Beck is attacking the enemy at the foundations of their power, their claim to race as a permanent trump card, their claim to the Civil Rights movement as a permanent model to constantly be transforming a perpetually unjust society.
He is nuking out the foundations of the opposition’s moral preeminence, the very thing I proposed in this post.
Actually, it’s more like the pretense of their moral preeminence.
What–you mean people whose agenda is based on coercion and legalized looting DON’T have moral preeminence?
What I found interesting was the interview John Stossel did with Glenn. It put the guy in a whole new light for me. He admits he is not quite libertarian, but he’s all the way over to our side on thinking that private companies like Blackwater can do a better job at running things that the equivalent load of State Bureaucrats. He’d also like to see private enterprise managing most of the rest of the war effort except for the pointy part of the spear where it is quite valid to have our well trained military volunteers.
You are right though. Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin do terrify them. I have seen good friends turn into slavering hatists at the mere mention of their names. It is a terribly Pavlovian sight to behold and I do try to suggest they pull back a bit and argue for their beliefs, not just spout Righteous Denunciations.
“You are right though. Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin do terrify them. I have seen good friends turn into slavering hatists at the mere mention of their names. It is a terribly Pavlovian sight to behold and I do try to suggest they pull back a bit and argue for their beliefs, not just spout Righteous Denunciations.”
I often visit and comment at the Internet Movie Database (IMDB), and if you want to see Pavlovian hate and thought-free Righteous Denunciations, visit the IMDB message board for Glenn Beck. (IMDB also covers television, and Beck’s there by virtue of his tv appearances. All the mindless party-line regurgitators and Hive catch-phrase-slingers have come out of the woodwork due to Beck’s Restore Honor shindig. Haven’t had much first-hand experience with Beck or his ideas, but anyone who gets the State-shtuppers so foam-mouthed must be doing something right.
“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root. ”
— Henry David Thoreau
Bilwick, you should see the naked hate for Beck and other non-leftists over on Pundit Kitchen and other sites in the icanhascheezburger family. For a group of sites about funny pictures of cats, they seem to have a real following among the DailyKos/DUMB crowd.
The “fear” I feel about Beck (and Palin) is the same as the fear I would have of a 5-year-old left alone in the control room of a nuclear reactor. It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.
What irritates me about Beck’s attempt to re-claim the civil rights movement is that, in the real civil rights movement, people died. Blacks and whites who helped them were beaten and/or killed. The biggest threat facing Beck is tripping on a microphone cable.
In short, Beck is uninformed and taking no personal risks, trying to claim a mantle of leadership from people who were exceedingly well informed and constantly risking their lives.
Yeah, Chris, right. I’m sure that’s what you dislike about Beck. The fact that he’s galvanizng people against your gang would have nothing to do with your fear of him.
“Beck is uninformed and taking no personal risks, ”
so that’s why he was wearing a bullet proof vest at the rally?
It is too bad the left always has to have an enemy when it comes to race. God forbid that no one likes racism.
I can’t recall any conservatives advocating the return to slavery for black people, enslaving the illegal immigrants from central and south America, or uniting through Islomophobia, yet that is exactly what the MSM and leftist politicians are accusing.
The stereotypes the left has of conservatives are off the chart inaccurate and offensive.
“In short, Beck is uninformed and taking no personal risks, trying to claim a mantle of leadership from people who were exceedingly well informed and constantly risking their lives.”
Risking their lives, yes. My current sweetie is a former Civil Rights voter-registration activist who got threatened regularly.
Although since the Left under “Il Dufe’s” thugocracy seems to be ramping up the thuggery, we of the anti-statist persuasion will probably get our chance at a little life-risking ourselves. But “exeedingly well informed”? Can you name some current examples? The current “Civil Rights gang” (pretty much the Welfare State’s Uncle Toms) seems to be a bunch of ignoramuses, about as well-informed on, say, economics as . . . well, you.
It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.
You just described Barry O precisely.
Forgot to add Beck being “uninformed” probably means he didn’t get the Hive’s memo that (despite its bloody and rapacious history) the State is our best friend, and we should entrust our lives and our fortunes to it totally.
It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.
I don’t think that one needs any further comment.
“It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.”
Yeah, God knows what kind of mess Beck would make out of a national crisis. Thank God we’re in the best of hands now.
“and taking no personal risks,”
How many death threats have you received today?
“The Right”, collectively, has pretty much given up on reporting them. The Left goes hyperbolic when there’s even a plausible inference from a certain viewpoint.
“What was Glenn Beck’s rally in D.C. really about?”
“It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.”
Gerrib has this fear due to his own personal experiences.
“It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.”
Did you really think before you hit ‘Submit’ on that one Chris?
That was definitely inadvertently hilarious comment of the week. I think that Chris’ sense of irony was excised at birth.
the same as the fear I would have of a 5-year-old left alone in the control room of a nuclear reactor.
Hey, Chris may finally actually have a valid point. Isn’t this what we are experiencing on a daily basis with Obama? Sheesh, I better rethink my opinion of Palin and Beck.
There is an Oscar Wilde quote to the effect of the young know everything, the middle aged doubt everything and the old believe everything. Obvious enough from a cognitive science perspective – the young only know what they have read in books and take everything as fact, the middle aged have intellect and experience enough to go beyond the book and learn from the real world directly (which teaches them humility and doubt), and the old, whose faculties are generally slowly diminishing, are consolidating/simplifying their knowledge and returning to the memories of their youth. Of course this is all a generalization.
The thought I am having is that maybe this also to some extent applies to the lives of countries – like the US. The US constitution is a very wise document, it came many years ahead of its time, but why have later generations been unable to really match it? Is the US trying to now revert to memories of its youth in the hope that this will somehow make it young? Those days are long gone, the world has moved on.
It is the free youthful culture and intellectual vitality that come up with the original foundations of the US constitution that has been lost – not the document itself. The US seems a bit like a senile old person reverting to their childhood, not a pretty sight. How to make the US genuinely young again?
Let’s see – Obama said he was going to pass health care and reform Wall Street, while drawing down in Iraq and ramping up in Afghanistan. He’s accomplished all of that. Looks like he’s doing a good job running the reactor to me.
Meanwhile, Glen Beck thinks Obama’s going to have to nationalize Walgreens over Medicaid prescription payments.
Yes, Chris, and I’m sure Obama’s Uncle Frank, now in Commie Hell, is also proud of the job his favorite nephew is doing. “Attaboy, Barry–just as I taught you!”
While Darth Soros is placing his finger-tips together, watching the economy tumble further down into the sewer, and saying, “Excellent . . . excellent!”
Looks like he’s doing a good job running the reactor to me.
Thank g0d you are in a very distinct minority.
Looks like he’s doing a good job running the reactor to me.
Further proof, as if any were needed, of what an idiot you are.
The problem is while he may be running the reactor on the Submarine, he sucks at Navigation and is heading us to the bottom of an abbysal trench at full seam ahead. Well-powered by his ‘stimulated’ reactor.
If Gerrib had added the phrase “right into Hell” after “running the reactor” I’d agree with him.
But if by “success” you mean “taking us further along the Road to Serfdom” than, yes, Obama has been a success.
U.S. unemployment rate: 9.5%
Adult men: 9.7%
Adult women: 7.9%
Whites: 8.6%
Blacks: 15.6%
Hispanics: 12.1%
Asians: 8.2%
Total umber of unemployed persons: 14.6 million
Persons jobless for 27 weeks and over: 6.6 million (44.9% of unemployed persons)
Helluva job, Barry.
[Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020.08.06]
And you forgot B Lewis, at a cost of Trillons of new debt. “Summer of Recovery” my a$$.
Obama said he was going to pass health care
He also said would be debated on CSPAN. He didn’t “pass” healthcare, he rammed it down our throats against our will.
and reform Wall Street,
Read as: staged a government takeover of huge chunks of the US private sector.
while drawing down in Iraq
Already planned by the Bush administration
and ramping up in Afghanistan
Also planned by the Bush administration, except without the “we’re leaving next year” caveat (that is Latin for “hey Omar, just hold out until we leave”)
“and ramping up in Afghanistan.”
Also planned by the Bush administration, except without the “we’re leaving next year” caveat (that is Latin for “hey Omar, just hold out until we leave”)
Omar: “Sure thing, Baraq! Happy Ramadan to you and Michelle! (What–I wasn’t supposed to say that . . . .?!”)
Don’t worry Omar, we don’t run translations of broadcasts in Pashto. Evar.
Chris, I read your comments on your blog and I have some feedback you may find useful:
What percentage of Walgreens business is represented by filling Medicaid prescriptions?
I work for a multi-specialty clinic, and while these numbers would apply only to our specific market (rural county in Southeastern US), the prescriptions our doctors write that involve Medicaid filings is just shy of 70 percent. I think our percentage is above average, but I also think the number of Medicare transactions are higher than just about anyone realizes and those numbers are going up dramatically with Obamacare.
Why wouldn’t the other drugstore chains pick up this business?
We have nearly a dozen pharmacists that represent our general area, including Walgreens, CVS, and Wal-Mart, and the rest are family-owned businesses. I wish there were more, because competition is good at keeping service levels higher and prices lower. It is my observation that each federal administration extends regulatory compliance rather than reduces it. Larger chains are able to absorb the costs associated with regulatory compliance (and lobbying) more easily than smaller businesses, so our hope for more competition likely will not be realized.
What are Walgreens financials like in the other 49 states?
I did not see the TV segment from which you posed these questions, so I can only guess at this one. Some states have laws that are more business friendly than others. I believe Delaware and Nevada have very low corporate tax rates and attract a lot of larger corporations, and I seem to recall that Texas is friendly to entrepreneurs. At the other end of the spectrum, California is driving businesses away in droves.
Why couldn’t the Feds just increase their reimbursement rates and/or work with Walgreens to get the meds at a better discount?
Well, since the Feds don’t generate any revenue, what you are really asking is “why couldn’t the taxpayers just increase their reimbursement rates”. I should also add that the Feds on both sides of the aisle demonstrate daily that they don’t know one whit about running a business (or a household) and therefore would be incapable of helping Walgreens get a discount.
I should also note that the Feds currently are dangling a 21% reduction in Medicare payments to doctors. If they abandon the plans for that reduction then they blow their promise for Obamacare to cost less than a trillion bucks. If they follow through with the reduction then between one third and one half of existing doctors will either retire or will refuse to take on new Medicare patients.
Note, however, how attention has been diverted from Gerrib’s stupid comments about Glenn Beck to his stupid comments about Obama.
I’m just sayin’.
Bilwick – I’ll bring the conversation back to Beck for you. Regardless of the competence of other political figures, the left’s “fear” of Beck isn’t that he’s some brilliant political figure about to overturn all our dasterdly schemes.
The fear is that Beck has no idea what he’s talking about, and if he BS-es his way into political power, bad things will happen. These bad things won’t even be his fault – he’ll try real hard – but he just won’t know to do the right things.
Jiminator – let me re-phrase the basic question: How much of Walgreens revenue is prescription-filling vs. selling the million other things they stock in the store? If you can’t answer that, don’t bother with the other questions.
The fear is that … has no idea what he’s talking about, and if he BS-es his way into political power, bad things will happen.
You are in rare suitable-for-framing mode today Chris.
So now evil giant Wal* companies and their loss-leaders are good things?
“You are in rare suitable-for-framing mode today Chris.”
He steps in the same pile of crap twice in one day!
“The fear is that … has no idea what he’s talking about, and if he BS-es his way into political power, bad things will happen.”
Thank God that kind of thing hasn’t happened in America yet! We could have . . . oh, I don’t know . . . some Red Diaper Baby who has spent his life in a socialist cocoon with people inflating his ego convincing him he is much brighter than he actually is. A far-out scenario, I know, but stranger things could happen!
Chis is showing a beautiful example of Orwellian Doublethink. He lambasts Palin for being unqualified for office when her executive experience was greater than Obama and Biden combined back in 2008. Somehow, she’s unqualified and Obama with no experience is qualified.
Tell me, Chris, exactly what were Obama’s qualifications to be president?
OK OK it’s been done already, but I’ve already copied the text and I MUST paste it!
The fear is that Beck Obama has no idea what he’s talking about, and if he BS-es as he has already BS’d his way into political power, bad things will happen. These bad things won’t even be his fault – he’ll try real hard – but he just won’t know to do the right things.
Come now Chris, are you really so dense that you didn’t see this coming when you posted that?
I think Chris actually must be a Conservative, posing as a lefty and posting nonsense in the name of progressive-ism in order to discredit it.
Otherwise he is actually as stupid as he sounds and that is scary!
The Left looks at Beck and sees what the Right sees in Obama.
Titus – read what I asked. I asked how a decision not to accept additional Medicaid patients in one state could possibly lead to Walgreens going bankrupt. Nobody has answered that for the simple reason that it isn’t a logical connection.
I did, and then I highlighted a potential cognitive dissonance in what you wrote. You’re welcome.
“The Left looks at Beck ”
and congers up a evil cartoon character that must be destroyed
Okay Chris, here you go:
According to Walgreens’ most recent 10K (http://investor.walgreens.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=104207-09-124) they derive 75 percent of their revenues nationwide from drug sales. Of that 75 percent, 95.4 percent of those revenues come from third party (private insurance and government) reimbursement. Their 10K was not granular enough to break out private insurance vs. government reimbursement percentages but you can be assured that the “millions of other things they stock in the store” contribute no more than 25 percent to their total revenues.
Specific to the Washington state case you referenced, in April of this year Walgreens took the step of not taking any further Medicare customers because they are losing too much money on each transaction. Bartell Drugs took a similar step a month earlier. Both companies cite a decision by the state of Washington to decrease drug reimbursements made through Medicaid. Washington lowered their reimbursement rate to 84% of the average wholesale price, or AVP (previously they were paying at 86%). Washington state estimated this reduction would result in annual savings of around $10 million
Interestingly, the AVP calculation that Medicaid and the states use for calculating reimbursements is pretty controversial. For what it is worth, Wikipedia includes this detail: It is a price derived from self-reported manufacturer data for both branded and generic drugs. There are no requirements or conventions that the AWP reflect the price of any actual sale of drugs by a manufacturer, or that it be updated at established intervals. It is not defined in law or regulation, and it fails to account for the deep discounts available to various payers, including certain federal agencies, providers, and large purchasers
It’s a fear that somebody clearly out of their depth gets put in a position of responsibility.
Hi everybody. I’m still picking myself up off the floor. It’s so difficult when you’re laughing so hard.
Chris, we’re talking about Glenn, not Obama. Try to keep up.
Looks like he’s doing a good job running the reactor to me.
In terms you might understand, your friend Jane Fonda should explain what ‘China Syndrome’ means to her. It’s all good until the meltdown.
The Left looks at Beck and sees what the Right sees in Obama.
Except, Chris, virtually no one is talking about Beck for president while millions of people on the Left were dumb enough to believe Obama was good enough for the job.
The Left looks at Beck and sees what the Right sees in Obama.
Yes, the left is delusional.
Beck has no intention to run for president. The delusional left believes it’s the only possible reason for ‘restoring honor’ which couldn’t possibly be taken at face value. Because the left tries hard to pretend objectivity when they are anything but.
Beck doesn’t see himself as the person to calm the sea and heal the earth… or however the enlightened one put it.
Beck knows he’s not perfect. We have no idea what Obama ‘knows’ about himself and others, other than it’s based on years of indoctrination in liberation theology (marxism.)
Beck admits mistakes and will make corrections. Obama can’t admit Bush was right about the surge (as if the Sunnis came around magically and for no reason.) …or come to think of it, Obama can’t admit to being wrong about anything (shhh, don’t tell Chris I’m trolling.)
If I’m reading this right, Chris G seems to think that Beck is about to reprise the Andy Griffith role in “A Face In The Crowd”, and therefore must be stopped. While I appreciate his total lack of confidence in his fellow citizens to choose political leadership, I’m not sure an Obama supporter should really be trying to make the “media creations make bad leaders” argument.
In point of fact, Beck is no more likely to try for (let alone actually get) any more power than he already has. Being a media star is a lot easier (and a lot more fun) than being a politician. It’s also a lot more certain.
So far I’ve read the article, Rand’s comments, and this entire thread and I still have no idea wtf Glenn Beck is doing.
Can someone set aside their politics for a second and explain what Glenn Beck is about?