PrisonPlanet Forum
May 25, 2013, 07:59:50 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Absolute 100% proof Glenn Beck is Fed Agent to infiltrate patriot movement  (Read 9064 times)
bigron
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,124


RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2012


« Reply #80 on: April 20, 2010, 04:39:06 AM »

Sarah Palin Seems to Think Founding Fathers Were Godless Socialists

Posted By stevebenen On April 19, 2010 @ 10:25 am In Uncategorized | 21 Comments

This post originally appeared on Washington Monthly.

THE THEOCRATIC WING OF THE GOP…. A certain former half-term governor appears to be drifting even further away from the American mainstream. Over the weekend, appearing at an evangelical Christian women’s conference in Louisville, Sarah Palin rejected the very idea of separation of church and state, a bedrock principle of American democracy.


She asked for the women — who greeted her with an enthusiastic standing ovation — to provide a “prayer shield” to strengthen her against what she said was “deception” in the media.

She denounced this week’s Wisconsin federal court ruling that government observance of a National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional — which the crowd joined in booing. She asserted that America needs to get back to its Christian roots and rejected any notion that “God should be separated from the state.”

Palin added that she was outraged when President Obama said that “America isn’t a Christian nation.”

The amusing aspect of this is the notion that the United States would return to its roots with support for National Day of Prayer observances. That’s backwards — Thomas Jefferson and James Madison explicitly rejected state-sponsored prayer days. I’ll look forward to the conservative explanation of how the Founding Fathers were godless socialists.

I also can’t wait to hear how right-wing voices who want smaller government believe it’s appropriate for the federal government to issue decrees encouraging private American citizens to engage in worship.

But far less amusing is the fact that Palin and others of her radical ilk reject any notion that “God should be separated from the state.” It’s the 21st century, for crying out loud. There are some countries that endorse Palin’s worldview and intermix God and government — Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan under Taliban rule come to mind — but they’re generally not countries the United States tries to emulate.

The separation of church and state has long been a concept that all Americans could embrace, and has served as a model for nations around the world to follow. For Palin to publicly denounce this bedrock American principle suggests she might actually be getting worse.

Postscript: As for Palin’s outrage over the president acknowledging that we’re not “a Christian nation,” Obama’s entirely correct:  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_04/017635.php


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from SpeakEasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy

URL to article: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/04/19/sarah-palin-seems-to-think-founding-fathers-were-godless-socialists/

Logged
citizenx
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,086


« Reply #81 on: April 20, 2010, 05:06:13 AM »

Well, definitely not socialists, but many of the "founding fathers" were Deists at best, and many may have actively hid their outright unbelief which would most certainly have been somewhat unspeakable at the time, especially in the somewhat provincial atmosphere of the colonies.  Even Hume was all but completely shunned for his outright atheism in the relatively "enlightened" Edinburgh at the time. There was even a myth that the Devil would appear at his tomb, after his death.

Paine, however, made no secret of the fact that he was in no way a "Christian" and his writings make clear he was neither a heterodox or even heretical Christian in any sense.

Attempts to use the founding fathers to justify fundamentalist theocracy or theonomy are beyond intellectually disingenuous.
Logged
phosphene
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,826



« Reply #82 on: April 20, 2010, 05:38:39 AM »

im def no constitutional expert, but i think she's right. theres nothin in the constitution about separating church and state. Nothin in there about state-run schools either. the founding fathers prob left all that out because they realized it was none of the fed government's business.
Logged

"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."--Joshua
citizenx
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,086


« Reply #83 on: April 20, 2010, 06:36:52 AM »

What part of "no established church" do you not understand?

I do agree the federal government needn't be involved in the day-to-day operation of schools, that ought to be something managed at the level of the community.  There's no strong argument for state involvement in the managing of schools either, as a matter of fact.

So, I think you're half right, and I think Palin is dead wrong.
Logged
citizenx
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,086


« Reply #84 on: April 20, 2010, 06:56:26 AM »

On another note entirely, Paine, though he was far from being a socialist avant la lettre did argue for a public pension system, something very like social security.  So, if believing in the need for some sort of "social security" system makes one a socialist, Paine was arguably a socialist of a sort.
Logged
Damascus
Guest
« Reply #85 on: April 20, 2010, 07:41:40 AM »

Separation of church and state is there to ensure that there is not a State religion, specifically for our republic to become a religious oligarchy. The state cannot endorse a religion, that being said they should not be encroaching in our personal lives either. I have a great problem with saying America is a "Christian nation" rather then a "nation that is a majority Christian"(the later I have no problem with). By saying we are a "Cristian nation" you are endorsing a "state religion". So which specific sect of Christianity do you think everyone else should be forced to worship? What about Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists? Should they GTFO? You think you are part of that system, but what if they then use that to put in the NWO elitist Gaia religion as the state religion. Be careful what you wish for. Roll Eyes
Logged
Geolibertarian
Global Moderator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,869


9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org


« Reply #86 on: April 20, 2010, 07:45:27 AM »

im def no constitutional expert, but i think she's right. theres nothin in the constitution about separating church and state. Nothin in there about state-run schools either.

But there's also nothing in there about "separating" school and state. Thus, by your reasoning, that alone means there's nothing unconstitutional about federal involvement in education.

The self-serving notion that the 10th Amendment applies to one issue but not another is clearly rooted in the desire to have it "both ways."

If certain people wish to employ such an obvious double standard, they are of course free to do so; but it sure would be nice if they would be honest, for a change, that that's what they're doing.

http://www.theocracywatch.org/separation_church_state2.htm
Logged

"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0
bigron
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,124


RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2012


« Reply #87 on: April 21, 2010, 01:56:08 PM »

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 21, 2010
11:00 AM
 CONTACT: Media Matters for America [1]
Jess Levin (202) 772-8162
jlevin@mediamatters.org
 

Fox's 300

Media Matters report shows network rallying for GOP in at least 300 instances



WASHINGTON - April 21 - Last week, Sean Hannity was pulled [2] from hosting his show from a tea party fundraiser, and today, Media Matters for America released a report [3] detailing how Fox News personalities in recent years have endorsed, raised money, or campaigned for Republican candidates or causes, or against Democratic candidates or causes, in more than 300 instances in at least 49 states.

"Fox's ethics crisis has gone nuclear," said Eric Burns, President of Media Matters. "In spite of their claim to be 'fair and balanced,' Fox has shown a startling pattern of complicity in letting its hosts and contributors use its network affiliation to promote and fundraise for Republican causes and candidates."

Burns continued: "Rupert Murdoch said he didn't believe it would be appropriate for Fox to support a political party. Try saying that 300 times fast."

BACKGROUND:

Though Rupert Murdoch recently said [4] he didn't think Fox should be supporting the tea party or any other party, Media Matters has documented [3] at least 300 examples of Fox News hosts and contributors endorsing, raising money, and campaigning for Republican candidates or causes. Republican parties and officials have routinely touted these personalities' affiliations with Fox News to sell and promote their events.

•Fox News contributor Karl Rove has participated in or is scheduled to participate in 23 fundraisers for Republican candidates and causes and has given $14,000 to Republican candidates since signing on with the network.
•Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich has participated in or is scheduled to participate in at least 16 Republican fundraisers and gatherings and has endorsed Republican candidates. Additionally, he serves as a campaign adviser to a Republican campaign and is chairman of American Solutions for Winning the Future, a 527 that has raised more than $14 million in the 2010 election cycle.
•Fox News host Mike Huckabee's political action committee, HuckPAC, has endorsed and given money to numerous Republican candidates. Huckabee has recently participated in or is scheduled to participate in at least seven Republican fundraisers and events.
•Fox News contributor Dick Morris regularly endorses and fundraises for Republican candidates; he has also used his Fox News employment to urge viewers to contribute to or help campaigns that advocate on behalf of Republican causes or against Democratic officials and candidates.
•Fox News contributor and host Sarah Palin has, since joining the network, endorsed numerous Republican candidates and has appeared at six Republican events. Her PAC has raised at least $2.5 million through the first quarter of 2010 and has given $8,500 to Republican candidates and causes.
•Fox News contributor Rick Santorum's PAC raised at least $1.5 million and has donated to at least 35 Republican candidates and causes during the current 2009-2010 election cycle. He has participated in at least eight Republican fundraisers and events and reportedly has planned trips to at least nine states to speak to Republican groups or campaign for Republican candidates.
•Fox News host Glenn Beck offered to host a fundraiser for Rep. Michele Bachmann.
•Fox News host Sean Hannity has participated in three fundraisers for Republicans and has donated money to a Republican candidate.
•Fox Business Vice President and Your World host Neil Cavuto has given money to former President George W. Bush.
•Fox News host Oliver North has participated in at least three Republican fundraising events and has contributed $2,000 to Republican candidates and causes.
•Fox Business host Eric Bolling has endorsed Republicans on at least three occasions.
•Fox News contributor John Bolton has fundraised and appeared at four recent Republican events.
•Fox News contributor Fred Barnes has spoken at Republican fundraisers on at least two occasions.
•Fox News contributor Dana Perino has participated in at least three Republican events.
•Fox News judicial analyst and Fox News Radio co-host Andrew Napolitano endorsed Pennsylvania Senate candidate Pat Toomey and has appeared at fundraisers for Acadiana Republican Women and Rep. Ron Paul.
•Fox News contributor Tammy Bruce has donated $10,000 to Republican candidates or causes. 
•Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin has appeared at Republican fundraisers on at least two occasions.
•Fox News contributor Monica Crowley is scheduled to be the master of ceremonies for a fundraising dinner "to support" "conservative Republican veterans running for Congress."
•Fox News contributor David Hunt appeared at several fundraisers for Republican congressional candidate Jim Lee (SC).
•Fox News national security expert and FoxNews.com host KT McFarland participated in a Santa Fe County Republican Party fundraiser.
For more information, please see:

REPORT: Fox Newsers rally for GOP in more than 300 instances and in nearly every state [3]

###

Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.

Media Matters for America Links: Homepage [1]Media Matters (Press Center) [5]Media Matters (Action Center) [6]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org

URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/04/21-2
Logged
bigron
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,124


RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2012


« Reply #88 on: April 23, 2010, 12:32:21 PM »

The Weird Theology of Glenn Beck and His Cohorts

The New Christian Right and Christianity


By Robert Fantina

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25299.htm

April 22, 2010 "Counterpunch" -- It is an unfortunate truth that organizations ranging from the mildly amusing to the extremely dangerous have all co-opted the term ‘Christian.’  Christian Right, Christian Coalition, etc., all use the term without, apparently, knowing what it means. It has reached a point where even Christians cringe when they hear the word in political commentary.
A few examples will suffice.

There is currently a case working its way to the Supreme Court involving the Christian Legal Society chapter at Hastings, a branch of the University of California. Hastings stopped funding this organization in 2004, when the society required its members to sign a statement of faith, and excluded all those who would not do so. Also excluded automatically are homosexuals. 
The Christian Coalition, on its website, has ‘Action Alerts,’ opportunities for its adherents to further the causes it espouses. As of April 19, 2010, two of the top three ‘Action Alerts’ pertain to opposing health care (‘Last Chance to Say ‘NO’ to Healthcare Takeover;’ ‘Critical House Vote Coming up on Obamacare’), and the third to discrimination against gays and lesbians (‘Help us Defend ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’).
Sarah Palin, the current darling of the Christian right, preaches abstinence as the most effective sex education, says that U.S. military “is a source for good throughout the world,” and, during her embarrassing campaign for vice-president, talked about how God blessed the U.S. with oil.
Glenn Beck, also wildly popular with the so-called Christian right, has said that people should leave their churches if those churches preach social justice. 
It might now be worthwhile to appeal to the Bible, to see, as closely as possible, how Jesus Christ, whom these worthies purport to follow, either did, or might have, responded in the areas mentioned above.

The Pharisees and Sadducees, learned religious and political leaders at the time of Christ, were shocked that he associated with ‘sinners’ and society’s outcasts. One such ‘sinner’ was the woman caught in adultery. Rather than accuse her, he accused her accusers. “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (John 8; v. 7). When her accusers slunk away in humiliation, he spoke tenderly to her, and offered his divine forgiveness. “Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” (John 8; vs. 10 -11).

Also outcast from society were lepers. They begged from afar, but were not permitted contact with family or friends; their entire community consisted only of other lepers. Jesus did not shun them, but healed them.” And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed” (Matthew 8; vs. 2 – 3).

 Other beggars, some blind from birth, some lame, deaf or mute, approached him, and were not rejected. He did not, like some right wing ‘Christians’ did during the health care debate, shout them down, or spit on them. Rather, he brought them to him, and healed them.

The christian right (the lower-case ‘c’ is not a typographical error; this writer is seeking some way of distinguishing those who demonstrate true Christian values from those who use the name but lack the values) is often angry; Mrs. Palin has recommended that they all reload, perhaps hoping for another ‘unifying’ event like the Kennedy assassination almost 50 years ago. During the 2008 presidential campaign, even the Republican presidential candidate, the elderly, doddering Senator John McCain, could not stop people at his rallies from venting their rage and racism, calling then candidate Senator Barack Obama a terrorist and a child-killer, and calling for his death.

When did Jesus get angry? There are few, but notable, recorded evidences of his anger in the Bible. One situation was when calling out the learned scribes and Pharisees, for their hypocrisy. “But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation” (Matthew 23; vs. 13 – 14).

 Might he not have something to say about today’s hypocrites, among whom are right-wing politicians who are forever quoting the Bible, attending prayer breakfasts and disdaining all ‘sinners,’ at the same time that they are having extra-marital affairs? Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina, telling the world that he was hiking down the Appalachian trail, when in actuality he was flying to his mistress’s bed in Argentina, and Senator John Ensign of Nevada, sleeping with his top aid’s wife, come to mind. And can one possibly forget Newt Gingrich? Mr. Gingrich was calling for the impeachment of Democrat Bill Clinton, wringing his righteous, family-values hands over the horror and sin of Mr. Clinton’s extra-marital affair with Monica Lewinsky, at the same time that Mr. Gingrich was sleeping in both his wife’s and his mistress’s beds.

Jesus Christ also became angry when finding merchants in the Temple; they had, he said, made his house a den of thieves. He forcefully and physically ejected those who had done so. “And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, and said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves”  (Matthew 21; vs. 12 – 13).

Based on this, one might logically consider that Jesus Christ was not as enamored with the almighty dollar as his alleged followers today appear to be.  One of their more modern heroes, former President George Bush, provided huge tax breaks to the nation’s wealthiest citizens.  Without exception, today’s christian right opposes President Obama’s efforts to let those tax benefits expire.

And what of Mr. Beck, urging Christians to leave their churches if they encourage social justice? Mr. Beck is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (possibly the only thing he has in common with this writer). Two LDS scholars, quoted in the New York Times on March 11, weighed in on Mr. Beck’s bizarre remark:

Kent P. Jackson, associate dean of religion at Brigham Young University, said this: “My own experience as a believing Latter-day Saint over the course of 60 years is that I have seen social justice in practice in every L.D.S. congregation I’ve been in. People endeavor with all of our frailties and shortcomings to love one another and to lift up other people. So if that’s Beck’s definition of social justice, he and I are definitely not on the same team.” 
Philip Barlow, the Arrington Professor of Mormon History and Culture at Utah State University, further stressed the point: “One way to read the Book of Mormon is that it’s a vast tract on social justice. It’s ubiquitous in the Book of Mormon to have the prophetic figures, much like in the Hebrew Bible, calling out those who are insensitive to injustices. A lot of Latter-day Saints would think that Beck was asking them to leave their own church.
Mr. Barlow also pointed out that just this year, the Church issued a new ‘Handbook of Instructions’ to Church leaders. A major revision was adding a fourth layer to the three-fold mission of the Church. That added mission is simply this: care for the poor.

One might say that minor, anecdotal evidence has been presented here. In response, this writer invites these christian zealots to show him where Jesus Christ ever opposed helping anyone in need. At what point did he disdain the lonely? Where in the Bible is it recorded that he held himself aloof from any common sinner? Where did he court the favor of the rich, and turn his back upon the poor? Yes, he harshly criticized the hypocrisy of the scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees, but while he condemned any sin, he was unfailingly warm and loving to the sinner.

And that, of course, brings up yet another problem with the christian right. In Luke 6: v. 37, Jesus is quoted thusly: “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.” That statement seems to imply strongly that judgment is left for someone other than the Sarah Palins of the world. For Christians, mankind’s role, it seems, is to follow the teaching and example of Jesus Christ, and leave the determination of sin to him alone.

This writer understands, but also occasionally finds reason to resent, criticism of Christianity and Christians, when it is directed against all who proclaim to be Christians. There is nothing in the Bible to support Christianity as intolerant, judgmental, violent, fearful and paranoid. Rather, the example of the master teacher, revered by Christians as the Savior and Redeemer, shows only love, tolerance, gentleness and acceptance. There seems to be little support for the angry, hysterical ravings of the christian right to be found anywhere in the scriptures.

Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006. 

   
Logged
sharpsteve
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,358



WWW
« Reply #89 on: April 23, 2010, 02:09:25 PM »

Beck explains "the plan that [God] would have me articulate, I think, to you"*
From the April 20 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' Glenn Beck Program:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201004200020

Glenn Beck: the Televangelist Con Man Selling God's Plan for America
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/glenn-beck-the-televangel_b_546417.html

During yesterday's Glenn Beck radio show, Beck delivered a 10-minute monologue in which he hit all of his phony-baloney touchstones -- some of them, as I've been writing for the last several weeks, are dangerous and some are simply ridiculous. But primarily, Beck was in full televangelist mode about God and something about a "plan" and, in the process, he dovetailed into a little McCarthyism and, as usual, a little historical revisionism. He even shrunk into a defensive bit refuting the accusations that he's a faker who's conning his audience.

Now, before you listen to this epic clip courtesy of Media Matters, I should warn you to turn down your speakers, because the over-the-top levels of audio compression and EQ on Beck's voice (say nothing of the half-dozen or so Beck sound-alikes who also occupy his studio) will absolutely blow out your speakers.

Most radio stations employ some sort of digital processing to make the host or disc jockey sound more resonant, but I've never heard a talk show with this much compression. Clearly, the BOOM! is there to enhance Beck's voice in a way that augments his level of psychological persuasion -- the deeper, diaphragm-vibrating low end increases the physical connection between Beck and his audience. A more subconscious aspect of his scam.

The overarching theme of this monologue is that God is speaking directly to Glenn Beck and giving him the plan. It's classic televangelism, which is commonly seen as nothing more than an exploitation of religious naiveté with the goal of making the televangelist rich. Listen to me. I have the answers. Because God is speaking to me. So give generously if you want to hear what God's plan is.

Right off the bat, there's the very recognizable televangelist delivery. You'll notice the characteristic melodrama and pathos -- the theatrical tone of voice. The pregnant pauses, the slight quiver in the voice and, as I mentioned, the artificially-enhanced resonance. These are all acting techniques we recognize from infamous televangelists like Oral Roberts, Jim Bakker, Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart -- not to mention the even more nefarious Benny Hinn faith healer school of persuasive speaking and gimmickry.

As for the content, it's always simultaneously vague and grandiose. He describes a lot of his crazy theories, which we often see illustrated as fact on his chalk board, as things that he's "felt but didn't understand." Or as Stephen Colbert once said, "Anyone can read the news to you. I promise to feel the news at you."

"It's darkness and I can just feel it coming," he says. What's coming? We don't know. He didn't say, other than it has to do with a plan and some form of "darkness." But we ought to look for the answer. To what question? Is "darkness" a question? And where do we look? We ask God, of course.

Naturally, this intentionally blurry Beck-inspired Question Time with God will yield all varieties of answers from all varieties of people based on their wide varieties of life experiences, values and biases. Never mind all of that, though, because whatever God says to you personally (okeedokee) is irrelevant because the plan, Beck says, is "hard for people to understand." But don't worry about trying to suss it out. Glenn Beck has the answer. God has delivered unto him The Plan:

    The problem is that God is giving The Plan, I think, to me [...] I think the plan that the Lord would have us follow is hard for people to understand. But I'm telling you, here's what I feel with everything in me.

Evidently, God is personally writing material for Glenn Beck. Yet another staff member writing Beck's stuff for him. There's ghost writer Kevin Balphe (not credited on Beck's book covers), there's a staff of writers and researchers, there's the several on-air co-hosts who sound exactly like Beck and then... there's God. All working in cubicles at Mercury Radio Arts. I wonder if God has to write His name on His Cobb salads in the staff fridge, or if staffers know it's God's Cobb salad because of the cherubim hovering around it.

But then, he doesn't say what this God-written plan is. Unless it's his "The Plan" from last week's series of TV shows, which was nothing more than Beck going through the list of cabinet-level departments and simply eliminating them indiscriminately, with a little help from Arthur Laffer, by the way. Genius! We just don't know what the plan is. Ask God. When He's not writing new acronyms for the chalk board.

At this point in the segment, however, Beck slides off into a tangent about how he used to be just "an entertainer," and now he's not. Clearly a self-conscious, back-pedaling response to his all-too-revealing "I don't give a flying crap about political process" quote from the recent Forbes profile. Another window into Beck's scam.

Anyway, so after leaving this defensive crouch, he circles back around and tells us that it's all about "faith." We should just have faith in what Glenn Beck is telling us about God's plan -- irrespective of reality. We feel it, therefore it is.

Now, see if you can figure this one out. Beck says in his monologue, "Do not accept coincidence in your life. Look for the answers of your life -- look for your answers in your life through coincidence. Because there's no such thing as coincidence." It sounds as though he's saying, there's no such thing as coincidence, but look for the answers in your life through coincidence. Okay, so is there coincidence or not?

Let's assume for now that Beck is anti-coincidence. In other words, the crazy connections he scribbles on his chalk board (the misspelled OLIGARHY acronym, for example) have to be true because there's no such thing as wild supposition and God is speaking the truth to him personally. There's no such thing as coincidence. Therefore if someone in the Obama administration mentions the name "Mao" in the context of a joke, he or she is obviously a communist, which, in turn, makes the president a communist, which, in turn, means there's a communist plot to take over America, which, in turn, means that we should all buy gold from Goldline in preparation for the coming barter economy. Because, you know, there are no coincidences. Full Joe McCarthy at 11 with more crazy and even less actual evidence.

This is all intertwined with the televangelist Call to Action. In Beck's words: "now is the time," "will you pick up the mantle?" and "your God will ask you: what did you do?" He also asks people to pray for him, "I beg of you to pray for clarity on my part." Because it's really all about him. Pray for Glenn Beck. And by the way, when you're not praying for him, fork over $75 a year for his "Insider Extreme" website (It's Glenn Beck! To the extreme!), or $20 for one of his conveyor-belt, staff-written books. But I digress. The only path to salvation, televangelists and faith healers say, is to give. Give money. Give prayers. To them. In Beck's case, he's added the political layer to the equation which, if ultimately successful, will financially benefit Beck and his peers in the wealthiest one percent.

And in between his wild delusions of grandeur, Beck recommends what amounts to faith-based activism inspired by both God and Gut, rather than empirical and objective reality. And so it's no wonder that he, like Sarah Palin, is passing off this utterly false history that the Framers of the Constitution never intended a separation of Church and State. Consequently, it's okay to propose and pass new laws based entirely on faith. This couldn't be more ridiculous. There are dozens of quotes refuting the Beck/Palin lie, including the separation clause of the First Amendment and the objective fact that many of the primary Founders were deists and products of the Enlightenment, but here are two quotes from the Framer of all Framers of the Constitution, James Madison:

    "Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion & Gov't in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history." (Detached Memoranda, circa 1820)

    "Having always regarded the practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government as essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, I could not have otherwise discharged my duty on the occasion which presented itself." (Letter to Baptist Churches in North Carolina, June 3, 1811)

Madison knew that the door swings both ways. If we allow religious dogma to interfere with secular law, then secular law is capable of interfering with religious dogma. Put another way: if religious zealots successfully blur the line between what happens in the pulpit and what happens in Congress, then it's that much easier for Congress to tax and regulate what happens in the pulpit. Put yet another way: be careful what you wish for, Beck and Palin.

There's no denying that Glenn Beck is nothing if not a masterful performer. He's talented, but at the same time, he's transparently derivative. Glenn Beck is, at once, capable of borrowing the most effectively persuasive techniques available in order to manipulate his audience, and he's gifted enough to pull it off. But what are the consequences? Like it or not, he's a major player and activator right now and so he's achieved, for his part, a gravitational field that pulls upon the trajectory of American political discourse. That makes his role a serious one. One with consequences. He's pumping the discourse with nonsense, false history and pure coincidence while also resurrecting McCarthy style communist witch hunts.

Glenn Beck is a political faith healer. And the sooner his viewers recognize the scam, the better off they'll be.

Oh, and it turns out that all this talk of "the plan" appears to be nothing more than a way to plug a book -- over and over and over again. Specifically, Glenn Beck's latest book just happens to be titled The Plan. Coincidence?
Logged

phosphene
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,826



« Reply #90 on: April 28, 2010, 12:00:03 AM »

But there's also nothing in there about "separating" school and state. Thus, by your reasoning, that alone means there's nothing unconstitutional about federal involvement in education.

The self-serving notion that the 10th Amendment applies to one issue but not another is clearly rooted in the desire to have it "both ways."

If certain people wish to employ such an obvious double standard, they are of course free to do so; but it sure would be nice if they would be honest, for a change, that that's what they're doing.

http://www.theocracywatch.org/separation_church_state2.htm

If the Constitution is essentially a list of limitations on the federal gov, then anything NOT on that list, is OUT of their jurisdiction. So, in theory, the federal gov is violating their own constitution by meddling in jurisdictions they have no authority over(churches,schools). Some people even go as far as to assert that the Fed gov's jurisdiction is limited to washington dc. But, asserting that the federal gov has jurisdiction over everything NOT listed in the constitution, is the self-serving double standard.

And in the end, it's not even a constitution issue at all. Because private contracts can trump the constitution, and even your own inalienable rights(non disclosure agreement). The states borrow tons and tons of federal reserve notes from the feds. thats how the feds obtain their jurisdiction and get around constitutional limitations. borrower is servant to the lender.
Logged

"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."--Joshua
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!