowd, and a huge Reagan is evil crowd. And each side seems honestly unable to understand how the other side could possibly consider their guy evil. The Obama is evil crowd isn't racist, they are the same crowd that thought Clinton was evil, and that Carter was evil. Probably the foremost among the Obama is evil crowd is Thomas Sowell, himself an African-American. Different priorities and opinions yield different perceptions, and we all need to honestly attempt to see the other person's point-of-view or we will continue to be a polarized nation. Honestly evaluate this question, are the birthers any crazier than truthers? They aren't. Conspiracy theories are popular. There are those on the left who believe that Reagan's people arranged for the Iranian hostages to not be set free so that he could win the 1980 election. Are these people crazier than birthers? No, they are equally crazy. Next question, does a person holding a nutty belief such as birthers, truthers, or hostage agreement believers automatically invalidate all of that person's opinions? If so, the vast majority of people believe in some conspiracy theory or another (how about the Kennedy assassination), so if we eliminate all those people there aren't many left whose opinions we consider valid. Being dismissive of the other side never helps in the long run, because eventually the other side will be in power, and you'll be trapped in a see-saw of each side undoing the things the other side worked so hard to accomplish. That's a waste of a lot of time and energy. The key is building coalitions and finding common ground; those are the reforms that actually work. And no, I am not talking about bipartisanship, coalitions need not be bipartisan in the sense the word is usually used. A reasonable solution will attract all of one side and most independents, at which point the concerns of the other side are moot, but there will be limited danger of long-term change to the reform (provided it works). So far, healthcare reform has shown no signs of coalition building, with one side saying it will vote against anything without a public option and the other saying it will vote against anything with one. And the average person is so caught up in the screaming or the finger-pointing (examples of problems with the current system do nothing to prove the efficacy of the proposed changes, no one denies the current system is less than perfect) that they don't bother looking for a middle ground. I am not advocating what most might assume I am, that liberals should meet conservatives in the middle. I am thinking more, since the left is in power, that we can assume the most left wing of the party is at 100 percent reform, and that the middle left is at approximately 60 percent, the middle right is at 40, and the right is at 0. In this situation, a middle ground would probably be somewhere around 75 percent, a little closer to the middle left than the left because parts of the middle right can be pulled over as well. Would I support this plan? Probably not, but a large percentage of Americans would, and I would certainly accept it because the law of the land is the law of the land, and I find the threats of secession by right-wing states as silly as the threats from some liberals to leave the country if Bush was reelected.

Patrick, I love it...tooo funny! I found another- http://hasglennbeckstoppedbeatinghiswife.com/

Kudos to Erickk Hoogenbaum and reniam for great comments.

The anti-Glen Beck and anti-Fox hate is politically driven and doesn't pass the "if it's good enough for the goose, it's good enough for the gander" test. The reason for Fox's popularity is that it reports a lot of stories that ALL the other outlets won't.

For example: the Van Jones story. He complains that he was a victim of a smear & lies campaign. In truth, what brought him down were videos of his own speeches. This is like the criminal who gets angry at the police when he gets caught. But where were CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc on this? Do these people & their organizations REALLY want a radical like this in that position of power? Is he good for anyone EXCEPT other militant/Communist/Marxist types, which most Americans - Democrat, Republican, and Independant - certainly are not. I love when truly corrupt people get their come-uppance, whatever their political affiliation. It seems that many here do not share this view, or there wouldn't be so many ideologue haters. C'mon, admit it. Glen Beck (along w/ others) getting Van Jones removed it a GOOD thing.

ahasuerus99 says

... Honestly evaluate this question, are the birthers any crazier than truthers? They aren’t. Conspiracy theories are popular..
... Are these people crazier than birthers? No, they are equally crazy. Next question, does a person holding a nutty belief such as birthers, truthers, or hostage agreement believers automatically invalidate all of that person’s opinions? ...

You dump "birthers, truthers, or hostage agreement believers " into the same category. I would like to debate you on "birthers" issue. We will see if you can provide logical arguments to support your claim of "birthers" being crazy and nutty.

What is your understanding of the term: "natural born citizen"?
How is it different from a citizen or a naturalized citizen?

I would like to know because we cannot debate the issue of "birthers" unless we have common understanding of what those terms mean.

In response to Patrick,

"Yes, that would do wonders to rehabilitate Beck if he showed he was not purely 100% corporate-owned.
When the government is acting badly (as in creating the Fed, or Fannie and Freddie) it’s doing it to benefit corporate interests, mostly banks it seems."

As a libertarian, I just wish that people would become a little bit more skeptical about the state. The American Academic System is set up to to promote the glory and value of the state. The state as an institution has committed many atrocities throughout its existence as an institution--especially the German and Russian states of the 20th c. If you read through a lot of the school system's textbooks, it takes on a "the state is good and benevolent" bias. Remember, the state is responsible for war. And typically it is the state that commits genocide. And it is usually only the state that creates inflation. Ultimately there is no perfect system. It's near impossible to completely sever the links between the public and the private sectors.

I think states do have some purpose, which you (Patrick) have written well in your bio. I agree with your points there. I'm very concerned about individual freedom and rights, and the state tends to habitually trample on them.

If Glen Beck murdered a girl in 1990, he'd write a book about it

And still ...................... No denial about the rape and murder.
Not a single peep.
Nada. Nothing.
Man! Have you no shame ????

And yes, rayscar is correct !

Gee. Reading previous comments, one finds a lot of whining birther libertarians.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

You guys make me sick. Stand up and reason.

In many of these responses, I see a dearth of understanding of the big picture. In the big picture, what a manipulative bozo does is irrelevant--even when he behaves contemptuously in how he talks about the President. It is the system itself that is cancer-ridden. Hence, it would be more constructive if citizens would stay focused on the big picture.

The Google documentary, "The Money Masters," makes it clear what runs our nation. Hint: it's not the President. It's a 3.5 hr. video, but the player has a slider to mark the segments viewed. Ive seen it four times in the last four years. There is so much spellbinding history in it, that with each viewing, I see new connections among many behind the scenes players. These players shape nations, charting the courses of national destinies more powerfully than any administration or office-holder--even if we can't directly see their hands at work. They do so by controlling the money supply.

As for Obama, he's smart, personable, and charismatic, and this is good for the national spirit. When it comes to power, however, he doesn't have much. For starters (as the documentary shows), there's no substantive difference between the two major parties (despite impressions to the contrary). Really, there' just one party, which I like to call the Money Party. The money party controls all Presidents--Obama included. They have done so since the Fed's inception in 1913.

One tell-tale indication of Obama's (or any President's) power is this: there are 26 security clearance levels above the clearance given the President. Question: how did the President get pushed that far down the clearance ladder? Who had enough clout to arrange for that? JFK was the last President to have the highest security clearance. As his speeches show, he intended to break the veil of secrecy which had grown up around the government. He was opposed to behind the scenes forces anathema to a democratic system. His voice was silenced, however.

The Money Masters makes it easy to figure out why some leaders die prematurely. They don't "play along." After I saw it the Money Masters, I was both shocked and disoriented. I found it necessary to re-evaluate nearly everything I thought I knew about how life works. Unfortunately for me (someone with two Master's Degrees), my professional friends were completely disinterested in what the video offered. Being Bay Area folks, they were too in love with being Democrats to listen to anything that challenged their core belief system. Thus, I was alone in my awakening.

Moreover, I was disheartened over their being close-minded to ideas bigger than any one party. Of course, had they never been been offered profound information such as the video shows, they'd have remained unwitting dupes of the system (just as I had been). After they shut their ears, however, I came to see them as willing dupes of the system. Sad, very sad.

Patrick, I admire what you've done with this site. You've earned its tremendous following. Likewise, I saw your goodwill in putting together a nursing home database, so people could avoid the kinds of obstacles you had encountered. I now hope you'll take a harder look at what America became once the Fed weasled its way into our governance. Watch The Money Masters. Or, if you like, tackle the works of Dr. Carroll Quigley (Georgetown), regarding the hidden controllers of the economy and the government. (Quigley was Bill Clinton's mentor and was lauded in Clinton's inaugural address. His credentials are impeccable.)

The more the populace can wake up to the corporate rule of this nation (via money control), the more hope I'll have that we won't be consumed by it. We still have a chance to take our democracy back from the two sold-out parties and the corporatocracy which runs them. We can still reclaim the Constitution-based governance which existed prior to 1913--or at least, that's my hope.

bwen said:

As a physician, I can tell you that the government has not been successful in its role of quality care at a good price; the private companies have done it better.

This is a baseless assertion, not supported by facts. I myself am also a physician, and am embarassed by bwen's lack of evidence in his assertion. It reflects poorly on our profession. Also, his assertion that VA and other federal systems deliver poor care is way off the mark; VA quality systems lead the nation, and have been adopted by many high-functioning private systems (Mayo Clinic, UCSF, Cedar-Sinai). Our public systems work, and deliver better outcomes than private systems to a greater number of people. Public systems do not deliver dividends to private sector specialists who demand above-average fees for their services, this is why some physicians are upset; physicans who are motivated towards the public's health are generally in support of the current reforms.

Patrick,
Your comment is no different. Now you are speculating.

Beck knows many of his viewers (most?) are racist and horrified we have a smart and articulate black president, especially in contrast to Bush, who was neither smart nor articulate.

HELL YES HE KILLED HER, I WAS WITH HIM AND WATCHED THE RAPE AND KILLING. HE NEVER SPENT A DAY IN CAMBODIA, VIETNAM OR ANYWARE IS SE ASIA... I CAN PUT HIM AWAY FOR A LONG TIME, BUT AS LONG AS HE KEEPS PAYING ME (CASH), I'LL KEEP MY PROOF TO INSURE THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND HE PAYS ME. BESIDES WE HAVE A GAY RELATIONSHIP... NOT GOING TO GIVE UP MY LOVER TOY BOY.

"Just like FDR made the depression much worse with his Communist programs."

Good God, people have about as much knowledge of history as dogs or rats.
I wish I could find this thread funny except the ignorant scare me too much.

monkframe says

Good God, people have about as much knowledge of history as dogs or rats.
I wish I could find this thread funny except the ignorant scare me too much.

monkframe,
Many of the points in this thread are quite intelligent. Several people tried to point out that there are many views and we should listen to them all.

You flatly insulted people as ignorant of history and economics without yourself doing any research. So you reject any opinion that does not match your own as without merit. Like it or not, believe it or not, many historians and economists have studied the great depression and concluded that FDR's programs extended the depression.

One reference:
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx