<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xml:base="http://www.glennbeck.com/"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Bloomberg the most dangerous man in America?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/</link>
	<description>The Fusion of Entertainment and Enlightenment</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:52:00 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phyllis Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-231069</link>
		<dc:creator>Phyllis Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-231069</guid>
		<description>MAYOR BLOOMBERG IS A   VERY DANGEROUS PERSON ESPECIALLY TO OUR CHILDREN AND HIM HAVING CONTROL OVER OUR SCHOOLS  WHAT HE HAS DONE TO OUR SCHOOLS AND HAVE ALLOWED HIM TO DO SO    THE PARENTS HAD KNOW WHERE TO GO AND EVEN IF THEY DID THE PEOPLE AND THE PANELS AND WHOEVER ELSE WERE IN OUR MAYORS POCKET AND HOW HE HAS LIED TO SAY HOW WONDERFUL THE SCHOOLS HAVE PROGRESSED SINCE HE HAS TAKEN OVER ANOTHER LIE THE NEW CORE SYSTEM OUR MAYOR STATES HE HAS NO MONEY SO WHERE ARE THESE BOOKS THAT GO WITH THESE WONDERFUL PROGRAMS MR. GLENN ALL YOU REPORTERS MAKE STATEMENTS BUT NOTHING IS FOLLOWED THROUGH OUR SCHOOLS ARE NOT A BUSINESS AND OUR CHILDREN ARE NOT COMMIDITIES AND WILL SOMEONE PLEASE TELL OUR MAYOR INSTEAD OF BLAMING OUR TEACHERS LETS START HIRING PEOPLE THAT ARE EDUCATORS WHILE I AM ON THAT SUBJECT MR. GLENN WHY DONT YOU GO AND CHECK 65 COURT ST. AND SEE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT EVEN EDUCATORS AND GETTING BIG BUCKS              </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MAYOR BLOOMBERG IS A   VERY DANGEROUS PERSON ESPECIALLY TO OUR CHILDREN AND HIM HAVING CONTROL OVER OUR SCHOOLS  WHAT HE HAS DONE TO OUR SCHOOLS AND HAVE ALLOWED HIM TO DO SO    THE PARENTS HAD KNOW WHERE TO GO AND EVEN IF THEY DID THE PEOPLE AND THE PANELS AND WHOEVER ELSE WERE IN OUR MAYORS POCKET AND HOW HE HAS LIED TO SAY HOW WONDERFUL THE SCHOOLS HAVE PROGRESSED SINCE HE HAS TAKEN OVER ANOTHER LIE THE NEW CORE SYSTEM OUR MAYOR STATES HE HAS NO MONEY SO WHERE ARE THESE BOOKS THAT GO WITH THESE WONDERFUL PROGRAMS MR. GLENN ALL YOU REPORTERS MAKE STATEMENTS BUT NOTHING IS FOLLOWED THROUGH OUR SCHOOLS ARE NOT A BUSINESS AND OUR CHILDREN ARE NOT COMMIDITIES AND WILL SOMEONE PLEASE TELL OUR MAYOR INSTEAD OF BLAMING OUR TEACHERS LETS START HIRING PEOPLE THAT ARE EDUCATORS WHILE I AM ON THAT SUBJECT MR. GLENN WHY DONT YOU GO AND CHECK 65 COURT ST. AND SEE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT EVEN EDUCATORS AND GETTING BIG BUCKS             </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230973</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230973</guid>
		<description> While I disagree with you I thank you for the respect. As a man of religion I do in fact practice tolerance but I also recognize fundamental differences, difference between a man and a woman, a child and an adult, a heterosexual couple and a homosexual couple. If I could go back in time and prevent the blowing up of building by those who claim to subscribe to my belief then I would do it. There was nothing moral or Christian about such acts of blind violence.

I would say only that while you tolerate religion, there are far too many atheists who would do anything to destroy religion and in fact they do so through the courts every day when they strip a student of the right to pray in public, or when they strip away even the right to display the ten commandments because they dont want to be presented with any display of religion in public while at the same time expanding what is considered public space. It is the same thing as those on my side who once did acts of bombing or who protest funerals in the name of God.

I really do wish you well and once again thank you for the respect of tolerance. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> While I disagree with you I thank you for the respect. As a man of religion I do in fact practice tolerance but I also recognize fundamental differences, difference between a man and a woman, a child and an adult, a heterosexual couple and a homosexual couple. If I could go back in time and prevent the blowing up of building by those who claim to subscribe to my belief then I would do it. There was nothing moral or Christian about such acts of blind violence.</p>
<p>I would say only that while you tolerate religion, there are far too many atheists who would do anything to destroy religion and in fact they do so through the courts every day when they strip a student of the right to pray in public, or when they strip away even the right to display the ten commandments because they dont want to be presented with any display of religion in public while at the same time expanding what is considered public space. It is the same thing as those on my side who once did acts of bombing or who protest funerals in the name of God.</p>
<p>I really do wish you well and once again thank you for the respect of tolerance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Angela Rich</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230945</link>
		<dc:creator>Angela Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230945</guid>
		<description>Yeah but those NY&#039;er still put him back in office. This is his last term I believe enless he changes the law again. He is trying to go out with a bang. He will make as many changes as he sees necessary for his own satifaction. I can&#039;t wait until he is out of office. And we must watch he&#039;s political influences around the country. He is a wack job.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah but those NY&#8217;er still put him back in office. This is his last term I believe enless he changes the law again. He is trying to go out with a bang. He will make as many changes as he sees necessary for his own satifaction. I can&#8217;t wait until he is out of office. And we must watch he&#8217;s political influences around the country. He is a wack job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230667</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 23:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230667</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s too long of a spill to take point by point...besides this debate has already been had a million times by people both smarter and dumber than us...
So I will just say that you don&#039;t have to accept gay marriage, you merely have to tolerate it. (As you already are doing; gay couples are being married in America as we speak and you&#039;re thankfully not out there blowing buildings up.) My grandfather never accepted African Americans being treated as equals, but he learned to tolerate it. I don&#039;t accept religion---I see it as detrimental to social progress, needlessly divisive, and quite frankly, silly---but I tolerate the existence of it.  That&#039;s life...that&#039;s America...we all have our prejudices but us sane ones buckle down and get on with life. 

I thank you for being sane and wish you well. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s too long of a spill to take point by point&#8230;besides this debate has already been had a million times by people both smarter and dumber than us&#8230;<br />
So I will just say that you don&#8217;t have to accept gay marriage, you merely have to tolerate it. (As you already are doing; gay couples are being married in America as we speak and you&#8217;re thankfully not out there blowing buildings up.) My grandfather never accepted African Americans being treated as equals, but he learned to tolerate it. I don&#8217;t accept religion&#8212;I see it as detrimental to social progress, needlessly divisive, and quite frankly, silly&#8212;but I tolerate the existence of it.  That&#8217;s life&#8230;that&#8217;s America&#8230;we all have our prejudices but us sane ones buckle down and get on with life. </p>
<p>I thank you for being sane and wish you well. <img src='http://www.glennbeck.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230568</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230568</guid>
		<description> Here is the difference. I and my wife can procreate naturally. We contribute to society by creating new life. Homosexuals can not procreate under any natural means. In fact not only can they not procreate under natural means but their choice of sex partner is a willful rejection of the value of procreation itself.  This is not an opinion, it is pure fact. Doesn&#039;t make Gays bad, it just makes them less useful to the furtherance of human existence.

We progress. Sure, of course other societies managed to stick around for several hundred years or even a couple of thousand years. By contrast our society has managed to start to crumble in less than 300 years and most of that in the last three decade. so yeah, go ahead and reject the value of tradition.

&quot;And, by the way, homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time. It obviously poses no threat to procreation&quot;

But we are not talking about homosexuality. We are talking about placing gay marriage on the same footing as natural, traditional heterosexual marriage. Not that you would see the distinction.

&quot; Gay marriage becoming legal does not make it mandatory.&quot;

Perhaps. But the same groups that are fighting for gay marriage equality are also suing churches for speaking out against homosexuality. They are the same groups that make it a hate crime to call a gay teenager a name but it is only kids being kids to beat someone up over a game. The same groups that tell our children that homosexuality is biologically natural, despite the fact that men and women are not even close to being biologically compatible with their own sex while telling them that their parents are wrong for being against homosexuality. 

&quot; People will still be allowed to marry opposite sex partners and breed.&quot;

 And this is why you are so tragically misguided. You use the term breed. In fact I can almost hear you hissing it out as if it were a filthy throwback to a more priomitive era. It is not procreation, an positive act of creation, it is only breeding, on par with what animals on a farm might do. Of course this doesnt surprise me either. I imagine you support abortion. The reality is there are two kids of people. Those who support and value human life and those who do not. The latter usually hide behind arguments of human rights when in reality the only right they are concerned with is the right to push an aggressive progressive agenda on everyone and who will demonize anyone who disagrees. 

Tell you what. You go out and &quot;breed&quot;. I will raise my beloved son to be a good man, respect himself and others without surrendering his core values and lets revisit this in 20 years, see what works better. Breeding, or being a father and a mother.
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Here is the difference. I and my wife can procreate naturally. We contribute to society by creating new life. Homosexuals can not procreate under any natural means. In fact not only can they not procreate under natural means but their choice of sex partner is a willful rejection of the value of procreation itself.  This is not an opinion, it is pure fact. Doesn&#8217;t make Gays bad, it just makes them less useful to the furtherance of human existence.</p>
<p>We progress. Sure, of course other societies managed to stick around for several hundred years or even a couple of thousand years. By contrast our society has managed to start to crumble in less than 300 years and most of that in the last three decade. so yeah, go ahead and reject the value of tradition.</p>
<p>&#8220;And, by the way, homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time. It obviously poses no threat to procreation&#8221;</p>
<p>But we are not talking about homosexuality. We are talking about placing gay marriage on the same footing as natural, traditional heterosexual marriage. Not that you would see the distinction.</p>
<p>&#8221; Gay marriage becoming legal does not make it mandatory.&#8221;</p>
<p>Perhaps. But the same groups that are fighting for gay marriage equality are also suing churches for speaking out against homosexuality. They are the same groups that make it a hate crime to call a gay teenager a name but it is only kids being kids to beat someone up over a game. The same groups that tell our children that homosexuality is biologically natural, despite the fact that men and women are not even close to being biologically compatible with their own sex while telling them that their parents are wrong for being against homosexuality. </p>
<p>&#8221; People will still be allowed to marry opposite sex partners and breed.&#8221;</p>
<p> And this is why you are so tragically misguided. You use the term breed. In fact I can almost hear you hissing it out as if it were a filthy throwback to a more priomitive era. It is not procreation, an positive act of creation, it is only breeding, on par with what animals on a farm might do. Of course this doesnt surprise me either. I imagine you support abortion. The reality is there are two kids of people. Those who support and value human life and those who do not. The latter usually hide behind arguments of human rights when in reality the only right they are concerned with is the right to push an aggressive progressive agenda on everyone and who will demonize anyone who disagrees. </p>
<p>Tell you what. You go out and &#8220;breed&#8221;. I will raise my beloved son to be a good man, respect himself and others without surrendering his core values and lets revisit this in 20 years, see what works better. Breeding, or being a father and a mother.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230555</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230555</guid>
		<description>Biden/Bloomberg in 2016.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Biden/Bloomberg in 2016.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230552</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230552</guid>
		<description>I think you trying to decide who someone can marry is a far bigger hit to their freedom than you deciding what size soda they can drink.

And I don&#039;t care how long a belief has stood. The belief that the earth was flat stood for countless generations too. Slavery existed for generations. 

We progress, we change, we EVOLVE. That is the only constant.

And, by the way, homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time. It obviously poses no threat to procreation. Gay marriage becoming legal does not make it mandatory. People will still be allowed to marry opposite sex partners and breed. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you trying to decide who someone can marry is a far bigger hit to their freedom than you deciding what size soda they can drink.</p>
<p>And I don&#8217;t care how long a belief has stood. The belief that the earth was flat stood for countless generations too. Slavery existed for generations. </p>
<p>We progress, we change, we EVOLVE. That is the only constant.</p>
<p>And, by the way, homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time. It obviously poses no threat to procreation. Gay marriage becoming legal does not make it mandatory. People will still be allowed to marry opposite sex partners and breed. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230530</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230530</guid>
		<description> Sure, you should be denied the right to buy a big gulp but by all means change the definition of marriage that has stood for countless generations. Generations that would not exist under homosexual parents.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Sure, you should be denied the right to buy a big gulp but by all means change the definition of marriage that has stood for countless generations. Generations that would not exist under homosexual parents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: landofaahs</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230502</link>
		<dc:creator>landofaahs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230502</guid>
		<description>How&#039;s Bloomy any different from any other &quot;progressive ,liberal, elitist, east coast, west coast,  , control freak? Di Fi on the west coast is just as control freak as any of them.  Please keep you charges of racism to yourselves because they are all connected with libtardism. It&#039;s in their DNA, literally.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How&#8217;s Bloomy any different from any other &#8220;progressive ,liberal, elitist, east coast, west coast,  , control freak? Di Fi on the west coast is just as control freak as any of them.  Please keep you charges of racism to yourselves because they are all connected with libtardism. It&#8217;s in their DNA, literally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/18/is-bloomberg-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/#comment-230497</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=44704#comment-230497</guid>
		<description>Another man who will not be missed. I hope you change your ways Mr. Bloomberg. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another man who will not be missed. I hope you change your ways Mr. Bloomberg.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
