Debate about George Soros has got bogged down.
Did he willingly help the Nazis deport Jews to their deaths, and plunder their property? Did he, even decades later, describe this as the most happy year of his life, fleeing only when he feared that the Nazis would discover that he himself was a Jew? Or did he have no choice, acting in the way he did simply out of a desire to save his own life?
How much did the parents of George Soros despise religious Jews? Did his father really support world government, and pass on this belief system to his son? Or was he just a man who enjoyed made up languages? Did his mother, in spite of being a Jew herself, really hate Jews? Or was it just a mild distaste? Does George Soros today fund groups, including groups in the Middle East, that want to wipe Israel from the map, out of hatred for Jews? Or, perhaps, out of hatred for any nation or individual that wishes to be fundamentally different – not part of a standardized world order? Or is Mr Soros simply ignorant of the true nature of the groups he funds?
Does George Soros fund – directly and via the Tides Foundation – groups in the United States that employ Marxists because he shares their desire to impose totalitarianism upon the world (making a mockery of his supposed anti totalitarian stand in Eastern Europe in past years)? Or because (again) he simply does not know the true nature of the groups he funds?
My own opinion is that the above is simply unknowable.
One can not get into the mind of George Soros to know whether he really knows that he funds anti-Israel groups, and far left groups. And one can not prove one way or the other whether he knows that many of the Marxists he funds, via the Soros money that goes to the groups they work for, are in “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” alliance with Islamist groups.
Mr Soros may simply be an old man totally unaware of, for example, the irony of his “Open Society Foundation” in the United States being controlled by a far left ex high officer of the SDS – someone who would be no friend of Karl Popper. For Soros to fund enemies of the Open Society in the name of the Open Society may simply be the result of a man whose brain is decaying with age – and who is getting a lot of bad counsel from evil advisers.
However, the written and spoken opinions of George Soros can be known.
Mr Soros may not be a good writer (I am not good writer either), but at least his works are fairly clear on his central claim. Pick one book at random, and the central political point is the same in each of the works that deal with policy. And his works have been stating the same central point – the same central lie – since at least the 1990s, so it cannot be a case of senility. If you wish me to pick out a single work, I suggest you look at the Open Society: The Crises of Global Capitalism. Remember that the first edition was published in the 1990s – long before any supposed senility can possibly have been a factor.
So what is the central lie told by George Soros?
It is his claim that “Market Fundamentalism” dominated the Western world in the 1990s, and in the 2000s. A fanatical laissez faire gripped the West, with government reduced to unimportance.
This is simply not true. Not only did governments in the Western world take up sometimes as much half the economy with their spending, but the economies of the West were dominated by government regulations – and the financial industry was especially dominated by governments. Almost every aspect of the financial industry was controlled by thousands of pages of national regulations, and also international regulations – “Basel” and “Basel II”.
Not only was every major economy of the West dominated by a Central Bank pumping out credit money support – creating the very credit money bubble boom and bust that George Soros, and those he funds, claim was produced by “unregulated capitalism” (for this process of government backed credit money expansion leading to boom/bust see Meltdown by Thomas Woods), but in the United States itself, supposedly the heart of this evil unlimited free market, not only was the credit money expansion the policy of the (bailout after bailout, “stimulus” after “stimulus”) Federal Reserve Bank of Alan Greenspan (“Greenspan saves the world” were the headlines that greeted each crackbrained “rescue” operation that Greenspan launched from 1987, then on into the 1990s, then into the 2000s), but also the credit money itself was directed into the housing market by government policy.
As The Housing Boom and Bust by Thomas Sowell explains, it was government policy that the credit money expansion be directed into the housing market. Nor was this any secret. Iit was obvious and open to anyone who cared to look. It is simply not credible that a George Soros of the 1990s – not the man who may, or may not be, senile today – could not have known that this was not “market fundamentalism” but, on the contrary, an active and interventionist government.
Yet George Soros, in work after work, in interview after interview, attacks a “market fundamentalism” that simply did not exist. This is a man who was active in the financial markets at the time and in a major way, so ignorance cannot be the cause of what he has falsely claimed. Falsely claimed, again and again.
We are not dealing, in the Soros of the late 1990s at least, with an ignorant or senile George Soros – we are dealing with a man who says things that he knows are not true, indeed are the reverse of the truth. In short, we are dealing with a liar, someone pushing a lie so vast, so opposite to the truth and of such scale and importance, that it is operating on “the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed” principle, the principle followed by both the Marxists and the National Socialists.
Mr Soros supports – or claims to support- the economic ideology of the late Lord Keynes. He supports government credit money expansion and spending – “stimulus” – as the correct response to the very economic crash that previous government-backed credit money expansion caused (not, of course, that he admits that). He rejects the ideas of the Austrian School of Ludwig Von Mises and F.A. Hayek. Indeed Mr Soros attacks Hayek in some of his writings – which is odd for someone who claims to have Karl Popper as his mentor (Popper was a long time friend and ally of Hayek).
However, it must be stressed that the above point is not about economic theory:
Mr Soros could say, without lying, that “the 1990s and 2000s were a time of government dominance of the the financial industry, via Central Bank backed credit money expansion – and a good thing too”. That would be a statement of opinion, not a false statement of fact.
But what George Soros cannot say without lying is “the 1990s and 2000s was a time of market fundamentalism especially in the banking and financial industries”. That is simply a lie – and it is a lie especially in the case of the United States.
No doubt many American financial enterprises contained stupid and/or corrupt people – Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase, General Electric, and Goldman Sachs spring to mind. But “market fundamentalists” fanatically devoted to laissez faire? This is a lie – no more truthful than claiming that John Calvin was a fanatical Roman Catholic.
On the contrary, such enterprises as J.P. Morgan Chase, General Electric, and Goldman Sachs were, and are, dominated by interventionists. And Wall Street was full of important people backing Barack Obama, long before the crises of late 2008, in the hopes of even more corporate welfare – even more government intervention – than they got under Alan Greenspan and the Bush Administration. And these hopes were fully justified – see the book Bought And Paid For.
So this is not a matter of George Soros supporting Keynesianism against the Austrian School. It is a matter of George Soros telling a “big lie”, the “market fundamentalism” lie. And telling it, again and again and again.
George Soros claims that this non-existent “market fundamentalism” is the main threat to an “Open Society”.
Mr Soros is quite open in stating that he does not consider “totalitarianism” to be the main threat to his “Open Society”, on the contrary it is the free market (“market fundamentalism”) that is the threat to his “Open Society”.
Can there be any clearer evidence that Mr Soros is not a follower of Karl Popper? Contrary to his claims.
Karl Popper, the friend of F.A. Hayek, whatever his other faults might be, spent his life fighting totalitarianism (Marxism, Fascism and National Socialism), not fighting freedom.
To George Soros the West is a terrible example of freedom gone too far.
Please think about that – the government dominated West, where, in nations like the United States, the economy is, for George Soros, dominated by the flow of government credit money, and a vast web of regulations and the power of officials, is freedom gone “too far”.
So what would things be like if George Soros had his way?
Clearly things would not be more free than they are today. Indeed even the existing level of freedom is unacceptable to Mr Soros – this is “market fundamentalism”.
It is impossible not to conclude that George Soros is trying to create a society that is even less free and even more government dominated than society is today.
And it is also clear that Mr Soros supports world regulation. We know this because he has said so, again and again, almost whenever he opens his mouth or puts pen to paper. World governments must “cooperate”. Yhere must be “world governance, (if not a formal world government. There must be no question of people having a free society to a flee to, for that would be “market fundamentalism”, a threat to the totalitarian “Open Society” that Mr Soros wishes to create. One can hardly have a society which can be best be understood as a boot coming down upon a human face (for ever) if people can just leave and go and live in lands of unregulated “market fundamentalism”.
Once this is understood, the funding of various Marxists and other totalitarian collectivists by George Soros, via the money he gives to their organizations directly or via the Tides Foundation, becomes far less strange. And one does not have to believe that Mr Soros has gone senile or has been deceived by evil advisers. It is simply a matter of their objectives, at least in part, being the same as his. In short George Soros is George Soros – not Karl Popper.
Also, as an atheist, Mr Soros may simply see radical Islamists as fools, as people whom he can manipulate for his own ends. The idea that religious people are all stupid is a mistake that other atheists have made, including highly intelligent atheists. So the alliance between his far leftists and Islamists need not bother George Soros. After all when the “barriers to world peace” (Israel, United States. …) are destroyed, he can get rid of these Islamists, and perhaps get rid of the Marxists as well. They are all stupid, no match for him. …
Mr Soros may be quite correct in his contempt for religious belief, although it is still odd that “religious” leftist groups in the United States should take money from a man who has nothing but contempt for the religions these leftists are supposedly believers in. However, of one thing I am certain of is that Mr George Soros, whatever he may think, is not God. He is not nearly so superior to the Marxists he funds, or to the Islamists, as he thinks he is. If he thinks, as he appears to think, that he can just use them and then get rid of them, then the great George Soros, no matter how high his IQ may be, is a fool.
It is easy to laugh at George Soros. I have almost fallen into that trap myself in the last paragraph. After all he is a man who has for decades denounced lack of regulations, yet who makes his living in the Hedge Fund industry, which is perhaps the only part of the financial industry not totally controlled by regulations. If regulations are so good, why has Mr Soros spent his whole life trying to avoid them? Here is a man who attacks tax avoidance, yet who bases his fund in the Netherlands Antilles. “Do not worry about Soros – he is a hypocrite, a corrupt joke, not a serious threat”.
However, it is too easy to laugh at George Soros. His actions are a threat to a real “Open Society”. By funding, both directly and via the Tides Foundation and other front organizations, the groups for which so many Marxists and other collectivists work, Mr Soros has done great harm to the cause of freedom. He has put vast resources into the hands of ruthless collectivists who will stop at nothing to destroy the free society around the world. Indeed Mr Soros has empowered some people with the same ideology that he once claimed so strongly to oppose in Eastern Europe.
Today (April 5th 2011) the various socialist and Marxist-socialist groups are having events around the world – including many events in the United States, where they increasingly control various trade unions and the overall AFL/CIO union organization, and where their power in schools and in universities is especially noteworthy. It is no accident that Bill Ayers went into producing works for teacher training, without changing his totalitarian “We Are One” ideology.
Mr Soros has funded many of these totalitarians, by giving money, directly and via the Tides Foundation and other front organizations. He cannot honestly claim that he has no moral responsibility for the actions they are planning even as I type these words.
I think there’s an alternate explanation besides intentional lying. People’s perceptions of how the world is are generally relative to how they think it ought to be, not based on comparison with the whole spectrum from absolute to absolute. The overachiever who gets 80% on his math test is crushed, the slacker is elated – they both got the same mark, but their reactions are opposites.
Similarly, the reactions to the deregulation of the 90s are going to be a mirror to your pre-existing positions. To someone like us, the deregulation is just obvious, nothing special, and isn’t it about time? To someone like Soros, it wasn’t regulated enough to begin with, and now they’re buggering it up more. Sure, you still can’t do *list of 126489496 things*, but you shouldn’t be able to do those anyways, that is just obvious, and people who want to let you do them are obviously malicious bastards who want to crush the economy. He doesn’t see regulation as regulation, it’s like air to him – obviously present, but it’s invisible while it’s there and you’d be very disturbed if it went away. The simple act of filing it in a different mental box could lead to statements as absurd as the ones he makes, and I think there’s a good chance it does – even if Soros in particular is a malicious liar, I’ve seen enough people who aren’t say the same things in the same ways that I know that there’s an innocent(albeit still wrong) explanation for people believing it.
Congratulations on this excellent piece of writing. Your questions are the simple obvious questions, the type of logic that seems to evade so many otherwise intelligent people.
If one looks at the implications of what he has done, funded and advocated, the truth is obvious.
You get beyond the mind manipulation of the MSM narrative.
There are many other factors such as his funding of J Street, and other subversive organisations.
And his promotion of interventionist economic policies is clear to see.
Presumably my first comment will be un-smited.
Until then. Just to say: Congratulations!
I must admit to never having read Popper, at least partially this is because of an episode of Glenn Beck that I happened to see, detailing pretty much all the claims you make with clips of Soros actually making them. I figured Popper pushed for world governance. Besides, I am still trying to get my head round Hoppe.
Yes, Glenn Beck is for red necks, but its better than the BBC as background on youtube whilst making the dinner. More people should watch Beck here in the UK IMO, the problems of the USA are also for the most part the problems of the UK. A two party ‘throw the rascals out’ system, an influential financial sector with an enormous interest in globalisation and the destruction of the old style isolated nation state… money printing, excessive borrowing.. a ruling political class who regard those who oppose their sweeping demographic changes as bigots or fools.
Soros is using the the ‘open society’ label to get under the radar, pretty much as did the leftists who took over the English Liberal party a century ago, so that it is now a welfare socialist party – having no significant connection with free market economics or of personal freedom and responsibility. It appears that the meaning of ‘open society’ has been turned about, as has ‘liberal’ .
And BTW, what’s wrong with rednecks?
“A fanatical laissez faire gripped the West, with government reduced to unimportance.”
If only!
Nothing wrong with Rednecks – says the man who even a April day in England is a bit much (if I try and cut the grass before the sun is lower in the sky I will not have fun).
Or do people not know that “Redneck” is an ethnic slur – about people who work outside (because they are poor – say in a carpark at a amusement park) and yet are not friends with the sun (because of their pale skin due to Irish or othersuch blood).
It must not be thought that I am saying that Karl Popper was a fanatical free market man – he was not.
But there is no way that Karl Popper would have given vast sums of money (even if he had vast sums of money) to organizations dominated by Marxists and other totalitarians.
On the friendship with Hayek:
Sometimes Popper and Hayek disagreed – but not in the way that people might expect.
For example, it was Karl Popper (not F.A. Hayek) who fundamentally dissented from the philosophical determinism that was (and perhaps is) so fashionable in academia.
Karl Popper openly supported “free will” – this was one of his core “metaphysical beliefs” (his words).
By the way the fact that Karl Popper had metaphysical beliefs shows how absurd it is to classify him as a Logical Positivist (as some ignorant people do).
🙂
So it appears Soros has invented a form of totalitarianism that honestly never occurred to me… trans-national fascism. The ultimate dream of a megalomaniac… to be the fabulously wealthy apparatchik at the right hand of the World Dictator! To be able to crush all competition by one whispered word into the right ear! There is no longer any doubt in my mind that Soros is the ultimate narcissist. How can he support heavy-handed regulation for others while he plays in his own unregulated sandbox? Because, as all narcissists will tell you, “It’s different when *I* do it!”
So it appears Soros has invented a form of totalitarianism that honestly never occurred to me… trans-national fascism. The ultimate dream of a megalomaniac… to be the fabulously wealthy apparatchik at the right hand of the World Dictator! To be able to crush all competition by one whispered word into the right ear! There is no longer any doubt in my mind that Soros is the ultimate narcissist. How can he support heavy-handed regulation for others while he plays in his own unregulated sandbox? Because, as all narcissists will tell you, “It’s different when *I* do it!”
Does Soros live in a hollowed-out volcano somewhere in the south Pacific? With a white cat?
He doesn’t need to, Laird.
Those guys now run the shop.
Cousin Dave – you “naughty, naughty man” you are not supposed to make me laugh (especially not laugh with agreement). I am supposed to be a grim, humourless, person.
Laird – I watched an interview which seemed to indicate that Soros thinks in these terms.
Soros, without a trace of irony, compared himself to God – accept that he really existed (and really was creating a new world) whereas God was a fable.
John B. – correct, as Soros will find out some day.
He donates lots of money (and the respectability of a “great businessman” with a past of being “opposed to Soviet totalitarianism” aiding “freedom in Eastern Europe”).
But the day he is no longer useful – the people of real power will turn on him.
A.G. Holder will prosecute him for some crime (perhaps one he has not actually committed – just to make things amusing for Obama and the others).
And he will die in prison – stripped of all his money.
What could Soros if (when) his “friends” turn on him.
All the media people (and academics, and “culture” people he has funded will turn on him the same day that the real powers turn on him.
George Soros will find that he has no real friends – no one who will try and help him.
Ironically perhaps the only man in the world who might have tried to help George Soros if (when) the Legion (of Devils) turns on him, and had a platform with which he could have helped is……
Glenn Beck.
“A.G. Holder will prosecute him for some crime (perhaps one he has not actually committed – just to make things amusing for Obama and the others).
And he will die in prison – stripped of all his money.”
Oh, how I hope you’re right, Paul!
“Citizen Equality” Laird.
Oath breakers and kinslayers tend to come to a bad end.
Paul, I see that Glenn Beck has been booted off Fox News. He may have been correct on certain issues but there is a tone of hysteria that I think gave a lot of Fox executives serious concerns. And he seems to have an issue with Jews; frankly, he does not pass the smell test.
Johnathan, Glenn Beck hasn’t been “booted off Fox News”, at least not completely. According to him and other reports I’ve read, he’s merely giving up the daily show, but will still be working with them on other projects (specials, etc.). I hope that’s true. While I’m not particularly fond of his style, he does have important things to say.
Smited? Over a Glenn Beck comment?
Minds that are great and free
Should not on fortune pause;
‘Tis crown enough to virtue still, her own applause.
Now, this is truly excellent: my complaint about the Smitebot interdicting my post has itself been smited! Do I get some sort of prize?
Had we but world enough, and time
This coyness, [Smitebot], were no crime.
I don’t watch him, so this is the first time I hear about that – is there a reference?
“And he seems to have an issue with Jews”
I don’t watch GB as often as some people (such as Paul), but I’ve never seen any evidence of that. He’s a big supporter of Israel, and on last Thursday’s show he made a big deal about the rise of anti-semitism in Europe (and he wasn’t supporting it, either). I don’t know where you go that, Johnathan (the BBC?), but I suspect that most of what you think you know about GB is wrong.
JP – you do not know what you are talking about.
That is the blunt reply to your “does not pass the smell test” comment.
I have watched Glenn Beck for years (and e.mails have been sent back and forth and so on).
True I have never met the man face to face – but I am not a kindly or trusting person (you know that). I normally think the worst of people, till they prove themselves beyond all reasonable doubt.
And I have no hesitation in saying I would TRUST GLENN BECK WITH MY LIFE.
Or with the lives of people I actually care about (people who know me, might guess I do not put a high value on my own life – and I do not).
Glenn Beck has always stood WITH (not against) the Jewish people.
The only basis for the “issue with the Jews” crap (and it is crap).
Is some stuff Glenn said about Jewish FOOD.
He said this to a Rabbi – an old friend of his.
It was a JOKE.
And taken as a joke by everyone – bar Mediamatters.
And you it seems.
I take this attack on Glenn Beck personally.
As I would if someone said “you know that J.P. – he has an issue with the Jews”.
Laird, I think Beck’s endless attacks on Goldman Sachs (a bank created by American Jews), and much of the language he uses about Soros (a secular Jew), play to tropes about conspiracies and connections that have been used about Jewish financiers in the past; it sets off a very bad smell. If Beck wants to avoid this point then he should have been a bit more careful, but I guess that is not good for ratings.
Beck by all means has said correct things about some of the problems we face, but his incendiary style is atrocious. He comes across as frankly demented. (And remember that folk such as Mark Levin, another conservative, has told him to cool it down.)
Smited, damn it. Waiting for the editors to unblock the drains.
Laird, I think the problem was the way GB kept going on about Goldman Sachs, a bank with a lot of American Jews, and its cozying up to Washington and vice versa. It reeked of a lot of the sort of conspiracy theory stuff we get about Jews in the past. Maybe I was mistaken, in which case I wrote in haste, but the incendiary style he adopts towards Soros etc makes me uneasy. Very uneasy.
Anyway, I am sure GB will be pounding the airwaves soon.
However, I will say that what JP says about Glenn Beck picking on Goldman Sachs, and drawing attention to the nubmer of Jews in it, is false.
I think there was one show devoted to Goldman Sachs – and nothing about Jews was mentioned at all.
Goldman’s treatment is as nothing as compared to the pasting Glenn gives General Electric (and not in one show – in many). Is General Electric a “Jewish” company?
Actually the only “Jew” Beck could be accused of picking on is George Soros – and he “goes on” about him, partly because of the anti Israel stuff Mr Soros funds.
As for “pounding the airwaves soon”.
Neither the radio show or the television show has stopped.
There is no better friend to Israel (and to Jews) than Glenn Beck. AS many Jews (including rabbis) would be happy to tesify.
“Endless attacks on Goldman Sachs” – simply not true, Glenn only sometimes mentions Goldmans (vastly less than he mentions General Electric) and NEVER mentions anything about Jews in Goldmans – never.
J.P. You write like a man who has never seen the Glenn Beck program, and never read any of his books.
That is FINE (totally fine) you do not have to watch television you do not watch, listen to radio you do not want to listen to, or read books you do not wish to read.
Ditto with glennbeck.com or the The Blaze, or Fusion magazine – do not read any of this stuff if you do not want to (again that is totally fine).
But then do not comment about a man you CHOOSE to know nothing about.
And, please believe me, reading a freaking article from one of the people over at “Reason” magazine does not tell you anything about Glenn Beck (or anyone else).
You are decent person – so I can not believe you invented any of these smears. So you got them from somewhere – and my bet is you got them from one of the Reason magazine crowd. I say that because I do not believe you were be stupid enough to go to a Soros front organization (such as Mediamatters).
Some months ago the representatives of George Soros approached people representing Glenn Beck and threatened him (via them).
Lay off Soros or we will smear you as an anti semite.
This is the game at work here. And it is particularly interesting considering the past and present anti semitic activites of George Soros himself.
Oh yes one can be anti semite “Jew”.
As for George Soros – I do not need Glenn Beck to tell me Soros is a scumbag, I knew that already.
“I spent 60 million Dollars and all I got was this lousy T shirt”
The attack on George Soros over his support of John Kerry in 2004. It was not Glenn Beck who suggested that attack J.P.
Kerry had the most leftwing voting record in the United States Senate (Comrade Barack was not a member back then).
John Kerry also gave aid and comfort to the Communist enemies of the United States during the Vietnam war.
Yes the much attacked “Swiftboaters”were correct.
Indeed I dimly remembered (even as an English schoolchild) a “John Kerry” appearing before the American Congress and lying and smearing fellow American soldiers – giving every aid to the enemy he could.
I could remember that – but somehow the entire American media had forgotten about it, as if some wicked fairy had robbed them of their memories.
Till the “swiftboaters” came along.
17 of the 23 men in his unit testified that he was a liar, a coward and a traitor (giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war is the text book definition of treason).
Yet the entire American media supported him – and pretended to forget what he had done only a few years before. The swiftboaters would have been pushed down the memory hole if they had not found people willing to back them.
Yes John Kerry was “swiftboated” with the TRUTH – but the left write history, so now to “swiftboat” means to lie about someone.
Indeed Kerry even made a merit of his military service “I am John Kerry and I am reporting for duty”, “I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President”.
If had kept his freaking mouth shut it might have been bearable – but,no, he wanted to make Vietnam a talking point.
And the media repeated all this utter bullshit – and with a straight face.
So a man who should have been hanged by the neck till he was dead (perhaps with a silken rope – out of respect for his vast wealth, inherited and married) almost became President of the United States.
With the full support not just of George Soros – but of most of the billionaries. But Soros is the man who commits the MONEY and he does not care how many Marxists and IslamoFascists he funds as long as the job is done.
The job of the destruction of the United States – and the destruction of Israel.
If being opposed to Soros makes a person an antisemite then I must be an antisemite.
After all look at the dreadful things I have just said about John Kerry – and it turned out that he was of Jewish ancestry.
He told story after story about how his Irish Catholic grandfather was persecuted in Boston in the 1920s.
The story (faithfully reported by the media) did not “pass the smell test” (to use your words) as the Irish DOMINATED BOSTON IN THE 1920s
It turned out that John Kerry’s grandfather was not Irish at all – and his name was not even “Kerry”, the man was an Austrian Jew who changed his name to Kerry.
“John did not know” problem with that is that his brother is a practicing Jew.
See how all the above (vastly more “Jew related” than anything Beck has said in his entire life) can be twisted to “prove that Paul Marks is an anti semite”.
Not enough people read, for example, John Cashill (in spite of him writing wonderful books such as “Hoodwinked”, about intellectual fraud in American academia, and “Deconstructing Obama”).
Cashill is the sort of intellectual you would like J.P. – and I like his work also (although he would despise me – because my grammar is no good and so on).
However, for every person who has come upon the work of Cashill at least a hundred have heard or watched Glenn Beck.
So it is Glenn Beck (not Cashill) whose name has to be dragged thru the mud.
“Anti semite”, “does not pass the smell test”.
Mediamatters – via the Reason magazine crowd.
That is how you wrote that you “READ” what Glenn Beck said about George Soros.
Glenn had written many books but never one on Soros. He has talked about him – but not yet written about him.
So how did you READ it J.P.?
You got it off the freaking Reason magazine smear site – did you not?
You have never heard Beck speak in your life – on Soros, or on anything.
Which, I repeat, is tottally fine.
But do not comment on a person you know nothing about.
If you can not help defend a man the elite are trying to destroy……
At least do not freaking well help them do it.
That makes three comments smited.