BaalChatzaf Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I'm sorry. I don't care how much G.B. mentions or praises Ayn Rand. I don't give a shit about Glenn Beck. Take him out with a stick.--BrantI agree. G. B. is a buffoon.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I agree. G. B. is a buffoon.Bob,You probably don't care much for what he is doing for Israel, either, right?btw - I saw his documentary on the history of Israel (in the premium section that Kat got me). One hell of a nice piece of scholarship formatted for popular consumption. I cannot go to his Restoring Courage rally in Jerusalem later this year, but now I can watch it live. I am sure the media splash the world over will be substantial. I think Glenn is doing more for implanting a positive public image of Jews into the mainstream than anyone else. Not bad for a buffoon...Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I agree. G. B. is a buffoon.Bob,You probably don't care much for what he is doing for Israel, either, right?You are encouraging positive ad homimen thinking? He is an entertainer, not a deep thinker. His brainial processes are superficial. I simply cannot take him any more seriously than I would take Bozo the Clown. His views on Israel do mot matter to me. I assume his motive is the typical Christian reason for supporting Israel. Jesus cannot make it back until all the Jews are in Israel. Well, if that is true, Jesus won't be back until after I am dead since I have no intention of going there.You will forgive me if I prefer logical rigor to politically motivated ranting.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Bob,You suppose a lot you don't know about.I remember you supposing a lot about the superficiality of David Kelley at one time.It might be a good idea to look at what you criticize long enough to be precise, but that's my value.There's another point that is really, really important. All major political acts start with persuasion--including killing Jews on principle. Persuasion is an art and Glenn Beck is a master.I don't see you particularly excelling in that area.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 There's another point that is really, really important. All major political acts start with persuasion--including killing Jews on principle. Persuasion is an art and Glenn Beck is a master.I don't see you particularly excelling in that area.He does note persuade me, and I do not care to persuade others. People will do what they damn well feel like doing.Let the politicians sell pigs in a poke. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Bob,People may "do what they damn well feel like doing," but if someone does not make the crap stop, it erupts into a lot of killing.So it's better to stop it before wars break out, not after.Don't forget, in all your bluster about the virtue of killing innocent enemy civilians, this also implies killing people on your side. Let me make that clear: dead Jews. Some even might be people you love. Killed dead.Is that what you desire?I say no killing is best. Can you possibly disagree with that?Thus...Ta daa!Enter persuasion...Throughout history, persuasion has been the one common element that is always found in the interface between war and peace. People just don't obey orders to commit atrocities in organized groups unless they have been persuaded to. People don't turn into antisemites unless they have been persuaded to. (Ditto for all forms of bigotry.)Having a good idea--or even a good philosophy--is OK, but if you can't get people to think about it and act on it, it is totally useless. Especially for combating evil.You may not be interested in keeping peace without killing others and watching your own die, but I am. That's why I am seriously interested in persuasion.Persuasion is a skill and it is learned just like any other skill. It can be used for good or for evil just like any other skill. When you spit on the persuaders for good, you are basically saying that you don't mind surrendering that field by default to your enemy. And--in purely concrete terms--that means you don't care about taking preventative steps to avoid the killing of your own people.I believe this is something worth thinking about. If you don't want to take it from me, show my comments to your Rabbi (or a thinker you listen to) and see what he says...Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Don't forget, in all your bluster about the virtue of killing innocent enemy civilians, this also implies killing people on your side. Let me make that clear: dead Jews. Some even might be people you love. Killed dead.Is that what you desire?.It is not what I desire. But in a war people are killed and their sh*t is busted up. What happens happens.The last one standing is the Winner.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Bob,You're dodging.What about before war?That's what I'm talking about and you know it.Would you have been one of those who watched Hitler ascend to power--initially by using persuasion techniques--and thought ignoring him or macho declarations was the proper tonic? And maybe spit on the good people who were sounding the alarm and trying to persuade the public to the contrary?A hell of a lot of people did that back then. Look what happened.History tends to repeat itself. Do you want to be a good example of such repetition?You make your choices. I am making mine.I stand with Glenn Beck--who I consider to be a good man. An intelligent man. A master persuader. And a man on the right side of history.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Bob,You're dodging.What about before war?That's what I'm talking about and you know it.One, I don't know "it", what ever "it" is. I simply do not get your point. That is because I am genetically obtuse. I am also happy that I am genetically obtuse. I feel no obligation to read between anyone's lines. Two, Never presume to "know" what someone else knows or does not know. You are not a mind reader. Neither am I.The only intentions I know are my own, because only I have private access to the inner workings of my brain. You don't.The only thing I know of others is what they manifest externally to me in a way that I can perceive with my senses. I have not got the foggiest notion of what other people are thinking. I sometimes know what they say or write and I sometimes know what they do in the real public world. But what they think is private to them. What they intend is private to them. What is yours is yours, and what is mine is mine.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Bob,What does all that have to do with the point?Have you bothered to read any history?Persuasion exists.MichaelEDIT: Incidentally, I just had a thought. What do you think a man does when he calls another a buffoon without knowing the person's work?Let's see if I can think of something. I believe such a person is claiming that "knows" "what someone else knows or does not know" and he is claiming to be "a mind reader." He is also claiming to be privy to that person's "intentions."Otherwise he would verify before mouthing off.And what do you call a person who does that to another who--at considerable risk--is standing up for him and everything he holds dear without any personal interest other than to do the right thing?Just a thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) Bob,What does all that have to do with the point?Have you bothered to read any history?Persuasion exists.MichaelEDIT: Incidentally, I just had a thought. What do you think a man does when he calls another a buffoon without knowing the person's work?Let's see if I can think of something. I believe such a person is claiming that "knows" "what someone else knows or does not know" and he is claiming to be "a mind reader." He is also claiming to be privy to that person's "intentions."Otherwise he would verify before mouthing off.And what do you call a person who does that to another who--at considerable risk--is standing up for him and everything he holds dear without any personal interest other than to do the right thing?Just a thought...History is Bunk --- Henry Ford (champion Capitalist). I would call that person one who likes to live dangerously. The Right Thing is of totally no use to a dead man. If one can do the Right Thing safely then it should be done. If there is a risk however, one must weight the costs versus the benefits of doing the Right Thing.I saw Beck on T.V. twice. I stand with my judgement that he is a buffoon. He is just another talking head, IMO.Ba'al Chatzaf Edited June 13, 2011 by BaalChatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now