Quotes of the day
posted at 10:40 pm on August 30, 2010 by Allahpundit
In the past, more secular Tea Party types might not have showed up at a religiously-themed event like “Restoring Honor.” Similarly, many of the devoutly religious people I met at Saturday’s rally probably would in the past have shunned an explicitly political event such as Friday night’s Freedom Works meeting. But I kept bumping into the same people at both gatherings.
“I happen to be opposed to gay marriage, but our peril is so great that goes on the back burner,” Debbie Johnson of Georgia told me on Saturday. Bruce Majors, a gay real-estate agent from Washington D.C., had a different take. He told me earlier this year that he felt perfectly comfortable working with the Tea Party on bringing the size of government under control. “We’re both about freedom and we have a common short-term goal,” he said. Indeed, in Washington this past weekend the more libertarian and the more socially conservative elements of the Tea Party seemed to get along just fine.
***
To this rally-goer, though, the most striking thing about “Restoring Honor” was the way the pageant effortlessly tapped into the same rich vein of identity politics that has given us figures as diverse as Palin and Howard Dean, George W. Bush and Barack Obama — but did so, somehow, without advancing any explicitly political agenda…
In a sense, Beck’s “Restoring Honor” was like an Obama rally through the looking glass. It was a long festival of affirmation for middle-class white Christians — square, earnest, patriotic and religious. If a speaker had suddenly burst out with an Obama-esque “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for,” the message would have fit right in…
For a weekend, at least, Beck proved that he can conjure the thrill of a culture war without the costs of combat, and the solidarity of identity politics without any actual politics. If his influence outlasts the current election cycle, this will be the secret of his success.
***
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Did you sign up @ The Blaze or you still looking for a name ?
macncheez on August 31, 2010 at 12:31 AM
Good news, Ann: Everyone here feels the same way about you. Leave. No one will miss you, because we know you’ve never truly been on our side and never will be.
Good Solid B-Plus on August 31, 2010 at 12:33 AM
BTW, AnninCA, I’m also puzzled by knee-jerk anti-theist comments. Care to discuss those at length? Remember what Socrates said: “An unexamined life is not worth living.” You just strike me as so sterotypical of the aging Baby Boomer libs. You were all such sitting ducks for the radical indoctrination of the 60s and 70s, weren’t you?
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 12:33 AM
Ditto that – thanks, Cindy. I bought a book too.
Missy on August 31, 2010 at 12:35 AM
Speaking of the Blaze-’Aleph’ showed up.
I had to explain to the other commenters that Aleph wasn’t pro-Islam.
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 12:38 AM
Did you sign up @ The Blaze or you still looking for a name ?
macncheez on August 31, 2010 at 12:31 AM
I’m boring old cynccook there, too.
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 12:41 AM
Thanks cynccook, not enough people corelate the 70s with the 60s.
They are , I believe, absolutely corelated, and should always be mentioned together as such.
listens2glenn on August 31, 2010 at 12:48 AM
I saw that. That kid has nothing new to say , just the same inside info about A’Jad ..but its still funny !!
BTW I posted a video to check their linky thingy…no worky
macncheez on August 31, 2010 at 12:51 AM
OK…cuz I was thinking
after following the above ezchange
macncheez on August 31, 2010 at 12:54 AM
I saw that. That kid has nothing new to say , just the same inside info about A’Jad ..but its still funny !!
BTW I posted a video to check their linky thingy…no worky
macncheez on August 31, 2010 at 12:51 AM
It would be nice if ‘he’ stood up for himself rather than let ‘Mama Twerp’ do it.
*sigh*
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 12:55 AM
OT: Bob Beckel in a moment of sobriety admitted on Hannity tonight that the lib/dems have created two welfare generations. He said they thought they were doing the right thing and now it has to be stopped. WTH
d1carter on August 31, 2010 at 12:56 AM
Yes he did, it was great! I could hardly believe it.
bluemarlin on August 31, 2010 at 12:58 AM
It was certainly still going on by the 80′s when I was growing up, but by then, radical had become establishment, and of course, lots of us were to skeptical and contrary to buy into that part and parcel. I can also remember automatically believing that abortion was just a thing that you could do if necessary — an option. It wasn’t until I was older that I found out what it actually meant, and I was horrified. I can remember in high school when we found out what ‘affirmative action’ meant, too. All of us were worried about paying for college only to find out that lots of people who hadn’t studied as hard or worked as much were going to be going to better schools, for free! We were all like, ‘What the h3ll??”
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 12:59 AM
Well, I’m off to bed. Maybe AnninCA will answer my earlier quesion at 12:19 AM by morning.
listens2glenn on August 31, 2010 at 1:01 AM
I very rarely respond to your posts Ann, for obvious reasons to anyone who knows me here.
However, you are really too much to take.
Perhaps the unborn children who you so enthusiastically toss to be butchered by the demons of abortion, ALONG WITH CHILDREN ALREADY BORN, BUT WITH SOME KIND OF ‘DISABILTIY’, WHO YOU SAID ALSO COULD BE PUT TO DEATH IF THE PARENT SO CHOSE, AND THAT YOU WOULD AVAIL YOURSELF OF THAT OPTION IN THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCE AND THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT, might find you,
at the very least, scary, creepy and want nothing to do with you.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 1:04 AM
OK…cuz I was thinking
SlamminAnninCannin
after following the above ezchange
macncheez on August 31, 2010 at 12:54 AM
LOL That’s a creative one! Seriously, though, I’m not trying to ‘slam’ her, but people like that irritate me. If you’re going to make a big deal about something, own it. Own all of it. But pro-abortion females like her never do. If they accepted what they had been advocating for and voting to support all of these years, they wouldn’t be able to live with themselves. They’re cowards. Most people I know would run into traffic to save a mangy dog — so how can you look at the limp body of a 24-month old unborn baby that’s just been wrenched from the safety of her mother’s womb and say, ‘yeah, that’s cool with me.’ C’mon. Religion has nothing to do with that, for me. And btw, where’s all that secular humanism we were told so much about?
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 1:11 AM
Hilarious. I just checked out The Blaze and found that you found Dave Rywall (or is it Rave Drywall?) — there’s also The Race Card over there, wonder if it’s the same?
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:14 AM
Oh, I bet ehy get extra pay for disrupting that site. I just signed up, have not messed with navigating it yet to see who is posting.
bluemarlin on August 31, 2010 at 1:20 AM
Probably John
SgtSVJones on August 31, 2010 at 1:21 AM
Have you noticed how easy Blaze.com is to read? Even the font of the comments is huge. I wonder if Beck’s degenerative eye disease is the reason? I hope not, but it makes it very easy to read!
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 1:22 AM
KATDADDY on August 31, 2010 at 1:22 AM
Perhaps the unborn children who you so enthusiastically toss to be butchered by the demons of abortion, ALONG WITH CHILDREN ALREADY BORN, BUT WITH SOME KIND OF ‘DISABILTIY’, WHO YOU SAID ALSO COULD BE PUT TO DEATH IF THE PARENT SO CHOSE, AND THAT YOU WOULD AVAIL YOURSELF OF THAT OPTION IN THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCE AND THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT, might find you,
at the very least, scary, creepy and want nothing to do with you.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 1:04 AM
Interesting. I have Asperger’s Syndrome which sits at the very top of the autistic spectrum.
I’m married and have a teenager so I can definitely function.
They have prenatal tests for Downs so I’m guessing it’s only a matter of time before the ‘medical community’ come up with one for autism.
Let’s just say a pregnant woman were to learn that their child would be born on the autistic spectrum.
Would Ann think that the ‘mother’ had a right to kill the baby because of it.
For some reason I’m guessing Ann would-and for some reason I’m taking that personally.
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:22 AM
ooooh, and you can REPLY to specific posts! I’ve always wished HA would incorporate that like other sites have done.
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 1:22 AM
you cheezwhiz?
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:23 AM
B effin’ S! You have admitted to voting Democrat your entire life, until the last election, where you cried over your savior, Hillary, losing the primary.
Don’t think you’re going to get a pass as a “GOP voter”…
ladyingray on August 31, 2010 at 1:23 AM
Hilarious. I just checked out The Blaze and found that you found Dave Rywall (or is it Rave Drywall?) — there’s also The Race Card over there, wonder if it’s the same?
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:14 AM
I didn’t RC-of course I wasn’t looking for him either.
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:24 AM
I once asked a liberal woman friend of mine is it okay to birth the baby and then smash its brains out on the wall as long as it was still attached to the umbilical cord? You know, since it was still “living” off the mother?
She hasn’t spoken to me since.
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:25 AM
She hasn’t spoken to me since.
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:25 AM
I kind of keep waiting for some dirtbag to proffer this as justification for murdering a newborn or shaking a really young baby to death — ‘How come I’m in trouble this month, but last month it would have been perfectly legal? No Fair!’
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 1:29 AM
Those mirrors are rough!
bluemarlin on August 31, 2010 at 1:29 AM
She hasn’t spoken to me since.
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:25 AM
My AS is due mostly to being born under weight and a month early but regardless of how I got it, it’s not a death sentence. Downs Syndrome isn’t either.
We’re all quirky-some of us are just quirkier than others.
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:31 AM
I just get so sick and tired of their intellectual dishonesty. Own up to it! Of course it’s killing life.
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:34 AM
My AS is due mostly to being born under weight and a month early but regardless of how I got it, it’s not a death sentence. Downs Syndrome isn’t either.
We’re all quirky-some of us are just quirkier than others.
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:31 AM
Well, whatever it is that you’ve got, it doesn’t seem to have made you any less sharp or quick-witted – and if it did, I shudder to think of how bright you would have been without it! You’re expecting yourself, aren’t you? Everything okay?
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 1:34 AM
I have a friend who’s daughter has full-blown autism.
Ash is 15 now and will never be able to live on her own.
My friend told me that had she and her husband known ahead of time that A. would have autism-it wouldn’t have made a difference.
Since A’s autism has a genetic component she’s an only child…who’s loved to death by her family and friends.
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:36 AM
OT/
This is happening RIGHT NOW IN CALIFORNIA: Senator Denise Ducheny has changed her vote on AB 1934 from “no” to “aye”. I need EVERYONE to call Ducheny’s Capitol office and urge her to vote “NO on AB 1934″. (916)651-4040
AB 1934 is California’s Open Carry law. Lori Saldana decided no law-abiding, screened citizens should be allowed to open carry in CA, even though we are cutting our police and crime is up. Open carrying deterring crime is historical fact. Please help out a Californian who is stuck here by making this bill go down in flames!
As you were, thanks.
NTWR on August 31, 2010 at 1:38 AM
Well, whatever it is that you’ve got, it doesn’t seem to have made you any less sharp or quick-witted – and if it did, I shudder to think of how bright you would have been without it! You’re expecting yourself, aren’t you? Everything okay?
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 1:34 AM
Me? Expecting?
Oh H*ll no!
I have a 16 year old son.
I’ve told my spawn that if I become a grandmother before he’s a married adult the baby will be fine but he’ll get a first hand experience with what Lorena Bobbit did to John.
*rolls eyes*
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:40 AM
Phone numbers and or email addresses would help out. I will look into it.
bluemarlin on August 31, 2010 at 1:42 AM
It was about a year and a half ago, on a stormy and windswept night (not really true about the weather, but I just couldn’t resist), that AnninCa let fly with her piece d’resistance about it being her right to kill her baby after birth if she so chose.
It was on a late night thread which was really rocking, with Ann defending abortion and careening into her past “sexual life” as another example of harmless living.
The posters were peppering her pretty good, and as it became more rapid fire, Ann kind of blew her cover with her hidden-until-then pro-infanticide gem. She didn’t mean to do it, and has made sure not to reveal that monster inside again.
But it’s there and I’ll never forget reading her words that night.
Of course, she doesn’t have the sense to know that the abortion monster that she holds so close to her heart is hideous too, and that it’s turned her heart black – black enough to embrace infanticide, too.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 1:48 AM
Good… LORD.
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:52 AM
Good… LORD.
John the Libertarian on August 31, 2010 at 1:52 AM
As soon as I noticed that he was getting interested in girls I explained to him allll about John and Lorena.
He isn’t even sort of a little worried.
LoL
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:58 AM
btw AnninCA, if you’re still reading this, and I think you are, I think that somewhere in your deeper self you wish that you weren’t such a slave to your pride. Many of us have the same problem, and I’m not saying I don’t have many major faults of my own, but one thing that comes across to me in your posts is an unreasoning and degrading pride; a complete inability or unwillingness to recognize or admit major wrongdoing and a refusal to confront it truthfully, i.e., a refusal to look at photos of aborted babies, even though you are shocking in your zest for abortion.
I could understand it in someone who was in their 20′s, but coming from someone who has more than double the life experience, you seem unable to match your sense of propriety with your years.
Maybe that’s why you come here, to get a taste of what it’s like on the brighter side of life. Like the kind of thing you saw at the Beck rally, which you just termed earlier today as “sweet, sweet”. The fact that you could recognize that is a very good sign.
But the sooner you admit that the sweetness came from a reverence for all life and for life’s Creator, the sooner you can seek some help to rid yourself of that death demon that wears you like a cheap suit.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 2:03 AM
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 1:48 AM
Whoa. Really? Wow. I don’t really know what to say to that. I must have missed that the first time around. Wow.
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 2:10 AM
annoyinglittletwerp on August 31, 2010 at 1:58 AM
As a young lady I once [tried] to teach English to once said, “Dayum, you hardcore, girl.”
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 2:12 AM
Yes, and I don’t like to bring it up; I’m hoping that Ann might start to examine her direction if she hears and sees herself outside of her own echo.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 2:16 AM
Yes, and I don’t like to bring it up; I’m hoping that Ann might start to examine her direction if she hears and sees herself outside of her own echo.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 2:16 AM
Dum spiro, spero — while I breathe, there is hope!
cynccook on August 31, 2010 at 2:20 AM
Amen, cynccook.
tigerlily on August 31, 2010 at 2:25 AM
I am a Christian but I don’t think Beck speaks for me. I don’t know that I even believe half of what he says. I do have great respect for the Tea Party movement however, and a lot of those people were out there meeting in small towns all over the country long before Beck realized what a draw they could be.
I think it would be a mistake for the Tea Party to become too close to someone like Beck. It is a grass roots movement of diverse people who have come together to bring the country back to the constitution.
I think Beck is a showman, a shaman, and I am not sure he is not a fraud. I listen to him attack a decent man like Bush while he panders to Reagan for basically the same policy stance on something like immigration. He is just aware of what going after Reagan would do to his ratings so he does not do it. I heard him support TARP before he decided it was pure evil. Presidents have to make decisions and live with them, unlike TV personalities they can’t just change their minds and move on.
The Tea Party does not need to be anchored to someone like that. So, while I don’t think God is a problem for the Tea Party, I do think Beck might be. He is just too strange.
Maybe they could see about getting someone like Franklin Graham to speak for them in the future. At least he is the real deal.
Terrye on August 31, 2010 at 5:50 AM
Restoring Honor and return to the Faith are parts of the same thing, although the expression of the Faith can and is different for each of us it tells us the same things.
Honor is personal and positive: something you do every single day of your life.
When you end a life of lies you are then called upon to make amends for living that life, and that is what any Faith gives you: the courage to sacrifice of yourself.
That is the road to Liberty, to Freedom for oneself.
It is personal Honor that we need to restore for ourselves, first, so we may then be able to help others from our own hearts and not take from our children and grand children. That does not start at the highest levels, it is not at government and Nations where Honor starts.
It starts with you.
ajacksonian on August 31, 2010 at 5:51 AM
When I say speak for them, I mean this strictly in terms of religion. I am not speaking of politics here, but if you want a preacher who can not be accused of being anything other than a servant of God, this might be the kind of person who would be less controversial and more believable.
Terrye on August 31, 2010 at 5:54 AM
I think this is true. But I also think that there are people out there who never lost their honor. Bush, Patraeus, Palin are all people who I believe have tried to live honorable lives. I don’t think the nation has lost its honor, it is still there, I just think it has lost its way.That happens from to time.
Terrye on August 31, 2010 at 5:57 AM
Obama builds a big tent — for Conservatives
WSJ
“I Can See November From My House.”
maverick muse on August 31, 2010 at 6:11 AM
Perhaps HONOR of itself requires public acknowledgment, unlike integrity which exists within whether or not others have the where with all to recognize it. In that sense, personal Honor of conservatives faces the ignorance in Washington that refuses to SERVE THE PEOPLE, insisting on RULING the people with Marxist whims, against constitutional rule of law. That is the work facing those with integrity.
maverick muse on August 31, 2010 at 6:18 AM
But when it comes to actual policies will people agree on what that means? I know a lot of people who get some sort of benefit whether it be social security, medicare, veterans, whatever and none of them think they are on the dole. All of them feel that they have earned whatever it is they get and when they think of government not serving the people, they always think of other people who are taking advantage of the system…never themselves. I think that will be where it gets difficult. People will always agree in principle, it is the details that derail movements.
Terrye on August 31, 2010 at 6:31 AM
How could we possibly “meet in unity”? You believe a baby is no more important than a mole.
Your head must hurt a lot.
Squiggy on August 31, 2010 at 6:31 AM
this fella does not understand what is going on. He thinks this weekend was about a thrill? Nope. He thinks there were no costs involved in this, ? nope. Maybe he’s finding that he has no angle from which to launch an attack, but there’ll be costs all the same. Beck himself admitted as much and this author needs to review the text of the speech and video. Back to school, son.
ted c on August 31, 2010 at 6:53 AM
As much as I hate to admit this, this is basically where I am. I’m not sure that Beck is a fraud, but I don’t think he’s at all like the way he presents himself to the world. Terrye’s description of him as a “showman” is a concise description of exactly the problem I have with him: I believe he’s always performing. When he pulls out the chalk board, when he starts crying, when he speaks in that sing-songy voice of his, I feel that it’s all being done for very specific effect and not because it’s his natural state of being and believing.
Contrast that with someone like Rush Limbaugh, who speaks from his heart and with powerful conviction, but never sounds either like he’s proselytizing or “anchoring” his show the way Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite did. It sounds like he’s an average guy sitting behind a microphone, alternately railing and enthusing about the things he cares about. In other words, he sounds real—his broadcasting “tricks,” to the degree they are tricks (the diaphragmmatic voice; the adoption of a specific lexicon of words, phrases, and nicknames; the tactical repeating of certain phrases at specific points to hammer home his points) are all externals. The same with Sarah Palin—people may criticize her voice and her speech patterns, but the underlying ideas are rock-solid and you never, ever doubt that she believes them. That’s why she and Limbaugh inspire true, abject fear in the hearts of liberals—the left know that they believe every word they ever say, and that is so attractive to so many people that the institutional lies on which American liberalism is based automatically looks as phony and insubstantial as it truly is in comparison.
But I don’t sense that same fear about Beck. The left dislikes his ideas and wants to discredit them, but they don’t seem to fear him the way they do Limbaugh, Palin, or Ronald Reagan—it’s as if they know they have to endure him because he will not last, even if many of his ideas are timeless. And this, I think, is true: Glenn seems to me to be a guy who found a persona that works for him (in the money-earning sense) and connects with people, but doesn’t necessarily connect with who he is inside. And the thing about this sort of acting job is that it’s difficult to maintain over long periods of time. The mask always has to slip eventually, because living a lie—especially in the public eye—24/7 is really hard. It’s why people like the Clintons, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, and Barack Obama, the Charlatan-in-Chief, start out sounding reasonable and like they really care and want to help you on the most intimate level of the soul, but are eventually revealed as selfish, power-mad idealogues: It’s who they always were, and eventually hiding it all the time just becomes too hard.
If I highly doubt that Beck belongs in their same destructive, hateful category, I have yet to see anything from him that suggests he is who he is as deeply as Palin, Limbaugh, and Reagan are/were. I feel like his TV and radio show, the “Restoring Honor” rally (much as I agreed with its precepts), and even interviews with him in other publications are more about optics and keeping up appearances than they are the distribution of popular ideas and deeply rooted personal truths and beliefs. I always know where Limbaugh, Palin, and Reagan stand—and, for that matter, people like Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank—because they are who they are openly. With Beck, I’m always left wondering, “Is that what he really believes, the way he really believes it?” It’s difficult—if not impossible—to marshal true power if the people you want to rule don’t know who you are. Barack Obama is finding this out right now. It wouldn’t surprise if Beck learns it sooner rather than later.
WesternActor on August 31, 2010 at 6:56 AM
Dislike George Will if you wish, but please recognize he is not an idiot, and he was carrying conservative water long when he was one of very few. I understand people thinking he’s an inside-the-beltway type, but I’d bet if you read him regularly you’d agree with him more than you disagree.
In any event, I have not seen Beck’s television show, and have heard him on the radio a few times. My impression is that he must be more disciplined on his television show than on radio–his radio show seems rather freewheeling, playtime with the other fellows, but he couldn’t do that on television if only because of time constraints.
DrMagnolias on August 31, 2010 at 7:01 AM
I know just what you mean. I do believe Rush is exactly who and what he says he is. But Beck? His willingness to jump on the pile and eviscerate Bush seemed like kicking a man when he was down to me and I just don’t see Rush doing that. I think Beck did it because he wanted to look as if he did not belong to anyone, he figured that would help his persona..never mind the fairness of it all. And a lot of people on the right do not care because he goes after Obama too, but I am just not sure that he will not turn on the right anytime it suits him.
I think the Tea Party movement has the ability to touch the lives of all sorts of people of different faiths and backgrounds and I am afraid that if it becomes too closely associated with Beck it will be diminished in the long run.
Terrye on August 31, 2010 at 7:04 AM
OT: gibbsy on morning joe, mika asked him if dear leader will give W credit tonight…gibbsy skirted that answer big time…
cmsinaz on August 31, 2010 at 7:22 AM
That Christians should not be in politics is the biggest lie that the liberals have been able to convince people of over the last 50 years. Christians should be in politics, because they have a belief systems that teaches responsibility, honesty and compassion.
flytier on August 31, 2010 at 7:32 AM
Wow … either you really don’t watch or listen to Beck, or your ability to judge people is way off.
You say you always know where Palin stands yet Beck is one of Palin’s confidants. They both share the same view that America must return to it’s moral and spiritual foundation to even have a chance.
Why would you think Palin would speak at 8/28 if Beck was just some “showman”?
I was at 8/28. The speakers Beck had there now risk attack and venom from the left for daring to appear side by side with Beck. Alveda King, MLK’s niece spoke there and has been under assault for daring to leave the democrat plantation.
All these people know something about Beck you don’t.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 7:47 AM
Like I said above … only someone who doesn’t actually watch or listen to Beck would make a statment like that. The guy literally spent a fortune putting on two events, one at the Kennedy Center on 8/27 and the one on 8/28.
If he’s not sincere in his efforts he wouldn’t have spent a dime.
He raised over 5 million dollars for the Special Operation Warriors Foundation on Saturday. 5 million dollars for the families of special operations warriors killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 7:53 AM
You do not understand the concept of natural law do you? Gay marriage and abortion are in direct contradiction to laws of God. That is why the groups that support those unnatural “laws” ally themselves with the enemies of God – Marxists.
True_King on August 31, 2010 at 8:14 AM
Interesting analysis about Beck – but I can imaginine some of his fans will not be able to finish the article. Pity.
http://www.tnr.com/article/77299/beck-top
Bradky on August 31, 2010 at 8:25 AM
Watch it. DVR it. You’re in for a treat. Beck’s research team does impeccable work.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 8:26 AM
Why would anyone want to read it, much less finish it? It’s a standard left hit piece. They can’t even bring themselves to admit the crowd size.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 8:31 AM
My husband, daughter, and I were at the rally on Saturday. Other than the heat (we’re delicate flowers in the sun), we enjoyed it greatly – and I’m not religious personally at all. Beck’s message was something I wanted my daughter to hear – mostly, that charity comes from within.
I know I’m in a super minority, with my non-theism and conservative beliefs, but I also know that the majority of this country relies on Christian values – whether they know it or not. People shall ignore that at their own peril.
Anna on August 31, 2010 at 8:32 AM
So you didn’t read it and can make an informed opinion about the article. How curious.
Bradky on August 31, 2010 at 8:34 AM
I’m an Aspie too, but not diagnosed until I was older. My youngest son has sensory issues, and it’s been a bit of a struggle getting him ready for school. Even if I had known that I would have trouble with one of my children, I’d never even think about anything other than educating myself on how to care for that child. All kids are awesome, those with special needs are awesome too! And quirks keep us on our toes. : )
Anna on August 31, 2010 at 8:39 AM
I scanned it. That’s all one needs to do to understand the thrust of the article.
You agree with the article I take it?
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 8:39 AM
They got Alveda King’s name wrong in that article. Very hard to take seriously after that – and yes, I read the whole thing.
Anna on August 31, 2010 at 8:41 AM
How about that flyover at the beginning of the program? We were standing at the WWII memorial, dead center when they flew right over us.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 8:41 AM
There are very few articles or op-eds I accept or believe outright. But I’m not afraid to see what others are thinking and how they view things. The focus on Beck’s career is factual and the conclusions are interesting.
Bradky on August 31, 2010 at 8:43 AM
We missed the beginning – stuck in the bowels of the DC Metro. My daughter was devastated that we missed Sarah speak – Sarah is one of my little girl’s heroes. We started off by the WWII memorial, ended up in the field to the left of it. Never saw that many people in my life, and I was there for 9/12 last year.
Anna on August 31, 2010 at 8:45 AM
Well, I think there are some videos on youtube. Beck talked about it yesterday.
It was truly awesome. The program had just started and there was music playing, everyone was quiet and suddenly down from the Washington Monument a flock of geese in a V formation flew dead center down the reflecting pool. It was just perfect timing.
We wanted to take the Metro from Franconia but saw the line and grabbed a cab. Our best move of the day.
Glad you went.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 8:51 AM
It;s always good to read all sides just to know what they’re thinking if nothing else, but most left writers are too predictable, and too rigid to stray far from the herd. They almost always revert to attack and smear mode when they feel threatened.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 8:53 AM
But wait, I thought the mere SUGGESTION of this was enough to torpedo Mitch Daniels’ possible presidential aspirations with conservatives.
Vyce on August 31, 2010 at 9:22 AM
My husband and I among the few people around who have such basic cable that we get about ten channels (I think most people believe we’re extinct). Unfortunately, FOX isn’t one of those channels. I actually would love to watch his show, but we don’t really watch television, and it’s hard to justify the big increase in expense for a single show. From the mention he’s given it on his radio show, I have the idea it’s really good.
DrMagnolias on August 31, 2010 at 9:27 AM
Beck has the platform in his tv show to announce to all interested Americans, whether they think of themselves as Tea Partiers or not, that we can come together in a large number in one place, at one time and raise our voices for our country. We know the politicians don’t listen but will watch from behind closed curtains and will be very afraid. Even the president was dismissive. The civil rights of We the People is what Beck is trying to recapture as part of the conservative movement, not the black civil rights movement of Sharpton.
Kissmygrits on August 31, 2010 at 9:33 AM
NO it wouldn’t unless it was being uttered sarcastically.
Dr Evil on August 31, 2010 at 9:51 AM
You can say that again! Screw the religious righteous on here who flaming you Ann. You’re right on point.
Conservatives can choose to save this nation by rescuing our economy and defending ourselves or we can choose to fall back on the easy religious votes by fighting the never-ending and self-destructive culture wars.
MJBrutus on August 31, 2010 at 9:59 AM
You don’t get it. All Beck is saying is we need to restore individual honor and integrity by restoring our individual faith in God. He knows not everyone believes, but he knows even those who don’t believe can restore honor and integrity in themselves. Only when we hold ourselves to a higher standard can we expect to hold others accountable.
Stop trying to read religion this and religion that into everything. This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian principles … not religion.
darwin on August 31, 2010 at 10:25 AM
.
I still support Beck in most of his positions (he tends to be a bit too conspiratorial though). Before I make my point however, if you haven’t seen this video of the Black Tea Partiers on the mall steps at Glenn Becks rally taking on a fellow brother who is liberal, and then taking on a screaming liberal, you must see it:
Okay, my main reason for posting a link to a chapter of my book. Obviously, since the “book” is on line it is free and I make no money from it other than the satisfaction of knowing #1, my thoughts are out there, and #2, that people can learn and delineate between worldviews and have a model to critique them. Glenn Beck wants to get back to the Judeo-Christian mores. Fine, me too. But Glenn is a polytheist. Nothing in the Judeo-Christian worldview comports to his core religious beliefs.
Mind you, I love when people [insert here: atheists, polytheists, pantheists, and the like] call our country back to its founding principles. However, one must still know when Glenn Beck says he is a son of God, this tends to be a bit more “messianic” than when a Christian says we are adopted as sons through His Son. Here are a few scanned pages of an actual seminary level book. There are two editions, both say the same thing in regards to the LDS understanding of “gods” attributes (1976, and 1992):
.
papa_giorgio on August 31, 2010 at 10:37 AM
.
I apologize. I linked to the wrong chapter in my book. That chapter is good, but useless when speaking about the differences between the historical Christian faith and that of the Mormon faith:
Again, I apologize for putting the wrong link in my above comment.
.
papa_giorgio on August 31, 2010 at 10:53 AM
I am a nonbeliever and I am so very on board with Glenn Beck.
Our nation is in a pitifully sick state a little “coming. To Jesus” will be a good thing.
esnap on August 31, 2010 at 11:39 AM
You know, I thought I heard that but I was uncertain because it was so out of character. If someone clipped that into a video it would be article-worthy in itself.
The problem will be the weaning. If you feed a stray dog for a month and then stop, he will come to your door and say where the hell’s my food.
slickwillie2001 on August 31, 2010 at 1:38 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2