Here's the sift in question.

*Blocked. Episode date?

This video has been flagged as having an embed that is Region Blocked to not function in certain geographical locations - declared blocked by notarobot.

Didn't blast 'em hard enough.

>> ^notarobot:
Episode date?


added to summary

Gotta love the argument being made here. What they are saying is, if Osama attacks it's because those dirty liberals in power wasn't hard enough and violent enough in their foreign policy, and if he doesn't attack it's because he's being smart and want to keep those dirty liberals in power that won't be hard enough and violent enough in their foreign policy. Brilliant, either way, they win.

I also love the logic of it. We need a violent protection against a terrorist attack that isn't likely to come precisely because that violent protection doesn't exist. So why did we need the violent protection again?

Seriously, do these people think AT ALL before they speak?

Michael Scheuer really screwed up there, I didn't follow his thinking at all. He is actually in favor of removing our troops from the middle east and non military intervention. Maybe he's suggesting an attack so we learn our lesson and move out faster or something?

I'm sure as those poor fuckers were falling from the World Trade Center -- a fall that took longer than it will take you to read the rest of this comment -- they were thinking, "I'm sure glad I'm dying to enhance some insane bastard's policy arguement".

Still falling.

Still falling.

Dead now.

Too bad we can't have more of that, huh?

So, Beck's point is that Bin Laden isn't going to attack America because he wants democrats to stay in power. . . Isn't that really just an argument for keeping democrats in power?

Personally I don't give a damn about what Al-Qaeda's reasoning is, I just care that they don't attack us. But I suppose to conservatives the thought of appeasing an enemy is so abhorrent that it's preferable to suffer massive civilian casualties again in the US. At least we'll never have admit we were wrong about anything.

Hey, I hope Osama detonates his 'major weapon' (read: nuclear device) on some neo-con/teabagging/secret muslim rumor-monger convention and maybe solve our problem and theirs all at once.

If they can suggest we need to kill Americans, I'm allowed to agree, and I believe I should have the right to suggest which ones need to DIA(nuclear)F.

That guy just gave credence to every wackjob 'we create wars on purpose/ 9-11 was an inside job' conspiracy theory on the planet. He almost announced that the CIA would encourage attacks on the US so the people would clamor for more 'protection'.. which is code word for more funding to the CIA and an even more incredibly massive yearly budget.

That and so we'd vote in another republican. As if the last one reduced the threat to the US and other western countries. Glen Beck is the craziest fucker on the air for actually agreeing with him.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by vaporlock.