Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » This Is Not MLK’s Dream

This Is Not MLK’s Dream

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

When Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. made his famous “I have a Dream” speech 47 years ago, he did it before a large and diverse audience full of both white and black faces, all united behind the cause of racial equality and equal opportunity for all Americans just because they were Americans, regardless of political, ethnic or social divisions. Today, while watching C-SPAN I saw the descendants of those who witnessed and even participated in King’s march on Washington gather in two largely segregated groups in an ironic segregation of the failure of King’s vision for our nation.




At the south end of the national mall, in the location where King spoke, there gathered a huge audience which was mostly white and middle and working class. They were enraged and driven to activism by the realization that the dream which Dr. King wanted white America to share with black America was now being taken away from both groups. At the call of a confused and clownlike fanatic with more media access than good sense, they came together to fumble for a shared expression of the powerlessness and frustration they feel when faced with a government running out of control and a nation wrecked on the shoals of greed and institutionalized corruption. There was far too much talk of God and Honor and other abstractions and too little talk about real solutions to the nation’s problems.

Not far away, at historic Dunbar High School, there were no good solutions to be found either. Before a small and unenthusiastic crowd which was uniformly dark skinned and had been bussed in by the SEIU, the AFT and the NEA, speaker after speaker repeated unionist slogans and socialist rhetoric with lukewarm response from the audience who had apparently been paid to show up but not to applaud. Unlike Dr. King’s spontaneous gathering of the people, this was a contrived event funded and manufactured by powerful special interest groups who have seized control of the government and promote an inhumane and exploitative ideology.

The contrast between the two rallies was striking.

Beck’s “Restoring Honor” event was enormous, far beyond anything I would have expected. Estimates of the crowd size place it well over 500,000 people, more than double the turnout for King’s original rally. In comparison Reverend Al Sharpton’s “Reclaim the Dream” event had a small and unenthusiastic turnout which may have barely topped 10,000, though comments from the podium suggested that the unions were still bussing in participants even as the original crowd was losing interest and wandering away during Sharpton’s speech.

The Beck event was largely apolitical. In fact, I found it troubling how heavily religious it was, with extensive references to Mormon symbolism and creepy religious figures spending time talking about moral values and vaguely threatening references to rechristianizing America. The most political speech came from former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, but most of the speakers were pushing a religious message, including some black preachers who had marched with King and his neice Alveda King. The union-sponsored event was quite different. Everything was political and the preachers who appeared were among the most radical of the speakers. It was all about blaming Bush and asserting political dominance for unions and activist groups.

At the Lincoln Memorial Beck’s followers were dressed normally and mostly not carrying signs. They were hot but enthusiastic and engaged, though I can’t figure out how most of them could see or hear anything at all given the size of the crowd. Much of the crowd at Dunbar High School showed up in uniform, wearing SEIU provided t-shirts and obediently participating in displays of support, but seeming quite disengaged from the speakers, some of whom became quite frustrated at the lack of response from the crowd.

Frankly, the Beck rally bored the hell out of me. Aside from a creepy bit at the beginning with some blatant token Jews and Native Americans and a bizarre preacher who seemed to e some sort of dualistic or pantheistic heretic with a speech impediment, the only part which kept my attention was Palin’s speech. I wanted more politics and less moralizing. Too much flag-waving and religiosity and a lack of content left me uninterested.

The “Reclaim the Dream” rally kept me riveted because of the obvious anger, hate and frustration on display. It was like looking at the moment where a populist movement achieves victory and begins the transition to despotism and oppression. All they needed was Hugo Chavez on the stage, or maybe not since several of their speakers did a fair but unintentional impression of him.

The rhetoric of revolution sounds like the rhetoric of tyranny when it comes from those who already have power and who are the new establishment. When Marc Morial of the National Urban League talks about poverty it’s impossible to take him seriously when you know he makes $657,000 a year and has a 7 figure benefits package. It’s hard to stick it to “The Man” when times have changed and you are “The Man.”

Perhaps the most ominous moment was when a Gregory Floyd of Teamsters Local 237 in New York City said that “We stand in solidarity with this social movement. Labor and this social movement, this civil rights movement, are one and the same.” Words with terrifying implications from the spokesman of an organization which is notorious for denying workers their right of free choice and free association in the workplace.

Surprisingly, the strongest expressions of ugliness and hate from either event came from a hispanic speaker. Jamie Contreras of the SEIU called Beck’s rally a “shame” and announced that it represented “hatemongering and angry white people.”

Al Sharpton was not far behind, announcing that “they want to disgrace this day. And we’re not giving them this day. This is our day and we ain’t giving it away.” But it’s not and Dr. King would not agree. His message was for everyone and no one, regardless of skin color or political ideology can claim it exclusively for themselves.

Forty-seven years seems like a very short time for Dr. King’s dream to have soured and become so misunderstood. When the exploitative labor leaders and hatemongering activists stood up at Dunbar High School and declared that they wanted to “Reclaim the Dream” the sad truth was readily apparent that their goal was to take a dream which was meant for all people and deny it to some while perverting its intent to their own advantage.

If they really believed in Dr. King’s dream they would have been at the Lincoln Memorial with Glenn Beck, demanding an equal voice and speaking to an audience which their presence would have made truly representative of the dream which both groups professed so stridently and unconvincingly to believe in and which neither was really doing anything to advance.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/alan-kurtz Alan Kurtz

    Excellent article, Dave. I missed the proceedings on TV (my set has been broken for two months and I can’t afford to get it fixed), but you’ve given me an engaging picture of what went on. Thank you.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    The fuzzy motives and themes of Beck’s rally don’t seem to have added up to much. A lot of the reaction from the left beforehand [myself included], was based on Beck’s history of bizarro rhetoric and antics, including calling the president a racist on national TV.

    Also all his portentous promises about this rally — that it would produce miracles and change history — now look empty and silly.

    The combination of media superstars Beck and Palin were bound to draw a big crowd — but to what purpose? I don’t think there are any clear answers.

  • zingzing

    the sharpton, et al, response to this was late and ill-conceived, which is typical of the left. the beck, et al, thing was either stupidity or quite cunning and evil, which is typical of the right.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    any other source of the crowd size other than a blogger? I looked at FOX News’s website and they only state thousands and not hundred thousands.

  • Chlotilde

    The crowd filled the entire mall and more. For other rallies that has been estimated at as much as a million.

  • jamminsue

    Dave – thank you for posting MLK’s speech. I am working on a paper about the Glen Beck event, for a class at UNLV, and wanted to re-visit that speech.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Evil is typical of the right, Zing? Come again? You actually think that people who want less government and more freedom are evil?

    EB, my impression is that everyone is now shying away from making firm estimates of these crowds because they’ve been burnt too many times. The blog I linked to has multiple links to other sources and you can draw your own conclusions. It certainly seems like a hell of a lot of people, especially in comparison to the turnout for the Sharpton event.

    Look at some of the video and photos and I think you’ll agree that Beck had as many people there as at any event in recent memory. Certainly more than the “million man march” or the Tea Party event this Spring.

    And believe me, I wish the Beck event had been a flop. I find it troubling that he could draw so many supporters.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Found another bit. The official Park Service estimate on the Beck crowd is 300,000 and they have historically estimated low.

    Dave

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Well Dave, you managed to get a few digs in here about the evil unions…Why am I no longer surprised?

    Also, the very same people that claim they want less government always find a way to grow it to serve themselves and their friends when it’s there turn…During his presidency, Reagan bloated the government’s size.

    “This is Robert Hager in Washington.

    The Reagan camp promised a revolution in the way Washington does business, and at first, it resembled one. At the Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Burford was busy shooting down a decade’s worth of anti-pollution rules. New leaders at the Federal Trade Commission virtually took the government out of consumer protection. There were promises to close down the Department of Energy. Close down the Department of Education, and cut government spending on health. Budget cuts did reduce the federal role in housing in welfare and in parklands.

    But the early zeal gave way to the practical problems of running government. Instead of decreasing, spending on health increased, and the Departments of Energy and Education remained, and got bigger. So the revolution came only part way, but enough to change the terms of future engagement. Nowadays even liberal politicians, opponents of the Reagan record, no longer dare to advocate a return to the pre-Reagan days of regulation writing and fiery consumerism.”

    more to follow…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    When it’s their turn, the only government departments that disappear are the one that employ *other people*, certainly not their friends, colleagues, and people they owe.

    Look at what Bush/Cheney did.

    Dismantle, cripple and wipe-out existing offices, and then bring in your own people to do the same jobs…example, Homeland Security.

  • Arch Conservative

    Jeanie, you may not have noticed but Bush and Cheney are no longer in office any more. Your golden boy is. You know…..the first messiah in the history of the world that required on the job training. Wouldn’t you rather speak about him and the miracles he’s performed such as turning water into double digit unemployment?

    By the way…….does anyone know if Tawanna Brawley showed up for the Sharpton shindig?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    What’s your point?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I think , I hit a nerve. :(

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Archie,

    You are so bitter. Would your entire personality change if the GOP were back in power? We will probably never know…

  • Jordan Richardson

    does anyone know if Tawanna Brawley showed up for the Sharpton shindig?

    Leave it to Arch to haul up something from the late freaking 80s in an attempt to be relevant.

  • Bill B

    Nothing at the link dave cited for attendance is remotely reputable except maybe the park service number – though as far as I know they compute from area occupied x number of folk (via formula – I believe 4cu. ft. per person though could be wrong) in said area – don’t know if they distinguish between shoulder to shoulder (the 4 cu. ft. #) and blanket and lawnchair crowds with their formula but an awful lot of green can be seen the further from the podium you go. Most close up pics show more leisurely lawn chair folk than shoulder to shoulder. Big difference.

    cbs commissioned a company to do an estimate and with a +/- 9000 margin of error (not sure how they compute) they say 87k.
    Check it out here.

    I suppose numbers aren’t too big a deal anyway – just kinda nuts how many folks actually believe/listen to this guy.

    Would like to have daves crystal ball telling us the socio-economic makeup of the crowd.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    “Glenn Beck Rally Attracts Estimated 87,000″

    thanks, Bill…i was wondering about that number…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I wish the Beck event had been a flop. I find it troubling that he could draw so many supporters.

    It was and he didn’t…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Good post, Jeannie, about the presumed motivation of the the Glenn Beck crowd. More freedom and less government, my foot. Their newly-found idealism and concern for America is but a pretext to make them look and feel good. They’d sell their soul to the devil if it meant furthering their self-interests.

    It’s interesting how Dave holds both ends against the middle, espousing the ideas while disapproving of the spectacle.

  • Arch Conservative

    The point was that you’re obsessed with blaming Bush and not even entertaining any legitimate criticism of the current administration.

    I think I’d like it if every politician in Washington, Democrats and Republicans (with the exception of Ron Paul of course) and all the international bankers dropped dead before I finished writing this post jeannie.

    As for Glenn Beck, although he shares some of my views, I can’t stand the guy. The presentation is over the top annoying. He’s always giggling.

    Oh and Al Sharpton is to race relations what Fred Phelps is to promoting a positive, open minded view of Christianity. He’s a fat pig in a cheap suit whose only goal in life is to get as much camera time as possible. I think MLK would most likely vomit in his mouth if he were around today and had to watch Al in action.

  • zingzing

    dave: “You actually think that people who want less government and more freedom are evil?”

    you actually think glenn beck and sarah palin represent that? no. they make suckers out of you. they are nothing but money-grubbing opportunists who know a fucking dope when they see one. they’re taking you for a ride and they don’t give a shit what happens to you or this country after they’ve made the cash.

    that’s what i think is evil. but by this point, those idiots at that rally yesterday just might deserve whatever they get.

    and stop with the meaningless “less government” and “more freedom” junk. you’ve really beaten those words into a soup. the catch phrases now, not ideas with any real substance.

  • zingzing

    they’re, not “the” in the last sentence…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Thank you, Roger

    I’m not alone in thinking that all this *smaller government* talk is just a smoke screen…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Exactly, zing, they’re nothing but fighting slogans by now, deprived of any real meaning.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Yes, Jeannie, a smoke screen for a defunct agenda.

    Just think, if conservatives, and I count Dave among the smartest, were capable of suggesting realistic solutions, they surely would have. Their constant fallback on the same old tired turn of phrase is proof positive that they have no idea how to even begin to think about today’s problem.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Arch, I’m glad to see that you’re still the only regular poster here that routinely wishes and cheers for the death of others. Gets me all warm and fuzzy inside, you big charmer.

  • http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/author/danmiller/ Dan(Miller)

    Here is a thoughtful analysis of the sparsely attended and monumentally unsuccessful Beck rally. Many here will probably agree with it. It begins,

    Yesterday, a nut-job demagogue held a huge rally in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, a majority of Americans object to the building of a peaceful cultural center in New York and one in five “believe” that the president is a Muslim, as though someone else’s professed religion is a matter for national referendum.

    With Labor Day around the corner, it’s time to admit it.

    The country has gone bonkers. We’re as feverish as a bad heat wave. Folks, behold the summer of our raging insanity.

    There were probably only a few dozen people at the rally (most of them escapees from the local lunatic asylum), and the photos on C-SPAN and elsewhere were doubtless photoshopped, just like the moon landing photos. Is there no depth to which these right wing nuts will not descend? Alas, there probably isn’t.

    Dan(Miller)

  • Bill B

    Also ‘more freedom’ (sorry arch!) is relative. Should wall street be ‘free’ to rape and pillage the countries economy or should we have *gasp* government regulation in place to keep their ‘freedom’ in check?

    So unless you’re (an insane) hardcore libertarian who worships at the market alter you believe government has a role – it’s a matter of what that role is and where the line should be drawn.

    Throwing ‘small govt’ and ‘more freedom’ out there is meaningless w/o context.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Dan (Miller), in your view, what would a successful Glenn Beck rally look like? God marches out dressed like Patton and reclaims America for the Tea Partiers while turning gays straight the country wide?

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Hmmm, a “grassroots” movement sponsored by billionaires who own oil companies? It seems “real Americans” have lots of money on their side. (what’s new?)

    The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Perhaps they’re experiencing a change of heart, Cindy, a conversion of sorts, as a result of Glenn’s Beck’s beck-and-call to recapture the noble sentiments of love of country and honor.

  • http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/author/danmiller/ Dan(Miller)

    Why Jordan, don’t be silly. It would have been successful only had Thor appeared during a massive thunderstorm and thrown lightning bolts all over the place, electrocuting the few survivors of a meteor strike. Then, the rest of us could cling with continued fervor to our Hope and Change slogan.

    Having escaped the wrath of the gods at least briefly, I anticipate that Mrs. Palin will soon convert to Islam, that Glen Beck will become an atheist and that both will defect to the Obama branch of the Democratic Party.

    So there.

    Dan(Miller)

  • Jordan Richardson

    Palin’s just one “you betcha” away from reciting shahada, so bring it on.

  • Arch Conservative

    “I’m not alone in thinking that all this *smaller government* talk is just a smoke screen…”

    Smoke screen for what exactly?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Look at what Bush/Cheney did.

    Jeannie I don’t represent Bush/Cheney and they don’t represent the Republican Party I’m part of. The rank and file of the party want a very different sort of government from that favored by the party elite and we are not willing to sit by and take them on faith any longer.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    It’s interesting how Dave holds both ends against the middle, espousing the ideas while disapproving of the spectacle.

    Roger, I actually don’t agree with the ideas Beck expressed in this event either. I just don’t have much to say about it because it was primarily a religious revival meeting on a giant scale. IMO it’s a pointless distraction and he’s pushing his own weird Mormon agenda. Any sensible conservative should be suspicious and avoid getting involved.

    if conservatives, and I count Dave among the smartest, were capable of suggesting realistic solutions, they surely would have.

    Roger, I’ve proposed lots of solutions and many others have theirs as well. Paul Ryan has a nice manifesto with some good ideas in it, for example.

    As for the crowd estimate, CBS’s figure is clearly bogus. The park service has the experience and the access and their figure is generally considered official.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Hmmm, a “grassroots” movement sponsored by billionaires who own oil companies? It seems “real Americans” have lots of money on their side. (what’s new?)

    The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party

    I love it. Cindy is a tool of the left’s propaganda wing. Is she paid or just a volunteer. The attack on the Koch brothers is the new Obama strategy. Thankfully those of us who have known them and their works for decades realize how deceptive it is.

    Newsflash – you can be a billionaire and still be sincere in your love of liberty.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    “I’m not alone in thinking that all this *smaller government* talk is just a smoke screen…”

    Smoke screen for what exactly?

    Better government?

    Dave

  • zingzing

    “Smoke screen for what exactly?”

    tell us exactly how you plan to make this government smaller. what programs would you cut, how would you get around the fact that people are dependent upon those programs, how would you create the private infrastructure to catch the fallout, how you’d pay off the national debt with less tax money, where you’d find the funding for those programs you deem necessary, who would actually be responsible for governing, where would the cuts end, how many lives are you willing to mess with in order to satisfy your want for less government, etc, etc…

    it’s a smokescreen because it’s just a phrase you throw around. you haven’t really thought through how you’d actually do any of it. as it stands, it’s a meaningless phrase.

    “more freedom” is the same thing. what freedoms do you want that you don’t have? what do you really want to do that you aren’t free to do right now?

  • zingzing

    “Newsflash – you can be a billionaire and still be sincere in your love of liberty.”

    you can also be a billionaire and want less taxes for several million reasons. tax cuts for the rich and big business are far closer to their heart than any liberties of the common man.

  • zingzing

    “Better government?”

    meaning what exactly?

    and don’t say “less massive government,” although that would at least be two words instead of one.

  • zingzing

    “Bush/Cheney […] don’t represent the Republican Party I’m part of.”

    like it or not, they do (or did). when they were in the executive office, the represented america as well. sucked.

  • zingzing

    insert y up there…

  • http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/author/danmiller/ Dan(Miller)

    re #39 — it’s a meaningless phrase and obviously very different from “Hope and Change we can believe in.”

    Ain’t bumper stickers wonderful! Wouldn’t it be great if the bumpers were now big enough to hold them all?

    Dan(Miller)

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    The Frank Rich piece Cindy links to was inspired by Jane Mayer’s splendid article in The New Yorker:

    Covert Operations
    The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama.

    Dave may like to write off Rich as a propagandist [takes one to know one], but Jane Mayer is a first-rank investigative journalist, and the article is a must-read, no matter your political views.

    The Koch brothers are not automatically evil just because they are mega-rich industrialists. Nor is their libertarian philosophy “evil” in itself.

    But their stealth and secrecy in hiding the links between their [enormous] financial contributions and the dozens of nonprofit front organizations they have established, as well as the roots of the Tea Party, are creepy, to say the least.

    It also raises the question of how spontaneous and grass-roots this “movement” is, when the catalyst for it was money from the Kochs.

    They decided the electoral political system wouldn’t get them what they wanted, so over the last 30 years they bought influence. And it’s working.

    And now winding its way back to electoral politics.

    Mayer concludes her introductory paragraphs with this:

    Charles Lewis, the founder of the Center for Public Integrity, a nonpartisan watchdog group, said, “The Kochs are on a whole different level. There’s no one else who has spent this much money. The sheer dimension of it is what sets them apart.

    They have a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it. They are the Standard Oil of our times.”

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Dave,

    So, several billionaires are funding a “grassroots” movement and you still consider it to be a grassroots movement? You don’t see an problem with a movement of ‘the people’ sponsored by big oil?

    Is your motto “Liberty if you can afford to buy it!”

    Let me make your statement true:

    Newsflash – If you are a billionaire, you likely are sincere in your love of the system that allows you the liberty (read license) to use your financial power over other people to maintain your unreasonable status.

  • zingzing

    “it’s a meaningless phrase and obviously very different from “Hope and Change we can believe in.”

    one’s a campaign slogan. the other is coming out of the mouths (or fingertips) of people on this thread. they’re both meaningless phrases. although, of course, the campaign slogan got someone elected and you guys are all in an uproar over the vast amounts of change he has brought. you know, now that we’re a communist-fascist state.

  • kurt brigliadora

    J D.. You wish that Glenn Beck’s rally was a flop? Why?, dont you think we need to bring about change? as to satisfy and @ least pacify the american tax-payer…the price of food has doubled , the cost of insurance premiums has skyrocketed and energy for travel and household use has risen significantly. At the same time the banks wont lend,they pay you 1% on your savings [after we bail them out] and most people’s largest asset…{house}has plummeted by 40 – 50%…I’v got an idea , why dont we impeach the 3 mosquteer’s. mr. e- mom, Bloomberg and Omamma!

  • zingzing

    “”What do you say we give the whole ‘let’s turn back to God’ thing a try and see what happens?”–glenn beck.

    if this is what the tea party has been reduced to–fixing politics with religion–then it’s time to send them packing.

  • http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/author/danmiller/ Dan(Miller)

    Not only that, but the dirty rotten filthy Nazi Fascist scum cleaned up after themselves. How very thoughtless and inhumane! This may mean unemployment for sanitation workers; think of the poor pigeons! Won’t some caring person at least go dump some garbage cans around? Cleanliness is a sure sign of anti-environmentalist sentiment.

    Either that or there were lots fewer of them than claimed. That must be it.

    Dan(Miller)

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    Hysterical, AC nags JD for bringing up Bush yet goes back to the ’80s to complain about Sharpton. Reminds me of the phrase, “if he had any brains, he’d be dangerous.”

    There’s no way Thor was going to show up. The marketing for the movie will start up closer to the release of the film

  • zingzing

    a fine point, dan.

  • Arch Conservative

    “how would you get around the fact that people are dependent upon those programs”

    Has it ever occurred to you that many of those people are only dependet because the programs exist?

    Dependency on the state is like a drug…..highly addicitve but poison to the mind, body and soul.

    Which do you think is the ideal zing…a society where we strive for as many completely self sufficient citizens as possible or one where the majority of the citizens function only when the government is providing for them and dictating their lives?

    I only ask because it’s seems like we’re headed toward the latter and you don’t appear to have a problem with it.

  • zingzing

    “Has it ever occurred to you that many of those people are only dependet because the programs exist?”

    has it ever occurred to you that that’s the unfortunate reality? you can’t just dismantle these programs without having something to back it up.

    (and by “dependent,” i don’t just mean the people who, say, get social security checks. i mean the people who work at the social security office. i mean those that depend on others who get social security. i mean their cats.)

    let’s say you found social security a little too “social.” or unemployment benefits. pick your program. you dismantle one (or both, meh). now you’ve got millions of elderly or unemployed without any money at all. they’re starving in the streets, rioting, stealing and murdering (in your future you don’t kill grandma, grandma kills you), etc, etc.

    that isn’t what you wanted, i’m sure. so, in the meantime, before your idealized self-sufficient citizenry can get their collective act together, you have to back up this program with something… what is it?

    it’s not that your completely self-sufficient citizenry thing isn’t a nice fantasy. it is. but it can’t happen overnight. it just can’t. so what private programs are you developing that will one day be able to provide the services that are needed for the elderly or temporarily unemployed? when will these programs be ready? how long do you foresee those programs as necessary? will we ever be free of them?

    what’s that you say? you don’t need any such services. let’s go look at the various countries around the world that seem to live up to your ideal of a self-sufficient citizenry… now where are they… ah ha! oh my, that’s ugly…

    hrm. all i can find is some pretty nasty stuff. do you have a current-day, concrete example of the type of nation you’d like us to become? some place on the map where you can say “they’re doing it right?”

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Cindy,

    “ANOTHER weekend, another grass-roots demonstration starring Real Americans who are mad as hell and want to take back their country from you-know-who.”
    – Link from Cindy’s comment.

    At one point I fell asleep and when I awoke, Glen Beck was praying to the lord for money on a plane. Was it a first class flight? cause that makes all the difference in the world…

    Funny how it’s easy to say money isn’t everything when you have enough of it.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Zing, writes about the social fabric of this country, neglected and overlooked for more profitable causes. We are all seen as unprofitable by-products in this *you’re on your own* society.

    Let’s face it, the baby boomers are aging.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    opps! bold!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Arch,

    #10 goes with the smoke screen comment.

    It’s like saying it’s different when it your turn.

  • Arch Conservative

    You’re on your own society?

    That’s not true jeannie.

    Even I see the need for social welfare programs. The point is that these programs should be very limited. They should provide a lifetime of welfare for the physicallly/mentally handicapped and provide short term asisstance aimed at helping the sound of mind and body get back on their feet when they stumble.

    But if you want to have an honest discussion you must admit that many many people abuse the system. They “game” the system, while politically correct government bureaucrats look the other way.

    You know it and I know it jeannie.

    The idea is that you don’t want to make it too easy for people. But that is exactly what we’ve done. Who wants to work hard when you can find some way to get for someone else to take care of you right?

    My father is in his sixties and recently lost his job. He spent his life working hard and paying into the system…. never collected a dime. Now he has two bum knees and other health issues that make it difficult for him to work but he has has looked for work nonetheless. He’s tried to file for disability but been denied. His 401K went in the tank the past several years and is worth next to nothing. He’s worried about losing his home.

    Contrast him with some illegal that comes here, gets free healthcare in the ER, doesn’t pay taxes and has a baby that allows him/her to collect benefits from the government, or some welfare mom who keeps having kids so she can keep collecting checks.

    While my heart breaks for my dad and every other person out there just like him And I have absolutely NO reservations whatsoever about some of my tax money being taken to help them. However, I absolutely HATE the second group of people. They are the scum of the earth and should be held up and ridiculed for the slime that they are by all decent people.

    That’s the difference between myself and you lefties. You all lecture me on my alleged lack of sympathy and compassion for my fellow man because I don’t believe that massive government entitlement programs are, as a general rule beneficial. The truth is that I know not everyone deserves sympathy, compassion and help. Some people are just rotten to the core that will take and take and take from society without ever giving a damn thing back.

  • zingzing

    “My father is in his sixties and recently lost his job. He spent his life working hard and paying into the system…. never collected a dime. Now he has two bum knees and other health issues that make it difficult for him to work but he has has looked for work nonetheless. He’s tried to file for disability but been denied. His 401K went in the tank the past several years and is worth next to nothing. He’s worried about losing his home.”

    how do you get from “they’ve made it too easy” to that?

    i’ll wait on your answer to #51. at least answer the last question. and tell me what you’d do with all those people you’d deny benefits to.

  • zingzing

    and sorry about your dad. never nice to see one’s parents having troubles.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    Jordan @ #26: Arch, I’m glad to see that you’re still the only regular poster here that routinely wishes and cheers for the death of others.

    He is?

  • Bill B

    Devil’s in the details arch.

    Even I see the need for social welfare programs. The point is that these programs should be very limited. They should provide a lifetime of welfare for the physicallly/mentally handicapped and provide short term asisstance aimed at helping the sound of mind and body get back on their feet when they stumble.

    But if you want to have an honest discussion you must admit that many many people abuse the system. They “game” the system, while politically correct government bureaucrats look the other way.

    Indeed. But the answer isn’t throwing the baby out w/ the bath water. It’s oversight, guidelines, resources, you name it. Takes money, people and ingenuity. Push for a plan that can distinguish the able from the not so able and nudges the able toward self sufficiency, maybe job training etc. I’m with you.

    Problem is most conservatives have been doing all they can to dismantle and justify said dismantling of these safety nets – let’s privatize SS and leave the welfare of the nations elders to wall street.

    Sorry about your dad’s situation – my parents went through similar fiscal/health trouble before passing in the last 5 yrs.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Archie,

    In your opinion, why is it OK to help certain groups and not others?

    my dad and every other person out there just like him And I have absolutely NO reservations whatsoever about some of my tax money being taken to help them. However, I absolutely HATE the second group of people. They are the scum of the earth and should be held up and ridiculed for the slime that they are by all decent people.

    also,

    You could have taken two other words and placed them in your comment instead of you.

    “if you want to have an honest discussion you must admit that many many people abuse the system. They “game” the system, while politically correct government bureaucrats look the other way.

    You know it and I know it Jeannie.

    The idea is that you don’t want to make it too easy for people,politicians, big corporations. But that is exactly what we’ve done. Who wants to work hard when you can find some way to get for someone else to take care of you right? ”

    Tarp, subsidies, campaign contributions are all forms of corporate welfare and corruption. why not yell about them?

    This comment might not make any sense to you. I’m so tired , I can’t either.

    nite Arch

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Arch,

    Sorry to hear about your father.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Ah, Dr. Dreadful. Right into my blind spot.

  • Kurt

    I did a search for a comparison between the two rallies. I watched both and was struck by the difference. One was focused on God and honoring the troops. The other seemed to just attack and divide. The latter seemed to go against MLK’s vision. I’m not saying that Glenn’s vision matches MLK but to me it seemed a closer match.

    I was pleased to find this blog which gave a comparison that matched what I saw. But then was appalled by the hate being spewed in these comments. It really solidified Glenn’s point that this country needs God more than ever.

    I pray for those that do not think that God is the solution to our countries issues.

    With Respect For ALL….Kurt

  • zingzing

    god’s not going to get involved. if he did, we’d have to throw him in jail. unless allah and buddah and the spaghetti monster bail him out.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    I pray for those that do not think that God is the solution to our countries issues.

    I pray for those that do think Beck is the solution. They are being fleeced by a charlatan.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Man, Cindy. It’s like someone programmed you or brainwashed you. I get a little kick out of seeing you repeat lies I heard last week in the MoveOn.org newsletter.


    So, several billionaires are funding a “grassroots” movement and you still consider it to be a grassroots movement? You don’t see an problem with a movement of ‘the people’ sponsored by big oil?

    Except that the Tea Party has no funding at all. The Koch Foundation funds issue activism groups which are not really part of the Tea Party movement, though they have tried to cash in on it. Their main outlet is Americans for Prosperity which most teapartiers look on with suspicion.

    You remind me of Nancy Pelosi wanting to look into who funds the protests against the Mosque in New York. It’s symptomatic of the left’s mindset that they assume protesters must be paid to show up. It never crossed her mind (or yours) that the Mosque protesters and the tea party people came out without being paid or recruited because they are genuinely angry and concerned.

    Dave

  • Kurt

    zingzing…I have no doubt He would be thrown in jail as the last time God showed up in the flesh he was murdered. Atheists strive to have character and a strong moral fiber. Do you think that making fun of other people’s beliefs shows character?

    handyguy…I thank you for your prayers. Please note I did not suggest Mr. Beck is the solution only that he is right IMHO when he suggests God is the first step.

    With Respect For ALL….Kurt

  • Arch Conservative

    In your opinion, why is it OK to help certain groups and not others?

    I thought I explained that quite clearly jeannie. Some people do not deserve help or compassion. Mainly these are the people that never even tried to help themselves in the first place but rather waited around for that first hand otu and have been on the dole ever since.

    I have all the sympathy in the world for people who make smart decision, work hard and try to get ahead but still have difficulty. That’s pretty much all you have to do to win me over….make a damn effort. IS that too much to ask? Anyone that can’t even be bothered to do that is dead to me.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    the Tea Party has no funding at all.?

    What’s Freedom Works, just a figment of Dick Army’s imagination?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    The United States is not a Theocracy and IMHO, Mr. Beck shouldn’t be praying to God for money.

    Mr. Beck is the solution only that he is right IMHO when he suggests God is the first step.

    What if you don’t believe in God?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “It never crossed her mind (or yours) that the Mosque protesters and the tea party people came out without being paid or recruited because they are genuinely angry and concerned.”

    People just don’t do that, Dave, which is to say, show up serendipitously; from personal experience, you should know that better than most.

    Regardless of how or whether they’re being funded, organization and mobilization are necessary conditions.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “Some people do not deserve help or compassion.”

    That’s the root of your problem, Archie, you tend to lump people into “groups.”

    What “people”? You can’t just blurt nonsense such as this in general; you shouldn’t even think it. You can only tell about things like that from personal experience. Do you have any? If you do, feel free to make your case, but a limited case it will be, and you know it. But no, Archie, you’re too comfortable to be expressing your bigoted views – and you know they’re bigoted, because the better side of you is trying it win this fight – and hide behind such blanket-statement generalizations, and why? Because you’re too chickenshit to face yourself and your conscience squarely. Poor excuse, Archie, and a sign of a coward in my book.

    I may agree there may be some “evil” people in this world, but in God’s eye they’re only instruments of evil; everyone deserves help and compassion. Even you might get to see that once you get to know them.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Arch,

    How do you recognize the dead ones?

    I have all the sympathy in the world for people who make smart decision, work hard and try to get ahead but still have difficulty. That’s pretty much all you have to do to win me over….make a damn effort.

    Anyone that can’t even be bothered to do that is dead to me.

    Many people lack opportunity, direction, family support, self-discipline, intelligence, physical and mental health, purpose, education, etc.

    : )All I ask is that you try to look at life through a *moon-bats* eyes…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    As an aside, Glenn Beck assured the crowds this wasn’t a political gathering but a religious one, not a political revival but a religious one. Okaaaay.

    So let’s accept Mr. Beck’s claims as to the statement of purpose at face value. He spoke of principles which made this country great, of Christian principles which all God-fearing people should obey; of principles which, if only reclaimed, we could have “our country” back. Never mind politics. Everything would fall into place. (Somewhere in the midst of Mr. Beck’s rhetoric, his presumably Mormon affiliation got lost in the shuffle, never mind that: it’s a minor point.)

    He also alluded many a times to the size of the gathering, far surpassing the Martin Luther King’s affair; the date of the event, Mr. Beck assured us, was purely coincidental.

    Whether coincidental or not, there is a delicious irony at work. Mr. Beck spoke of principles which made this country great; Mr. King spoke of the potential, “the dream” being the operative word.

    But of course, you’ll make out your own mind as to whether Mr. Beck’s political disclaimer is genuine or not. Come to think of it, there is a sense in which he could be right. Political evangelism is America’s trademark, her claim to fame. And it’s no less rabid or fanatical – kid yourself not! – than any zeal or fervor we typically associate with our fire ‘n brimstone preachers. Which is perhaps why the line between politics and religion is so difficult to draw for Mr. Beck.

    One thing appears certain. Mr. Beck does indeed fancy himself as one of the evangelical-political leaders, not unlike Moses perhaps, whose mission in life is apparently to save the children of America from the slavery and the inequity to which they’ve been subjected. I don’t know much about a Mormon background or state of mind, but perhaps, just perhaps, Mr. Beck envisages himself as having been “called.” Being a “recovering alcoholic” (by his own admission) doesn’t hurt either: we all know from personal experience how people who stop drinking are apt to become missionaries.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Missionaries or dry drunks…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You know Jeannie your main asset? The vibrant energy you bring into this site. Too bad Mr. Kurtz fails to appreciate your talents, being a misanthrope he is or simply portrays himself to be. It’s his loss.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Without the massive free publicity provided by Fox News [via both Glenn Beck and “news coverage”], and without the organizing/coaching and, yes, funding by FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity, it is unlikely that Tea Party would be getting even 1/10 of the attention it attracts.

    Dave talks out of both sides of his mouth about the Kochs, praising them in one post and claiming without evidence that “most tea partiers” view Americans for Prosperity with suspicion.

    Why does this alleged majority of tea partiers distrust Americans for Prosperity? Why does Dave praise [repeatedly] both Americans for Prosperity and the tea party?

    As Rich points out, the Kochs’ financing of groups to slime a liberal president is nothing new: the DuPonts funded the anti-FDR American Liberty League in the 1930s, and the Koch brothers’ father was a prominent member of the John Birch Society in the 1950s and 1960s, which slimed not only JFK but Dwight Eisenhower!

    [And one of the Koch brothers was the VP nominee on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 — running to the right of Ronald Reagan, calling for the abolition of the FBI and the CIA.]

    These are not mainstream people. They are extremists. And they have used their massive wealth, mostly under the radar, to turn their philosophy into a “movement.”

    I would be glad to hear Dave’s evidence that the movement doesn’t trust its own backers.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Missionaries should have been in scare quotes.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    These are not mainstream people. They are extremists. And they have used their massive wealth, mostly under the radar, to turn their philosophy into a “movement.

    They’re not extremist from the standpoint corporate elites.

    It’s this inconvenient fact Dave has trouble with, which is the main reason why he keeps on equivocating, the “populist libertarian” he portrays himself to be.

  • Kurt

    Jeannie danna…I agree that the USA is not a Theocracy and I pray to God this remains true. But you must realize that this country was founded by people of God. That our founding documents and our laws are based on Gods law. Even our money says “Trust in God” not “Trust in Government”. The underlying concept of this country is based on the individual not the collective (i.e. we are a Republic). I have seen progressives struggle with this concept (I am not suggesting you are a progressive). Our founders believed that people could govern themselves and we do not need a government or religion telling us how to live our lives. The federal government should be focused on “national security” and very little else.

    Jeannie you should realize that God believes in you and loves you even if the feeling is not mutual.

    To ALL…I have read in these comments that we should not cut federal programs because many people would suffer as a result. I agree that this is a major problem in reigning in the federal government’s spending. But just so you know that traditionally this safety net has been the private sector. Usually this came from your family, your neighbors and friends, your church, and/or community charities. Back then when Americans relied on God helping ones neighbor was critical. Depending on the government for charity is a trap that leads to slavery IMHO.

    With Respect For ALL….Kurt

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    The federal government should be focused on “national security” and very little else.

    Leave your preaching at home, Kurt, or wherever it properly belong. And if the safety net ought be left at the discretion of the private sector, not to mention family members, neighbors and the church – which you so readily suggest – why not do likewise with respect to national security and leave it at the hands of the Almighty? After all, if “In God Trust” is not supposed to be an empty slogan, as it surely doesn’t appear so to you, let’s your faith where your mouth is and dismantle our federal government and our armed forces, and leave it all at God’s hands. For God is surely more reliable than one’s family, friends, neighbors, even His church.

    Indeed, if you were to advocate such a move, I would really take you for a true believer; at the very least, you’d be consistent. As it stands, however, you’re coming across as just another Christian Right ideologue.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kurt,

    You mistakenly thought that I was refering to myself…but, just as you yourself said that you agree with me this country is not a theocracy my religious faith or lack of or anyone’s religious beliefs, are personal.

    Jeannie you should realize that God believes in you and loves you even if the feeling is not mutual.

    ?

  • Kurt

    Roger nawosielski…I am obligated by my faith to try and help others, whether that is through charity or by proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Nothing will stop that. What you fail to know is that God states in the Bible that we should protect each other. What you are spewing is a misconception on what is meant to rely on God. I hold no ill emotions against you as I know this is because you do not know God or his Word.

    So the left are not Christian? What a statement. If there is a Christian left should they have a separate ideologue or would a Christian left or right come to same truths?

    With Respect to ALL….Kurt

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Are these the same people who resist any type of regulations, taxes, or laws designed to help this country get out of this mess?

    You know, the ones that told us all that we had to fall on our knees and give generously of our money to tax-free organizations in the name of Jesus.

    Hypocrites!

  • Kurt

    jeannie….I humbly apologize for my assumption that you were talking about yourself. You should know that this is based on the apparent attacks on my beliefs in these comments and I thought you were piling on. So does my response answer the question of what non-believers should do and realize?

    With Respect to ALL…..Kurt

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    Thanks for the shout out in #80, I just noticed it. LOL Are these *scare quotes* ?

    : )Where is, Alan? by the time I wake-up in the morning he’s already managed to get himself errased…sad

  • Kurt

    jeannie…No these are not the same people. I don’t claim anything on my taxes and pay the full amount. There are some who only donate for the tax breaks. These people are filled with greed not God.

    With Respect to ALL….Kurt

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kurt,

    Please stop preaching to us. This is blog critics either praise, whine, or criticize…: )with all due respect…

  • Kurt

    jeannie…I try not to whine or criticize but I have been praising God. Relax just a joke. I came here because the blog I read was good but the comments were….never mind. The “claimed” point of the rally was religion and this blog stated that. Don’t be surprised when blogs like that attract Christians. It also makes me cringe to think an apparent member of the left would try to silence somebody…with all due respect…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kurt,

    Don’t play that word game with me.

    I see what you are up to. A *real* Christian wouldn’t divide…I never said that you didn’t have the right to express yourself. There’s a line between self-expression and witnessing for the lord and perhaps you’ve crossed it.

  • Kurt

    jeannie…maybe I didn’t understand the words “Please STOP preaching to us”. I’m glad that I’m not the only one claiming to know what a *real* Christian would do. In this comment series my self-expression has been a witness for the Lord. No line as it is the same thing. Some peoples self-expression is secular, religious, political, or whatever. I have the right to express my love for God and for you to insist I stop is a shame.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Kurt, I do know what the Bible teaches so no, I don’t need a lesson from you. But I also know that people, whether they’re Christian or not, do what they will.

    And no, I didn’t mean to suggest that the Right has the monopoly on Christianity, so don’t try to sidetrack the discussion by making irrelevant points. But it is the Christian Right, let’s face it, that comes across with that “holier than though” attitude and point of view.

    And BTW, if this is a clandestine effort on your part to lend support to Glenn Beck’s agenda, I think it would be more manly of you to just say so rather than to couch your approval in a pseudo-theological discussion of religion and belief-systems.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    they assume protesters must be paid to show up. It never crossed her mind (or yours) that the Mosque protesters and the tea party people came out without being paid or recruited because they are genuinely angry and concerned.

    You are missing my point. I didn’t claim TPers required payment to protest, Dave. The problem is that their agenda is perfectly suited to huge big oil’s agenda, to Rupert Murdoch’s agenda. What kind of movement of “the people” is supported by huge corporations that siphon wealth from the populous?

    Don’t you think that what “the people” presumably want will be skewed by the fact that the voices of a few people are promoted by huge business interests?

    It’s like giving a few people a megaphone and the majority a dixie-cup with a string and then claiming because the voices of those with the megaphone can be heard that they represent ‘the people’.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Besides, there is something very sick in an ideology that would be supported by industries that have been raping both the masses across the globe and the planet in promotion of their ‘liberty’.

  • zingzing

    kurt: “Do you think that making fun of other people’s beliefs shows character?”

    i’m not making fun of your religious beliefs. i am making fun of your political beliefs. ever heard of separation of church and state? who’s god is going to lead the way in this nation? yours? why? what about everyone else’s gods? where do they play?

    god is simply not the answer to our political problems. do you want to live in a theocracy? if your god is the answer, then that makes everyone else’s god the problem. then you start killing people or exiling them or making them into second class citizens. not good.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I have the right to express my love for God and for you to insist I stop is a shame.

    Love for God is being expressed everyday, Kurt, by ordinary people, and neither you nor anyone has a monopoly on the form or style of the expression. But it’s best expressed and documented by acts and deeds rather than empty words, especially when they’re smack of political undertones.

    So in that spirit, again, I’ll say – leave your preaching at home.

    And BTW, you still haven’t answer a rather straightforward question I put to you a comment or so ago: Are we supposed to interpret your comments as representing animplicit support of Mr. Beck’s agenda, or are we to somehow think of you sudden appearance on this thread as mere coincidence.

    It behooves you to answer this simple question since your continuous silence on this matter is liable to leave us the readers with the wrong impression.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “whose god,” zingo.

    Excuse me for playing the part of the Grammar Nazi before the real Grammar Nazi shows up.

  • Kurt

    People…I don’t have a political bone in my body. I do have political opinions but I have always considered myself independent. I believe that the far left fights for the people and far right fights for capitalism. Surely the answer is somewhere in between. I want what is right for the country. Some things Beck says makes sense to me but there are other things he says that is inflammatory, conspiracy driven, and jaded. But when Beck states that God (whether that be Allah, Buddha, Christ, or whichever God one follows) is needed in this country I’m all for that. This country is slowly becoming morally bankrupt and financially bankrupt. To think that politics will fix the morally bankrupt problem is short sighted. I’m not saying the left or right is to blame alone for the financial part. They both are. I along with Beck was appalled at what President Bush was doing his last 3 years in office. I also believe Iraq was a mistake before the war, during it, and especially after I saw they had no plan to re-build Iraq. I also am appalled by President Obama’s reckless spending. Both of these Presidents claim to be left or right but appear to be progressive. The notion that we can spend our way out of this economic issue is a suicidal thought. Extending the unemployment I’m all for but to just to spend trillions of dollars on non-job creating things is a progressive idea, again by both Presidents.

    With Respect For ALL….Kurt

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Come on, Kurt, who is kidding whom? It was you who brought up the matter of “national security” as possibly the only legitimate function of the federal government. And then you speak, off-the-cuff, by the way, of Obama’s (and yes, Bush’s too, “reckless spending.” So please excuse me if I don’t take your disclaimer at face value. And on the face value at least, you do come across as a political hack of the Christian Right, garden variety, whether you intend it or not. It’s up to you to straighten us all out; otherwise, the impression lingers.

    Besides, you do seem to approve of Mr. Beck’s religious agenda, namely, that if we only put our trust in God, all the political problems and the kind of morass we find ourselves in will miraculously disappear.

    Now, just like Glenn Beck, you may really believe in that particular credo. Personally, I don’t think Mr. Beck himself believes in it, though he surely finds it convenient to mask his political ambitions under the coat of religious fervor and religious kind of righteousness.

    Consequently, the simple question I put to you still stands: Do you agree with Mr. Beck’s agenda, as stated, or do you not. A simple yes or no would suffice, and why.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Read the rest of your comment, Kurt, and you do make some good points. However, if the country is “morally bankrupt,” as you say, thank the capitalist for taking it to the cleaners. But you can’t revive moral or religious fiber of the American society by turning the clock back. It’s too late for that.

    Whether you like it or not, for better or for worse, we have become a secular society. Consequently, the kinds of problems we experience have be dealt on those terms. The kind of agenda that Mr. Beck proposes is not only a reactionary one, leading people down the garden path, and that’s irrespective if he truly believes in it or is moved by his political ambitions. So to reiterate my point, a revival meeting may have it’s proper place in a religious congregation and context. As far as I’m concerned, it has no place in politics.

    So perhaps Jeannie Danna was right about you in the first place. You do seem to have a problem separating your religion from your politics.

    Since you’ve tried to give me an object lesson on the Bible, let me reciprocate: Christ was the furthest from this idea.

  • zingzing

    “”whose god,” zingo.”

    yeah, yeah, i screwed the pooch, a’ight? it happens.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kurt,

    Your #102 tries to force feed your belief system down our throats. Frankly, I’m still full after that *clown show* on Sunday with the unclear agenda…

    when Beck states that God (whether that be Allah, Buddha, Christ, or whichever God one follows) is needed in this country I’m all for that. This country is slowly becoming morally bankrupt and financially bankrupt. To think that politics will fix the morally bankrupt problem is short sighted. I’m not saying the left or right is to blame alone for the financial part.

    So you believe only *organized religion* holds the moral code?

    We are NOT a Theocracy and I have met very intelligent and moral people in my life; they not only abstain from attending church, but they also don’t believe in the pointy hat’s stories.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Saturday…sorry

  • Kurt

    Roger nowosielski…Are you suggesting that we are morally sound as a country? I can agree that the human nature of greed can and does turn capitalism against us. But I am wondering if you are blaming the capitalist system or the people who has used the system in an evil way? Are you suggesting that if we remove capitalism and replace it something else that we would be morally sound? I never suggested turning back the clock and not even sure what you mean by that. But we can revive the moral fiber with God’s help.

    I reject your notion that we are a secular society. It might be true that a growing portion of our population has become secular. And my point is that this is becoming a problem. How has the secular system helped us? It is now OK to have pre-marital sex in the secular society creating disease, unwanted pregnancy, and despair. It is now OK to kill babies as people do not have rights in a secular society until they are out of the womb. It is now OK to join a gang and prey on people as many kids in the secular world aspire to be gang banger. It is now OK to turn to drugs and alcohol to fill whatever hole our life has. It is now OK to have children and run off to the next “hoe” leaving that child in despair. It is now OK to treat marriage like a door mat in secular society. These are just a few examples of what a secular society can do. On a side note I think a married gay couple should have the same privileges as a married straight couple. Believe it or not there are some things in the secular world I am for.

    I’m not suggesting that ALL secular people are morally bankrupt. There are some fine upstanding individuals that have no faith. But to suggest that the secular society has the keys to morality defies the facts of what is happening out there.

    Are you upset that I would give you a bible lesson, or preace as Jeanie says? If so why is that?

    With Respect For ALL….Kurt

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kurt,

    Here you say,
    I reject your notion that we are a secular society.

    I reject your assertion that you don’t have a political bone in your body.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    It’s now OK to, _____ and then insert you’re perception of what is secular.

    Oh really, Kurt? It’s only secular societies that are morally corrupt?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Believe it or not there are some things in the secular world I am for.

    Reality?

  • Zedd

    Dan (Sane Dan),

    This deserves a re-post:

    Yesterday, a nut-job demagogue held a huge rally in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, a majority of Americans object to the building of a peaceful cultural center in New York and one in five “believe” that the president is a Muslim, as though someone else’s professed religion is a matter for national referendum.

    With Labor Day around the corner, it’s time to admit it.

    The country has gone bonkers. We’re as feverish as a bad heat wave. Folks, behold the summer of our raging insanity.

    The libs would say it’s because Mercury is in retrograde. The lunacy should end around the 13th. :o)

  • Kurt

    Jeannie…I guess your suggesting that my message is conflicting. Secular definition is “of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal”. How secular and political are the same is not understood by me. I stand by all my statements. We are a predominately a Jewish/Christian Society with others in the minority…this being Secular, Islam, etc. Why I would reject his notion that the secular people are in the majority is obvious and not political.

    Both of you have mis-judged my intentions. It is a shame that first you want to debate me then you turn on me for expressing my beliefs. I’m all for a debate but I can tell Christians are not welcome here.

    I wish you all well.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m not upset by you, Kurt, doing what you’re doing. You simply don’t know any better. And I don’t care whether you accept my proposition about ours having become a secular society. Obviously, your thinking is in the minority and yours is the last Hail Mary – a sure sign of a people that are dying out. Give or take a generation or two and you will all become extinct.

    But to the larger point, one’s spirituality and moral compass are private matters and the moral crisis is alluded to doesn’t stem from disintegration of individual values. It stems from the fact that corporate America, and yes, I’m including here our all-too-complicit government, had let its people down. So a religious revival, whether of Glenn Beck or anybody else’s kind, is no solution to our ailments, because that was never out problem. “One Nation under God” has always been a myth, Kurt, a call-to-arms slogan, to keep people like you complacent so that the government, any government, could do it’s dirty work on behalf of those who ran it. Most people have woken up from that dream, but you and Glenn Beck followers apparently have not. Which is why you can’t seem to distinguish religion, which is a personal matter, from politics which is public.

    Anyway, I don’t find this discussion fruitful anymore. Have a nice day.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I wish you well back, Kurt. :) but as Roger said,Most people have woken up from that dream, but you and Glenn Beck followers apparently have not. Which is why you can’t seem to distinguish religion, which is a personal matter, from politics which is public.

    :O Please don’t feel that your not welcome here, nothing could be further from the truth.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna
  • Zedd

    Kurt,

    As a fellow Christian, I would like to ask you where you believe this country needs to get back to?

    I read that the point of the rally was moving in the wrong direction and needs to go back. I’m curious what point we need to get back to? When was America righteous?

    I’m looking forward to getting your perspective.

    Oh and with what denomination do you affiliate.

  • Zedd

    roger,

    Perhaps you can help me understand what people mean by a Christian country. I am a Protestant and my doctrine conflicts with that notion. I understand the ideas of a country which is inhabited by Christians but not a Christian country.

    In my faith, one must be born again to become a Christian. In other words, they must elect to relinquish or open their minds to an understanding of the spiritual realm, that involves a certain view of the super natural. The decision is a personal one; an individual decision.

    How do people who profess to understand their own faith and who say that they have made a personal choice to receive Christ, believe that a nation can do so?

    Yes this is rhetorical. But do please indulge me if you have the patience.

  • Zedd

    Dave,

    Your article was disengenous. I believe you have lost the ability to descern when you are telling a lie, even to yourself. I am not sure why you believe that your political ideology is so important that you should surrender so much of yourself to it.

    Hint:
    It’s just an idea. It’s more than likely flawed as all things man made are (especially ideas). It’s not universal truth.

    They way you go our of the way to distort reality in order to make your “side” cleaner, neater and tidier than it is, Im guessing that you’ve tied so much of your identity to your political ideas that you cant see yourself aside from them.

    There is no need to be so sold to a notion that you loose your entigrity (and dignity). There is an entire world out there of “I don’t know” or “a little bit of this and a little bit of that” and it’s awesome!!!

    You didn’t change the picture.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    You know why I like Nate Silver? Because he concentrates on FACTS. Many times he reports facts that liberals like myself don’t want to hear…but he’s certainly one of the most accurate statisticians in America today.

    He estimates your crowd at between 300,000 to 400,000. That’s less than what you said, and FAR less than what many on the right posited…but far MORE than what many on the left said, as I’m sure you already know.

    Give us what’s real, what’s provable, what’s factual – not what’s required by political dogma.

  • Gary

    Hello all, little history of myself.. I am a friend of Kurt. I listen to Glenn Beck, read stories from AP, Reuters, Politico, Washington Post, Huffington Post, Time, and many other assorted sources.

    There is a problem in this country that is perpetuated by division used by both political parties. Both have become divisive by using racism, sexism, religion (or lack thereof), economic condition, and anything else they can do to divide us and get votes. Nothing else matters. Washington is disconnected with the people.

    I think what Glenn Beck, Kurt, I, and many others are saying by attending these rallies is “we are fed up with the way things are going”. For me, this started LONG before the current administration, but the festering has been there. Writing my senators doesn’t help (half the time they don’t respond even with a “we got your letter”), voting party lines doesn’t help (see Congress acting like irresponsible children), donating to political causes doesn’t help because there are so many hidden motivations that it’s nearly impossible to tell what the TRUTH is anymore.

    I could argue for hours about post #115 and how people’s religious beliefs or lack thereof ultimately effect the law of any land. Even with that being said, and proclaiming proudly I am a Christian, I have no problem with any peaceful religion establishing roots in this country. 140 different faiths and denominations were represented at Beck’s Rally in unity sending a clear message that “we are not made up of racist, zealot, homophobs, or natzi supremists that people try to make us out to be.” Glenn has been accused over and over of trying to divide this country. But, I believe this action was an attempt to unify all of us, peacefully.

    Finally, yes I am aware of Freedomworks and other GOP funding of the “TEA PARTY”. This is again, a divisive step taken by the GOP to control something that is NOT theirs. Sarah Palin and many other GOP politicians will find out that she’s not as popular as she thinks. Most of us want people in office who want to fix things like; the re-writing of the tax code to something fair for everyone, the national security risks of capitalism on an uneven playing field that devalue every job in America, a federal government that stays out of both business and union politics alike, earmarking bans, and term limits.

    If the majority of politicians on the Democrat side swing this way, I’m a Democrat. If the Republican side swings this way, I’m a Republican. If neither side swings at all, we’re screwed.

    United we stand, Divided we fall.

    BTW: I read the entire article and found it an interesting read in compared to some of the drivel that drips from AP and Reuters. Thanks for the good read! :)

    GBYA!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    The best analogy I can give is to refer you perhaps to the Holy Roman Empire, or what used to be called once “Christendom.” It was more a matter of arming the various peoples with a sense of self-righteousness, self-righteousness as to both their moral, religious superiority as individuals and self-righteousness in the collective sense, as a nation or nations. And we know of course the typical expression of that kind of self-righteousness: in Holy Wars.

    Well, America is still sort of engaged in a holy war of sorts, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. The religious-evangelical fervor is still very much a part of our national psyche and it expresses itself in equally evangelical form of our politics. Take the ole George W, for example: it was his heavenly father who told him to invade Iraq, was his answer in one of the interviews, not George Herbert Bush.

    So I guess many of us are still medieval in our thinking. The need for self-justification is insatiable, and many go to great lengths to feed their insecure ego.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    For anyone who cares:

    CBS commissioned an estimate from AirPhotosLive, a company that provides crowd sizes based on aerial photos. CBS noted that there’s a margin of error of plus or minus 9,000. So, by this estimate, there were as few as 78,000 attendees or as many as 96,000.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “140 different faiths and denominations”

    got a citation for this?

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Beck is a TV star, and had another big media celebrity [Mama Grizzly, ick] as his special guest speaker. So he drew a big crowd. So what?

    It was for no apparent purpose.

  • zingzing

    handyguy: “I would be glad to hear Dave’s evidence that the movement doesn’t trust its own backers.”

    the thing is that most tea partiers don’t even know who is providing the money. it’s an astroturf thing. so no, they don’t trust them. they don’t distrust them. they don’t know what’s going on.

  • Zedd

    roger,

    What is interesting or confusing is that most people who espouse these beliefs profess to be protestants. Protestantism implies that one believes in an acquittal of guilt for the person; a salvation through faith and not by his own works.

    If that be the case, the notion of a Christendom which can be referred to as the Body of Christ can not experience salvation nor justification and therefore Christendom is not Christian. It does however refer to the congregation of Believers and that congregation is not distinguished by geography. This is where the mixing of patriotism and this Christian identity gets confusing to me.

    These individuals were not on the lawn as members of the Body of Christ. They were there as Americans, members of a Christian nation. This is were my bewilderment lies. Is this ignorance or delusion? What really?

  • zingzing

    kurt: “I’m all for a debate but I can tell Christians are not welcome here.”

    christians are fine. (as are jews and muslims and buddhists and atheists and whatever else).

    the idea that our society is predominantly judeo-christian and therefore, our nation should turn to the judeo-christian god as its guiding light is against all american principles. that’s what america was invented to escape.

  • Bill B

    Sorry Gary – I get the fed up thing and I get that you say it’s been a long time coming for you. But here’s the problem; This ‘movement’ has ZERO cred when it sits on it’s hands and watches what went down for 8 years of Bush (6 of which while they had congress too) and does and says next to NOTHING (oh there was the odd chirp about how bush wasn’t a real conservative with his spending ways) and less than 2 months into Obama you’d think someone raped Betsy friggin Ross!

    Soory bud – you latched onto the wrong bunch – and you need to fact check the drivel that spews from becks mouth – even against what he’d previously said himself!

    Also conspicuously absent from your list is religious freedom and what the would actually mean. Hmmm? Should gov be deciding whether or not gays can marry? C’mon Gary, surprise me!

    Already there’s blubbering by certain evangelical circles that Beck is kinda cool and all, but that Mormonism stuff – ut-uh. Not the way to the promised land! Unity my ass!

    Try here and here. Granted, maybe a marginalized extreme but 2 days after the fest – just the beginning?

  • Bill B

    btw Roger – I answered you on that other thread though the thread has taken a trip down Lunacy Lane and you probably didn’t even realize it.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I saw it Bill, just got caught up in the entertainment aspect of BC, not to mention a flurry from Glenn Beck fanatics.

    Let me catch a few zees first before I respond.

  • Bill B

    tehe – cool

  • Zedd

    Tea partiers like many right wingers support ideals, in many cases romantic notions that have circulated the political stratosphere since early in our nation’s history. (If Lincoln only knew what his political campagine about coming from humble beginnings would do). Most of those ideals are manufactured and have no relation to anything that has ever occurred or is possible.

    To be fair, this is what I believe to be what they believe:

    1. Small federal government – Im not sure why post communism and after Republican politicians have proven time and time again that this is impractical in a modern, global society, they still push for this. Perhaps someone will open my eyes as to why this is stance is relevant.

    2. They believe that we are a Christian nation. All Christians know that a nation can not be saved from sin and that a congregation of Christians exists for the support of the individual Christian.

    3. They often believe that we were better in past years; more moral, more fiscally conservative, etc. These same Christians believe that we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God; That at no point in human history has man ever been righteous. The drama in the Bible substantiates that. Also, as a nation, we are actually becoming kinder and more tolerant of others (less judgemental). They also, of course are not able to pin point a time when we ran the nation the way that they would have it (fiscally), and things went well.

    4. They don’t want to be taxed. I also dreamt of a day in a candy store where I could get all the candy I want when I was 3yrs old. The dream of not being taxed for all that makes this country as amazing as they say it is bizarre at the very least.

    5. They want prayer in school. Neither of them would be okay with a Muslim or Mormon or Other leading their child in prayer. Oddly enough, they believe that they can talk to God any time (silently and in their heart) so not sure why they have to be lead in prayer by math teachers, its confusing.

    6. They believe that Capitalism is close to godliness. Not sure why. I think its because of the communism scare from several decades ago.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    If that be the case, the notion of a Christendom which can be referred to as the Body of Christ can not experience salvation nor justification and therefore Christendom is not Christian. It does however refer to the congregation of Believers and that congregation is not distinguished by geography. This is where the mixing of patriotism and this Christian identity gets confusing to me.

    I realize that Glenn Beck is not your cup of tea, Zedd. But if “Jesus and the body of Christ” is where the Republicans are headed, then the Democrats will get the Jewish vote in 2010 and beyond. But the Democrats are not good choices either.

    Beck is alright in what he says – until he starts flapping his jaws about Christianity. Sarah Palin is a Christian dominionist, and Glenn Beck does not sound a lot better to me. Considering who is on the other side – a Muslim sympathizer, if not an actual Muslim himself – my solution the whole mess would be to move to Israel.

    Oh, wait a minute – I did that already!! Nine years ago!

  • http://loftypremise.blogspot.com/2010/07/tyrants-start-somewhere.html Tommy Mack

    Thankfully, this thread is not dominated by argument about the body count at the rally, as did WaPo and NYT threads have. Now, smaller government is a nifty topic.

    Pop Quiz. Who said, “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!”

    Ronald Reagan did.

    The spiritual head of the GOP is well known for his quips. “Honey, I forgot to duck” is one of my favorites. But on the pragmatic matter of bureaucracy, the Gipper was right on. Bureaucrats who suffer a cut in budget have arrived at the terminus of their career. Thus the rhetoric of smaller government can only succeed if the present government is overthrown and replaced.

    If only there were books to burn.

  • Zedd

    Ruvy,

    The evangelicals, aside from the Jewish vote are the primary reason that we are supporting Israel. It is their theology that makes it impossible for the US to hold Israel to the same standards as it does everyone else.

    While you will say you don’t want America to support Israel, Israel would disagree with you.

    So like it or not, they are sustaining your existence.

    Oh and please don’t respond with a long history lesson. Or a restatement of your same old same old position. We’ve heard it all from you. I wont read it. And certainly don’t write any Hebrew… no comprende so its useless.

    However, if you’d like to add some new insight I would be delighted to engage with you. But telling me you are glad you are not in the US and you don’t want help from the US and the problem with Jews is that they have turned away from blah blah blah and wahabi this or that.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Zedd,

    You haven’t a clue what “supporting Israel” means.

    If America were truly supporting Israel, I wouldn’t have to do patrols of the village, I wouldn’t feel obligated to be a police volunteer, taxes would be lower, there would be no building freeze, barely any terrorism, no PA, no hypocritical Americans trying to delegitimize our country, no boycotts, no bullshit, etc. etc. etc. My kid would not be going into the army or getting bennies from them for marrying! Prices out here would be a lot higher, and I would not be writing articles here about how your nation is trying to destroy this country behind our backs.

    What you mean to say, Zedd is this: The evangelicals, aside from the Jewish vote, are the primary reason that we are not openly against, and working openly to dismantle Israel. It is the evangelicals’ theology that makes it impossible for the US to hold Israel to the same standards as it does everyone else.

    See? No history lessons, no blah blah blah. Just a little readjustment of your lenses so you can see the truth.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    By the way, Zedd, if the United States were truly supporting Israel, 4 Israelis now dead would be alive, and rabbis would not feel the need to say it is time for Jews to act like madmen. So much for what you know.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Zedd –

    Your comment #133 is spot on. I’ve never read a more succinct expose of the hypocrisy of Republicans in general and evangelicals in particular.

  • Zedd

    Ruvy,

    None of what you are whining about is the job of another country. Yes please do your own neighborhood watch. My HMO organizes one.

    What I know is that my very real tax dollars are going there, 2.4 billion of them in 2009 to purchase your weapons. Over the next 10 years Israel will receive 30 billion dollars.

    I’m not sure how you could be so confused about he type of support Israel is getting.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’ll second Glenn’s #139. With respect to Zedd’s last bullet point, Max Weber’s classic, Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, lays out the groundwork.

    However, the analysis presented in #136 is somewhat faulty. The main reason why the US “supports” Israel is geopolitical. This element of US foreign policy in the Middle East has been in effect for quite some time, before the evangelicals and the Christian Right, as a well-organized political block, were on the map.

    US foreign policy is never swayed by the popular sentiment. It hasn’t been thus far and it’s unlikely to become so influenced in the foreseeable future. To believe otherwise is a form of delusion.

  • Zedd

    roger,

    I have to disagree with you on this one. The US could build relationships with any nation it so chooses for the most part. Israel is the easiest support because of its significance to Americans. It is the birth place of Jesus Christ. For a nation of Christians, this is quite relevant. More over, don’t forget that according to protestant belief, those who war with Israel will encounter the wrath of God.

    I would agree that the powers that be have used the vulnerability of the American people towards Israel, to meet their goals, however the extensive courting of that nation has a huge political benefit.

    The US has an ally in Jordan. We have friends in the region and could have friends with stronger bonds if we paid them as much as we pay Israel.

    The truth is that Israel is becoming a liability. The issues that we are having with terrorism stem primarily from our relationship with Israel. Had we not had the power of the Jewish vote in this country and the fear of God’s wrath, we would have kicked them to the curb a long time ago.

    Okay, the benadryl is kicking in. I’d better go before things get too fuzzy. I hope I’ll read this tomorrow and still feel confident in the position that I have taken.

    For now, I stand firmly in my assessment of the situation.

  • John Wilson

    Zedd #133 says “6. They believe that Capitalism is close to godliness. Not sure why. I think its because of the communism scare from several decades ago.”

    Actually, capitalism is closer to communism than to godliness. Capitalism and communism just differ in who runs things: capitalists appoint the winners of various regional and sector business playoff matches, and communists appoint the winners of various regional and sector political playoff matches. But they are alike in the careless disregard for the lives and fortunes of their unfortunate serfs, i.e., the losers of those playoff matches.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    John,

    Capitalism and communism just differ in who runs things: capitalists appoint the winners of various regional and sector business playoff matches, and communists appoint the winners of various regional and sector political playoff matches. But they are alike in the careless disregard for the lives and fortunes of their unfortunate serfs, i.e., the losers of those playoff matches.

    Well said, but can you agree that not all capitalists are, sly, greedy, and blind to the needs of others or the importance of working in an ethical manner?

  • Zedd

    John,

    So they are basically made up of human beings by human beings.

    It is for this reason that I don’t understand the bandwagoning and staunchness that goes on with regards to social theories. We are just people.