Chicago Boyz

What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?

  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • I Think I See What Glenn Beck is Doing (Updated)

    Posted by Chicago Boyz Archive on September 3rd, 2010 (All posts by )

    The Glenn Beck rally is confusing people.


    He is aiming far beyond what most people consider to be the goalposts.

    Using Boyd’s continuum for war: Material, Intellectual, Moral.

    Analogously for political change: Elections, Institutions, Culture.

    Beck sees correctly that the Conservative movement had only limited success because it was good at level 1, for a while, weak on level 2, and barely touched level 3. Talk Radio and the Tea Party are level 3 phenomena, popular outbreaks, which are blowing back into politics.

    Someone who asks what the rally has to do with the 2010 election is missing the point.

    Beck is building solidarity and cultural confidence in America, its Constitution, its military heritage, its freedom. This is a vision that is despised by the people who have long held the commanding heights of the culture. But is obviously alive and kicking.

    Beck is creating positive themes of unity and patriotism and freedom and independence which are above mere political or policy choices, but not irrelevant to them. Political and policy choices rest on a foundation of philosophy, culture, self-image, ideals, religion. Change the foundation, and the rest will flow from that. Defeat the enemy on that plane, and any merely tactical defeat will always be reversible.

    Beck is unabashed that God can be invoked in public places by citizens, who vote and assemble and speak and freely exercise their religion. They are supposed to be too browbeaten to do this. Gathering hundreds of thousands of them to peaceably assemble shows they are not. But showing that the people who believe in God and practice their religion are fellow-citizens who share political and economic values with majorities of Americans is a critical step. The idea that these people are an American Taliban is laughable, but showing that fact to the world — and to potential political allies who are not religious — is critical.

    Beck is attacking the enemy at the foundations of their power, their claim to race as a permanent trump card, their claim to the Civil Rights movement as a permanent model to constantly be transforming a perpetually unjust society.

    He is nuking out the foundations of the opposition’s moral preeminence, the very thing I proposed in this post.

    Ronald Reagan said we would not defeat Communism, we would transcend it.

    Beck is aiming to have America do the same thing to its decaying class of Overlords, transcend them.

    Beck is prepping the battlefield for a generation-long battle.

    He is that very American thing: A practical visionary.

    See, simple.

    Restore pride and confidence to your own side, and win the long game.

    As Ronald Reagan also said, there are simple solutions, just no easy solutions.

    God bless America.



    UPDATE: One commenter, Richard40 who attended the rally said “As a conservative secular libertarian, I felt a bit left out … .” He said Beck could have included him by having a non-religious person on stage, and by saying “our only requirement is you believe in the founding principles of America, and wish to return to those principles.” He noted further, correctly in my view, that “The key to the Tea Party coalition is to stay unified on issues where conservatives and libertarians agree, like spending, deficit, size of government, and honest government, but allowing a big tent, that respects differences on social issues … .”

    I did not go to the rally, I don’t know Glenn Beck, I don’t have a TV so I don’t know watch his show, and I am not a mind reader. So I can only speculate about this event. Other people have been a little bit stumped by it, too. I think that it was expressly not labeled as a Tea Party event. If so, that would make sense. The Tea Party is one circle on the Venn Diagram. The target audience for this event is an overlapping but not identical circle. The goal here seems to have been to encourage and mobilize one very large group of people, a huge segment of the population. No event is going to accomplish everything or appeal to everybody. Since the event included a call for forty days of prayer for the country, it was pretty obviously directed to people who pray. The totality of the coalition which is growing, which I think of as The Insurgency, is made up of several components. The unifying element is exactly the political and economic factors Richard40 mentions. A purely political event would have been a different event. There is room for all kinds of events.

    And as a Roman Catholic, I will extend my hand to Richard40 and all other non-religious fellow citizens who share the same civic, political, economic and Constitutional principles I do. For the small number of doctrinaire libertarians who cannot stand dealing with someone who goes to church, I can only say, wake up, look hard at what is happening, and see who your real opponents are. We can have a civil discussion about the issues we disagree about when this current menace has been beaten back. We are in this thing together.

    UPDATE II: Whoa. Mr Beck himself linked to this post, and tweeted: “The ONLY guy to actually get it!”

    So, the accuracy of my penetrating analysis is confirmed.

    Is the Internet the most groovy thing ever, or what?

    He also mentioned his new news site The Blaze, which I am now going to look at … .

    UPDATE III: Apparently Mr. Beck commented on this post on his radio show. If there is a link for that, I would appreciate it if someone would put it down in the comments. [Thanks to several people for sending the transcript. here it is.]

    UPDATE IV: Beck-O-Lanche! [Moved here.]


    242 Responses to “I Think I See What Glenn Beck is Doing (Updated)”

    1. newguy40 Says:

      Excellent summary.

      Thanks. That is a keeper.

    2. morgan Says:

      Lex, very insightful and spot on target.

    3. Mike H Says:

      I always thought it was odd that while liberals say “culture follows politics” they have been much more successful at changing culture through the various pop-culture outlets that they nearly exclusively control. Gay marriage has only become a widely accepted notion because the left has laid the groundwork through its popular culture outlets. Everyone likes Will and Grace and Pedro Zamora. Single parent homes and all the political baggage that goes with that (subsidized child care, schools turning into defacto parents with 24/7 services, etcetera) was largely an byproduct of the cultural revolution of the 70’s and the women’s lib movement that sought to destigmatize divorice and out of wedlock children.

      On the flip side, most conservatives say that “politics follows culture” but have been fighting the culture war for the past 40 years without trying to change the culture.

      I think that’s what folks like Beck and Andrew Breitbart understand.

    4. Bruno Behrend Says:

      Drop everything and get working on that book, will you?

    5. cjm Says:

      this thesis is worth tracking over time. i will keep on the look-out for any confirming news. palin seems to tap into this cultural approach as well (and she was in DC this week-end too).

    6. Lexington Green Says:

      Bruno, I am working on it today.

    7. David Foster Says:


    8. deichmans Says:

      Brilliant post, Lex! Thank you for giving context to what is so often either marginalized or demonized.

    9. Ginny Says:

      Thank you Lex. This seems acute and accurate. The last decade has cleared away a lot of the noise and let us see what we were in danger of losing – I hope before it is lost. The American vision isn’t of the “best” but the “better trying to become the best.” It isn’t static but it needs to keep in touch with its heritage, or else that movement won’t be forward but churning or even, well, worse. For instance, Beck understands the black robe brigade was important. He sometimes gets a fact wrong, but the essence – which is inclusive, warm, respectful, resilient – that he’s got right.

      Yes, I, too, would like to read the book.

    10. Sgt. Mom Says:

      I think it was relevant also – that there were so many at Beck’s rally, no matter how you cast the numbers, either 300,000 or half a million. It was a LOT, and you can safely assume that for everyone present, there were any number of others who couldn’t afford it, couldn’t travel that far, had family and job obligations.
      Secondly, last year I was still doing media relations for the local Tea Party, and it was very interesting to me that we got a whole lot more consideration and respect from local media outlets after the 2009 9/12 event. I know they are still quibbling over how many attended that, but the same thinking applies – for everyone who went to Washington from our Tea Party, there must have been at least fifteen or twenty or more who would have gone, if they could. Suddenly, after 9/12/2009, it was as if the local media generally woke up and said, ‘holy c**p, there’s a heap of Tea Partiers out there, they are solid citizens and not a bunch of disorganized wack-jobs and — er, maybe we should pay attention!’

      Funny story – I was so out of pop culture generally when the Tea Parties began launching, that when people in the local Tea Party started going on about Glenn Beck, I had him mixed up with Jeff Beck, and thought, ‘Oh, cool – another conservative rock musician besides Ted Nugent!’

    11. PenGun Says:

      God, an interesting concept. One of the best part about the god scam is that you get to call ultimate moral victory just by saying god is on your side. It’s obvious from the concept it’s self that that is wrong.

      I figured that out when I was 16. That’s why I became a Buddhist.

    12. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      Sgt. Mom

      Agreed as to the impact of 9/12. Here in my small mountain town, our local paper refused to cover any of our local TEA Party events [even when we had several hundred people at the main intersection of town]. Contacts inside the paper confirmed that the chain that owned the paper had sent out orders that no TEA Party activities were to be covered because, “protesting against the government and taxes is treason” [and yes, the quotation marks are appropriate]. In October, after the 9/12 gathering, suddenly there was front page coverage that was not hostile, and even friendly. A combination of the impact of the 9/12 event, and a reduction in the number of subscribers may have had something to do with it.

      Glenn Beck did reach out to far more than the boogeyman “religious right”. I am neither white [I fail the physical because of epicanthic folds] nor of the Judeo-Christian faith. But I got what he was after right away.

      Our country was founded on certain assumptions as to the relation of the government to the individual that mirror the relationship between God and Man in the Judeo-Christian system. ONLY in that system is it possible to have a real covenant with God, a relationship wherein the individual can expect God to keep his side of the bargain. Our rights come from that conception of rights being above the machinations and manipulations of mere men. As someone has said, would you want to depend on your rights being enforced only by the whim of Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid?

      And since those rights come from something more than men, when men try to abridge those rights; it is up to us to defend them; both as a right and as an absolute moral obligation. And as Americans, we tend to want to take on the burden so that our children will not have to. We have a duty to match or exceed the efforts of the Founding Fathers.

      I am not Christian. I am not White. But I am an American, and I would have been proud to have been in Washington last Saturday.

      Subotai Bahadur

    13. J. Scott Says:

      Lex, This is the best thing anyone has said about the Beck gathering. Thank you, you are to be commended for excellent analysis—for you are spot on. I plan to give this wide coverage in my little world. Thanks again! And, Keep the Faith!

    14. T.L. Davis Says:

      I went to the Beck rally and have written on it, but I had been struggling for its actual meaning until now. Thank you for the excellent analysis.

    15. renminbi Says:

      A very good one Lex,but what I love about this blog is the intelligence of the commentary and its good nature.How can leftists stand the constant potty mouthed negativity of their commenters? It can’t be a good life reading all that negativity.

    16. ahem Says:

      You’re correct. Although most do not yet realize it, this rally is a turning point in American politics.

      [Be polite to the other guests, whether you think they deserve it or not. Lex.]

    17. Lexington Green Says:

      TL Davis, I read your post. I think “Restoring Honor” means restoring honor to American values, to the American way of life, which have been dishonored for a long time now. While the rally was a “show of force” against Obama, that was only incidental. The rally was aimed at a positive message for its own participants. If you believe in yourself, and your cause, and your country, and your friends and neighbors, and you reject the lies that have been told about you and people like you for so long, then you can do all kinds of good things. Any political intimidation of Obama exists on a much lower scale of importance. Obama will come and go. He is a symptom. The disease is our lack of faith in ourselves. The cure is the truth about ourselves. The vicious, hate-filled, violent, racist mob is a mirror image the Left sees. It is a picture of them, not us.

    18. Anonymous Says:

      Excellent analysis. Liberals can’t stand to be confronted with the truth. That’s why they always stoop to name calling instead of responding in an adult manner. “Don’t cloud the issues with facts!” is the real liberal battle cry!

    19. Percy Dovetonsils Says:

      “Obama will come and go. He is a symptom.”

      I do think he is the catalyst for the cultural pushback. For a lot of Americans, he is their first real glimpse of the academic Left, and its utter contempt for the traditional American ethos.

      And that has been a massive wakeup call.

    20. Robin Says:

      Fab. U. Lous! I’m passing this link on to everyone on my list. Thanks!

    21. richard40 Says:

      Perceptive article, and I largely agree.
      I do have one problem with Beck’s rally though. While it is indeed important to make it clear that the religious folks in the Tea Party are not some Taliban like bogeyman, and to let them know it is good to be religious, his approach ignored another vital part of the Tea Party, conservative secular libertarians.

      As a conservative secular libertarian, I felt a bit left out of his Faith Is Everything rally. But he could have brought me in with a very simple change. When he had all the religious leaders on stage, he could have also had a prominent conservative secular libertarian, and pointed them out. Then he could have added these words “My message of faith, hope, and charity also does not leave out those who have no religious faith, like (point out said secular libertarian leader), provided they do have faith in the constitution, the founders, capitalism, individual freedom, the golden rule, and the goodness and honesty of everyday Americans. Our movement excludes nobody on the basis of their religion, or lack of it. Our only requirement is you beleive in the founding principles of America, and wish to return to those principles.”

      Adding my suggested change would have eased the concerns of many libertarian Tea Party members, who still worry about the movement being hijacked by Christian Coalition types, and returning to the Bush days, where Republicans burnished their “conservative” credentials on abortion/gays/religion, while totally ignoring spending and size of government issues, which was a major factor in the 2006-2008 republican collapse. The key to the Tea Party coalition is to stay unified on issues where conservatives and libertarians agree, like spending, deficit, size of government, and honest government, but allowing a big tent, that respects differences on social issues, like abortion and gay rights. That aproach will form a permanent winning coalition, that will permanently defeat the progressives, the real enemies of both conservatives and libertarians.

    22. onparkstreet Says:

      This is a very thought-provoking post, Lex.

      – Madhu

    23. Anonymous Says:

      Great analysis. I just wrote a piece yesterday along the same lines called “What was Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally really about? (Maybe not what you think)” at

    24. Mike Senterfeit Says:

      Adding my thanks to all the others, you really put Beck’s rally in the proper perspective.. Thank You

      Re the Obama phenomena and what he means to America long term: My theory is that his policy failures will turn off an entire generation of younger democrat voters. Now if the Republicans can just find the courage to govern as conservatives with a conscience…

    25. Cindy Says:

      Beck is working towards godhood, that’s what all good lds do. He sees himself as saving the Constitution. Those are his only motives.

    26. Lexington Green Says:

      Cindy’s name has the same first syllable as cynic.

      And she may be right.

      Or it may be that Mr. Beck has an impenetrable mix of motives, both egotistical and public spirited.

      Anyway, he is a smart guy, who is making it up as he goes along.

      I bet his thinking is roughly what I outlined.

      If anybody knows him, send this link and ask him.

    27. Heidi Says:

      He cut them off at the knees at every pass on Saturday, Sharpton looked the fool..

    28. David Thompson Says:

      You forgot to mention his war on Science and evolution despite all the advances they have brought us.

    29. Jones Says:

      Beck needs to realize he is up against the mythical hydra

      he will need many swords

    30. Quayle Says:

      Cindy says Beck is working toward godhood. That statement alone tells me that Cindy is herself working toward heaven. So as a Mormon I ask Cindy, what is heaven? What happens when you get there?

      Cindy doesn’t know, really. (I know. I’ve asked Cindy’s co-hearts.)

      But not withstanding that Cindy calls herself a child of God, and that she prays to her Father in heaven, she can’t accept that she might actually, literally be a child of God, and as such, if she cooperates, is being brought along by her Father to……

    31. LowOnProzac Says:

      Beck completely outsmarted the Left and the Media. He kept the theme of the gathering secret and made it non-political. The Media thought they could twist political attacks into hate speech, so they went in swinging and landed a punch squarely on their own jaw. They looked foolish.
      I am non-religious, but I completely agree that the Left is destroying the culture. I’ll go with the flamboyant and religious Beck.

    32. Lexington Green Says:

      I now realize I have no idea what Cindy and Quayle are talking about. Which is fine.

    33. TommyD Says:

      Thanks Lex…I have no idea what they are talking about either. Glad to know I’m not alone.
      Great read!

    34. PurpleSlog Says:

      Beck just tweeted ( ) re this post:

      “The ONLY guy to actually get it!”

    35. Guitanguran Says:

      I don’t think Mr. Beck holds anyone’s Atheism against them any more than I can hold his Mormonism against him. There are some places where his mind and mine won’t meet, but the foot of the Lincoln Memorial and in front of the Constitution are places where I can.

    36. j.b. Says:

      Very nicely done. Found this via GB’s twitter. You can pretty much BET he will include the excluded when he hits the airwaves.
      GB started up a new NEWS site…

    37. Anonymous Says:

      Nonsense. He’s just holding a revival meeting for a faith-based conservatism that’s died of deregulation fever.

    38. Anonymous Says:


      You misunderstand the nature of the 8/28 gathering. Beck himself said yesterday “This is the third great American awakening…”. The beginning, at least. It was not a political rally – see Subotai Bahadur’s comments above – it concerned our existence as free people who recognize our life is a gift from God, and our freedom fundamental to the exercise of that gift. That there is a lot of overlap with the Tea Party is inevitable since many in the Tea Party are believers and regular church goers.

      Read up on the first and second “Great Awakenings” and you will have a better handle on what the 8/28 rally was about. One of the purposes was to show, as Sarah Palin said, “you are not alone”: The rally was an affirmation that we believers are not after all an isolated, impotent minority. It reminded that our duty to God and country requires our best efforts in everything we do, not just politics. If we approach life in that manner, the politics will fall in line. If we don’t, the politics aren’t going to matter that much. As Jesus said, “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”.

      When I was younger I was agnostic, because it seemed intellectual honesty demanded it. I later became a follower of Jesus, because intellectual honesty demanded it. We all have to find our own path. I encourage you to challenge your secular assumptions; you might be surprised where it leads you. C.S. Lewis might be a worthwhile read. But don’t worry about the Tea Party – I think most of us religious types are as ready to avoid muddying the waters with social conservative politics as you are.

    39. Predikari Says:

      As an outside observer I have to say that your post looks good, and I sincerely hope that you are right about Beck as that’s really not the impression I get from these rallies. Having watched quite a bit of fox news regarding this movement all I seem to see is raving about making America the Christian nation it should be, about going back to religious values etc.

      When the tea party movement first started I cheered, I am a libertarian freedom lover who believes in the freedom of choice, freedom of religion and freedom of speech, limited government and self governing but when the movement starts revolving around an objective(religion) I actually disagree with it sort of ruins the option for non-religious freedom lovers to participate.

      I’m just happy you have people that are for less government over there in the USA, here in Iceland there’s no such thing.

    40. Jack Okie Says:


      Not sure what happened. I did not mean to post anonymously. Well, anonymous – anonymous, anyway.

      Jack Okie

    41. Dweller Says:

      I totally agree with this post.

      What many have not articulated before (and Glenn eloquently crystalized in his speech – which I would rank right up there with Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream someday” speech) is that we are fighting against an enemy as huge as Communism, but even more subversive because it comes wrapped in the fine clothing of American ideals.

      You really said it when you said that Beck is fighting America’s “decaying class of Overlords” – although I would disagree that they are actually “American” but what the hey.

      Our “American” overlords are trying to suppress our rights by marginalizing Christianity, and pretending that an elitist Ivy League education makes them wiser than us. What they need to realize is that Christ comes before politics, and there is a difference between wisdom and book smarts, and that we the people have the wisdom.

      I once had a friend in high school who went on to a private school in the northeast called Bard. He and I used to see very much eye to eye about many things – the military, taxes, music. But when he came back he was completely different, and not just the facial hair, clothes and new musical tastes. Everything he believed was different!

      Some people think that just because they have a degree in music appreciation, have volunteered at a homeless shelter, and have played lacrosse, that they are suddenly better than everyone. Well, I’ve got news for you! Jesus was a populist! And he didn’t believe in taxes, or money. “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s!” he would shout.

      It’s time to render unto Obama. And I don’t mean rendering money. I mean rendering something else. REVOLUTION!!

    42. izzy Says:

      I am a proud black American… I and my 5 old year son were there at the “Honor Rally” in DC. I love this country. My main reason I went to the rally was because I always believe and know that America different and special from other countries world wide. She is the best hope for mankind. She was founded on God’s principles and precepts.

      Every kid in some struggling country desires to come here because they believe… In America anything is possible, anyone with a willing heart to work hard can succeed. You know, I came here in these United States twenty years ago with ten dollars and one shirt and jeans and I am now leaving the American dream. No, I received to hand-outs from the Feds but through hard work and my faith in God, I am what I am… prosperous and happy. And I want it to stay that way for my kids.

      The two people that see and hear fighting for the heart and soul of America, day in and day out, at this point in time are: Gov. Palin and Glen Beck… that’s the second reason I went to the rally. And I would do it again tomorrow.

    43. Jack Okie Says:


      I think involvement in the Tea Parties caused a lot of us to start asking ourselves how we got to this current state of affairs. This led to the conclusions expressed in the 8/28 rally. The United States, despite Leftist propaganda, was founded on Judeo-Christian principals. Unlike most other countries, the majority of folks in the United States believe in God, and a (smaller) majority attend church regularly. As one of our Founders, John Adams, said: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

      As I pointed out to Richard40 above, the 8/28 rally was NOT any kind of Tea Party activity. It was an opening event in what seems to be becoming the third Great Awakening. Please read about the first, particularly, for context for 8/28.

    44. Quayle Says:

      “I now realize I have no idea what Cindy and Quayle are talking about. Which is fine.”

      “Thanks Lex…I have no idea what they are talking about either. Glad to know I’m not alone. Great read!”

      Great read. I agree.

      Cindy lobbed a favorite attack of evangelicals on Mormons and Mormon theology. I responded. Inside baseball.

      But Cindy was reminding us, unwittingly by example perhaps, that some people’s dislike of Mormons is so strong that it makes them unable to support or participate in any cause, no matter how good, if a Mormon is also somehow contributing or involved.

      (I don’t have the heart to tell such people that it was a Mormon that made the world’s first working television system and another was dubbed the father of stereophonic sound.)

    45. Bigbob Says:

      Thank you for the insightful analysis, it helped clarify what the upcoming battle is really all about, and how important it is. I find that it’s helpful to have a mental model or framework into which I can fit the various pieces, and someone like Glenn Beck has always been a bit of an enigma for me. But I think you are exactly right, he is aiming higher, addressing a bigger issue, and laying the foundation for our successful return to the core values and principles that have made this nation the special place that it is. “A practical visionary” – that sir, is about as succinct as it gets!

    46. VekTor Says:

      Guitanguran Said:
      “I don’t think Mr. Beck holds anyone’s Atheism against them any more than I can hold his Mormonism against him. ”

      I’m a huge GB fan, and I can accept that he may not be trying to do it deliberately, I can tell you that he has nearly shut me out completely, as someone who has walked the path and rejected the common conceptions of God in the various forms of Christianity… For reasons of intellectual honesty.

      In the last month in particular, his choice of language has made it abundantly clear to me that he DOES NOT accept that those of us who actively reject his God can be part of the solution as anything like peers.

      At best, he throws sops and crumbs at us with lip service about how we don’t have to believe, while in the same breath saying this CANNOT be solved without God. I see it as unnecessarily divisive, since the obvious conclusion is that the godless cannot solve this, only his subset of the population.

      He’s gone all-in on this message, and trying to include us now would simply lead to contradiction

    47. VekTor Says:


      You can’t say simultaneously that you HAVE TO turn to God, and that you don’t… that you can solve it equally side by side with him WITHOUT turning to God.

      Or at least, not if you want to be coherent.

      He’s made his choice via his rhetoric… he’s just not willing to follow it to its logical conclusion, because that’s an embarrassing conclusion to admit when you keep contending you believe the opposite.

      Perhaps we don’t HAVE TO believe in God, if we just sit quietly in the back of the bus and let the real solvers turn to God and fix America. He’ll share a restored America with us… so long as God gets the credit.

      As Richard40 pointed out, he didn’t have to do it this way. I know he’s smart enough to know that in his bones, but he chose that path anyway.

      That tells me it’s deliberate. He chose his strategy, and all of his signifiers along with it, and we’re acceptable losses.

      I don’t actually have an issue with that. I have an issue with him making TOTAL honesty a key of his 40 day challenge… while he refuses to be honest about the clear second-class status that he imputes to the godless as agents to fix this issue along side him.

    48. Margie Says:

      Lex, an amazing, insightful article. I will save it to read again and again. Esp. to show to others who don’t quite “get it”.

      Quayle, thank you for your comments to Cindy.

      I read a comment on a YouTube channel yesterday that really floored me. Maybe Cindy wrote it? It said “If the majority of these Beck sheep knew he was a MORmON, they would NEVER go to his rallies or support him!”
      Maybe, as a LDS myself, I was looking for it, but it seems to me that Brother Beck is pretty up front about being LDS.

    49. Lexington Green Says:

      VekTor, I think you are over-thinking this. Political coalitions are always composed of groups that disagree with each other. There is simply no prospect of non-religious people getting “sent to the back of the bus” in this country. The political point is creating a big enough coalition to push back against the leviathan that is spending us to oblivion. We have a free exercise clause, which also allows non-believers to do their thing and be left alone. Besides, the various religious people spend a lot of energy fighting among themselves, even on this comment thread. In the meantime, if conservative religious people feel confident enough to get engaged in politics, good. In that realm they can argue their case to their fellow citizens and see how their ideas hold up. On economics and politics, I expect to have lots of overlap. I want as many troops mobilized on my side in the struggle we are in. Anyway, if you no longer like the guy, don’t watch his TV show. Find some other way to get involved.

    50. Kimberly Says:

      I think that Mr. Beck is trying to get people to study history using orignal sources. There is so much propaganda in our schools it’s a wonder that most adults are even aware of our founding documents.

      I was struck by post on a blog that I read regularly about Houston’s history. Topic being who are the top five Houstonians. And I quote in part:

      “3. Barbara Jordan: Raised in the Fifth Ward, educated at TSU and Boston University, Jordan practiced law in Houston before turning to a life in politics. She was the first black state senator since 1883…”

      I have to wonder how many folks read on past “first black state senator SINCE 1883” and the implications of that fact and all the history henceforth. I think it was probably more than most. Sad.

    51. Jeff Says:

      I’ll start by saying most would identify me as a Left-Coast Elitist Progressive. I’m secular, supportive of some tax hikes, parts of “Obamacare”, etc etc etc.

      Beck’s rally confirmed, and this post reinforced, that some folks with conservative beliefs are increasingly convinced, and VERY willing to state, that people in my mold have wholly suspect motives–that the differences in my politics derive from the fact I am indubitably irredeemable.

      Whatever the goal of this movement is, I would warn against this stance as a bridge too far. I care deeply for my country, and always want to see it grow healthier and stronger. It’s just that my concerns and hopes can sometimes find their resolution in political ends that are different from “yours”. That, however, has NOTHING to do with some deep-seated lack of moral courage, content of character, or faith in country on my behalf. To those who are lining up to suggest otherwise, I would say, “How dare you!”

      In fact, perhaps the highest expression of my patriotism is my assumption that people whose beliefs and political goals are different from mine are, in fact, patriots, too.

      Neither do I so fundamentally doubt my leaders, of any political persuasion, on such consequential, moralizing grounds. They need to be held accountable, indeed, removed from public service should it come to that. But that’s because they’re fallible (read “normal”), not wrong in some fully transcendental way or below some test of purity I hold them to.

      I think, since the beginning of this fine country, it has been said many times that the experiment has been “lost” to a band of “enemies”; that “the powerful” have won and that they are forcing a world that is “morally corrupt” upon the fine, regular people of “pure heart”. Those voices have always been wrong, and they’ll be wrong again. The prosperity and grandeur of this country will grow, but only against the wishes of those who would paint their opponents as sad, lost or evil souls.

    52. Seattle Realist Says:

      Fascinating post and comments. No liberal academic here, but liberal utopian fantasies are nowhere as scary as the “return to our roots” tripe dripping off this page. Restore honor? An honor Wall Street whored away well before Obama was elected, perhaps? A Wall Street given unfettered power by a Congress of Republicans sitting pretty with the knowledge their boy George would sign anything they put in front of him (including the suicide pill to our personal liberty — the Patriot Act.)

      Our honor indeed is dashed, but the head-on-rock mauling happened during eight years of conservative rule by the fraudulent “small government unless we are running it” Republicans.

      Where were you Tea Partiers when our honor was lost and our dignity destroyed? When a tragically unnecessary war was paid for off budget? (Our budget deficit was already a trillion when Obama took office, folks.) The seeds of our destruction were planted and well watered years before this bright black man you so fear was popularly elected as our leader. Your silence during eight years of thinly veiled fascist rule by budget-busting hypocrites lays waste to your and Glenn Beck’s cause.

      Even if not one of you were a bigot, your absence until years after the crimes were committed renders you irrelevant.

    53. Lexington Green Says:

      Jeff, the shoe is on the other foot. Suspect motives? Anyone who voices a conservative opinion in this country is vilified as racist, and “preaching hate.” I am so old that liberals (before they so totally tainted that word that switched to “progressives”) still called you a “fascist” if you voted for Reagan, or said taxes were too high. Fascist is out of style now. Now, if you say Obama’s program is in any way deficient, you are a racist, and hate-spouting, and divisive. That sort of thing.

      The total exclusion of conservative views and people from the media, academia and the entertainment industry, the intellectual monoculture, the continual drubbing of the same bogus pieties over and over again, the active and fraudulent collusion between the media and the Democratic party … . I would almost think that even people who agreed with it would be sick of it.

      But, tens of millions of people are no longer going to just say, aw, shucks, yeah, sorry, forget it.

      You sound like a reasonable person. Have you noticed this all your life? Or did it just seem normal to you?

      It wasn’t. It isn’t.

      It is very nice to now say, hey, wait, aren’t we all fellow citizens?

      Sure. We are. Vote for the person you think will be best for America.

      Extend basic respect to your fellow citizens, and I can only speak for myself, I will do the same.

      And try to notice when this sort of thing is happening from any source, not just the ones you disagree with.

    54. Lexington Green Says:

      Seattle Realist, I actually agree with some of that. The GOP has been a disaster. It needs to be replaced from the inside out. But, have you noticed, the old, insider GOP is target number one? People are finally waking up to some of this stuff? Stop focusing on yesterdays struggle. Bush is gone. Many of us learned lessons from the experience.

      As to fear of the bright Black man, that is funny. You should mention handsome, too. And eloquent. But I don’t fear him. I just want to vote him out of office. I could not care less about his race. But you will never believe that. And I don’t know how bright he is. He has made a lot of pretty stupid and avoidable mistakes. He was promoted far too early. We will never know what he might have been if he’d gotten some relevant experience before he was turned into a rock star and launched into the office. A classic case of overpromising and underperforming. Sad, really.

    55. Anonymous Says:

      Wow, I really had no idea GB was a Mormon.


      He’s campaigning for Mitt Romney ’12.

    56. PJ Says:

      Hey richard40,
      You really were not left out as a conservative secular libertarian. That was the good thing about the rally!
      Those of us who are conservative Christians welcomed you as much…nay, probably more…than our counterparts! All people are welcomed by true Christians when they practice the principles of honor: faith, hope and charity.
      Whether you name a resource for your practice of those principles in your life or not, those practices are still welcomed, and honored! Christians are very easy to get along with when treated with common courtesy.
      I think Christians tend to think everyone believes in God. We forget sometimes because it is an unconditional, automatic part of our daily lives; we don’t mean to offend or leave anyone out. We also won’t be offended that you don’t believe our way. That would be your decision. But we will share with you our hope of salvation in Jesus Christ if you’re willing to believe.
      We don’t run on batteries, and obviously we’re not plugged into a wall. Something great is driving our destiny. I always wondered where kind secular people drew kindness from. I happen to believe God puts it in all of us.
      I can say without a doubt that Glenn Beck was just as happy that you were at the rally as he was with me attending! Glenn is a Christian, and as such, dispenses the same grace toward all men of honor.
      Just my rambling thoughts. I’m glad you didn’t miss the rally.

    57. VekTor Says:

      Lex, you seem to be missing the thrust of my comments. I’m not saying that he’s trying to send the godless to the back of the bus of America, but instead to the back of the bus of the coalition that we both recognize is necessarily. His rhetoric is issuing non-voting stock within the coalition to the godless.

      We’re the most “junior partner” possible, and he shows us only enough lip service to avoid the characterization that he’s actually saying that he honestly believes that we can be equally effective agents for fixing America without turning to God. I’ve listened for that level of ackowledgement, hour after hour, day after day… and I have NEVER heard him make it.

    58. PJ Says:

      I’m sorry Seattle Realist, what crimes did George Bush commit? When did he serve time in prison? Who tried him in a court of law? Give me even one true incident where he committed a crime, not just spouting your opinion, and I’ll honor you with my respect.

    59. PJ Says:

      You’re wrong; there’s no “god scam,” at least with true Christians. God expects you to prove yourself, not just drop His name to score points. Those moves, when you’re a Christian, don’t earn you any points. In fact, you would be a hypocrite. The victory is in the enduring without fanfare. I’m glad you do have a belief system…it shows you are growing, as all believers should do.

    60. VekTor Says:

      That’s not how you build an effective big-tent coalition in my book… not by alienating those who share common cause with you on so many other issues. He chose the rhetoric that ONLY by turning to God can this problem be fixed. That’s a slap in the face of every potential ally who rejects God. He is the one foreclosing on us being truly equal partners in this coalition.

      When he starts regularly saying you DON’T have to turn to God to be just as effective a member of the coalition to fix America, and does it in roughly the same proportion of his speech as the godless are to the believers,

    61. VekTor Says:

      … That’s when I’ll believe he wants us in the coalition. But doing so (accurately) opens him up to accusations of incoherence, because you can’t have it both ways.

      Not without changing the rhetoric.

    62. VekTor Says:

      … that’s when I’ll believe he wants us as full and equal allies in the coalition. But doing so opens him to the (accurate) charge of incoherence of message. You can’t simultaneously have to, and not have to do X to effect change Y.

      If he truly wants to share a coalition with us, he REALLY needs to adjust his rhetoric. I keep getting the message that he really DOESN’T want to.

      My apologies for the posting pattern, this form is not friendly to posting via iPod Touch.

    63. Ex-pat in Oz Says:

      Hey VekTor, for what it is worth, I think Beck is, from an operative political standpoint, actually a Deist more than anything else. I respect his faith but I don’t share it. And I also recognize that I’d rather be in a foxhole with him than a fellow “wet” Episcopalian.

      To me, it isn’t a religion thing at all. As a 45 yo, I see it as a generational thing. I REMEMBER the feelings Beck evokes.

      We care/d about AMERICA. In the 70s we despaired over Carter (well, I did as a precocious geek). Revelled in Reagan. Shrugged the Clinton experience. Were blown away by Gingrich Contract with America. Skeptical then vigorously supportive of post 9/11 Bush. Grew increasingly wearied by the seemingly endless Iraq war and the ramped up spending. Unimpressed by McCain. Struck by the authenticity of Palin. Utterly depressed by Obama. Now we are the grown-ups.

      I LOVED the analysis and it seems right to me.

      He’s like Breitbart– more a Patrick Henry than a George Washington.

      That’s cool.

      YOU can be the Washington– you seem OK to me! : )

    64. Doc Rampage Says:

      VecTor, I can understand your problem with Beck’s beliefs, but I hope you don’t see it as hostile. At a libertarian event where they talked about promoting gay marriage, the evils of the the Patriot Act and the Iraq War, legalizing pot, and the over-bearing law enforcement of the drug wars, a social conservative may not feel very welcomed either. But maybe he shouldn’t have gone to a libertarian event expecting it to be all about smaller government. I think that you just misunderstood what the Beck rally was about (and that may be Beck’s fault, for all I know), but that’s no reason to feel that you are not respected as a political ally, just that this particular event was tailored to a different subset of the political spectrum.

      As to Beck’s comments about the nation needing God, I can understand why you don’t like this. I was a social drinker from a family of mostly non-drinkers who feared that drink would ruin my life. I didn’t like it when someone would comment negatively about my drinking, but I understood that they were doing it out of genuine concern. They were wrong, but just wrong –there was no reason to accuse them of being judgmental or condescending. Given their wrong beliefs about the dangers of alcohol, what they said was merely decent concern. As long as they didn’t nag me, I tolerated the occasional comments which were, after all, made out of concern, not hostility.

      So my advice to you is that if you enjoy the family picnics, keep going. They will be happy to have you there. And you can have a good time even if there isn’t any beer and Aunt Amy asks you if you are still a drunkard. Just don’t bring along a bottle of Jack Daniels and start guzzling in front of the kids because that would be rude.

    65. Jeff Says:

      Don’t fear Glen Beck or feel that he left you out by being so religious. The truth is God exist whether you want Him to or not. A call to prayer acknowledges this. God does more with His unseen hand than we can do with every political advantage on our side. So all you “secular libertarians” out there: lighten up. God can use you for His purposes even if you don’t realize it.

    66. Jeff Brodhead Says:

      “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Hebrews 11:1

      As one Pastor says: “God is still on the throne and prayer changes things.”

    67. Jeff Brodhead Says:

      For those who were offended by the content of the Restoring Honor event, Glenn said each weekday, for the 40 days prior to the event, that we should all get on our knees and pray. What should be the expectation after such a lead-in?

    68. bsdguru Says:

      In order to maintain credibility, you’ll need to lose the word “groovy” from your vocabulary. Otherwise, nicely done.

    69. seedtick in ohio Says:

      I have thoroughly enjoyed this blog and all of your comments. I routinely read, sometimes comment and sometimes read comments of others to see what is going on outside my intimate world in selected blogs: American Thinker, Redstate and Instapundit for example. This is the only time I have read all of the comments to a blog post. You are to be commended for your manner and consideration both in tone and intellect. This is a concrete example of the way in which adults should engage in conversation whether agreeing or disagreeing. Thank you Lex for providing and managing this forum.

    70. Party of One, Florida Says:

      Thank you for your well thought out and spot on analysis – well done sir!

    71. Tibby Says:

      Bravo to the writer and the commenters This is the best summation and discussion I’ve seen on the Honor Rally. Great post!

    72. Jason Wilder Says:

      I was the only one to go to the 8-28 Event from my church. I asked out Pastor if I could have about 10 minutes this Sunday to explain what I heard and felt. I have tried to write that down, and feel like I’ve failed or have yet to adequately describe it. You have done an amazing job, Glenn Beck just read it on his radio broadcast.

    73. Bhelmet Says:


      Great post and great synopsis. You are oviously intelligent and a thinker, that is refreshing. I think you will be hearing from Glenn or his people really soon.

    74. Corwin Says:

      Thank you. With all I’ve read and heard about the rally, it has been confusing. This was a well thought-out post.

      Whether one believes in God or not, the ideals that God put forth (or, for the non-believers, the concepts put forth by idealists in the bible) are ideals we all can agree on. And should live by. There’s nothing wrong with trying to live by the Golden Rule. Nothing wrong with trying to live by the Ten Commandments.

      Following these concepts is good for us all.

    75. D Carter Says:

      No Beck is not campaigning for Romney! Beck was critical of Mittcare even though it is much different than Obamacare.

    76. Mark Boabaca Says:

      Thank you for a detailed, well thought out description of Glenn Beck.

      He just read most of your analysis this morning.

    77. Ed Says:

      I don’t understand Richard40’s comment mentioned by the author of this article. Why would a self-proscribed “conservative secular libertarian”, who believes in the founding principles of America and has wish to return to those principles, have a problem with religious people on the stage? Religious beliefs played a big part in the founding of this country. Perhaps Richard, it would help if you don’t look at them as “religious”. Look at them as people who are expressing their belief in the founding principle “endowed by our creator”. You don’t have to go to a church, synagogue or mosque to believe in that.

    78. Bhelmet Says:

      I believe Glenn would accept atheists or agnostics or whoever so long as they had priciples and values. Most Christians believe there will be people in Heaven who never knew God. How did they get there? They lived there lives in the model of Jesus. Anyone can do it woth ot without God. I believe it is easier and more rewarding (in the sense of seeing His Hand in your life) with God, but not impossible without Him. I believe that EVERYONE at that rally would welcome any atheist/agnostic so long as they had HONOR. That went for anyrace, religion, or creed as well. We gathered fo love of country and freedom. We must look to those issues that unite us (I believe there are far more) and turn from those that divide us (especially since they usually are so petty). I, personally, will stand with any man/woman that loves this nation and the freedom we are so quicly losing, no matter what color, race, religion, or lack thereof. I will stand like Samule Adams with any man b/c I am no bigot. We must build our foundation together on the principles of freedom. The social aspect of our beliefs are left to each as individuals. If we can truly get our freedom back then we can allow each to live their life as they fit. Like Jefferson said, what difference is it to me so long as it does not break my leg (badly paraphrased). I think the vastmajority of those at the Honor Rally feel much the same way.

    79. bt Says:

      The biggest problem of America is what Glen pointed out rightly “Godlessness in the highest levels”. If the transcendent being is removed out of our our lives, the only thing that exists is pure “EVIL”. The heart of man is desperately wicked.

      Our New Religion

      From “Gaily the Troubadour”
      by Arthur Guiterman (1871-1943)

      First dentistry was painless.
      Then bicycles were chainless,
      Carriages were horseless,
      And many laws enforceless.

      Next cookery was fireless,
      Telegraphy was wireless,
      Cigars were nicotineless,
      And coffee caffeineless.

      Soon oranges were seedless,
      The putting green was weedless,
      The college boy was hatless,
      The proper diet fatless.

      New motor roads are dustless,
      The latest steel is rustless,
      Our tennis courts are sodless,
      Our new religion — godless.

      This is what America is turning out to be.

    80. Quayle Says:

      I would suggest that Glenn’s Mormonism or the religious nature of the movement should not and must not be a stumbling block. It is the left that has made hash of our body politic by always first asking what group someone is from as a means of validating their view or discrediting it. This obsession with groups and classifications is one of the first things we have to avoid, expose, and then put down.

      I’m interested in the core principal and whether it is true, damn the race or group of its adherent. I want honest leaders. I don’t care if they are black or white, because honesty is not a black or white issue. I want modest, serving leaders. I don’t care if they are theists or atheists, because modesty and service are not cultivated or appreciated only by theists.

      If some of you won’t fly to pieces at the mere mention of the name, Joseph Smith said in 1843, “If it has been demonstrated that I have been willing to die for a ‘Mormon,’ I am bold to declare before Heaven that I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholics, or of any other denomination”. (And I would take the liberty of adding, ‘or no denomination at all.’)

    81. petefrt Says:

      Linked you in comments at Hot Air, and sent your post to Ed and AP. Hope they start a thread on it.

      You write what I think too. And you capture the genius of Glenn Beck.

    82. Anonymous Says:

      Bravo Lexington Green!!! Are you really from the chicago area????? There is hope afterall….well done.

      I attended the event and expierienced firsthand what you described…you nailed it.

    83. Carl Says:

      2 Corinthians 6:14-18

    84. Quayle Says:

      Luke 10:9-14

    85. Quayle Says:

      (Sorry, fat fingered the previous one) Luke 18:9-14

    86. Lexington Green Says:

      Carl, getting people to agree on some policies and candidates is not being “yoked together” with them. If Paul had found some pagans engaged in a work of charity would he have shunned them? No, he would have worked with them, gotten to know them, and spread his faith the best he could to them by charity and friendship. You can’t pull single verses out of the Bible and use them in isolation. Politics is the realm of prudence, a cardinal virtue, which recognizes human limitations. Find common ground and work from there.

    87. Ed F Bias Says:

      Great analysis Lex! Maybe you benefited a bit from not being there.

      Not unlike Richard40, I was struck at times by the sometimes preaching nature of the event. I appreciate your response to his concerns. I am Catholic but am not one that outwardly invokes religion. I respect the rights of those that do. I do not see it as exclusion, but simply as the free expression of their convictions.

      Those looking for violence or the political crutch were left without ammunition. They have turned towards religion and selectively avoided the foundation of the event. You have nailed it’s meaning and, looking past the religious nature, have found the core principles that unite 70+% of Americans. Working to solidify this core, creating a base of understanding and communication, will shake the foundations of liberalism in this country.

      At this time and to our advantage, it is these principles that the left cannot seem to identify. Or, based on some of their visceral reactions, it shocks them to their core. To avoid confronting that fear directly, they strike out from the crumbling foundations of their power base (media, unions, “civil rights” leaders).

      I have never seen anything like it and am energized daily. You were that spark today and I thank you.

    88. Lexington Green Says:

      ChicagoBoyz: Now featuring duelling Bible verses.

      That is a part of American life that has rarely graced our site.

      Let 100 flowers bloom.

    89. ex libris Says:

      Good analysis Lex, I don’t disagree with it in the least. What I do disagree with is the premise that is implied by Beck, and in deed yourself and much of the right, that the cultural changes that have taken place in America over the last forty years is the work of some monolithic left and as such are part of some agenda to transform god-fearing, capitalistic, Constitution loving America into a secular communist wasteland, while disavowing any personal role in those changes.
      What I see is an America that has evolved just as all societies evolve, subject to their fears and apprehensions, desires and needs. We didn’t get to where we are today because one group dragged us here, we got here collectively. We all have a desire for security and social justice, we all have a need to believe, we all have faith, in something. We share the same institutions and history, we watch the same TV shows and we go to the same movies.
      I don’t believe for a moment that Americans are as deeply divided as those who would exploit this busted economy would have us believe. What I see are the typical populist figures that arise during every period of national distress and seek to build their own constituencies from those whose fears have made them vulnerable. The tactics are the same, scapegoating and fear-mongering, the calls for a return to some mythical righteous past, the religiosity.
      Yes, we have problems, but they won’t be solved by the Beck crowd, they will be solved by the creative genius of the American people for re-invention. There will be hard lessons learned from this, they will be good lessons, and we as a society will continue to grow and change, that can’t be stopped.

    90. Anonymous Says:

      Re: Ex-pat in Oz on September 2nd, 2010 at 3:15 am

      Ex-pat, it sounds like you and I are largely cut from the same cloth. I respect that Glenn has faith in a God that I explicitly reject. I think he can be at least as moral and effective as I am even though we disagree on that issue.

      I get the loud-and-clear message that Glenn does NOT genuinely respect my rejection of God (in the sense of considering it morally valid), and that he does NOT (like so many other Christians) think that I can be at least as moral and effective as he is while holding that position. That’s the asymmetry here. I can accept him as wholly moral and good without his embracing that part of my belief structure. In don’t think the converse is true. If it is, I think he’s done a remarkably poor job of actually living out that principle by his choice of speech and characterization. He lumps me in as the PROBLEM, rather than including me in the solution.

      He’s perfectly entitled to that opinion. Unlike too many on the other side of the political fence, I can actually tolerate intolerance, and recognize that its existence in someone doesn’t categorically rule out a strong moral and political life as a force for good.

    91. VekTor Says:

      That anonymous was me… on a real browser this time.

      Re: Doc Rampage said: “VecTor, I can understand your problem with Beck’s beliefs, but I hope you don’t see it as hostile.”

      I contend that if you think I have a problem with Glenn’s beliefs (per se), that you don’t understand my position. I don’t have an issue with (what I perceives as) the fact that he believes that God is the key to fixing this. I honestly don’t.

      I grok the wonderful analysis that Lex has done here, and commend it. The goal of restoring America is extraordinarily laudable, and this seems a highly effective approach. I simply wish that Glenn would be more consistent and clear as to where those who reject God “fit” into the goal of fixing America… and then if he actually believes we are fully moral partners alongside him, that he would choose to speak in such a way that he doesn’t throw us to the wolves while conveying his message.

      That’s all, really.

      Later, Doc said: “They were wrong, but just wrong –there was no reason to accuse them of being judgmental or condescending.”

      I seriously wish I had a dollar for every Christian who said flat-out to me that I COULD NOT BE MORAL without abandoning my beliefs and accepting his God. That’s a little different, to me at least, that simply having “genuine concern”. And yes, some have done it to my face while my children were standing there with me.

      I recognize that in their belief system, they don’t see that as “wrong”… that they actually see it as moral and proper to do. They think it is actually laudable. Their beliefs do NOT, however, make their behavior any less rude or uncivilized. They ARE being condescending, and judgmental in the negative sense (rather than, as Glenn properly points out, merely exercising discernment). That is, in my view, an actively hostile stance.

      I’ve had some tell be straight to my face, while my children were there with me, that I was a bad father and irresponsible for expressing my own belief (which contradicts theirs) while they just did precisely that to me. That’s not a proper symmetry in my book. I can respect that they don’t believe as I do. I can recognize them as good moral beings without them having to align with my beliefs on the subject of God. The converse is definitely NOT true.

      Doc also wrote: “Just don’t bring along a bottle of Jack Daniels and start guzzling in front of the kids because that would be rude.”

      When you can recognize that the Christians I mention above (one of whom was a former pastor of mine) are just as much guzzling a bottle of Jack Daniels in front of my kids with their public condemnation of me as an immoral person in front of them, then you’ll understand why I react the way I do to the exclusionary nature of Glenn’s casting the problem as being one of too many people not turning to God.

      Whether he wants me to or not, I recognize the moral validity of Glenn’s approach. I simply wish that he would either recognize the moral validity of mine, or stop fence-sitting and actually say out loud that he rejects me… and recognizes that he’s actively choosing to do one or the other.

    92. Carl Says:

      It’s always interesting to see that no matter how clear the scripture is we seem to find a way to muddy the water with our vast knowledge of worldly wisdom instead of remaining faithful to the One who crated us in the first place especially when it is unpopular.

    93. Lexington Green Says:

      Carl, you are a citizen. You are one of over 300 million people. Most of them do not share your religious beliefs. You have to get along with them. Civic peace is a good thing we all value and need. You have to be charitable to the others, be a servant to them, be like Christ in your dealings with them. Trying to live in isolation will not work. Refusing to work with others in the political process who have the same political goals, is fruitless. You will end up yielding the public space entirely to people who don’t share your values. Your only hope of bringing people to Christ is charity. Your only hope of political change is to work with people who want the same political results, whatever their deeper motives may be.

    94. Blake Says:


      In case you are unaware of it: Glenn Beck has a lot of respect for Penn Jillette.

      I think Jillette and Beck are close friends.

      Jillete is an avowed atheist.

      I think you may be seeing something in Glenn Beck that isn’t there.

    95. LuluBelle Says:

      Dear Lexington Green: You said to Carl, “most of them do not share your religious beliefs.” Then you said that he, Carl, must “get along with them,” and “be like Christ.”

      First, you are mistaken when you say that most Americans do not share Carl’s religious beliefs.

      Second, you missed Carl’s point entirely. His point, as Glenn Beck is affirming, is that we humans always think we know more than God and that is what gets us into trouble. We want to be God; that’s what the original sin was. (It is also why so many people say they don’t believe in God; they want to be God themselves.)

      Third, they have to get along with us too. We do no one any favor when we allow corruption, bad manners, false accusations, demonizing, and outright lies to prevail or to silence us just because we think we are supposed to turn the other cheek.

      Jesus didn’t always turn the other cheek. There is a time for righteous indignation and that time is now. Godspeed.

    96. VekTor Says:

      bt said: “The biggest problem of America is what Glen pointed out rightly “Godlessness in the highest levels”. If the transcendent being is removed out of our our lives, the only thing that exists is pure “EVIL”. The heart of man is desperately wicked.”

      Thanks, bt, for providing a vivid example of the point I was trying to make.

      I respect and accept that these are your beliefs. I don’t think you’re categorically an immoral person simply because you hold them. I don’t think you believe the same about me. If someone expects me to see your stated position as one that is not actively hostile towards me… they are likely to be disappointed.

    97. Bill in Baltimore Says:


      good article, and good for you.

      I was at the rally. I am a Christian, but I was surprised at the extent of the religious aspects, though I agreed with it.

    98. Lori Says:

      Best comments acout 8/28 Restoring America at the Lincoln Memorial. Glenn read your post on his radio show this morning and said “Lexington Green” realy gets it.
      Glenn has a subscription service(found on Glenn called “Insider Extreme” (best subscription I’ve ever had). His radio program is broadcasted live with video. There is also a feed (live chat service)between members and staff. I watched his Friday night 8/27 “Divine Intervention” at the Kennedy Center. I was streaming live to “Insider Extreme”. I believe it is still available for viewing. Can’t get any truth from the mail media so I turn to Insider Extreme, Glenn’s TV and some internet news. Lexington I hope you check it out. I’m adding your site to my favorites.

    99. Sam M Says:

      I’m not a person that normally reads blogs. Generally they are just a platform to spew vicious baseless innuendo, on both sides, right and left. However, I found Mr. Green’s analysis of of Becks rally refreshing, honest and spot on. I’ll continue to read this blog just for more insightful bon mots from Mr. Green. I only hope his co-contributors can be as prescient.

      Oh, as a Christian Libertarian, I find Mr. Beck to be starting and refreshing. Unlike others in the media, Hannity and Limbaugh, Beck focuses on the spiritual and religious and faith based aspects of life and politics. His show, vilified by many, is not easily classified. Beck himself is an enigma. I think the problem for the left is his views on religion, are inclusive rather than exclusive. For the Left, the exclusive Christian Right is an easy target; how they ignore the ultra exclusive Islam is a freaking mystery to me. Mr. Beck’s inclusive nature trumps all arguments against him. All the Ed Shultz’s and Olbermann’s can do is scream louder; which only pushes people back towards Beck.

      I’ve always wondered why there isn’t a left version of Beck. The uniformity of the left is reflective of their talking points. Between Shultz, Olbermann, Maddow, they mirror Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin. Why isn’t there a left version of Beck?

      That’s just my two cents for what its worth.

    100. Trent Telenko Says:


      Beck’s appeal is to a conservative and religious vision of the American ideal that the majority of America has, and Left no linger shares, but cannot admit…because it would mean losing the “Moral superiority card” the Left has used to ensconce itself in power.

      What Beck sees, and what most Leftists fail to see, is that we have a country that quite literally has different realities depending on where you live, what people you associate with and what media you choose to use.

      There is no common American culture anymore.

      There are a lot of reasons for this, but at root, it boils down to this:

      “He who believes in nothing, will believe in anything.”

      The Left’s rejection of the Christian God and associated moral teaching has left “memetic space” for other more nihilist philosophies to take root.

      The only way to square the cognitive dissonance of those non-christian beliefs and the American ideal is to become functionally anti-American.

      Go read this and thik hrough the implications:

      Fred Siegel
      Progressives Against Progress
      The rise of environmentalism poisoned liberals’ historical optimism.
      Summer 2010

      For the first two-thirds of the twentieth century, American liberals distinguished themselves from conservatives by what Lionel Trilling called “a spiritual orthodoxy of belief in progress.” Liberalism placed its hopes in human perfectibility. Regarding human nature as essentially both beneficent and malleable, liberals, like their socialist cousins, argued that with the aid of science and given the proper social and economic conditions, humanity could free itself from its cramped carapace of greed and distrust and enter a realm of true freedom and happiness. Conservatives, by contrast, clung to a tragic sense of man’s inherent limitations. While acknowledging the benefits of science, they argued that it could never fundamentally reform, let alone transcend, the human condition. Most problems don’t have a solution, the conservatives maintained; rather than attempting Promethean feats, man would do best to find a balanced place in the world.

      In the late 1960s, liberals appeared to have the better of the argument. Something approaching the realm of freedom seemed to have arrived. American workers, white and black, achieved hitherto unimagined levels of prosperity. In the nineteenth century, only utopian socialists had imagined that ordinary workers could achieve a degree of leisure; in the 1930s, radicals had insisted that prosperity was unattainable under American capitalism; yet these seemingly unreachable goals were achieved in the two decades after World War II.

      Why, then, did American liberalism, starting in the early 1970s, undergo a historic metanoia, dismissing the idea of progress just as progress was being won? Multiple political and economic forces paved liberalism’s path away from its mid-century optimism and toward an aristocratic outlook reminiscent of the Tory Radicalism of nineteenth-century Britain; but one of the most powerful was the rise of the modern environmental movement and its recurrent hysterias.

      If one were to pick a point at which liberalism’s extraordinary reversal began, it might be the celebration of the first Earth Day, in April 1970. Some 20 million Americans at 2,000 college campuses and 10,000 elementary and secondary schools took part in what was the largest nationwide demonstration ever held in the United States. The event brought together disparate conservationist, antinuclear, and back-to-the-land groups into what became the church of environmentalism, complete with warnings of hellfire and damnation. Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, the founder of Earth Day, invoked “responsible scientists” to warn that “accelerating rates of air pollution could become so serious by the 1980s that many people may be forced on the worst days to wear breathing helmets to survive outdoors. It has also been predicted that in 20 years man will live in domed cities.”

      Thanks in part to Earth Day’s minions, progress, as liberals had once understood the term, started to be reviled as reactionary. In its place, Nature was totemized as the basis of the authenticity that technology and affluence had bleached out of existence. It was only by rolling in the mud of primitive practices that modern man could remove the stain of sinful science and materialism. In the words of Joni Mitchell’s celebrated song “Woodstock”: “We are stardust / We are golden / And we got to get ourselves back to the garden.”


      The American ideal believes in “Progress.” Things being better for the next generation than the current one.

      The Left — regards the environment and much else — does not.

      Beck’s envoking the ecumenical American ideal is very much a cultural sorting tool for seperating the current ruling class from non-rulers and convincing the majority to deny the current ruling class power over them.

      The non-violent overthrow of ruling elites by elections is also very American…and opposed by the left through the government bureaucracies and the Federal courts.

    101. Stirner Says:


      Beck addresses how atheists fit into the picture in this recent interview with Bill O’Reilly, starting around 2:30.

    102. Curtis Gale Weeks Says:

      Sam: “Why isn’t there a left version of Beck?”

      I suspect that if there were, that version and the Right’s Beck would get along. It would probably rip a lot of observers’ minds in half, if not outright shatter them.

      A less extreme example would pair Beck with a liberal libertarian. And yes, despite the hard work some on the Right have done in trying to make “liberal” a curse word, there ARE liberal libertarians. And conservative libertarians. The problem is that the culture wars have, through “4GW”, perverted our language and our ability to see the real distinctions. Indeed, the culture wars have created exclusive distinctions, i.e., have made distinction itself the mode of polarization. Whereas, there ought to be the ability to make distinctions which do not automatically polarize but instead add depth to any movement.

    103. Debbie Says:

      “I suspect that if there were, that version and the Right’s Beck would get along. It would probably rip a lot of observers’ minds in half, if not outright shatter them.”

      Or he would call his wife and make fun of her miscarriage, as he did with an old “enemy” in his radio days.

      Consider the amount of time Glenn Beck spends telling people how right he is, how popular he is, how evil people who disagree with him are. These are not the hallmarks of a good and humble leader. They are the hallmarks of a megalomaniac. He tells people exactly what they want to hear, then tells them how smart they are for listening.

      He’s good at what he does, but what he’s doing is playing on the fears and prejudices a lot of people have. And he’s doing it to make money, plain and simple. I guarantee that if there were a left wing version, the right would be beside themselves with horror at his antics and the gullible nature of his followers.

    104. Carl Says:

      Lex, partnering together (Christians and non-Christians) to make the world a better place is not the goal, it never has been. Also, Christians should not totally remove themselves from non-Christians, that’s ridiculous as well, people need God (the God of the Bible not the one people have created in their own minds; any god will not suffice). At best what is being accomplished here is that the world is being made into a better place in which to go to Hell from. As long as people are separated from God no real hope exists and this partnering together with non-Christians (yes, this IS a partnering together) blurs who God even is. I expect though, you and most of your readers would disagree.

    105. newrouter Says:

      And he’s doing it to make money, plain and simple.

      same could be said of the minister of doom algore

    106. Debbie Says:

      “same could be said of the minister of doom algore”

      Well, technically, it could be said of anyone doing something to make money.

      But the rhetoric used by Al Gore and Glenn Beck are worlds apart. Gore uses proven peer-reviewed science using an indoor voice. The research he uses is ongoing and is subject to test after test.

      Glenn beck uses spurious connections, coincidences and vague similarities to connect people to Nazis, communists, socialists, terrorists – all kinds of awful, terrible “ists”. His points can be refuted very easily by actually investigating his claims.

    107. Sam M Says:


      I have a few issues with statements you’ve attributed to Beck. One, “Consider the amount of time Glenn Beck spends telling people how right he is, how popular he is, how evil people who disagree with him are. These are not the hallmarks of a good and humble leader. They are the hallmarks of a megalomaniac. He tells people exactly what they want to hear, then tells them how smart they are for listening.

      He’s good at what he does, but what he’s doing is playing on the fears and prejudices a lot of people have. And he’s doing it to make money, plain and simple. I guarantee that if there were a left wing version, the right would be beside themselves with horror at his antics and the gullible nature of his followers.”

      How much time does Beck spend doing that? I listen pretty often, especially in the last several months, and I don’t hear him telling people what they want to hear. In fact I could say the opposite is true. I do believe Hannity and Limbaugh, (full disclosure, I occasionally listen to both, but find their rhetoric to be dizzying.) do stroke the fires of their audiences, that’s what they’re paid to do. I think they do it better than Olbermann, Maddow and Shultz, but they both have the same shtick. Beck on the other hand challenges his audiences and to me personally, has made me re-evaluate what I think and how I think. These are not the traits of someone that inflames his audience with incendiary rhetoric (as I believe Mark Levin and Savage both do, even though they hate each other).

      What prejudices do you think he plays on? Specially, what does he say that makes you believe he plays on peoples prejudices?

      And as for VP Gore’s “peer review science”, I think that to invoke that as the main difference is laughable. Besides the “typo” on the Himalayan Ice melting in 2350, not 2035, the errors and obfuscations presented by Gore and his acolytes diminish whatever credibility he sought to have. By the way, before you condemn me as a anti global warming Big Oil poster, I actually don’t know what to believe. I have read Gore’s books and Lomborg and Warren Meyer and have come away completely baffled. What I do believe is if there is a problem something should be done about it. What I know, is that all current “plans”, e.g. Kyoto, Cap and Tax/Trade, etc do NOTHING to combat whatever climate change exists.

    108. newrouter Says:

      Gore uses proven peer-reviewed science using an indoor voice.

      too funny

      Glenn beck uses spurious connections, coincidences and vague similarities to connect people to Nazis, communists, socialists, terrorists – all kinds of awful, terrible “ists”. His points can be refuted very easily by actually investigating his claims.

      so refute one

    109. Josie Says:

      I am puzzled why people think that they should have been included in anothers program. I was at the rally and it was just right the way it was. If you have a message you think you need to share with Americans, then plan your own program and see who comes to listen. Why does Glenn have to prepare a seat at the table for you or anyone else for that matter that does not support his message? Plan you own and stop gripping.

    110. Lexington Green Says:

      Carl, if you see no role for politics unless the other people in the process already have the exact same religious values as you, then you don’t have anything to do in the political sphere until you convert everyone to your religion. In the meantime, people who accept the God of Bible, and his son Our Lord Jesus Christ, will continue to render unto Caesar their political participation and unto God all that is due to Him.

      As James Burnham said, if there are no options, there is no problem. I don’t see that you have left yourself many options.

      I will offer this suggestion: Making the world a better place is not just making it a better place to go to Hell from. It his how you show love and service to your neighbor, how you live charity and forgiveness, how you express love for God by seeing Christ in other people.

      I bet if you and I were to sit on the porch and talk it over, we would find that our political views and our views on what the government ought to do and not do have a lot of overlap.

      I see no reason to wait for you to join my religion before having that conversation, as we are doing now, and putting some of these agreements into practice.

      You can go last if you want. But that is how I see it.

    111. Teresa Says:

      vektor, why would you reject God if he would also be on your side to share the common cause as you put it. If your live next to a good guy, lets say his name is “God” and you know he’s going to have your back on something you strongly support wouldn’t you go knock on his door? After the trouble is done, you go back to your home and he to his.

      Beck is just one guy, he has read a lot and was looking for the patterns and the why and when. He finds it in people of faith, something that he can get behind since he is also a person of faith, he’s just trying to figure out how to help his country.

      I think he has the right code, WE THE PEOPLE, WE THE PEOPLE, WE THE PEOPLE. Do you think all those guys that signed the Constitution all have the same type believes and faith or interest or purpose. Common sense tells me no way.

    112. Julie Says:

      I’ve been watching Beck since he started with FOX and I have learned so much from his shows.
      I too, now have a better understanding of his passion after the Restoring Honor rally.
      I wasn’t there, but I now see how he needed to take his message of Hope, Faith and Charity
      out of of the studio and visually show us what it means by creating a forum for us to participate.

      Even though he introduced this theme in January, the real kick-off was on 8-28 I believe.

      Glenn is a God-send and thankfully we have someone with a loud voice to speak on the behalf
      of Americans who simply want common sense, honor and truth to prevail in this great country.
      He is making a noticeable impact.

    113. Anonymous Says:

      re: Stirner on September 2nd, 2010 at 10:55 am

      Thanks for the link, Stirner. Beck makes it pretty clear to me in that video that he uses a fundamental premise that I simply do not accept: That our rights come from God. I realize that the consensus position of the Founders of the US spells out that premise explicitly as well in our founding documents… but I can still believe in a good, decent, strong America and be a good, decent, strong American without accepting that premise.

      Glenn’s choice to put ONLY those with religious faith of some sort up on stage as part of his “black robes” example, and specifically to exclude anyone like Richard40 mentioned from inclusion on the stage (as an example of a moral equal WITHOUT having to embrace God), someone who does not embrace the notion that our rights come from God, tells me that he does not consider those sorts of folks as equals for the purposes of this exercise. And that’s FINE. Just don’t act like they are welcome with your when you explicitly make them unwelcome with your actions. That’s the main point I’ve been driving at.

      He makes faith the first of the three key points of this event. Again, that’s fine, and it has its purpose. I am in no way, shape, manner or form saying that the event should not have been held. I just find it disingenuous to say that you HAVE TO have faith, but that you’re also “including” those with no faith at all. You’re not. Be honest about it.

      I didn’t belong at that event. I wasn’t the target audience. That’s perfectly OK by me. Not everything has to be about me, despite the countless Christians who have insisted that I think it does (when I don’t). But he shouldn’t get credit for trying to include me if his actions try to exclude me. That’s hypocrisy, not honesty. I expect better from Glenn.

    114. VekTor Says:

      Blast. That’s me again.

      In the second paragraph, “are welcome with your when” should read “are welcome with your words when”.

    115. Debbie Says:

      To Sam M:

      “How much time does Beck spend doing that?”

      I don’t watch GB’s program all the time, but I have been trying to catch it more lately to learn what he’s all about. I did notice a fair amount of horn-tooting. Enough that it made me uncomfortable, as though he sees himself as a harbinger of things to come. He often talks about his ratings as proof of his correctness. I agree, he resonates with a lot of people, but I don’t think that has any direct ties to his accuracy.

      Part of my issue is in his overly-dramatic presentation. I am told that this style of presentation is popular within the Mormon church (I heard this from some current and ex-Mormons on another message board I read). They take on a very serious tone with a slow cadence and often come close to or to tears because they wish to show their passion. So for me, that’s a style issue.

      “I listen pretty often, especially in the last several months, and I don’t hear him telling people what they want to hear. In fact I could say the opposite is true.”

      I think people want to believe the worst about Obama, our government and liberals in general. They are more than willing to hear nefarious details that reinforce their negative view of the left wing, even if the proof is less than obvious. He relies on making connections that are entirely speculative and open to interpretation. The results depend on how you decide to interpret them. If you want to be right about Obama’s desire to destroy this country, then you will take whatever evidence handed to you.

      You’ll be happy to hear that I don’t think every single thing that comes out of his mouth is awful. I have, at times, been surprised to find myself agreeing with him on certain things. He does have moments of lucidity that I am more than happy to agree with. I don’t think anyone is always wrong. Frankly, it’s just not possible for every single decision someone makes or thought they have to be 100% wrong.

      “What prejudices do you think he plays on? Specially, what does he say that makes you believe he plays on peoples prejudices?”

      Fear. Most especially of “the other”. That Obama is something other than a true American, that he’s lying about who he is and what his goals are. That he and liberals in general wish harm on America, that we don’t love our country. I can disprove that by simply saying that I am a liberal and I love this country. I want it to prosper. I see a lot of fear-mongering coming from conservative talk show hosts, and viewers are assured that the only hope for their safety lies in watching their shows. That’s dangerous.

      As for your view on global warming, I also am not sure what to make of all the research, so there you go. We have something in common. I do read a lot of opposing research to see why some people oppose the vast majority of researchers. I’m not a scientist, so I can only go by who I find trustworthy. It’s not easy in a world run by big business with concerns for their bottom lines. I do my best to read and understand all sides of the issue and I have found myself on the side of those who have found global warming to be a pressing issue.

      As far as what to do about it? Well, alternative energy seems like a good place to start, but again, big business isn’t too keen on that sort of thing and they have a lot of politicians in their pockets. So maybe reforming government so it’s not a wholly owned subsidiary of industry might be the place to start.

    116. Anonymous Says:

      Glenn Beck lied TWICE ~ TWICE that day to the #828 crowd.

      He lied. He is despicable. He is dangerous.

      What part of “HE LIES ~ HE IS A CHRONIC LIAR” don’t you get?

      What in the world is WRONG with you?

      A lie is a lie is a lie when the facts show it as such.

      Glenn Beck is a lying liar to our face.

      He lies.

    117. Anonymous Says:

      Tell us how you really feel!

    118. VekTor Says:

      Teresa said on September 2nd, 2010 at 12:22 pm: “vektor, why would you reject God if he would also be on your side to share the common cause as you put it. If your live next to a good guy, lets say his name is “God” and you know he’s going to have your back on something you strongly support wouldn’t you go knock on his door? After the trouble is done, you go back to your home and he to his.”

      I appreciate the interest, but I don’t want to clutter this fine blog too much with a defense of my own moral and ethical code. I don’t proselytize, and I don’t expect anyone else to embrace my beliefs. They are mine. That should suffice.

      But in as short as I can get without distracting excessively: All of my moral, ethical and political positions relate directly or indirectly to one core premise, which I do not take as negotiable. That premise is that slavery is evil. Romans 9, and countless Christians, have told me that I must accept that I am the property of God, and that it is moral and just that God could create me and dispose of me as he sees fit… that I must accept that I am God’s slave and property.

      I do not accept that premise. My moral system largely cannot overlap with the acceptance of that premise without becoming incoherent. Thus, I reject a God that (I am told) thinks I am his property.

      I never said that I sought common cause with God. I don’t. I said that I sought common cause with Glenn in trying to make America the best country it can be. I can seek common cause with Glenn because Glenn doesn’t think I’m his property. So we can reach an accord.

      Your analogy breaks down because, from all I’ve seen, God will not ‘go back to his home and me to mine’ when it’s all said and done. I ask no one to be property, and none should ask me to be property either. I’m not asking you to believe that, nor even encouraging you to.

      Here’s one of the things that I think separates me from Glenn, lulu, Carl, bt and many others. I believe that BOTH of the following statements can be true:

      1. America can become a much better, stronger, and more ethical country if every single person were to turn to God.

      2. America can become a much better, stronger, and more ethical country if every single person were to turn away from God.

      I believe that Glenn and many others can accept only one of those two, and consciously or not, I think that informs their treatment of those of us who reject God. I could be happy and think this country could prosper if every single person in every government position in the country was a strong believer in God.

      I don’t think Glenn could be happy with (and think this country could prosper if) every single person in every government position in the country rejected his conception of God.

      I believe that because I believe that we can have good, strong morals without God… that religion and morality can, and in many cases do, move orthogonally to one another. I believe I am a prime example of that concept. Glenn seems to disagree with that premise. I’m OK with that. But when he paints it as a DANGER for too many in government to not embrace God, then he paints me as a danger, too… and we’re only arguing over degree, not kind.

      I don’t think Glenn and those who share his beliefs are dangerous, or need to be muffled, or shouted down, or hounded out of the public square. Quite the contrary. I welcome and embrace their free public expression of their beliefs. But for too many (in my experience), the same does not hold true for those of us who reject God for moral reasons. Too many of the religious see it as not only proper, but their DUTY, to try to drive me and those like me from the public square if my expression directly contradicts their own beliefs.

      Hope this helps to make the matter clearer.

    119. Joanne Says:

      You should try the website:

      This site usually puts up Glenn’s TV and sometimes radio program excerpts on this site.

    120. Anonymous Says:

      In regards to update III, here’s a link to the transcript of what Beck said on the radio.

    121. Katie K Says:

      Glenn just posted a link on his Facebook to the transcript of his radio show this morning, including a link to this blog post. As you requested above, here’s where you can find it :)

    122. firstHat Says:

      What people don’t want to hear

      No, most people don’t want to hear or believe what Beck has to say. In fact he lost audience for a long time because he was doom and gloom long before President Obama was elected. He was yammering at Bush and warning about the housing bubble and watched his numbers dive. If he “boasts” about his numbers, it is less crowing and more noting how out of step and actually “fringe” those who would call themselves mainstream are (even as they would call Beck “fringe).

      If you hear Beck “boasting” about how he was right in the past it is only because he is so very frightened about where we (the US) is heading and about the depth of the trouble. He needs to get our attention and is asking us to believe what may sound unbelievable.

      And how believable is it? I wish I could sit with those of you who doubt how bad things really are — how deep the trouble runs in our culture and tell you what I learned while I was grooming to become the teacher of your children among the educated elite. No, there is no “conspiracy.” That would be too easy. That could be uncovered and revealed (or in the postmodern elitist lingo ‘dis-covered’). If I told you that pretty much any graduate level paper or article written for any of the humanities or social sciences begins with the unspoken and unabashed premise that we want revolution and the end of the free market, would you think I exaggerate? I don’t.

      How about that in the graduate classroom today what is called “right” and “fascist” is what was once known as “progressive” because it (at least) envisions that culture is moving toward a “better” tomorrow even if it would use an iron fist to get there. Against this “right” is the new “left,” which in those arenas holds that there is no ultimate good we move toward (though we might use those who believe such a thing) but that this culture needs to end entirely so that some new, undefined culture should take its place. It believes in what one of my professors admitted when pressed is an endless revolution where the “marginalized other” takes power over the oppressors…world without end.

      These are the people who are teaching our next leaders. These are the people writing your text books and teaching the teachers. They don’t expose what you might see as the dark underbelly of their beliefs nor open them for debate. And yet, under their tutelage, the debate starts at a place that leaves out all of what the true mainstream think is “normal.”

      In general, Beck leaves open a place for the Godless, but at the same time he knows the value that was added by the founders through the inclusion of their God in the founding documents of this country. On the other hand he realizes how under attack those of us who still believe in God have been. It took me a long time to figure out how to tackle the tenants of liberation theology. It was the last dragon of my graduate days I had to slay. Beck knows there are many like me. His rally was a call for those of us who have let our faith wander through the Marxist/socialist/postmodern paths and need some support to find our way back. To those who do not share a belief in God I believe he would hope they would see what that belief added to our founding documents and respect the aspects of that faith if not the faith itself.

      As an aside: truth be told, I also think that Alveda King still clings to a desire for the sort of social justice her uncle turned toward late in his career. However, Alveda also still clings to the pole star of her faith as she struggles to bring those opposed beliefs together. Whether Beck sees this or not, I don’t know, but he does see that she is a strong and courageous woman who, though she may not see God as he does, struggles toward peace and true freedom.

      OK, I’ll step down from my soap box and geeeeee I hope I got the html stuff right here!

    123. Debbie Says:

      “No, most people don’t want to hear or believe what Beck has to say. In fact he lost audience for a long time because he was doom and gloom long before President Obama was elected. He was yammering at Bush and warning about the housing bubble and watched his numbers dive.”

      That kind of proves my point about people paying attention because he’s saying something they want to hear. Conservatives didn’t want to hear him bash Bush, so they didn’t watch. Now that he’s bashing Obama, they can’t get enough.

      Did you listen to him during the Bush years? Or have you read transcripts of old shows from those day? Do you agree with what he was saying then as much as you do now? Or do you find that with his growing popularity, he’s saying more and more things you agree with?

    124. Anonymous Says: This is the link for his talk show off of Facebook. We don’t have a tv either but watched it live via Facebook link. I didn’t read all the comments so don’t know if you already have the link to his talk show. There is a link for a video on this link. It’s nice to know other people get it…

    125. Nikki Weaver Says:

      My husband and I both watched the 8/28 rally….he is an atheist and I am a Mormon. My husband and I respect each others views. And even though the rally was about God, my husband had no problem feeling like he was included. Because he understands that the country was founded on these beliefs. He wasn’t insulted by anything Glenn said. Did he wish it had been a little less about God yes…but it didn’t change the fact that he too was touched by the things that were said that day. He read what Vektor wrote and said he understood where he was coming from but feels like people want to be offended and look for ways to exclude themselves. Which is exactly the opposite of what Glenn is trying to do. It seems he is trying to get us to come together for one common goal. And the end result is a better country for our children to grow up in. God bless you Mr. Beck. And thank you Mr. Green for this well written and thought provoking piece.

    126. Nikki Weaver Says:

      To Debie:

      Yes I did listen to him during the Bush years. I agreed with him then and still agree with him today. Could you please show us where you got the statistics about his “numbers diving” I’d love to see those. It sounds like an interesting statistic. Thanks.

    127. LGB Says:


      Thank you for being honest! you are now on a national stage good luck! To Anonymous take a pill your going to stroke out!

    128. Laurel Says:

      FYI, you are linked by Glenn Beck’s The Blaze in this article:

      And, you are linked by The Right Scoop in the headlines here:

    129. Debbie Says:

      To Nikki:

      “Could you please show us where you got the statistics about his “numbers diving” I’d love to see those. It sounds like an interesting statistic.”

      Is this a request for me? I don’t think I said anything about anyone’s numbers diving, maybe it was another commenter?

      And that’s good to know you’re a long time listener. I only became aware of him shortly before he joined Fox. There was some kind of interplay between him and O’Reilly that I vaguely remember. I think they discussed his criticism of Bush and I was intrigued because he was surprised Fox asked him to join up, but didn’t follow him after that.

    130. Anonymous Says:

      Here is where Glen talks about you. That’s how I got here! Thank you for your awesome article! Linda Cottrell

    131. firstHat Says:

      I had my problems with Bush enough so that I couldn’t bear to listen to him (Bush) whenever he gave a speech. Don’t know if that answers your question. Many of us libertarian types did. Why did Beck’s numbers go up?

      As for why people are waking up and now believing and listening to Beck? I’d suggest that this administration has acted in ways that don’t make sense to the average person on the street and so people are paying more attention. However, you can’t make the argument that the majority of people started out hating this administration and thus flocked to Beck because he was smart enough to support their dislike when President Obama enjoyed such an overarching popularity at the beginning of his administration Using that logic it would make sense that someone who just wanted to make money and gain listeners would NOT attack an otherwise popular president.

    132. My13cents Says:

      I am a Pentecostal minister. I extend my hand to Richard40 also. Let’s stay unified on the essentials “like spending, deficit, size of government, and honest government”.

    133. Big D Says:


    134. Jerod in North Texas Says:

      Hey Lex you got a shout out on Beck. He’s reading it hah!

    135. Carl Says:

      Lex, I’m sure there would be many things we would agree on were we to sit and talk but that is irrelevant.
      The end result of something does not always justify the means of obtaining it. Look at the outrageous offerings to lower abortion. You would probably agree that this current administration has seemingly lost it’s mind. Following in the direction of God’s word I would agree is not the way this society leans toward, but it is right. We lean more toward those who stroke our ego and tell us we got it right. Glenn is not the final authority for truth, he says alot of things that sound good and because we are so tired of the silliness in Washington we are ready to jump on any bandwagon that comes along that sounds even a little bit better than what we currently are experiencing. It sounds like you think it’s impossible thing for a Christian to hold any type of political office whatsoever and we must work with the corrupt individuals who are there. It’s time to say NO, light and darkness cannot find common ground, right and wrong cannot thrive together. We do have to be in this world but not of it. I’ll will now end my rambling because even if my words were the most eloquent of all, even if I possessed great amounts of knowledge, wisdom, and truth the selfish desires of fallen man would not accept it. Why, because those who do not trust in the Lord love their sin and do not wish to depart from it. Yes, sin is the problem not politics.

    136. cindym Says:


    137. Willys Says:

      Glenn Beck is commenting on this post, Thursday, 09/02/2010, 5:15 p.m. as the only posting he has seen that ‘gets it’.

      “Thank you, thank you to the one person on the Internet who gets it.”

    138. Willys Says:

      Glenn Beck is commenting on this post, Thursday, 09/02/2010, 5:15 p.m. as the only posting he has seen that ‘gets it’. This is on his Fox News program.

      “Thank you, thank you to the one person on the Internet who gets it.”

    139. Anonymous Says:

      Excellent column and excellent comments. I tried (but failed; not enough time!!!!) to read through them all to find out if anybody granted your wish of posting the link to where Glenn mentioned this on his radio program this morning. Just in case nobody did, here is the transcript:

      Would have been nice if the transcriber had inserted quote marks, which is what led me to the original.

    140. Willys Says:

      Glenn Beck is commenting on this post, Thursday, 09/02/2010, 5:15 p.m. as the only posting he has seen that ‘gets it’. This is on his Fox News program.

      ‘Thank you, thank you to the one person on the Internet who gets it’ < Beck statement, close to accurate.

    141. Dotty Says:

      Thanks, Lex, for “getting it.” Glenn, as I know you’ve read from countless others, read your article on air today (TV). I was impressed mostly because so many so-called “journalists” – especially on the left – have been knocking the rally and never “got it” at all. They have a very hard time giving a conservative any kudos, especially Glenn! He has taken so much slack and hatred from others, even on the right, that I don’t know how he keeps the faith to go on. I admire Glenn so very much and pray his desired “faith, hope and charity” will stay with all of us and move us to a better place in this society.

      Thanks again for your very well done article. I hope your website grows enormously!

      Also, I did listen to Glenn when he was bashing Bush. In fact, I was a determined Liberal and told myself I would NEVER be on the side of Conservatism. Wow, here I am and I’m glad to be here. I didn’t like Bush at all, but now wish he could come back and replace Obama. (I think people in Ohio were polled and many of them said they would prefer Bush over Obama.) People are waking up all over this great country of ours. Thanks to Glenn for his inspiring messages and also because he brings his agenda with facts, not just comment. He backs up everything he says and when someone says “he lies,” they obviously don’t listen to him.

      God Bless (even those who don’t believe in Him) LOL

    142. Richard, Stratford, CT. Says:

      Right on!

      You got it!

      And ………….no I don’t think you’re a serial killer!

    143. Kevin in NC Says:

      Hope you don’t get tired of hearing this. Thank you! Great write-up!

    144. newrouter Says:

      ot but related

      The media and public schools were correctly identified by Gramsci as the most influential cultural institutions, and it was therefore those that the left realized must be targeted.

      It is this sophisticated Gramscian plan, and not the more brutish Marxist idea of simply seizing power by force, which has guided leftist thought in America since WWII. And it is why the media and education have, over time, been slowly turned into engines of leftist propaganda. Gramscianism matured into “critical pedagogy” which is the real-world application of his educational theories, and countless left-leaning young adults have for decades been nudged toward careers in education and the media. Some time ago, we crossed a threshold in which the Gramscian infiltrators no longer had to ply their trade surreptitiously, but became the majority in the media and in education, and after that point the process accelerated rapidly as they took over both fields and turned them into ideological weapons.

      (As an aside: Note also that Wikipedia correctly identifies Frantz Fanon as a Gramscian thinker. “At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy.” — Barack Obama, in Dreams of My Father.)


    145. Curtis Gale Weeks Says:

      Starts at about 12:10 of this video:

      Continues in this video:

    146. Jennifer H Says:

      I think the left does “get it”, they are so frightened that they will spin their stories any way that they can to delegitimize this event. They are purposefully being obtuse and providing mis-information in efforts to obscure the true purpose of this event. They can’t hide what occured, so they must fight back with the same strategies they have used in the past:
      Mis-information, misdirection, deliberate misunderstanding, marginilization, and ultimately demonization.

      They are also now planning their own event in response to the 8/28 Rally, and have a new website up to “track” the racists in the Tea Party Movement.

    147. Anonymous Says:

      Outstanding analysis of Glenn Beck’s 8/28 rally. If you haven’t already gotten this, go to this link to see a transcript of Glenn’s comments on your article. Keep up the good work. You have talent and can make a difference. You’ve created a new fan here. I’ll be tracking you from now on.

    148. Pat Says:

      I just want to say THANKS to all of you for your civility. I found my way here because of GB’s reference to your blog on his show — I have been so discouraged reading the hateful, snide, foul comments left by both liberals and conservatives on facebook sites like “Being Conservative,” “CNN” and “MSNBC.” Your discourse gives me great hope. Instead of calling people names you are actually discussing concepts! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    149. Bill Pierce Says:

      That anonymous post at 7:02 pm was from me. I didn’t see where I was to identify myself. Sorry ’bout that.

    150. Bill Pierce Says:

      Is Mercury in retrograde? It took me three posts to finally get it right. I forgot to include the link to the transcript of Glenn’s comments on your article. Here ya’ go…


      OK I didn’t have time to read through every single comment to check for sure. But since you asked so nicely here’s a link to the transcript of what he said on the radio about your article.

      And incidentally how I found out about your article. Very insightful and I liked your reference to Reagan and Boyd.

      Thanks for the truth.

    152. Anonymous Says:

      Nice job & great insight – Have a great day:)

    153. Judith Says:

      What a wonderful discovery, Chicagoboyz:
      1. Boyd’s Continuum of War
      2. Venn Diagram
      3. The Insurgency
      4. Unifying Element. Now to find them.
      Beck’s rather an amazing person. Challenges his listeners with facts, ideas, and connections, with documentation, then, says check it out. He believes in the truth and accepts the pain it may produce.
      I appreciate your comments on secular libertarians. The founding fathers were people of faith, influenced by George Whitfield and many of the 18th Century thinkers. Their codifying of individual liberty was a pure and unique method for avoiding tyranny. It is quite mighty, wouldn’t you say? Please refer to for archives.

    154. Anonymous Says:

    155. Lexington Green Says:

      Good to see everyone being polite to each other in the comments.

      That’s the spirit.

      I am going to post something in response to all this soon, hopefully tonight.

    156. RoseOtter Says:

      Excellent blog….and I am so glad that Glenn spoke of you on his show tonight because I missed his radio broadcast today. I will now be following your writing…thank you!

    157. Hank Says:

      Very nice post, Lexington Green.

      Shut it, Debbie. You can shut it too, Carl.

    158. Clair Says:

      This piece was like a long, cool drink of water on hot day… aaaahhhh! Thank you So much!!!

    159. David Says:

      Interesting piece. While I rarely have time to listen to Mr. Beck’s radio program I do follow his show daily. It is there I became aware of this piece. (given your “Update III” you got two mentions). He read the complete piece. Agree with him or disagree one fact holds true, he continually advises listeners to seek the truth for them selves, not rely on him as the source. He has been promoting Faith, Hope and Charity for the past year and the Restoring Honor rally was the culmination of this campaign. I have certainly done a bit more reading in the past year and continue to seek understanding of where we went of track if you indeed believe we are on the wrong track. Your analysis is dead on. A well written piece that as Glenn stated “The only guy to actually get it!”.

    160. ryan Says:

      Great blog. Glenn Beck has excellent long term vision coupled with the periodic short term ADHD big mouth thing. But he has had EVERYTHING to do with changing the focus of conservative americans. His daily radio and TV shows are filled with original or historic content (FA Hayek most recently). He gets what codevilla and others have got and that is the lack of moral principles. He is intellectually honest (as much as any of us can be) and happy to be proven wrong. I heard charles Krauthammer describe the event basically as The Tea Party describes everything that those americans are against (spending, government, loss of liberty) and the Restoring Honor rally is everything that those americans are for (honor, principles, faith, etc). Another great little website is

      Here is a great blackboard image (poor quality video though).

    161. Jim Says:

      As a conservative secular Libertarian like Richard40 and a long time Beck fan I attended the 8/28 event. Even though I am not a religious man I find the message of Beck who now is offering the solution to our current problems to the progressive movement by identifying their tacticts to erase god and religion from our society, which attacks the very essence of our constitutional guaranteed rights.

      My opinion is that in order to be a constitutional conservative you must believe that the founding fathers were religious and the founding documents were patterned after christian principles. I don’t have to practice the christian faith to believe the christian faith was instrumental in forming our nation. The principle that God gave us our rights, and only he can take them away, is at its core.

      To me Beck has not only identified the problem he has given us a solution. It is a non denominational enlightenment that our success depends on, and I’m as non denominational as you can get.

    162. Buster Says:

      Lex – Congrats, sir, on a very astute analysis. I heard about your article, and Chicago Boyz from Glenn, was listening, watching actually as I am an Insider Extreme member. I got the link at his site and had read the article before he began talking about it on his radio show.

      It goes beyond this article, and Brooding, which you linked: in order understand the significance of the Restoring Honor rally, one must understand the magnitude, the gravity, and the reality of the crisis our great nation is facing. You, sir, obviously get that too.

      I have also been impressed with the comments here, I see a lot of substance, genuine effort to help all gain a better understanding.

      Let me ask you and your commentors a question, have you gone through an epiphany of some sort during the past several years? Something where a large piece of question or mystery suddenly became clear? I did, and I have read of others who have had a similar experience.

      How many of you reading this have had such an experience?

    163. Geo Says:

      Very good comments from everyone involved. Lex, thank you for helping me define what I saw on 8/28.

      If you caught Glenn today at 5 he had a good response regarding anyone who is agnostic or atheist. He talked about Penn Gillette and his non belief in God. I think his point is clear that as long as you arrived at that position by “Questioning with Boldness” and your core beliefs still retain Faith (in your beliefs), Hope and Charity. Then you are in line with what he is talking about.

    164. David Foster Says:

      A rabbi writes about his impressions of the rally and makes some really good points.

    165. Anonymous Says:

      To FirstHat:

      I don’t think Beck changed his tune after the election at all. I think there was a large percentage of the country that was worried about the election going to a democrat long before Obama was elected. I’m sure Beck was one of them.

      I don’t begrudge people having issues with any administration, but it bothers me when many of the issues they have are manufactured and presented as scare tactics by the likes of Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity (I recall him calling it the “Obama Recession” before he was even elected).

      I’m all for dissent and “throw the bum out!” and the like. But when it’s “throw the secret muslim, communistic, socialist, fascist America-hating, Kenyan bum out!”, that’s when I stop listening and can’t take it seriously. But I think a lot of people are looking for reasons to justify their dislike of Obama and liberals and Beck provides them in a way that seems important and justified and patriotic. But mostly it’s misguided, exclusionary and just wrong.

      I guess what I’m saying is that I think you deserve better than Glenn Beck.

      Also, thank you for a really polite conversation about this. I appreciate it.

    166. Debbie Says:

      Sorry, I forgot to add my name to my note to FirstHat.

    167. SueDinNY Says:

      Mr. Lexington Green, I looked you up after seeing Glenn Beck on television reading some of your blog. I was blown away by your analysis and just had to read the whole thing. As someone has already said, just brilliant! I will say that I am sorry you don’t watch television. If you are impressed with a radio recitation, I’m sure you would have been doubly impressed by his television presentation. Glenn definitely has put you on the map, my friend. On your analysis, I believe you have broken it down into it’s proper components. Most of us do not think in those terms. We just know that the foundation is crumbling and must be repaired. You have defined the way to repair the foundation. I agree with you that individuals who do not believe in God should not be left out. There is room for everyone “who share the same civic, political, economic and Constitutional principles.” Absolutely. In fact, I had considered this when Glenn said it was to be about faith. Faith doesn’t have to be religious, does it? We can have faith in the Constitution, in the principles that established this great nation. I also felt a rabbi and imam should have said a prayer. It would have shown unity. While the left is attempting to establish the right as racist bigots, it would have slapped them in the face. But, then, I’m not Beck. I truly hope that we, the American people, will restore our constitution, our honor, our integrity, our hope, and our faith. They have been missing for much too long. May God Bless You, Sue

    168. firstHat Says:

      To Anon. who replied to me:

      I don’t begrudge people having issues with any administration, but it bothers me when many of the issues they have are manufactured and presented as scare tactics by the likes of Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity (I recall him calling it the “Obama Recession” before he was even elected).

      I’m all for dissent and “throw the bum out!” and the like. But when it’s “throw the secret muslim, communistic, socialist, fascist America-hating, Kenyan bum out!”, that’s when I stop listening and can’t take it seriously. But I think a lot of people are looking for reasons to justify their dislike of Obama and liberals and Beck provides them in a way that seems important and justified and patriotic. But mostly it’s misguided, exclusionary and just wrong.

      First, if the made against the administration are “manufactured,” Beck has been more than forthcoming in asking to be challenged. The red phone on the set may be a bit of a laughing point, but it is real. The White House did not hesitate to correct him in an email on the title he gave to Van Jones, but they never once challenged what he had to say about Van Jones.

      Otherwise, you really don’t get it, do you? You sling words like “communistic” and “socialist” as though people use these as derogatory words. Where I came from in the upper stratosphere of the educated elite, and in the circles people such as the president travels, these words are not derogatory, but merely descriptive if not assumed. Read again what I said about where all academic arguments start these days. I spent the better part of 15 years of my life answering to Marx in one form or another with no question that there should be any other basis for measurement. These are not insults, they are assumptions. And yet, somehow we have no right to question those assumptions.

      Before the 2008 election I was speaking with friends outside of academia and even there when I said (in response to how I was voting) that I had spent enough of my life answering to Marx to know I didn’t want to vote for someone as socialist as then senator Obama, their response was not to defend him against such labels, but to accept the label and challenge my rejection of that way of thought. In the academic world and in urban liberal life, the words “American” and “Christian” have been flung as insults for years. They belong with those equally despicable words such as “rural” or “southern” as belonging to that abyss otherwise known as the equally insulting “flyover” or “red state.” The difference is that when Beck uses descriptive terms such as Communist or Marxist, he is not using them as insults. He asks these people to respond to them so that we can “have the conversation about the ideas.” As someone who had to write for the woman who resurrected the term “Politically Correct.” I know what is truly exclusionary and Beck’s use of these words are not.
      On the other hand, if you want to “throw the bum out”, I would hope you could say why you want to throw the bum out or you risk finding another just like the last, or worse. If you believe I deserve better than Beck then I ask you to listen to Thomas Sowell and especially around the 2:07 mark and see if his more educated tones suit you better. He doesn’t say anything more or less than Beck says, but perhaps he sounds smart enough for you to accept.

    169. csj Says:

      I would disagree that this rally represents some sore of cultural turning point. The fact of the matter is that September 11th created an immediate and at the time seemingly desperate need for unity behind that cultural reserve of guarded, somewhat isolationist patriotism that every naturalized American has. The fear 9/11 caused forcefully brought that patriotism out in a huge amount of moderate democrats and independents, who proceeded to vote for Bush – something they would never have done if it weren’t for 9/11. Meanwhile, Bush’s campaign ran heavily on social wedge issues, like gay marriage and abortion rights, which made his base believe that his win represented a mandate to roll back the social liberal trend. In fact, the democrats ran a candidate whose military credentials had been completely shot by O’Reilly. Whether that was right or wrong, I’m not here to discuss. But what is true is that democrats were in droves holding their noses and voting for Bush for the simple fact that they were afraid of giving Kerry leadership during wartime. As time went on, fear of a counterattack gave way to detestation of Bush’s social agenda, and a good portion of those moderate democrats who voted for Bush found themselves despising his policies, and with them went any hope of having a favorability rating above 40%.

      When you think about it, Obama’s story is very similar. He came in as the most forceful proponent of ending the Iraq War. Before the economic collapse it was his singular issue. And after the Lehman Brothers failure, again fear came into play in a major way, and the prospect of having McCain in charge of “fixing the economy” (as he liked to put it) scared everyone. Intellectual Obama was the safe vote when it came to the economy. Social issues again were relegated to second consideration, and moderate republicans – people who never would have voted for Obama if it weren’t for the economy – held their noses this time.

      The economy, however, is following its age-old trend of being completely agnostic to anything the government or Federal Reserve throw at it, and the electorate is following its pattern of blaming it on whoever is in power. And as the benefit of Obama to the economy fades, his social agenda is again proving more and more important to those moderates who ignored them two years ago. Further, Obama has to contend with very, very angry social conservatives, who remember (falsely) having had a mandate for a broad social shift to the right that they never got. I suspect that explains much of the animus directed at GWB from the Tea Party though he faced a democratic party hell bent on his destruction – again a parallel with Obama, whose liberal base is very angry with him, though he’s contending with the republican equivalent.

      I see Glenn Beck as initially being the voice of the very, very angry social conservatives, but, being a smart man, is beginning to tap into those disillusioned moderate republicans and independents who voted for Obama. He’s walking a bit of a tightrope right now, and he’s doing it relatively well with the aid of an umbrella (i.e. by being very vague). It’ll be interesting to see what happens when the independents return to the left. Will Beck fade into obscurity? Or will he become something entirely different?

    170. Anonymous Says:

      [Nope. See the comment guidelines. Behave. Lex.]

    171. VekTor Says:

      Csj, I saw an interview with Beck on O’Reilly, where Bill was somewhat busting Glenn’s chops for NOT being a “culture warrior”, so I don’t see Glenn as “initially being the voice of the very, very angry social conservatives”.

      Glenn is extraordinarily good at what he does… but he’s definitely not trying to co-opt any particular political segment, from what I see. He’s strongly and consistently offering his message, with a sense of humor that makes it immensely powerful, memorable and accessible.

      He’s charting his own course, rather than pandering to what some political segment wants. More power to him, I say! He’s got boatloads of it “right”.

    172. WonkishRogue Says:

      Anon: religious bigotry is an ugly thing. Beck and others are working for the reaffirmation of the traditional American ethos. Your small minded ignorance contributes nothing. Take it some place where it will be appreciated. Westboro Baptist Church comes to mind.

    173. lewis shepherd Says:

      You nailed it: insurgency vs Big-Unit behemoth(s). Well done, and keep going.

    174. cb77 Says:

      Phenomenal post. Kudos to Lexington Green. These are the conversations we need to be having, especially as the everyday American uses today’s technology to connect and engage in respectful debate. I truly can see an American Renaissance coming. P.S. Anon: couldn’t help noticing your post. Your lack of respect for your fellow citizens, and name calling, is revolting. Your unimaginative talking points will be better appreciated somewhere else.

    175. vanderleun Says:

      Green shoots.

      He SCORES!

      Nothing but net!

    176. vanderleun Says:


      Could you shoot me an email about doing a paid piece for on this concept:

      Today’s tools favor our side in this struggle, which I am calling the Insurgency.

      The Insurgency is based on individual freedom, autonomous decision-making, spontaneous order, voluntary association, open-mindedness, adaptiveness, transparency, networks rather than hierarchies. It is at bottom a fun loving and joyful and open spirit. In many cases this is based on religious faith. (I raise my hand.) In others it is based on love of human potential and creativeness, or other positive factors. This model works. And it works better and better with the tools of today and tomorrow.

      We’re launching next week.

      And btw, just so you know, I had this item up in my sidebar about two days ago at American Digest.

      Faster than Beck.

    177. Inge Says:

      I want to thank you for this Brilliant layout in words; many of us feel that way, but can’t simply state what we feel, or think, and even want to do.
      I also feel the need to address those, who ‘do not like people going to church’…!
      That is ok too, as the writer states, as long as you believe in the goodness of this country, there is nothing wrong with you not liking, or thinking much about going to church.
      There is a touching example in The Bible regarding a woman, who did NOT know about God, nor did she ever heard anything about it.
      However, she did what was rigtheous in God’s Eye.
      So , here you find, that you do NOT need to like going to church, as long as you do whatever is right, such this writer within his thoughts layed out.
      I want to invite all of our friends, atheiets, or whatever it is that binds you with us doing what is ‘Naturally right’; thats all it matters. We still will arrive at the bottom line!

    178. tarawa1943 Says:

      Psalms 11:3 If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? 11:4 The LORD [is] in his holy temple, the LORD’S throne [is] in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

    179. OxWoman in Charlotte Says:

      “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” – Mahatma Gandhi

      Thanks Lex — you are now on my “favorites” list!

    180. Da2utes Says:

      Brilliant! I just added you to my favs.

    181. 2feathers Says:

      Ronald Reagan spoke of transcending politics.

      One can usually hitch their wagon to others transcendancy or stay mired down in there own spirituality, selfish emotionalism, idealism, dogma or lack of spirituality etc.

      Rising above ones humanity is not totally giving up on ones own comfotable affiliations. We broaden our worldview by joining others actions or gatherings. That is why blogging is so popular. Just saying…..

      Our lack of maturity usually door stops us at some threshold though. Growing up is not one of our favorite things to do. Most people hate politics or religion cause that is in the “old peoples” que. Most young people loath the idea of getting older or getting involved.

      Reagan showed us that we have more in common than just party affiliation. Transcending our selfishness is the starts by our realization that this world is not just about me.

      In the end our death levels the playing field wether we have grown up or not. Then comes the ???? How do I transcend death ?

    182. petsitter Says:

      What causes this movement to transcend is our Creator. Without Him there can be no positive change because it is an internal change and self-regulation that allows us to choose to go against selfish desires and a baser nature. Sarah and Glenn get it because they have both experienced it and understand that each of us is human – a humbling recognition that the Opposition cannot relate to. That’s one of the simple but not easy solutions Reagan spoke of and allows us to offer our hands to anyone who is in need or likeminded, whether they are of our specific religious persuasion or not. It’s truly amazing grace! Thank Him!

    183. Aine Says:

      VekTor, in the past few days Beck has been speaking to atheists using the example of Penn Gillette, who is also an atheist. Perhaps you’ve missed that. If God is not your compass to right behavior and higher ground, I presume something within you is. You have character and integrity, or you haven’t. The point I came away from DC with is to become my highest self, be the change I wish to see, but to rely upon something greater than a politician from either party to do so.

      My husband and I attended the Restoring Honor event. I am a lapsed Catholic; my husband is a British Quaker and naturalized citizen. We had friends around the nation watching on C-Span who are spiritual but not religious. We all got what Beck was trying to do. Yeah, it was like a revival meeting, but that wasn’t the point and we were able to see the larger picture. Lexington Green has beautifully and succinctly given words to what we have been pondering since our return from DC. There’s a larger picture here: America, as a nation of free and self-reliant people, is nearing her death rattle. If we don’t put aside our small differences, we won’t have the luxury of worrying about them in a few short years. We need to step back from our personal contributions to the mosaic to see what the larger mural is about. Like a tapestry, this nation has many unique strands contributing to a beautiful fabric…there’s room enough for all, including atheists, provided they, too, believe in a good, strong, and free United States. If we manage to save the patient from complete systemic collapse, we can argue later about the cosmetics.

      However, I personally believe “Reliance upon Divine Providence” is in our nation’s DNA.

      BTW, both my husband and I worked for liberal/socialist causes as young students decades ago. We’ve each had our personal “Great Awakening” and are now working with diligence and resolve to save this country from where we know Progressives will take it if we let them. We don’t care what light bulbs you use, or which adult you marry, or whether or not you believe in God. We roll up our sleeves now, or eek out our remaining decades in the grim misery of Dr. Utopia’s Amerika.

    184. AJ Says:

      I am very scared for this country, with people flocking to the fascist Tea Party movement like sheep, and Beckites tuning in nightly to Faux”News” for their daily Gospel — this portends a very terrible future for us all.

      People forget that the public arena is a shared arena, and while some voices are louder than others, the basis for our Constitution is equality — do not tread on me: not with your theology, not with your racism and xenophobia, and certainly not with your ignorant arrogance and pride.

    185. VekTor Says:

      Very well put, Aine. I’ve missed most of the last two or three days when Glenn is on, while getting my financial house (further) in order with another mortgage refinance. I’m heartened that he’s trying to address the concerns of atheists… that tells me that he’s aware of the issues that some of us have with the approach he’s been taking.

      I agree that the goal is to get the big-picture problems addressed as a big-tent coalition of those who embrace the idea of America as it was originally conceived. To my mind, that idea is one of the most precious and transformative in the history of the world. So I’m right there with Glenn on these big-picture items, and agree with where we need to end up (as a country) with respect to both our behavior as individuals, and the relationship that we have with government.

      That relationship needs adjustment, in my opinion. For too long, we’ve been backsliding into complacency, and allowed our good will to be exploited to the point where a “ruling class” has arisen, with a personal sense of entitlement to literally rule over us. That must end. That is not America.

      That is the “Awakening” that I support, and I stand arm-in-arm with Glenn and other like-minded folk who embrace fixing this serious problem. I am Glenn’s ally in this, which is why I found it so disheartening when he kept using so much language that so completely excluded me, given my other beliefs.

      I’m glad he’s addressing that issue, and I’ll try to make arrangements to listen again in the short term.

      Thanks for the heads-up, I seriously appreciate it.

    186. Blake Says:


      You invoke the idea of a shared arena and admonish people not to be racist, xenophobic, etc.

      In the process, you call Tea Partiers “fascists” and denigrate those who watch Fox News and listen to Glenn Beck.

      Do you not see the irony and inherent hypocrisy of your post?

    187. dick Says:

      Lex, where do you get “browbeaten”? Who’s ever stopped us white folk from saying a prayer on a streetcorner? This sounds paranoid. And if you’re so concerned with “vote and assemble and speak and freely exercise religion,” where’s your post defending the ground zero mosque?

    188. firstHat Says:

      I can’t speak for Lex, but read my two longer posts (please pardon the typos in the last). When the debate begins outside the discourse that includes one’s position, one tends to become browbeaten.

    189. Lexington Green Says:

      Dick, you racist scoundrel, I won’t participate in your street-corner prayer group since you limit it to white people. Don’t you know we are all God’s children? My church lets everybody in. You should do the same.

      There are so many issues, out there, so little time. You should feel free to aggressively promote the Ground Zero mosque, if that is your big concern.

      My take on it is more subtle, complex and nuanced than yours.

      Here it is: The GZM controversy is a concocted, irrelevant issue. The GZM is on private property and it is going to get built. If private individuals, like construction workers, want to refuse to work on it, so be it.

      But, since you brought it up, here is where my paranoia comes in. The GZM issue is meant to distract Conservatives with a meaningless “social issue” so that the GOP leadership can avoid take painful political positions to deal with taxing and spending and regulation. The GOP wants to keep their insiders racket going, ride out the current populist wave without changing anything, and keep their snouts in the trough. So the mosque thing is a gimmick meant to distract the rubes.

      Don’t fall for it.

    190. dick Says:

      this epitomizes the right wing nuttiness. for 30 years, “less government” has been the mantra. less government gave us a health system that excluded 40 million people and cost the rest of us way too much as a result. (recall that nixon *wanted* universal healthcare; how things have changed.) it gave us lax financial regulation and a near-depression. it’s helped give us global warming and crumbling infrastructure, because to deal with those things, you have to have a plan that makes honest demands on businesses and the people who own them — and the right wing conveniently deems such demands socialist. so big, real problems don’t get solved. how does the GOP deal with these problems? it doesn’t. it doesn’t even acknowledge them. what it does is tell america that evil forces are conspiring to take away our right to “vote and assemble and speak and freely exercise religion.” it’s a smokescreen and it’s a joke.

      remember the wonderful financial boom of the 1990s? you remember what started it? it’s when george bush broke ranks and raised taxes and lowered wasteful spending. the financial markets were so relieved at the strong logic of this move that they drove a period of prosperity unlike any in american history — and i’m not even talking about the b.s. housing bubble of the 2000s. now bush’s party won’t even countenance a return to those tax rates, even for the super-rich.

    191. dick Says:

      okay, now you make a lot of sense. but why do you think glenn beck isn’t unwittingly part of that same GOP smokescreen? where does he get down to brass tacks about taxing and spending and regulation? the GOP has to love how he distracts conservatives, as you rightly put it.

    192. Jill Says:

      I couldn’t read through everything posted here, so forgive me if I repeat what someone else has said. If you listen to Glenn at all, his “spirituality” is all-inclusive even to the aetheist/agnostic. He doesn’t speak so much to “religious” values as he does to moral values – things which I think we can all agree on that transcends religion, and the greater good that we each can exemplify. Without that, Robert40, I don’t think there is “hope” for our country. Certainly you can’t say Glenn isn’t all about getting back to our founding principles as well as limited government. If you believe the Left, the Founders were all Deists devoid of Faith – strange how the Founders seemingly got it right that without our “Sacred Honor” being at the forefront of our lives, we will always fail. What I got the most out of the Rally (even though I am a believer) is that we are not alone and that together, we can be a force to hold ourselves and then our politicians accountable.

    193. Larry Sheldon Says:

      I’ve not read all of the comments yer–did anybody mention that Mr. Beck read your piece on TV last night (I think he read it all)?

      On the matter of religion issues–it is a complex web involving individuals. Since we are not a theocracy, each individual can talk about the matter as it affects them individually.

      My reading follows.

      Mr. Beck was born and raised a Catholic (Roman Catholic, I assume). This mean there are things from that religion that are pretty much internalized and part of his structure and can not be removed. (Go to an emotion neutral matter like language [francophones may need to pick another topic]. It seems to be pretty well accepted that once you are past childhood is is difficult to learn a second language.)

      He became a Mormon–it appears to me from things he has said–as much as a matter of compromise as of conviction.

      Switching to my own view (rather than my view of his views).

      As a child, I attended a Methodist church (I don’t remember much of that except my baptism), a Lutheran church (don’t know what flavor), Presbyterian (I don’t remember which flavors) churches over most of my childhood (with which I had and have some serious differences of opinion) and in my high school years some searching involving a Baptist church (no, I don’t know). In most years I was an avid, well studied, believer.

      In my Navy years as a result of some unfortunate experiences I decided that there was nothing in the plan for salvation that required organized religion. During that time I met and married an active Episcopalian …..

      Enough history–the point is, my guess is that Mr. Beck has a belief system with aspects that probably make just about every religious leader cringe.

      More importantly, I think if you listen carefully, he is saying that our Judeo-Christian foundation has aspects that are desirable and that if you find them desirable, it doesn’t matter what your religion is–what went into the development of your citizen-ship beliefs. Think sausage–as they say, you might not wven want to know what is in it.

      So the summary.

      I think Mr. Beck thinks the best plan is for everybody to agree with him in his beliefs. But if you don’t, it is OK as long as what you believe doesn’t get in the way of what he believs.

      Which is kind of what the Constitution is all about.

    194. firstHat Says:

      Dick and Lex, OK… now I wish there was a delete button here. I obviously stepped into an ongoing discussion. Pardon me folks. Nothing to see here. Just me under my desk in the fetal position. (someone needs to tell me when to shut up).

    195. Lexington Green Says:


      You are getting off topic. This post is about my speculation about what Mr. Beck was doing and why. As I said, I have never even seen his TV show except the excerpts I linked to.

      We can take up financial regulation at another time. It is a big issue.

      And, don’t go slinging around accusations of racism. I decided to laugh it off, but it is degrading to the person who does it as well as the one who receives it unless there is a very sound basis for it. Be civil.


      That sounds about right.


      Get out from under that desk.

    196. Jeannie Says:

      Thank you, Lexington Green, for your succinct summary of the Restoring Honor event. I was there too. I was one of those who spent the night on the mall in front of the Lincoln memorial in order to get an up-close view of it (having travelled from the far west coast to do so). I’m not particularly bothered by crowds of people, but I must admit that there was a brief moment there when I understood the concept of shock and awe — the crowds were not only vast but packed in like a giant box of crayons. In some areas if you fainted, you would not have fallen to the ground. I drew the short straw early Saturday morning and my mission was to refill the huge coffee thermos someone brought. It took me nearly an hour just to get back to them by the reflecting pool from the Vietnam memorial — a distance of about a football field. I’m pretty sure the majority of the people there well-understood the deeper meaning(s) of the event — the ones you describe in your post — even if they cannot articulate them in the way you did. I know I “get” them. That’s why I was there. Glenn Beck, I think, was saying that among the people who are speculating on what the event meant, the ones who are ascribing all sorts of motives to it from their position outside the event, you are one who actually knows what the thing was all about. My hope is that your view of it goes viral. In the absence of that, I think it should be pretty obvious that the press’ spin of it is just more of the same and either they (and their audience) genuinely do not get it or they are standing on willful ignorance. At this point, what the press or media thinks and says matters not to the vast majority of Americans who have now got bigger fish to fry, so to speak.

      Very best wishes on your book. It will be timely and important. I am thinking about my own book as well. It’s the story of an average American woman who came through the most liberal university in the country, rabidly supported the Democratic party and ended up at a Glenn Beck rally on restoring honor.

    197. dick Says:

      my point is at a time of great suffering, 40 senators are stalling legislation in the name of a political ideology that had its chance and failed, and that 20 percent of americans are too benighted to know that obama’s not a muslim and that it wouldn’t matter a bit if he were. in this context, we don’t need platitudes on the Mall. we need the officials we elected to craft honest, responsible, unflinching policy that works. if beck’s bloviating had a prayer of achieving that, i’d love him. but it doesn’t and he knows it.

    198. Mike D Says:

      AJ – After reading the comments so far on this blog, I can only assume that your comments are based on your experiences and observations and not on the previous comments. If I understand you correctly your fears are that people who have attended Tea Party events, watch or listen to Glenn Beck, watch or listen to Fox news will somehow tread on you with theology, racism and xenophobia (I must confess I had to look this up because while I had heard the term, I didn’t know what it meant). If you have read the previous comments in this thread you would see that we are not the facist, racist, xenophobic “sheep” you apparently believe we are. On the contrary to call us “fascist” is puzzling to me since we for limited government and maximum individual rights. My understanding of fascism is that it requires maximum government and limited individual rights. “The basis of our Constitution is equality”. If you mean equal opportunity and not equal results, we are in agreement. Let’s work for equal opportunity and equal justice. I don’t think name calling really advances those causes.

    199. David Taylor Says:

      It must be disheartning(spell check) to give a speech and then have everyone guessing what it was about.
      People this country is in trouble. Our politicians got us to this point and we are still standing around witing for them to fix it. How stupid can we be? I have lived a long time and every election has been about the same thing health, education, welfare. They have all said they are going to fix it, they just haven’t said how they broke it.
      If we send a child to school to study economics we would certainly be disappointed if they came out conducting business like our politicians have.
      One last thought. If the tea party had a convention in tents or other more economic building I would have more respect for them than when they hold it at expensive places in Las Vegas.

    200. VekTor Says:

      AJ said on September 3rd, 2010 at 8:14 am: “I am very scared for this country, with people flocking to the fascist Tea Party movement like sheep, and Beckites tuning in nightly to Faux”News” for their daily Gospel — this portends a very terrible future for us all.”

      AJ, you seem to be lashing out in fear and anger. I think you misunderstand terribly what the Tea Party movement is about if you think it is “fascist”. It is most definitely not.

      The Tea Party movement is about freedom and liberty, not about oppression. It is about bringing freedom to all of us, and that includes freedom from the oppression that too many in our government seek to impose upon us. It’s not about imposing a theology on anyone, despite the language that has been used recently. I never thought it was, and that’s why I was so concerned with the unqualified language. The parts I wasn’t hearing (because they weren’t there), were the qualifiers to say that Glenn was calling to those who already had faith to return to the moral foundations that their faith had given them before… to work hard on being a much, much better person.

      That’s a laudable message no matter where you are on the political spectrum. We can all benefit from that. The point I take away from Lex’s analysis is that Glenn is trying to restore the sense of pride and openness that the religious should have in how that can help them be a better person… that they should not be cowed into keeping quiet through, frankly, some of the sorts of language you have been using. They should embrace the ideals of being a better person and helping to make the country a better place, and should not be ashamed if it is their religion that is helping them get there.

      It’s not supposed to be about imposing a religion on anyone. For those who mistakenly think it is, I will stand in opposition against you. This is about being better people, and embracing the ideals of the founders that you don’t have to subscribe to a particular faith or any at all in order to be a wonderful member of our society.

      AJ then said: “People forget that the public arena is a shared arena, and while some voices are louder than others, the basis for our Constitution is equality — do not tread on me: not with your theology,”

      We stand side-by-side on that much, friend! That is note-for-note in perfect harmony with the goals of the Tea Party movement. We may be much, much closer to one another than you realize.

      AJ ended with: “not with your racism and xenophobia, and certainly not with your ignorant arrogance and pride.”

      It sounds to me like you’ve “fallen for” the false propaganda being brought to bear by those desperate to remain in power, against the Tea Party movement. It is definitely not about racism or xenophobia. Have you actually attended one, and observed it without preconception or bias? These are, in my experience, wonderfully diverse and eclectic events.

      In my view, there is only a tiny subset of the population for which this “portends a very terrible future”. That subset is made up of only part of what Codevilla describes as the “ruling class”. Those are folks who are dead-set on telling others how they have to live, on taking their money to redistribute in ways that the “rulers” see fit, and otherwise feathering their own nests with rent-seeking behaviors and the petty power which they seek to maintain.

      For those in the “ruling class” who are able to take a step back, re-evaluate what it is they have been doing, and change their ways to conform to the American ideal of leaving each to their own devices as much as possible, they will be welcomed with open arms. Americans love a tale of redemption, and they will be cheered when they shed their old ways and join us in making America the greatest nation it can possibly be.

      For those in the “ruling class” who refuse to give up their scam, it will be a very terrible future indeed… because the jig is up! The public is awakened, and they are seeing through the veneer of bluster and intimidation that has allowed these people for far too long to dominate over people of good will. Their rule will end, of that I have no doubt. They can wake up, reform, and stand side-by-side with us… or they can be dragged kicking and screaming from their positions of power, and ridiculed into irrelevance.

      But make no mistake: This scam is over. They are impotent. America is being taken back.

      Not by a theocracy, not by racists and xenophobes, not by the ignorant and arrogant. It is being taken back those who recognize the utter brilliance of what the Founders created in this nation. It’s being taken back from the parasites who live off of our hard work, and being restored to where it belongs… the people. It’s being taken back by those who will no longer be cowed or coerced into being quiet about being proud to be a free American.

      It’s being taken back by those who will no longer be ruled by petty bureaucratic tyrants who insist that they get to control us, and we should accept it and be quiet to boot. No more, my friend… no more.

      That is not ignorance and arrogance. That is resolve. That is steely determination to exercise the eternal vigilance against those who seek to take our liberty from us. We wavered in paying attention to that vital lesson, and we are paying the price today for that laxity.

      Glenn’s message, as clarified by Lex so well, is that we will no longer accept the premise that those who seek to lord power over us actually have the moral high ground.

      They do not.

      Glenn is trying to awaken that realization in those who have a strong religious background. That is a good, good thing. It should be awaken in all Americans of good will.

      I you see ignorance and arrogance when looking at the Tea Party movement, AJ, and want that to not be the case, I’d commend to you (and everyone else) the words of the late Michael Jackson:

      “I’m starting with the man in the mirror,
      I’m asking him to change his ways,
      and no message could have been any clearer:
      If you want to make the world a better place,
      then just look at yourself and
      make that change!

    201. Judith Says:

      Lex, you have been right on. Chicagoboyz, this is a very good forum.

      I’ve listened and watched Glenn for the past year. He evolves before our eyes, or so it seems…

      At this moment he is taking his “followers” to a place where there is viseral anger about our leaving our children and grandchildren with the lives of slavery to the debt that has been created on our watch… our watch. It is wrong and on the level of sinful.

      We need to rid ourselves of this debt during our lifetime. He is warning us of/preparing us for the sacrifices that will have to make individually and what we will have to give, financially and personally, to replace the funding from taxpayer dollars. He is suggesting that we rid ourselves of all debt, now.

      More later, got to live!!!
      I’m so glad you all are here. Makes me feel safe and hopeful.

    202. Lexington Green Says:

      VekTor, you need your own blog. Keep it shorter.

    203. VekTor Says:

      Lexington Green said on September 3rd, 2010 at 12:51 pm: “VekTor, you need your own blog. Keep it shorter.”

      Gotcha. HUA.

      (Heard, Understood, Acknowledged)

    204. Percy Dovetonsils Says:

      “On the contrary to call us ‘fascist’ is puzzling to me since we for limited government and maximum individual rights.”

      Ehh, you know those damn liberty freaks – trying to seize power so they can leave other people alone. The scoundrels.

    205. Larry Sheldon Says:

      Gone viral, man!

      Good on you.

    206. Anonymous Says:

      Lexington Green:

      I wasn’t able to reply the other day, I didn’t get a text box, but I wanted to point out that we were kind of saying the same things in different ways. My point was I have never believed that America, or the people have lost their honor, only that one segment, the most powerful segment has. That didn’t mean that our honor was under seige, but I have not yielded and about 499,999 others at the 8/28 event have sustained their honor.

      When liberals control the mass media, upper education, lower education, the film and TV industry, community newspapers, public radio, half of the pulpits, half of the boardrooms, numerous personalities, rock and hip hop stars, and a good deal of professional athletes etc they have a powerful lobby and sure, they have been diligent in trying to drag this nation down into the cesspool that is Europe and the greater share of the world, but they are not us, we are not them.

      That’s what I was saying and my belief is that giving them credit for destorying the honor of this great nation is, even with all of their weapons, less than probable.

      Again, though. Great Post, perhaps one for the annals of blogdom.

    207. T.L. Davis Says:

      The above comment was mine. I forgot to put my information in. I am Anonymous in the preceding comment.

    208. Hans Granberg Says:

      Found this blog via Glenn Beck. Excellent writing, keep up the good work! Glenn Beck is an important person in Americas awakening towards the values that made it great. Times seem tough at the moment but hopefully this is just a stepping stone for a great future. Without Americas Freedom there is not much hope for the rest of the world. Greetings from Finland and God Bless America!

    209. Evan3457 Says:

      Not the only guy to get it. I got it, too. I just didn’t get it in writing (a blog), so nobody will believe it now. If we accomplish what Beck is trying for, the next phase will be to march back the institutions, Gramasci in reverse. Public schools, colleges, and the iron triangle: broadcasting/journalism, education schools, and law schools.

    210. LetsGetReal Says:

      Lexington Green,
      What great insight. Yes, you got it and brought it home. This was good reading. A lot of good thinkers and not afraid of writing the truth without too many resorting to pandering liberal lies in ignorance of what Glenn Beck is standing for.

      Having said that, it is God who makes great and gives strength to all. He gives good leaders as a blessing and bad leaders as a corrective measure. He allows bad leaders to destroy the proud and the arrogant and allows good leaders to lead the humble. All good leaders (in every instance in the bible) call those he leads to repentance prior to leading them into victory. God does not fight on behalf of those who refuse to repent of believing the lies they believe that lead them to commit the sins they commit. Repentance is the number one priority of every leader established by God. He uses bad leaders as a sledgehammer and good leaders as a source of blessing.

      Where you stand after the battle is over depends on where you kneel before it begins.

    211. Dan M Says:

      THANK you for this post….I truly appreciate the insight, confirmed by Mr. Beck.

      I had not thought of it in this way, and now that I do, I can appreciate Mr. Beck’s intent even MORE than I did before.

      God Bless America!

    212. Lexington Green Says:

      Evan3457, start writing a blog. I like the way you think.

      “If we accomplish what Beck is trying for, the next phase will be to march back the institutions, Gramsci in reverse. Public schools, colleges, and the iron triangle: broadcasting/journalism, education schools, and law schools.”

      Yes. Very good. Not a rollback, but Gramsci-in-reverse.

      Just as we can learn about tactics from Alinsky without buying his whole philosophy, we can learn from Gramsci about strategy, without buying his whole philosophy.

      That said, I think a lot of the, mostly hierarchical, institutions that the New Left marched through are going to be superseded and replaced by networked organizations.


    213. Unity? Says:

      “Beck is creating positive themes of unity”.

      Really? Wait, this post is supposed to be enlightening, intelligent, etc.? Everything aside, the writer of this post needs to reconsider the “accuracy of [his] penetrating analysis”.

      you may agree with Glenn Beck, you may disagree with Glenn Beck. One thing is for certain: he does NOT unify people. He is one of the most divisive figures in American politics. That fact that you can even begin to grasp that simple notion, is a stunning fact.

      Before you write another article, sit down an reconsider what you’re talking about.

      He is not a unifying figure, regardless of your political leanings.

    214. Patriot Dreamer Says:

      The dinosaur (MSM) media is dying, they just don’t know it, yet. And it’s all thanks to the Internet and alternative news. It is a strategic change, because the liberal MSM is no longer the “gatekeeper” of the news.

      We need a similar strategic change to take out the public education cartel. Homeschooling is a good start, but here is another idea:

      (I’m not a Ron Paul fan, but we need to be thinking about “out of the box” ideas like this one to fight back.)

    215. Anonymous Says:

      Beck is just selling books to dumb rednecks.

    216. Judith Says:

      Lexington Green,
      Re Alinsky model check out David Horowitz and what he has to say. He’s crossed over from a fringe. Beck observes that America is right of center. To exchange one extreme for another makes no sense.
      Great conversation.

    217. Judith Says:

      Note: America’s meant to be right of center according to Glenn.

    218. Anonymous Says:

      I’ve long thought of myself as being an agnostic or an athiest.
      At the same time, I’m passionately in love with my country and her blessings of inalienable rights.
      But, as Glenn has been reminding me, these rights I so cherish, ARE ENDOWED TO ME BY MY CREATOR (and nobody else!), and claimed for me by courageous men who belived in and relied on the PROTECTION OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE.
      So, I’m asking myself this week after the rally, how does it work for me to be both an athiest and an ardent American?
      GEEZ, GLENN!

    219. Scott Eudaley Says:

      “If we accomplish what Beck is trying for, the next phase will be to march back the institutions, Gramsci in reverse. Public schools, colleges, and the iron triangle: broadcasting/journalism, education schools, and law schools.”

      Yes. Very good. Not a rollback, but Gramsci-in-reverse.

      Just as we can learn about tactics from Alinsky without buying his whole philosophy, we can learn from Gramsci about strategy, without buying his whole philosophy.

      “Welcome to the party, pal!” — John McClane, Die Hard

      You’re a little late in recognizing this. Ayn Rand in the title essay of her book For the New Intellectual identified the bankruptcy, hatred and destructiveness of the modern intellectual professions in 1961. Unfortunately for the religiously-minded, she doesn’t offer much succor to your hopes. For she identifies you as part of the problem, not a part of the solution. I can’t do justice to her argument here, so I encourage you to read that essay.

      Your “Great Awakening” won’t work. At best, you might slow down the march to statism, but you won’t stop it. As Ayn Rand noted on a number of occasions, conservatives always have and always will give ground to the left because they share the same morality–altruism–and the left are much more consistent altruists than the conservatives. If self-sacrifice is the moral ideal, it is impossible to beat “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs”. One simply can’t square the altruism of the Sermon on the Mount with the inherent selfishness of rights, freedom and the system that results–capitalism.

      As Ayn Rand noted, our founding fathers were political revolutionaries, but not ethical revolutionaries. And that was their undoing. The long march from their political ideals over the centuries occured precisely because those ideas lacked the necessary ethical system to provide a foundation. Despite its unmatched practicality and undoubted benefits, capitalism has always been viewed as immoral, or at best, amoral. In such an environment, its destruction is inevitable for rights are selfish, freedom is selfish and capitalism is selfishness incarnate. What is needed today is an ethical revolution to complete and restore our founding father’s political revolution–a full-throated, uncompromising defense of “the virtue of selfishness”. No faith-based system can do so, and most certainly not Christianity. So far, only Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism offers such a defense. Without such a defense, you are doomed to fail.

      Like VekTor, I am distinctly unwelcome in Glenn Beck’s world, despite his protestations that “some of my best friends are atheists”. I want no part of it. America certainly needs a “Great Awakening”, but Beck’s solution is to offer more of the poison that is already killing us.

      As a short-term, defensive measure I am willing to ally myself with the Tea Party movement, as long as it stays strictly limited to fiscal and regulatory issues. As soon as it veers from that, and it almost surely will, I will continue the fight on my own.

    220. Ritchie The Riveter Says:

      In my view, an essential component of restoring honor is the restoration of intellectual honesty … that we have to accept “inconvenient truths” (as opposed to politically-convenient cult beliefs covered with a candy coating of junk science) as truth, even when it isn’t reflective of the world as we would like it.

      A good place to start in that regard, is to recognize that EVERYONE acts in faith … some in a Deity (or Deities) beyond their own humanity, others in their own omniscience … and we need to freely declare when we are speaking from the basis of fact, the basis of reason, or the basis of faith.

      It is here, where I see the true battle lines have formed for the national soul …

      … on the one side, the intellectually honest for whom, by their respect for absolute truth and their honesty regarding the basis they speak from, rejection of ends-justify-the-means relativism is evident … regardless of the basis of their faith, be it God or their own eyeballs … and in that knowledge, understand that power over others must be accountable and limited in our society.

      … on the other side, those for whom relativism is a feature, not a bug … who consider the elements of their faith as reason and/or fact … and will leverage intellectual dishonesty, along with the good-faith tolerance of those from the other side, to implement the tenets of their faith as the Only Acceptable Creed of an “intelligent” people, dismissing all others as “ignorant” or “selfish” or “bigoted” … and in the process, set themselves up as a self-selecting priesthood that, because they possess the “right” credentials (be they academic, professional, or street), is above challenge by the masses of the laity.

      The latter have been able to use the popular culture and our public insfotitutions (since they are not “religious”, the Establishment clause does not apply to them) to embed the tenets of their faith into our society as the conventional wisdom … for decades …

      … but only because the former did not challenge their intellectual dishonesty, wishing instead to maintain civility.

      THAT is what is changing, for restoring honor also means the principled-yet-resolute challenge of intellectual dishonesty wherever it appears.

    221. Gray Champion Says:

      Lex. Thanks for bringing us such a great discussion. The intellect and civility of most of the participants has been — refreshing.

      And, Mr. Beck has praised your work so what could I add? Not too much. Just that coming from me, you have done well.

      I have read probably eighty percent of these comments. I am an engineer not a writer, so please bear with my awkward and incomplete word-smithing skills. At the risk of being told “you need your own blog” I am going to comment here in an extended way.

      I attended the 8/28 rally. I am a Mormon.

      To me the nagging question is, Can Beck succeed?

      Beck’s foes are at two levels. At one level they are completely opposite him. At the other they are almost like him. (I mean opposite and alike with respect to Beck’s personal beliefs.)

      At the first level we clearly have the “Liberal Bigots” or elitists that were described by Rabbi Aryeh Spero in ‘They Cheered My Yarmulke at Beck’s Rally’ ( thank-you David Foster). This group has a vested interest in keeping the various Judeo-Christian belief systems at odds with each other. And while they do present a challenge, Beck completely outmaneuvered them last week. He is talented at this and will continue to be able to keep them at bay.

      Beck is a Mormon. At the second level, his ‘other’ foes will appear (to a far-off observer) to be almost like him. I make an illustration. Consider us Americans watching the conflict between Sunni and Sheite Muslims in Iraq. To us they appear in their belief systems and cultural moorings to be only inches apart. We wonder why they fight.

      Another illustration. Consider us Bible readers who observe a New Testament from the distance of time and culture. We have the back-ground of the story of The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-30) and the story of The Woman at the Well (John 4). We know about the traveler who fell into trouble on the highway and that no one would help him but the Samaritan. On the other story, we see the inference of the woman at the well who wondered why Jesus, a Jew would have dealings with her, a Samaritan. At that time in the ancient world the mainstream Jews hated the Samaritans and would walk miles out of their way to avoid them. Now to us as we gaze across the chasm of time and culture, the Jews and Samaritans appear almost identical. We wonder – what was the real beef? Why were they at odds?

      A third illustration. After I attended 8/28, I went with my family to the Archives to see the actual constitution. I inquired to a Chinaman in the line “Cheung” (am trying hard to remember the way he pronounced his name), “what is your interest in seeing the founding documents of America?” In his words he said they were a significant contribution to the history of mankind. Cheung is coming from the developing world and wants China to play a major role in the globalist arrangement that all major nations are heading for. He wants his people to do well. That is his world. Now to this student of Mao who is interested in the founding of America, who would it be that appears almost like Beck in his Mormonism? Other Christians?

      This blog had a very subtle exchange between Cindy September 1st, 2010 at 6:22 pm and Quayle September 1st, 2010 at 7:44 pm which focused on the very thing that could cause Beck to fail. Lex deflected it. September 1st, 2010 at 9:39 pm Yes, we want to stay “on topic”. But here it is. From all indications, Cindy is an anti-mormon. Anti-mormon christians are a minority of main-stream Christians, but they are very energetic in their beliefs. There are differences between Mormons and anti-mormons that appear neglidgible from a remote outside observer, but to an anti-mormon the differences are huge. The result to the outside observer is that while mormons generally admire Christendom and feel to be identified with it because of similar beliefs and common values and politics, the anti-mormon faction holds mormons in contempt as heretics. It is not unlike the avoidance between ancient main-stream Jews and Samaritans. I dread the day that the chasm would be as large as the conflict\ between Iraqi Sunnis and Sheites. For the sake of America, Beck is trying to bridge that.

      However, anti-Mormons do not want to allow mormons to the table of any bid for religious unity. Of course, not all Christians are anti-mormon (all the Christians I spoke with at the rally were rather accepting of mormons — willing to agree to differ for the sake of the cause).

      Meanwhile, the Liberal bigots the Rabbi showed us cannot see daylight between the Mormon position and the Christians who are anti-mormons. However they are all too willing to exploit it because they have a vested interest in keeping all the various Christian groups at odds with each-other. And they have done so. Just look at Mitt Romney. Whenever the anti-mormons make their point, the Liberal bigots snicker. The pitiful irony is that with that division, all Christians lose and with that divided house the Liberals have the most to win.

      Beck is not asking these energetic Christians to stand with him. He is only asking them “ to stand with freedom and liberty.”

      So that’s it. If during his bid for religious unity, the anti-mormons don’t push Beck out of the tent, he may yet succeed.

      Meanwhile, with no malice and only love for our country, I would ask all my Christian brothers who have been taught to be ill-disposed toward Mormons, to consider the words of Jesus when He said, “who is your neighbor?”

    222. Lexington Green Says:

      “… I am distinctly unwelcome in Glenn Beck’s world …”

      There has been a lot of this kind of talk.

      So what?

      If you don’t want to participate in Beck’s activities, don’t. If you don’t want to watch his TV show, don’t.

      There is a whole country out there, a whole Internet, local, county, state and federal elections, whatever you want to do.

      Get involved and do something.

      What Glenn Beck is doing will form part of a political coalition.

      If it rubs you the wrong way, get involved with some other group, that can then be part of a political coalition.

      For political purposes we only need to have political agreements. We can disagree all day long about everything else, including more important things, like religion. It is delusional to think that you can accomplish anything at all if you insist on religious uniformity before you can have political cooperation. If that is how you want to play it, you are already beaten. Count me out of that approach.

    223. partsmom Says:

      One problem I see with claiming moral values without reference to a transcendent source is explaining where those values come from and why. Understanding values as deriving from submission to God acts both as an antidote to arrogance and having available a source of power behind those values. In other words, relationship with God should keep our ego under control, and make it possible to bring our lives into line in ways we cannot do on our own.
      The world has always had those who believe themselves to know better than anyone else what is “good” for everyone else (usually most good for themselves) without the consent of those affected. In recent politics, this led to well-meaning requirements on banks and lenders to put social goals over financial reality, which made some people rich for awhile and lots more people poorer now. It also leads to the wishful thinking that “government” can solve everyone’s problems, without realizing that “government” is comprised of nothing more than fallible human beings who often think they are wiser than anyone else including God. It is ironic than these are often people who are philosophically convinced in the limited resources of the Earth, but in the unlimited resources of “government.”
      Belief in God does not mean that we can successfully manipulate and use God for our own agendas, in faith that He will honor our good intentions. We are not wise enough to supercede God, as much as confidence as can have in our incomplete wisdom.
      This discussion here is valuable and timely. However, we do need to realize that good will is not enough.

    224. Steve Lindsey Says:

      This guy gets it article.

      Btw-as a fan of Glenn that has been with him for years let me say… YES you do.

    225. Ragfish Says:

      The culture has been carefully degraded/coarsened via Public Opinion and Mass Psychology. While at first Edward Bernays’ talents were focused on creating consumer demand for products, such as cigarettes for women, his techniques were quickly applied to the sphere of electoral politics.
      Our formerly godfearing citizen were transformed into godless consumers, being hustled from the feed lot into the slaughterhouse by the rattling of the corn bucket of perverse incentives and outright hedonism.

      Illustrates the example of Bernays’ shaping of American public opinion against the populist democratic socialist regime in Guatemala in the 1950’s. The classic BBC documentary, Century of Self is an excellent backdrop for appreciating Beck’s “Overton Window”.

    226. Scott Eudaley Says:

      If you don’t want to participate in Beck’s activities, don’t. If you don’t want to watch his TV show, don’t.

      I do, in fact, often watch his show. I find it interesting, especially when he is discussing history. However, he often goes completely off the rails.

      There is a whole country out there, a whole Internet, local, county, state and federal elections, whatever you want to do.

      Get involved and do something.

      What Glenn Beck is doing will form part of a political coalition.

      If it rubs you the wrong way, get involved with some other group, that can then be part of a political coalition.

      I am. As I noted, despite my disagreements with conservatives, I am willing to make common cause on political issues to combat the hard-left lurch that has occurred under Obama. I am involved in the Tea Party movement. This year I will be donating far more money to Republican political candidates than I have ever donated before. But that is a short-term, emergency defensive measure. I have no illusions that any of this will have any impact on the long-term drift toward statism. But it might buy us enough time for the real solution to arise.

      For political purposes we only need to have political agreements. We can disagree all day long about everything else, including more important things, like religion. It is delusional to think that you can accomplish anything at all if you insist on religious uniformity before you can have political cooperation. If that is how you want to play it, you are already beaten. Count me out of that approach.

      You (and Beck) claim that you are aiming for a long-term realignment of the political dynamic, the so-called “Third Great Awakening”. The point I am making is that even if you succeed, it will have zero impact on the long-term trend toward statism, because you are unable or unwilling to challenge the underlying ethical system that is driving that trend. You can re-arrange the deck chairs (the political system) all you want, but if you don’t change the direction of the ship (the ethical system), you’re still going to hit that iceberg (statism).

      Your phrase, “more important things, like religion” is highly revealing. For they are, in fact, more important–more fundamental. A political system is the end result of an underlying metaphysical, epistemological and ethical system. If you are unwilling to change that underlying system in any fundamental way, then the political system will not change in any fundamental way either.

      Conservatives go to great lengths to pretend that they are somehow different from the left at the ethical level. Yet both are proponents of altruism. Oh, you disagree, often violently, about the proper form of altruism, and contend endlessly over the details. But in every fundamental sense you agree. Thus, the RINO phenomenon, the perpetual “me-too-ism” of the conservatives, and as a result, the endless growth and intrusiveness of the government even under Republican presidents and congresses. Even that paragon of Republicanism, Ronald Reagan saw significant growth in the size and intrusiveness of government. One would think that such a consistent and unrelenting failure might prompt a re-evaluation, but it seems not. It is easier just to blame the Democrats.

      The simply truth is that conservatives are morally disarmed in the face of the left and have lost before the war even begins. Oh, you might win a battle here and there, but you’ll never win the war.

      The Marxists understand all of this. Karl Marx himself noted that his political system had, as its base, a fundamentally Christian view of ethics. And he is right. Of all the Christians, the most intellectually honest and consistent are the neo-Marxist liberation theologists. The intellectual contortions conservatives go through to reconcile the inherent selfishness of the free-market system with the Sermon on the Mound are sad, pathetic and utterly unconvincing. And have had absolutely no impact on the larger historical trend.

      Your claim that I “insist on religious uniformity” is also revealing. I do no such thing. That is a red herring designed to avoid dealing with the more fundamental issue of the essential identity between your ethical system and that of your enemy. About that, you say nothing.

      The foundation you refuse to examine (altruism) can not support the structure you wish to erect (a free society).

    227. tyouth Says:

      Scot, I think you make too much of altruism. Providing for the less able, the weak is a fine and noble thing but it is by no means the the height of morality. It is not near the apex of moral behavior, I’d suggest, because it’s not usually very efficient in producing most good.

      Mathew 26.11 “The poor will always be with you but you will not always have me”.

    228. Lexington Green Says:

      Scott, I am glad to hear you are nvolved in the Tea Party movement and supporting candidates financially.

    229. VekTor Says:

      re: Ritchie The Riveter on September 5th, 2010 at 10:12 am

      Ritchie has hit upon a key component in drawing the “bright line” if we wish for the political coalitions to hold together, rather than descend into infighting and back-biting.

      The distinction that we must emphasize above all others is intellectual honesty. We must be merciless in routing out and exposing those who want to continue the charade and pull the wool over the public’s eyes.

      We should set aside differences in type or style within the coalition so long as that fundamental principle of honesty is embraced, and treat things as “live and let live” within the coalition until the crisis is past.

      That is the only path that I see for a lasting coalition to fix this. As Reagan said, there are simple solutions that are not easy solutions. This is one.

    230. VekTor Says:

      partsmom said on September 5th, 2010 at 6:24 pm: “One problem I see with claiming moral values without reference to a transcendent source is explaining where those values come from and why. Understanding values as deriving from submission to God acts both as an antidote to arrogance and having available a source of power behind those values. In other words, relationship with God should keep our ego under control, and make it possible to bring our lives into line in ways we cannot do on our own.”

      It’s quite possible to derive a coherent set of moral values without reference to the “transcendent source”, and to recognize that there are a wide variety of moral systems. Some of them are superior to others. While it’s true that many turn to religion as a source for that, there are others for whom this is not an effective means.

      It is inherently against the notion of the pluralism of this nation to insist that only those who believe in God can have a firm moral foundation. It is untrue. You can either accept that there are those who don’t need religion to be excellent citizens, or you can’t. In my opinion, if you fail to do so, you’re not really embracing pluralism… you’re giving it lip service.

      I have no problems whatsoever with keeping my ego in check despite rejecting God. My moral foundation is sound. Please learn to live with that and stop trying to make the case that it is somehow impossible for me to exist. It’s not. My moral system is simple, but not easy.

    231. The Glenn Beck Review Says:

      I will be offering an alternative perspective to what Glenn Beck was doing on 8-28. I’m not a sycophant, and I am not taken in by his elegant deceit. I will be using this perspective, since Mr. Beck drew attention to it, as a punch to counter, naivete to inform.

      I have already posted Glenn Beck and the Assault on Historical Memory by Time Wise, and now I have your reactionary, not “conservative,” perspective to critically analyze.

      Wise’s article is at:

      FYI, the 1st Amendment DOES apply on The Glenn Beck Review.

      [I decided to leave this up. People can make their own assessment of it. TGBR, next time, be polite or I will delete your comment. Speaking literally, and legally, the First Amendment does not apply to your site. You are not the government and no one can compel you to allow comments on your site. Your willingness to do so speaks in your favor, nonetheless. Lex.]

    232. Anonymous Says:

      Thanks so much.

    233. VekTor Says:

      I’ll take a shot at engaging TGBR over in his backyard, rather than here. We’ll see how it goes. Thanks for letting that post through to the extent that you did, Lex, as it opens up that kind of opportunity for engagement.

    234. Anonymous Says:

      Scott Eudaley said ”capitalism has always been viewed as immoral, or at best, amoral” – I beg to differ. What do you think Paul was suggesting when he said, “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.” (2Tim 3:10). This is capitalism in its basic definition.

      The early church tried socialism and found it did not work because when they had used up all the money from the estates of those who voluntarily offered them to the work of God, they had nothing left to live on. They were expecting the return of Jesus within days, not centuries. So, they had to revise their image of what it meant to endure until the end.

      Capitalism grew out of the recognition of that problem in the colonial economy. The first year they all worked really hard and grew enough to feed them all through the next winter and until harvest. They put all of their produce into a single storehouse and rationed equal portions to all.

      Within a few years, they found that there wasn’t enough produce to last through the winter. Upon observation, they saw that there were drunkards and lazy people getting the same portion as the hard workers. They found that the hard workers were able to produce enough to feed everyone, but they stopped being willing to work harder when their incentive to work was given to others. They came upon a system whereby, they would put a certain portion of their produce into a communal storehouse and let those who had more barter with their extra proceeds. They never starved again.

      Capitalism is the source of a thriving economy sufficient to feed everyone, and also provide luxuries for the hardest workers. That is the foundation of capitalism. Varying from the prototype brings hunger, starvation and poverty. Which is a very un-Christian thing to do.

      One thing I have noticed as a bookkeeper and office manager. I have always worked for very hard workers. They worked harder than me. I worked hard and provided excellent service and superior office skills (and was well paid for my work). Ultimately, I did not want to invest the time, energy and dedication necessary to make hard decisions, be responsible for others, and gain the professional skill of an engineer, entrepreneur (or whatever) needed to run a business big enough to employ other people. But, I received the benefit of their strength by supporting them in their endeavors. They have been run out of business by an all consuming government. I am no longer employed. There is no one to hire me.

    235. GettingReal Says:

      Oops! That reply to Scott was from me. I didn’t realize I needed to sign in for each post.

      Scott Eudaley said ”capitalism has always been viewed as immoral, or at best, amoral” – I beg to differ. What do you think Paul was suggesting when he said, “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.” (2Tim 3:10). This is capitalism in its basic definition.

      The early church tried socialism and found it did not work because when they had used up all the money from the estates of those who voluntarily offered them to the work of God, they had nothing left to live on. They were expecting the return of Jesus within days, not centuries. So, they had to revise their image of what it meant to endure until the end.

      Capitalism grew out of that problem in the colonial economy. The first year they all worked really hard and grew enough to feed them all through the next winter and until harvest. They put all of their produce into a single storehouse and rationed equal portions to all.

      Within a few years, they found that there wasn’t enough produce to last through the winter. Upon observation, they saw that there were drunkards and lazy people getting the same portion as the hard workers. They found that the hard workers were able to produce enough to feed everyone, but they stopped being willing to work harder when their incentive to work was given to others. They came upon a system whereby, they would put a certain portion of their produce into a communal storehouse and let those who had more barter with their extra proceeds. They never starved again.

      Capitalism is the source of a thriving economy sufficient to feed everyone and provide luxuries for the hardest workers. That is the foundation of capitalism. Varying from the prototype brings hunger, starvation and poverty. Which is a very un-Christian thing to do.

      One thing I have noticed as a bookkeeper and office manager. I have always worked for very hard workers. They worked harder than me. I worked hard and provided excellent service and superior office skills (and was well paid for my work). Ultimately, I did not want to invest the time, energy and dedication necessary to make hard decisions, be responsible for others, and gain the professional skill of an engineer, entrepreneur (or whatever) needed to run a business big enough to employ other people. But, I received the benefit of their strength by supporting them in their endeavors. They have been run out of business by an all consuming government. I am no longer employed. There is no one to hire me.

    236. The Glenn Beck Review Says:

      Lexington, you amended my comment: “I decided to leave this up. People can make their own assessment of it. TGBR, next time, be polite or I will delete your comment.”

      However, you let anonymous write “Beck is just selling books to dumb rednecks” without comment.

      I’m not sure how that was viewed as more “polite” as my matter of fact statements. Referring to “dumb rednecks” is more polite than deeming myself not a sycophant. Does the phrase “double standards” mean anything to you? (I hope that wasn’t impolite to ask.)

      Debbie’s comment that Beck’s “points can be refuted very easily by actually investigating his claims” is also true; I’ve been doing just that for months now. Recently I debunked his “Tree of Revolution.”

      I’m nearly finished with my post, “Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally: point/counter point,” It will by published by day’s end, after I’ve had time to proof-read it. Lexington, if you feel that I’ve made excessive use of your post in “point/counter point,” comment thus and I will replace it with another noting your objection. On the other hand, if you wish to engage in a dialectic on the Review, I will be happy to do so.

      What I should have written above is that on The Glenn Beck Review, no censorship is applied. Lexington, you were right. The 1st Amendment is not applicable; now tell that to Sarah Palin and Dr. Schlessinger. They appear to have confusion on this point w/r/t using the N word.

      Finally, it’s nice to now understand where VekTor is coming from. He was not exactly forthcoming on The Glenn Beck Review. has proof of Beck’s lies and exposes his frequent hypocrisies including the hypocrisy of lying during his speech that you “get.” I guess you missed the three deceptions.

    237. Anonymous Says:

      i saw nothing but nutjobs

    238. Bc Says:

      This is what I have concluded so far:
      One problem that’s here now and getting much bigger soon is our finance sector is way too big as a percent of GDP. Unavoidably many banks will fail. Oligarchs alligned with this sector will use any tools at their disposal. This makes them dangerous to the Republic as if we didn’t already have big trouble.

      The Depression will stress the middle class to the breaking point. Populist demigods will appear. Some will be mere opportunists. Others will be beholden to hidden interests. The key players will crudely be as Marx defined them…Firms, labor, and Banks. Firms will shed their finance divisions which will be dragging them down. Hopefully firms and labor will realize their mutual adversary is the banks. Outnumbered but very dangerous the banks will decide how nasty the struggle will get. At minimum they will attempt to confuse and co-opt the middle class (again). The financial olgarchs will use the urban core media and cultural elites will form a vanguard aligned with urban financiers.

      Economic necessity requires this realignment of relative power to occur. A wild card is the military and our ongoing struggles abroad. The Iranians look like idiots destracting their people by picking unnecessary fights with their neighbors. Ironically we may be about to get the same from our corrupt and feckless elites and for the same reasons. God help us if we fall for this, the oldest trick in the book.

      Optimistically our firms and labor will reallign to produce tradeable wealth and our subdued banking sector will be about one percent of GDP, much smaller than it is now.

    239. Michael Bonfigli Says:

      It must be nice to have such an eloquent voice to be able give Glenn Beck the words to actually articulate what he is trying to say and do. It is also nice that you acknowledge religious freedom. Though when you or Glenn Beck evoke god in any context is it clear to all that you really mean Christianity. It is really about Christianity at the exclusion of the beliefs of everyone else, right? So is it also a problem that America needs to be “browbeaten” to feel that race, gender and sexual orientation should not be a means of discrimination? Of course the concept that “these people” are the American Taliban is preposterous, but to march in the name of Christ without the understanding that most of the world does not even believe he was the son of some god is for many like rallying behind the Tooth Fairy.

      “Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.”

      Thomas Jefferson-Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

      America, home of the brave and land of the free.

    240. Lexington Green Says:

      TGBR, just be happy I am letting you play in my sandbox.

      Keep being polite and you can keep putting up comments. No problem.

      As to what I do with other comments, I am not really interested in babysitting this thread all the time.

      Obviously stupid things speak for themselves and can be safely ignored, just don’t feed the trolls.

    241. The Glenn Beck Review Says:

      The point/counter point post is up:

      I could have named it, “I think I see what Lexington Green is doing.”

    242. The Glenn Beck Review Says:

      “Lexington,” I’m reading The Backlash by Will Bunch, and I get to the chapter on the Oath Keepers and where they meet annually: Lexington Green. Based upon your posts it doesn’t seem like you’re the Oath Keeper type, but I have to ask: are you using a pseudonym or did your folks have a great sense of Revolutionary War history?

      242 responses to this post now. I wonder if Mr. Beck will ever mention The Glenn Beck Review. He’s lucky: if I had been the viewer who noticed the number of his red phone line, 2 million or so of his viewers would know about “Beck’s Honesty, Political Values and Methods of Communication.”