I rest my case.Beck is going to turn this into a classic parody. Big time back fire here.
arianna huffington:
She met oil millionaire Michael Huffington, a family friend of the Bushes, at a 1985 party hosted by Ann Getty in San Francisco. The couple was married in 1986 at a wedding paid for by Getty, who had declared that she needed to find Arianna a husband. They moved to Washington, D.C., when he was appointed to serve as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Negotiations Policy. They later established residency in Santa Barbara, California, in order for him to run in 1992 as a Republican for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, which he won by a significant margin. He was a political conservative on most issues. Arianna campaigned for her husband, courting religious conservatives, arguing for smaller government and a reduction in welfare. In 1994 he narrowly lost the race for the U.S. Senate seat from California to incumbent Dianne Feinstein.[6]
The couple divorced in 1997, and in 1998 Michael Huffington revealed that he was bisexual.[7] The financial terms of their divorce agreement remain undisclosed. Arianna Huffington chose to retain her former husband’s surname, although she had been known as Arianna Stassinopoulos Huffington during the period of her marriage
Sounds like a murder for hire contract to me... Beck should call the FBI.
Rats cornered will fight viciously. No matter. They just don’t “get it” that Glenn Beck isn’t the Tea Party leader. He just isn’t.
He is an influential voice reflecting concerns of millions of Americans, yes, but this “Tea Party” thing, born out of a comment by Rick Santelli on a little-watched business network, kindled a fire that has spread well beyond mere talk radio or Fox News or “The American Spectator”.
There are millions of people who are SICK of the federal government’s growth—and are ready to cut it back down to size. We’re of all different religious persuasions, of different skin colors, and are registered under different parties. But we do agree: limited government and free markets are the way to go.
And the mentally challenged drooling Obama sycophants at the Huff Post (and, for that matter, everywhere else in the media) just don’t realize that yet. I think it is because they live in a fishbowl that still tells them Obama is awesome, he is just having a hard time “communicating his message.”
You know, a determined group of people could overload this moron with so much stuff that he could never sort it all out!
Beck raised 5,5 mil for people who have given so much more than they ever will and that includes their messiah.
Disagree or agree with him, what he did this weekend was great for those who have sacrificed and yet the left and their messiah ignore this.
Using money to buy or hurt a human being.
Who is this guy?
Why does he hate Glenn Beck so much?
Google it.
Typical.
Can’t debate the message, so destroy the messanger.
That’s tired and old, too.
They just don’t get it. The opposition won’t cave in anymore and roll over.
IF (and I mean if), they find anything, Beck himself states that he was the lowest of the low.
No one will care.
Saul Alinsky stuff. Let’s look over the offerer. Time to understand EVERYTHING about him.
Does this one fit?:
“21-3428. Blackmail.
Blackmail is gaining or attempting to gain anything of value or compelling another to act against such person’s will, by threatening to communicate accusations or statements about any person that would subject such person or any other person to public ridicule, contempt or degradation.
Surely this could be prosecuted as harrassment....
Perhaps Glenn should just wear bondage gear on his show some night and collect the 100g’s himself..!!
Mockery is a viable weapon..
Low, shameless, Beau has sold his soul...
Background about this guy:
Now Mr. Friedlander gave his: childhood in Redding, Conn. Formative years at Bennington College, then graduate school at Oxford and Columbia University. In 1992, he abandoned a doctoral thesis at Oxford University–on William Wordsworth and “the way in which the sublime can be seen being comparable to contemporary political power structures”– and went to Columbia, only to abandon the same thesis a second time. After a short stint as an editorial assistant at Alfred A. Knopf, he started his own business, Context Media.
If I were the huffington I would worry more about this article pulled from newsmax.
Newsmax Military Coup
Against Obama Article Axed
Column Suggesting Military Coup Against Obama
Newsmax
8-19-10
Here is the full text of John L. Perry’s column on Newsmax which suggests that a military coup to “resolve the Obama problem” is becoming more possible and is not “unrealistic.” Perry also writes that a coup, while not “ideal,” may be preferable to “Obama’s radical ideal” — and would “restore and defend the Constitution.” Newsmax has since removed the column from its website.
Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention
By John L. Perry
Via TalkingPointsMemo.com
8-19-10
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
# Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
# They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
# They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/09/full_text_of_
newsmax_column_suggesting_military_co.php
so they tried to name call him but it did not work.
They tried to get him off the air it did not work.
They tried to stop the money coming in but it did not work.
They now try this.
obvious where the hate filled left stand on free speech isn’t it?
I rest my case.So much for tolerance.