Glenn Beck, at it again

To Glenn Beck’s credit, he isn’t dialing down the crazy in response to the extremely successful boycott of his FOX News show… Check this out:

That’s right, he’s suggesting that Obama is spending half a “trillion” dollars on the creation of a private army to do his bidding.

Only problem is, it’s just a little over $100 million, and it’s not for a modern version of the SS. It’s for the AmeriCorps program. Here’s the breakdown from Tree Hugger:

…In the clip, Beck argues that Obama asked for half a trillion dollars for AmeriCorps, putting it on par with the Pentagon in terms of funding. In reality, for fiscal year 2010, the president requested less than two billion dollars for the Corporation for National and Community Service, AmeriCorps’ parent agency, and Congress appropriated $110 million…

One wonders what’s next.

Oh, and if you want to see what the kind of cold-blooded killers Obama is assembling for this elite SS-like squad of his, just look at these terrifying images of current AmeriCorps personnel. What this Kenyan has in store for us, America, is absolutely diabolical.

This entry was posted in Media and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

50 Comments

  1. Me
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 2:53 am | Permalink

    Nice legs on the Water Quality Monitoring Nazi.

  2. Dharma
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 7:44 am | Permalink

    this is too insane. i can’t believe how he is twisting the whole point of americorp.

  3. Meta
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    See also Glenn Beck’s lies about Van Jones:

    http://www.alternet.org/story/142310/glenn_beck%27s_crazy_lies_about_van_jones/

  4. ytown
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    Mark have you read the bill regarding the Civilian National Security Force?

    It specifically give the power to carry firearms and make arrests. This is not the national version of the Peace Corps.

    Here is a link:
    http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h675/text

  5. kjc
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    ytown do you know any americorps volunteers?

    this shit’s laughable.

  6. gboy
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:26 am | Permalink

    What are AmeriCorps volunteers going to do, cry on people? Or help them to death? This is a great next step from the Death Panel idiocy.

  7. gboy
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    And 100 million doesn’t come anywhere close to half a trillion.

  8. Tim
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

    ytown, your link has nothing to do with Americorps. It is about civilian employees of the Department of Defense, such as civilian cops who work on military bases. Americorps volunteers are not employees of the Department of Defense.

  9. EOS
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

    Civilian cops who work on military bases? I thought they had MP’s. I don’t think Glenn is afraid of Americorps, he’s wondering why the funding for a National police force is being laundered through their Agency. You can’t use employees of the Department of Defense against a civilian population, or should I say the Constitution prohibits it, but when has the Constitution stopped any modern President?

  10. kjc
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Glenn Beck only makes sense to EOS.

    Now that makes sense.

  11. Jill
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

    Sweet Jesus! Are you kidding me? What the hell is wrong with this man (Beck)? I’m a former Americorps volunteer and I can assure you I am not a revolutionary communist. Good lord.

  12. EOS
    Posted August 31, 2009 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

    “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

    Pres. Obama, July 2, 2008 – Colorado Springs

    Yeah, Glen Beck is at it again. Asking Obama to explain what he meant when he spoke the above words. A nation with a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded as our military is a fascist police state. There is absolutely no credibility in suggesting that this quote refers to an expanded Americorp.

    The boycott of Beck’s show is a joke. FOX hasn’t lost a dime, some advertisers have merely switched the time slot of their commercials and Beck’s viewing audience is ten-fold more than it was on CNN.

  13. Dharma
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    EOS, this is about expanding the Peace Corp, Americorp etc. It’s all in detail in The Blueprint for Change: Barack Obama’s Plan For America. Can we argue about the merits of spending money on expanding such programs without resorting to scare tactics not based in fact????

  14. EOS
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    Dharma,
    Are you saying that you think Obama is referring to Americorp as a civilian National security force that will be just as powerful, strong, and well funded as our military? In what manner is Americorp considered a security force equivalent to our military? Is $100 million in funding for Americorp what Obama was referencing as being as well funded as our military? The fact is Obama made the statement and he has yet to give a credible explanation.

  15. Mike
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    I find it funny that some people believe Glen Beck and Steven Colbert are really conservatives. How much harder do they have to push the sarcasm button? Do they have to push so hard that they shatter people’s televisions screens?

  16. EOS
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    So Mike –

    Do you think Obama’s quote is referring to Americorp?

  17. Dharma
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

    EOS—context: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_obama_planning_a_gestapo-like_civilian_national.html

  18. Curt Waugh
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

    EOS, you just got your ass handed to you.

    Folks, EOS doesn’t understand that “strength” and “power” can come from things other than guns. Of course, if he ever actually studied Christianity (or read the autobiography of Malcolm X, for that matter) instead of just hiding behind a Bible when people start using big words, he would learn that the true nature of power is how people relate to other people. Human relationships. Communication. Care. Perception.

    Oh well. Back to Beck…

  19. Bob
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    Let’s get back to water monitoring – http://www.basinalliance.org/images/Monitoring/Americorps%20vol_SRS.jpg

    I would pay $110 million to have her monitor my water

  20. Posted September 1, 2009 at 9:05 pm | Permalink

    Damn, Bob.

  21. EOS
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

    The FactCheck link is not unbiased on this particular topic. The link merely disputes that Obama is planning to set up a Gestapo-like civilian security force. FactCheck says that, referring to a Gestapo-like security force, is a false claim and a badly distorted version of Obama’s call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.

    To its credit, FactCheck did include the written transcript of the relevant portion of Obama’s speech in July, 2008 in Colorado Springs. “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” Every major media outlet at the time deleted these two sentences from the published transcript at that time. If it weren’t for videos posted on YouTube, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

    The military budget for FY 2008 was about 500 billion dollars. To suggest that merely doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service would require $500 billion dollars a year is ludicrous.

    Curt – My strength and power is in the Almighty God – neither guns nor security forces can touch that. I’ve read Malcolm X. He was a muslim who advocated violence for at least a portion of his adult life. What has that to do with the study of Christianity?

    The reference to “strength” and “power” of a civilian national security force is not an alarming concept to me. That Obama would want to fund this force at the same level as our current defense budget does greatly concern me and should raise the alarm in every American’s mind. Fact check said Obama’s detractors make much of his expansive (and exaggerated) description of such a force. How exaggerated is it Mr. President? This year, in an enormous economic crisis, he requested, according to Mark, under 2 billion and Congress appropriated $110 million. What is his goal? How many Americans will be employed in this civilian security force once he completes the takeover of our industries and banking?

  22. Brackinald Achery
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 10:39 pm | Permalink

    If Obama wants to buy me a machine gun and an RPG, I’m all for it.

  23. Posted September 1, 2009 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

    Speaking of Glenn Beck, does anyone know if he’s officially denied this yet?

  24. Brackinald Achery
    Posted September 1, 2009 at 11:21 pm | Permalink

    Funny, but not quite an apt comparison if it is in regards to the birther thing. A more apt one would be an allegation that Beck is not actually qualified to be a Fox News host because he lied on his resume regarding something that was mandatory for the job. I’m not sure what the criteria for being a Fox News host are, however.

  25. America has Spoken
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 10:18 am | Permalink

    85% of American’s believe Beck raped and killed a woman in 1990.

    http://www.twiigs.com/poll/Politics/38512

  26. EOS
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    There you go. Couldn’t have a better illustration of the differences in America today. One side tries to talk about an issue and the other side fabricates malicious personal attacks while calling the other person crazy.

  27. dan
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svf0vhVZ3Fo&feature=related

  28. kjc
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    By malicious personal attacks I assume you mean Glenn Beck calling Obama a racist and a Nazi. By “one sides tries to talk about an issue,” I assume you mean those who want to debate the extension of health care to more Americans, while others fabricate (“death panels”) and willfully misinterpret (Americorps volunteers as a de facto national police force).

    I agree–a clear illustration of the differences.

  29. EOS
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    kjc –

    At what point in the video does Glenn call Obama a racist and a Nazi? Tell me what the timer says when he speaks those words. What I heard was, ” …I’m not suggesting anything. I am asking questions…”

    You are willfully misinterpreting.

  30. kjc
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    i didn’t watch that stupid video. i wouldn’t watch glenn beck for money. watching that dude makes people stupid, clearly.

    as for “i’m not suggesting anything…” HA. check your bullshit detector. it ain’t working.

  31. Robert
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

    EOS, there have been private security companies providing guards at military bases for several years now. Your heroes in the Bush administration did that as part of their massive efforts to privatize. It’s odd, I don’t recall you, or any others of your ilk, expressing any concern about any of this until the last few months.

  32. EOS
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

    Robert –
    Bush is/was never my hero, nor a candidate that received my vote.

  33. EOS
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

    kjc –

    We don’t have to worry about those “fabricated death panels” anymore since the Senate committee has announced that the provision was removed from the bill under consideration. That “crazy woman” Palin forced the change by making a single post on her Facebook page.

  34. kjc
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

    yep, you’re right, EOS. no more end of life counseling–though palin had pushed for this in her own state.

    i tell you–turn off Fox. save your brain cells.

  35. James Madison
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    EOS,

    Just curious, but can I ask you as question? In a comment above you wrote that the government “can’t use employees of the Department of Defense against a civilian population, or should I say the Constitution prohibits it”. What passage in the constitution is it that you base this statement on? I admit to being rusty and dead, so I’d appreciate a clarification on this point. Thank you.

  36. Brackinald Achery
    Posted September 2, 2009 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

    I assumed he as referring to the posse comitatus act, which, I believe, was passed about 100 years after the Constitution was ratified and isn’t part of the Constitution.

    The Constitution does, in fact, provide for Congress to call forth the militia to enforce federal law under the command of the President, if memory serves. It actually is one of Congress’ enumerated powers, unlike providing universal healthcare.

  37. EOS
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 5:17 am | Permalink

    You’re right James, Brackinald and Robert,

    Posse Comitatus is not in the Constitution. My mistake. The Federal law limits the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement in the United States. I actually wasn’t aware of civilian guards on military bases. Are any of them armed?

  38. James Madison
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:20 am | Permalink

    Okay, another serious error of constitutional interpretation by EOS, but this one he admits to having made. The constitution does require the federal government to suppress “domestic insurrection”, and that’s relevant to what the Govt. can or cannot do under the constitution.

    As for the enumerated powers: where is the federal power to build highways or supervise civilian aviation enumerated?

  39. EOS
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:33 am | Permalink

    James,

    While I don’t proclaim to be a Constitutional scholar such as yourself, I believe Article I, Section 8 gives Congress the authority to regulate commerce between nations and states and this governs highways and aviation. I have a question for you. Where is the federal power to provide for publicly funded education?

  40. EOS
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    Where is the federal power to have the federal Reserve regulate the monetary supply?

  41. EOS
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    Where is the federal power to engage in international treaties or international courts that have supranational powers that dictate our laws without the consent of the governed?

  42. Larry
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    They’ve found Beck’s mug shot from 1990.

    http://imgur.com/VDXdS.png

  43. Brackinald Achery
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    As for the enumerated powers: where is the federal power to build highways or supervise civilian aviation enumerated?

    Again I agree with fraudulent Madison. The federal government shouldn’t be doing these things.

  44. Ment
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    Where does it say that the government should develop the internet in the Constitution?

  45. Brackinald Achery
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    Where does it say the Government should manufacture toilet paper? We all need toilet paper! If you leave it up to private enterprise, each piece will be $10 and made of ground up whales!

  46. James Madison
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

    My point, EOS, is that many necessary activities of government are not specified in the constitution, and that a modern dogmatism, shorn of all knowledge of actual constitutional history and practice, blinds some people to the main virtue of the US constitution: it’s flexibility. There are plenty of general clauses in the constitution that can be interpreted to permit nearly anything the government may wish to undertake — or to prohibit them. It all depends on who controls the government, doesn’t it? Fortunately, we wrote a constitution designed to protect property and property holders, and it’s done that pretty well. The General Welfare clause of the preamble permits, indeed encourages, a lot more active government.

    Please note that neither I nor any of the Founders are making a constitutional argument against government power being used for publicly defined purposes. We in 1787 created a national government of great powers, something that the so called conservatives of 2009 fail to understand. True conservatives are not so anti-government, for government is the necessary method for establishing order. And only with order can property be secured.

  47. Brackinald Achery
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

    Fraudulent James Madison once again butchers the prevailing philosophy of the founders for his own modern progressive purposes. This is getting old.

  48. EOS
    Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    Another lesson in revisionist History from academia.

    The Constitution can be legally changed by amendments. It was designed to constrain the Federal government, not to be distorted by any officeholder to suit their personal preferences.

    This is getting old.

  49. Posted September 3, 2009 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

    Who the hell is Glenn Beck?

  50. Me
    Posted September 11, 2009 at 12:13 am | Permalink

    I am just really liking those water quality monitoring legs.
    I am so sorry to interrupt.

2 Trackbacks

  1. By Your Chamber of Commerce dollars at work on September 10, 2009 at 10:58 pm

    […] a call and ask. I wonder if members of the Michigan Chamber, like Beck, believe that Obama plans to arm AmeriCorps students and use them has his private army. Or I wonder if it’s just that they really appreciate his firm stand on issues like […]

  2. By Ypsi/Arbor Exit Interview: Josh Chamberlain on September 29, 2012 at 11:30 pm

    […] circumstances?JOSH: I started in August 2009, according to my RSS reader. The oldest post in it is this one, which was published when I was 15. My friend Meghna at Greenhills read the site, and I was aware […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect

Sidetrack ad Aubree’s ad BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Frankenstein Escape