[Ira]

Glenn Beck was a radio DJ who had to go into alcohol rehab, and Conservatives follow him like he's the messiah. Crazy thing is, they actually think that he believes or cares about the issues he covers:

It's just show business for him.

Surprisingly, just like Jimmy Swaggart and a plethora of other evangelists who the lemmings follow right off the cliff.

[GeneV]

Glenn Beck was a radio DJ who had to go into alcohol rehab, and Conservatives follow him like he's the messiah. Crazy thing is, they actually think that he believes or cares about the issues he covers:

It's just show business for him.

That really is the heart of what annoys me. Beck made $32million last year on his showmanship, and he will make more than that this year. Black, white or whatever, I have trouble with a clown who makes a ton of money from his shtik taking on any part of the mantle of a leader who repeatedly suffered for and made the ultimate sacrifice for a cause.

[Nesster]

Yesterday I caught a bit of the Glenn Beck show, it was one where he had high school students in a q/a sort of thing... question was: what had they learned and maybe challenged their teachers about. The kids's answers were like the greatest hits of the threads here: the first kid mentioned the Communist Goals...

I'm trying to place who he reminds me of - maybe Phil Donaghue + a high school teacher whose method is "outsmarting", i.e. letting the students in on something "smarter" and revisionist, i.e. the students feel superior and so on after hearing him. This feeling of being in the know and smarter than the usual consensus is strong, and will get students to learn... but also to not question the teacher's word... the teacher is taking them into confidence and encouraging them to question others. This way he can slip in a lot of less than substantiated material, or stuff that's simply "makes you think, eh?" without any real basis in truth.

Where revisionism is factual and supported by evidence, it's good. When revisionism is a-factual, it may not be so good.

[gokenin]

That really is the heart of what annoys me. Beck made $32million last year on his showmanship, and he will make more than that this year. Black, white or whatever, I have trouble with a clown who makes a ton of money from his shtik taking on any part of the mantle of a leader who repeatedly suffered for and made the ultimate sacrifice for a cause.

Yet you have no problem with perhaps one of the most divisive african american leaders of today (AL SHARPTON) taking on the King mantle? Who really would you choose to carry on the role?


I am curious are all of you opposed to the message or is it simply that you hate the messanger?

---------- Post added Aug 30th, 2010 at 16:59 ----------

Glenn Beck was a radio DJ who had to go into alcohol rehab, and Conservatives follow him like he's the messiah. Crazy thing is, they actually think that he believes or cares about the issues he covers:

It's just show business for him.

Surprisingly, just like Jimmy Swaggart and a plethora of other evangelists who the lemmings follow right off the cliff.

so then IRA i guess you are saying that there is no redemption for anyone that has a substance abuse problem and they should all simply be discarded or again is it just your hatred for Glenn Beck that makes him worthy of this hes and alcolhic so why should anyone care what he says?

---

Last edited by gokenin; 08-30-2010 at 01:56 PM.

[jeffkrol]

Yet you have no problem with perhaps one of the most divisive african american leaders of today (AL SHARPTON) taking on the King mantle? Who really would you choose to carry on the role?


I am curious are all of you opposed to the message or is it simply that you hate the messanger?

---------- Post added Aug 30th, 2010 at 16:59 ----------



so then IRA i guess you are saying that there is no redemption for anyone that has a substance abuse problem and they should all simply be discarded or again is it just your hatred for Glenn Beck that makes him worthy of this hes and alcoholic so why should anyone care what he says?

I don't like "fear mongers" who tell you others are "fear mongers".....
See the whole show btw:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-august-26-2010-michael-bloomberg?xrs=share_copy
Nor "bible thumping" telling people to be Christian or your not American....

People do not need to believe in the divinity of ancient religious text in order to be ethical, in order to be happy, and in order to have a reason to live. That is the truth. A vision for a bright American future should be inclusive of all non-extremist religious and non-religious beliefs. One does not need a belief in God in order to believe that all of mankind is born equal with certain unalienable rights such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. One does not need to be religious to love the United States of America and the freedoms we cherish.

The will, character and integrity of a person matters more than their religious or non-religious affiliation. A superficial label tends to mean very little on how people actually conduct their daily lives. Beck’s “Restoring Honor” was exclusive of any alternate religious views. This kind of arrogance will not unite our country. This rally could have been so much more than a wasted opportunity to unite all Americans, religious and otherwise, toward a noble cause.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/religion_theseeker/2010/08/glen-beck-dis...-in-rally.html
Religion and "entitlements" didn't put us where we are today.. Greed and War did......... Can't understand how people can minimize that.....

[Nesster]

There was an interesting piece at huffington that spoke about Beck - born Catholic, converted Mormon - speaking in evangelical Protestant terms at the rally. The point being, the Tea party is largely economically conservative... but not religiously so... and the great Reagan coalition was of economic and social/religious conservatives. Beck thus was broadening the base, combining two constituencies, to build a real base of political power.

There's nothing wrong with that, in fact, it's kind of ingenious. And I do respect people whose politics come from deeply felt convictions. The USA has been reformed time and again by Protestant Christians, whichever political end they have been, combining their moral convictions and energy with political action.

However, along the way, Beck has been (and likely will be) a demagogue, using the tools of demagoguery, and telling untruths - I mention one of his tactics above. People on any side of an issue have a depressing tendency to turn out exactly the way they demonize their opponents. That's the worry here.

[GeneV]

Yet you have no problem with perhaps one of the most divisive african american leaders of today (AL SHARPTON) taking on the King mantle? Who really would you choose to carry on the role?


I am curious are all of you opposed to the message or is it simply that you hate the messanger?[COLOR="Silver"]

What did I say about Al Sharpton (answer: nothing) and what does he have to do with this discussion of Beck (answer:nothing)?

I am opposed to a performer making millions on the back of MLK. If tomorrow an African American DJ were to do the same thing Beck is doing, I suspect I would feel the same. FWIW, I'm not a member of Al Sharpton's fan club, either.

[Ira]

Yet you have no problem with perhaps one of the most divisive african american leaders of today (AL SHARPTON) taking on the King mantle? Who really would you choose to carry on the role?


I am curious are all of you opposed to the message or is it simply that you hate the messanger?

so then IRA i guess you are saying that there is no redemption for anyone that has a substance abuse problem and they should all simply be discarded or again is it just your hatred for Glenn Beck that makes him worthy of this hes and alcolhic so why should anyone care what he says?

You have to start paying better attention, but I guess this is a common Conservative fault. It must be in the genes or something:

Where did I, or any other liberal here, positively comment on Al Sharpton? Or Jesse Jackson, who I think is just as bad? (Probably worse, because he mostly works under the radar.)

So, the fact that you think I support the above racist opportunists (which I don't), combined with the fact that you support the racist opportunist Beck, leaves us where?

It leaves us with the fact that one of us in this post seems to support racists, while the other doesn't.

And yeah:

I would say that the fact that Beck was nothing more than a Morning Zoo DJ, and Limbaugh never even graduated college, makes them kind of unworthy of any serious attention.

Like Palin, but again, you Conservatives just keep making the same mistake over and over again:

All anyone has to do is mutter "God" or say something negative about Barak, and you're there for their cause like white on rice.

---------- Post added 08-30-10 at 03:55 PM ----------

And I do respect people whose politics come from deeply felt convictions. The USA has been reformed time and again by Protestant Christians, whichever political end they have been, combining their moral convictions and energy with political action.

Two points about this:

1) Do you categorize intolerance of others as conviction?

2) Do you really believe that the U.S. has been reformed by Protestants, and if so, exactly how? I ask as far as modern day goes, because there's a big difference between the whole of Protestant groups in this country and those Protestant organizations supposedly speaking for all of them.

[jeffkrol]

2) Do you really believe that the U.S. has been reformed by Protestants, and if so, exactly how? I ask as far as modern day goes, because there's a big difference between the whole of Protestant groups in this country and those Protestant organizations supposedly speaking for all of them.

Think he was referring to this:

The original WASP establishment created and dominated the social structure of the United States and its significant institutions when the country's social structure took shape in the 17th century until the 20th century. Many scholars, including researcher Anthony Smith, argue that nations tend to be formed on the basis of a pre-modern ethnic core that provides the myths, symbols, and memories for the modern nation and that WASPs were indeed that core.[8]

WASPs still are prominent at prep schools (expensive private high schools, primarily in the Northeast) and Ivy League universities and prestigious liberal arts colleges, such as the Little Ivies or Seven Sisters. Those colleges are overwhelmingly meritocratic, but still favor "legacy" alumni. Students learned skills, habits, and attitudes and formed connections which carried over to the influential spheres of finance, culture, and politics.[9]

WASP families, particularly the affluent upper-class, are sometimes stereotyped as pursuing traditional British diversions such as squash, golf, tennis, equestrianism, croquet, polo, and yachting--expensive pursuits that served as a marker of affluence. Social registers and society pages listed the privileged, who mingled in the same private clubs, attended the same churches, and lived in neighborhoods — Philadelphia's Main Line and Chestnut Hill neighborhoods, New York City's Upper East Side, and Central Park West; Boston's Beacon Hill and Georgetown, Washington D.C. are fine examples. Also they may live in smaller wealthy communities like Cape Cod; Martha's Vineyard; Nantucket; Greenwich, Connecticut; Newport, Rhode Island; Falmouth Foreside, Maine and The Hamptons near Montauk, New York.

Therefore, in modern times the term WASP is sometimes applied to individuals who are technically non-Anglo-Saxons, including people with:

* Dutch descent, such as the Vanderbilt and Roosevelt families.
* German descent, such as the Rockefeller, Heinz, Astor families.[6]
* French descent, such as the Du Pont family.
* Scottish descent, such as the Carnegie and Getty families.
* Scots Irish (Irish Protestant) descent, such as the Mellon family.
* Irish descent, such as the Ford and Kennedy families.
* Welsh descent, such as the Morgan family.
* Norwegian (and other) descent, such as the Hilton family.

Contrary to Parallax I believe THIS is whats really driving the current political backlash.. the usually unspoken "inevitability" which has the "white "chrisitan" population scared to death Think about the "worst president ever" and just add he's black........

Intermarriage keeps snowballing, producing mixed-race children. Scholar Michael Lind says "the beiging of America" is an unstoppable trend -- and a good one, boosting equality in the social melting pot.

For years, the Census Bureau has projected that standard whites will become a U.S. minority around 2040. More than a decade ago, President Bill Clinton told Oregon university students:


"Today, largely because of immigration, there is no majority race in Hawaii or Houston or New York City. Within five years, there will be no majority race in our largest state, California. In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States. No other nation in history has gone through demographic change of this magnitude in so short a time.... [These immigrants] are energizing our culture and broadening our vision of the world. They are renewing our most basic values and reminding us all what it truly means to be American."

Since Clinton spoke, California, Texas and New Mexico joined Hawaii as states where non-Hispanic whites comprise less than half the population. The District of Columbia and six other large metro areas also are "minority majority." Minorities have climbed above 40 percent in Maryland, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, New York and Mississippi.

Most senior West Virginians grew up in an era when WASPs (white Anglo-Saxon Protestants) dominated America's culture overwhelmingly. The Mountain State is one of the few places where that pattern survives. The rest of America is turning relentlessly into a multicultural hodgepodge.

The transformation disturbs some whites. But it's pointless to stew over the inevitable. Remember the great prayer asking for wisdom "to accept the things I cannot change."

America is evolving steadily into the world's first major cosmopolitan society. Like it or not, the shift is coming. Nobody can deter the demographic trends. Everyone should relax and watch the fascinating new culture taking shape.

http://wvgazette.com/Opinion/Editorials/201008060654
Interesting side note.. for those that may want to connect the dots:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=151689
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005110061
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201008300084

Beck: "I believe we're approaching a last call: All aboard God's train. Buckle up, because trouble is coming"

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201008300093
Just for liberal fun (NOT really Beck but likely scenario:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008280005

[mel]

Glenn Beck lies and fabricates and twists facts to be not quite actual facts but mere shadings of truths. He did this with something a government program that I happen to have a very large amount of knowlege on and we could sit there and pick apart everything he said and point out how it was either twisted or and outright fabrication. Lies. He was telling lies. And the sad thing is that most of those expsosed to his lies are not going to bother to try to determine the truth for themselves out of disinterest or sheer laziness. He is a dangerous person. Idiots shouldn't wield so much power.

[Nesster]

Originally posted by Nesster
And I do respect people whose politics come from deeply felt convictions. The USA has been reformed time and again by Protestant Christians, whichever political end they have been, combining their moral convictions and energy with political action.

Two points about this:

1) Do you categorize intolerance of others as conviction?

2) Do you really believe that the U.S. has been reformed by Protestants, and if so, exactly how? I ask as far as modern day goes, because there's a big difference between the whole of Protestant groups in this country and those Protestant organizations supposedly speaking for all of them.

Intolerance may be born out of conviction - and better that than cynical intolerance.

I was thinking of e.g. the antislavery movement, the temperance movement, the trust busters, the civil rights movement, and so on. Just because today reactionary protestants seem to have their moment doesn't mean historically valuable and progressive reform hasn't benefited from the protestant association.

So yes, in a way Southern slave owners - and even more so the non slave owning whites whose social position felt threatened by the prospect of freed blacks - would have seen intolerance in the Northern church people.

I guess there's a litmus test for righteousness: does the righteousness serve and aim to increase liberty for all humans, or to restrict some in order to retain/re-establish it for others? The civil rights movement, with Christian associations, aimed to increase liberty, at the expense (as they saw it) of certain white people. The current fundamentalist Christians are full of deep conviction, and in a way - an abstract way when it comes to a large number of non-white skinned people - are for an increased liberty for all. However, the things that go along with this liberty seem to make it clear that there are Us and Them in every thing, and that They do not deserve the same Liberty as We do.

[gokenin]

That really is the heart of what annoys me. Beck made $32million last year on his showmanship, and he will make more than that this year. Black, white or whatever, I have trouble with a clown who makes a ton of money from his shtik taking on any part of the mantle of a leader who repeatedly suffered for and made the ultimate sacrifice for a cause.

quote of IRA

"You have to start paying better attention, but I guess this is a common Conservative fault. It must be in the genes or something:

where did I, or any other liberal here, positively comment on Al Sharpton? Or Jesse Jackson, who I think is just as bad? (Probably worse, because he mostly works under the radar.)

So, the fact that you think I support the above racist opportunists (which I don't), combined with the fact that you support the racist opportunist Beck, leaves us where?

It leaves us with the fact that one of us in this post seems to support racists, while the other doesn't."

As usual you don't read very well Ira do you Gene as quoted above makes a comment how he is offended that Beck takes up the mantle of one who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the cause. I responded by who would he suggest take up the cause maybe Al Sharpton who was commented by the current media as running anti-Beck rally to reclaim the civil rights movement for the rightful heirs as he states. Also if you are going to call me a RACIST you had better have the proof to back that up pal and I don't see anything in my posts that would be justification for that. On a side note there IRA you who advocated that this section not even be allowed to exist have suddenly become one of the most single minded people on here, again I ask do any of you actually read what I post of do you simply ignore it out of hand because I am a Republican? None of you have commented on is it the message from Becks rally over the weekend that you oppose or is it simply hatred for Beck?

[larryinlc]

quote of IRA None of you have commented on is it the message from Becks rally over the weekend that you oppose or is it simply hatred for Beck?

I tend to be in the middle when it comes to politics, so I'm not loyal to either party. That being said, I think many would dismiss what Mr Beck had to say over the weekend because of his past body of work. He reminds me a lot of Burt Lancaster in Elmer Gantry.

[jeffkrol]

None of you have commented on is it the message from Becks rally over the weekend that you oppose or is it simply hatred for Beck?

No hate for Beck (dislike maybe, annoyed as well) but I hate the wolf in sheep's clothing chameleon ability and the fact that many buy into the lunacy..
This article pretty well sums up most of my feelings.........

Beck, of course, ignores the Founders’ attraction to Deism and the Enlightenment, including Benjamin Franklin’s questioning of Jesus’s divine origins. Instead, Beck proposes that America was founded as a Christian nation, and, indeed, some colonies proposed freedom of religion for all Christians in order to prevent the immigration of Jews. While Beck does appear willing to expand his religious boundaries to include a Judeo-Christian tradition, there is certainly no room in Beck’s America for non-Christians or those who might profess no belief in a supreme being. Thus, Muslims are left out of Beck’s national classroom, and he and his followers are able to embrace a clash of civilizations historical narrative which opposes the creation of an Islamic Center within blocks of Ground Zero, even though a gentleman’s club and lap dancing are tolerated. In addition, Beck’s religious history lesson omits the tradition of Christian socialism in the United States which helped foster the social gospel movement and combined fundamentalist tent revivals with socialist political meetings on the Oklahoma frontier in the period before World War I.

Beck’s notion of America as a capitalist, Christian nation allows him to endorse American exceptionalism and the concept of manifest destiny. In Beck’s world view, Americans are God’s chosen people, ant it is incumbent upon Americans to share the blessings of their civilization with the less fortunate peoples of the earth. Thus, the continental expansionism of the United States and formation of a global empire, in which American military personnel are stationed around the world, are the unfolding of God’s plan for the planet. Beck’s history does not allow for introspection or reflection. Instead, a blind patriotism is celebrated in which subjugation of the environment and Native Americans, racial slavery, intolerance, exploitation of labor, and global imperialism are glossed over in a story of triumphant expansionism............So, in the Beck classroom we must abandon the very individualism which professor Beck claims to embrace and cherish. We must all adhere to the same religious and economic principles, denouncing free speech for those who fail to support the troops and dare to critique American foreign and military policies. Women must be denied their right to choose, gays and lesbians must not be allowed to marry, and immigration must be controlled in the name of restoring honor. To restore America and reclaim the Civil Rights Movement, professor Beck insists that his pupils engage in historical amnesia and illiteracy. The straight jacket classroom of Beck works better if we all become the unthinking drones of The Stepford Wives or the obedient aliens in Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Of course, such drones are perfect candidates for Beck’s hucksterism as he shamelessly promotes his position as the spokesman for the purchase of commemorative gold coins. On the other hand, is professor Beck’s national classroom really the type of America envisioned by Thomas Jefferson?

I'd say no.
Glenn Beck’s History Lesson: Amnesia and Conformity

[Ira]

None of you have commented on is it the message from Becks rally over the weekend that you oppose or is it simply hatred for Beck?

Therein lies the problem:

You actually heard a message?

All I heard were the disjointed, racist ramblings of a lunatic showman.