Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Glenn Beck CPAC 2010 Keynote Speech—Specific Topics for All Americans

Glenn Beck was the keynote Speaker at the CPAC 2010 convention this year, and if you’d like, you can watch the entire speech at Ablur’s blog, where I watched it. Thanks Ablur!

Beck is very popular among Conservatives but not so with Liberals. You can find Beck’s speech deciphered all over the net by a lot of bloggers, authors and journalists, some positively, some not so favorably. I found a fair amount of what Beck had to say very sensible and think some of it is worth repeating.

Glenn Beck felt that, “...it’s not enough just to not suck as much as the other side”

Who can disagree with that! “Not sucking as much” isn’t BETTER, it’s just mediocre. This is a message that our Representatives NEED pounded into their heads. Who wants to SETTLE for mediocre? Certainly NOT me! Do you? Why would our Representatives? Why wouldn’t they want to be the absolute BEST that they can be? And more importantly, why aren’t MORE Americans demanding that our Officials be the BEST?

Beck went on to say that he was a recovering alcoholic and that he believes in redemption. I do too, by the way. Although I believe you must repent to those you’ve hurt. It doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks as long as you are truly sorry and make amends to those to whom you’ve caused grief. We’ve all screwed up, but, if we make amends, never do it again, and atone to those we hurt, I feel forgiveness is possible.

But what happens when it’s our Public Officials who are making the mistakes and causing the pain? Do they deserve forgiveness? Well, it’s my belief that if they admit to their mistakes and are truly remorseful, then yes, they should be forgiven. But do we have any Representatives who will actually stand up and tell us that they screwed up? Are any of our Representatives capable of remorse? Repentance? Or are they all too self-absorbed and “above us” to ever admit to anything, especially a major screw up?

Or as Beck said, “You are somebody who has said ‘Okay I’ll represent you’. Did you check your soul at the door? Make sure you hang onto your soul. Now if you are just like me, if you are just like the average every day person, you won’t lose your soul along with way. ”

He’s right. I didn’t lose my soul or check it at the door when I was in a position of power. I was in charge of hundreds of employees and I didn't "lose my way”. I conducted myself in an honorable manner as I was the role model. If my subordinates saw me behaving less than honorably what would stop them? Our Officials are role models but yet they don’t conduct themselves honorably. Why should Americans be honest on their taxes when we have a bunch of tax cheats in Public Office? Or put in an honest day’s work when our Officials aren’t working 40 or 50 hours per week yet getting paid a lot more than the average American and on OUR dime! Why should WE worry about a balanced budget or the deficit when Congress is on a spending spree that would put a drunken sailor on shore leave to shame—yet we’ve cut back on everything from movie tickets to haircuts! These people are out of control but they preach to US about fiscal responsibility. We NEED politicians in DC who will reflect decency, integrity and good moral character, plus NOT take advantage of us, our country or the position they hold.

Glenn said that he wasn’t sure what the definition of Conservatism was in America anymore, however, he knew what it meant to him. It meant “personal responsibility”. He and I couldn’t agree on something more. Also, if you’ve done something wrong then it’s up to YOU to pay the price. It’s up to YOU to make it right. Wouldn’t it have been great to have the CEO’s stand up and be “accountable” rather than have the American people “bail” their reckless butts out? That USED to be the American way. What the heck happened?

He said that people needed to stop jabbering about their childhoods. You know, he has a point. Personally I could “boo-hoo” about the nightmare of a childhood I endured, but I don’t, because everybody has a sob story. A bad childhood doesn’t give you the right to “bail-outs”, “hand-outs” or “opt-outs”. It’s over and done with; today is a new day and if you’re still “moaning” about your childhood then you’re using it as an excuse NOT to take “personal responsibility”.


Which leads me to Glenn’s point, “We have a right to fail. Without failure there is no growth.” Failure isn’t bad. I’ve had failure in my life and I’ll probably fail again. I’ve also had quite a few successes. It was my failures that made me strong. They taught me determination, self-discipline and courage. Without those I wouldn’t be the independent, brave, compassionate woman I am today. So, I’m thankful for my failures. If someone had bailed me out, how would I have learned a valuable lesson? Or take famous novelist John Grisham’s first novel, “A Time to Kill”, it was rejected by a dozen publishers and 16 agents before breaking into print and launching his career. Failure is only bad if we give up.

I’m with Beck 100% on this message, “This is America, there is no cap on success. There seems to be some sort of cap on willingness to search for success. That has to change in America. We have a different system here. We choose our own destiny. We choose. All men are created equal. All men will not end up equal. But all men are created equal. And in our daily choices that determines our outcome.”

There ISN’T a cap on success and it most definitely ISN’T limited. The only thing that is limited is our thought process. Many people have pulled themselves out of poverty to become extremely wealthy, although success isn’t only determined financially. For me success is determined by one’s level of happiness. [Achieve THAT and you have the world in the palm of your hand-- regardless of your W-2!] The message, however, is very clear—we are all equal, but we don’t all end up equal and that is due to our CHOICES. Again, don’t blame it on your childhood because a pleasant childhood doesn’t guarantee a good life just like an awful childhood doesn’t guarantee a bad life.

“We need an understanding that life is not fair. It is not fair. The bad guys sometimes wins. Sometimes OJ Simpson gets away with it. Sometimes the big banks fail. Sometimes the good banks fail. Not everybody gets a trophy. What is the point in competing for a trophy if everyone gets a trophy? Please stop teaching my children that everyone will get a trophy just for participating.”

Oh don’t get me started on giving trophies to everyone who participates! I find THAT practice not only ridiculous but damaging in more ways than one. We are teaching our youth that all you have to do is “show up” and you “win”. What kind of message is THAT? People need to realize that competition is healthy and not everybody wins. But it’s those who refuse to “give up” who eventually “win”. Again, everyone’s level of “success” is measured individually, but “participation” shouldn’t guarantee anything.


There are times when bad things happen to good people. There are times when we are victims of circumstance and sometimes life just happens and it’s JUST NOT FAIR. But guess what? We can wake up tomorrow and the sun will be out and we need to realize WE have the power to fix our OWN lives! We can make choices to alter our course, to alter our destiny and make a difference. Will this guarantee that bad things will never happen? No, of course not. But it will guarantee that OUR life and OUR destiny is in OUR hands and not the hands of someone else! I will be damned if I will hand my power over to someone else. I WANT the power over my own life. And anyone who doesn’t want that power has been brainwashed to believe that they have no power and THAT is shameful.

Glenn mentioned that, “People are losing a fundamental belief that it’s going to be better tomorrow than it is today.”

Of course they are. Our economy is in the tank. Unemployment is 10% and probably going to get higher. Inflation is sure to hit. Interest rates are low only because they are being held down on purpose. The housing industry is only doing as well as it is because of government intervention. But take those incentives away and what would happen? The economy is NOT getting better and I’ll go out on a limb and say that’s it’s going to take quite some time before it does. The price of everything from paper towels to ground meat has sky-rocketed but most salaries have not followed. People who have worked hard all their lives watched as their life savings was lost. They also watch as the Government spends their taxes frivolously with no regard for their future. We’re angry, frightened and disenfranchised. We have tightened our belts but Congress hasn’t. No, Congress has been doing business as usual and then some—all under the “guise” of “it’s best for our country”. That’s bull. Spending us into oblivion isn’t in our best interest. Congress states it can’t “cut” because everything is necessary. The first stimulus was necessary. This second stimulus is necessary—EVERYTHING Government does is NECESSARY—ever notice that? Yet we are bleeding through every vein, losing private sector jobs daily, BUT Government jobs are SAVED! Yippee! Tell that to the carpenters, hair stylists, waiters, car salesmen, technicians, secretaries and childcare workers, to name a few, who have been out of work for over a year and can’t find work and whose unemployment benefits have run out. Tell them how many jobs have been saved. They’ll tell you the government is full of it—and they are right. You NEED private sector jobs to pay for those “saved government jobs” and THAT is the FACT Jack.

I’m tired of the lies, the distortion of facts and the spin. I want honest people in Congress to tell me the truth—for once. We, as Americans, have the right to the truth. And by golly if they don’t start then we have every right to FIRE them! Forget the voting booths. These people aren’t “public servants” anymore—they are PAID employees! And we are their bosses! We have the RIGHT to fire them if they aren’t doing their job. You give me a list of those who are doing what is RIGHT, TRUE, HONEST and IN THE BEST INTEREST of our country and her people and I’ll get off my soap box…until then I will preach about the dishonesty of DC until the cows come home.

In closing, like or dislike Glenn Beck, he made some valid points in his speech. Personal responsibility shouldn’t be avoided and neither should failure as failure can lead us to our greatest success because success isn’t limited. We also need some optimism, which isn’t easy with what we’re faced with today. But it might help if our politicians were more honorable and decent and if they aren’t then we should be doing something about them—no more “status quo”. This is OUR country and we Americans need to take pride in her and make sure that everything our Representatives are doing is truly in the “best interest” of OUR country.

262 Comments:

  1. How are the conservatives going to explain why they didn't invite the Republican choice for president, Sarah Palin, to attend. As for Glen Bek, read his bio on WIKIPEDIA which explains that his wife divorced him because he was drunk and on drugs all the time. Add to this the fact that Beck barely finished high school. This is the same Beck who now tries to con folks into believing he is one of the worlds greatest gift from God.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I do have to add that Glenn Beck admitted that he learned a lot about what he spoke about at CPAC from PUBLIC Libraries and the books therein, which he said were "FREE."

    EXCEPT: Public libraries are collectives: Socialism!

    People pay their taxes and those taxes go to support "free" libraries!

    They're "free" by dint of taxpayers' money which is collected and redistributed to the "free" libraries!

    Glenn Beck, therefore, supports and benefits from "commie" libraries! /snark

    But this is true.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Excellent.

    "Glenn Beck is a war hero".

    Discuss.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lynne: Yes, I’m well aware that Beck was “drunk and on drugs all the time” and consequentially hit rock bottom about 15 years ago. He admits this regularly on his radio and TV show and also admitted that in his speech and I mentioned it in my post, “Beck went on to say that he was a recovering alcoholic…"


    His “barely finishing high school” just proves his message, and mine, that “success isn’t limited”.

    Here is a list of some famous people who actually “didn’t even finish” High School:

    Andre Agass: Tennis player, winner of 8 Grand Slam titles. Quit school in the ninth grade and turned tennis pro at the age of 16.
    Bryan Adams: Singer, Songwriter.
    Tom Anderson: Co-founder of MySpace.
    Sonny Bono: Singer, Actor, Songwriter, U.S. Congressman.
    Julie Andrews: Oscar-winning Actress, Singer, Author.
    John Jacob Astor: Multimillionaire Businessman. America's first multimillionaire.
    James M. Cox: Newspaper publisher, 3-term Governor of Ohio, Presidential nominee in 1920, Founded Cox Enterprises.

    Here are a few that dropped out PRIOR to high school:

    Jane Austen: Novelist. Elementary school dropout.
    Yogi Berra: Baseball player, Coach, and Manager. Quit school in the eighth grade.
    Andrew Carnegie: Industrialist and Philanthropist. Started work at the age of 13 as a bobbin boy in a textile mill. One of the first mega-billionaires in the U.S. Elementary school dropout.

    Personally I say “Kudos!” to anyone who makes it big, especially if they drop out of school! Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating dropping out of school as I have a great respect for education and believe it's an extremely valuable commodity!

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's interesting to note that in the UK, Glenn Beck's show has run for almost two weeks without ANY advertising, because no one wants to support his toxic hate.

    They're not even American; he's not talking about the UK; and still they don't want any part of him.

    At least 119 companies have pulled out of sponsoring him.

    He spins innuendo, he preaches xenophobia, racism, sexism and hate, and he's a huge part of what's wrong with politics today: pumping up the volume on the freak fringe so loud it drowns out the few rational voices.

    Even Republicans know this.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Arthurstone said...

    Excellent.

    "Glenn Beck is a war hero".Discuss.


    Pardon Me, My mistake, I was thinking about Batack Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It's more than past time to bring the teachings of our Lord and savior back into the schools.

    Ah, the voice of Dominionism. I've been so hoping for this.

    Firstly, what would you propose to do with the millions of American citizens that aren't Christians?

    Secondly, to run a nation on Christian law is exactly the same (and just as bad) as running a nation on Sharia law.

    Dominionists preach openly that their goal is to overtake American society, culture, and legislature and enforce Biblical standards on all. This includes stoning incorrigible children and adulterers. It includes the stipulation that only Christian males may hold office, and that non-Christians will not have citizenship. It includes the dismantling of all government social services, which will henceforth be run through the church, and-you guessed it!-wouldn't be available to any non-Christian. Women will be taken out of the workforce and put back in the home where they belong, and all media will be expected to conform to Biblical standards of modesty, etc.

    I didn't make this up.

    And it's happening now.

    So, Mal, since you think it's time to bring Jesus into the picture, would you say you agree with all of the above?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Speaking of Glenn Beck I can't imagine there's much point in waiting to give up your life for him.

    No time like the present!

    Any problem with that?

    ReplyDelete
  9. So we have heard the usual nonsense and hate from the usual suspects.

    The same Glenn Beck that pointed out that Anita Dunn "worships" and "idolizes" "her hero" Mao Zedong. . It is surreal to think anyone in the once great USA would criticize such a brilliant man when we have a foreign born, terrorist loving Muslim loving Dictator Loving in the white house. Comparing the intellects of Beck and Obmmy is like comparing the basketball skills of Michael Jordan in his prime with those of an infant. I, like tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of Americans would gladly give me life for Beck if he instructed me to. If Beck were president, we wouldn't have to worry about Iran building any nukes, because we already have them and consequently there wouldn't be an Iran anymore. It's more than past time to bring the teachings of our Lord and savior back into the schools. Once we do that, we won't have to worry about Muslims being president.
    Just as the liberals destroyed Sarah Palin, they are out to destroy Glenn Beck. Why was is ok for the liberals to call George Bush a Nazi and a Hitler and a brown shirt and to call him stupid and compare him with a chimpanzee etc. But if Beck calls Obama a racist, the libs have a five-alarm meltdown! Somebody please explain to me, without mincing words or beating around the bush, how Obama could have sat in the congregation of Jeremiah Wright for over 20 years and not have racist opinions!

    And how come it's fine to do all those awful and nasty, and outrageous thing to Sarah Palan and these bloggers still do!
    Calling a republican a racist is something "liberals" learn to do at 4 years old.
    I can remember when one of these blogger listed every one of Glenn Beck's Sponsors on her blog so that people would boycott them. What a great American that is... Black Listing a Radio Talk Show Host for his opinions. They have called him every dirty name in the world ..too bad he don't drive a pick-up truck.
    ACORN, Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett, Anita Dunn etc. And Glenn Beck is the problem??
    Ya gotta be kidding!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Satyavati devi dasi said...
    So, Mal, since you think it's time to bring Jesus into the picture, would you say you agree with all of the above?

    No, I do not.

    And with all due respect Saty, I have a problem agreeing with 90 or 95 percent of what you say. So this is nothing new.

    ReplyDelete
  11. And with all due respect Saty, I have a problem agreeing with 90 or 95 percent of what you say. So this is nothing new.

    Except that this isn't what I'm saying.. this is what the Family Research Council, D. James Kennedy, James Dobson, and plenty of (overwhelmingly Republican) Congresspeople are saying, and working desperately to legislate even as we speak.

    So you're not disagreeing with me as much as you are with them.

    But what I'm really interested to hear is what YOU mean by this:
    It's more than past time to bring the teachings of our Lord and savior back into the schools.

    So please, enlighten me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Satyavati devi dasi said...

    So you're not disagreeing with me as much as you are with them.

    But what I'm really interested to hear is what YOU mean by this:
    It's more than past time to bring the teachings of our Lord and savior back into the schools.

    ----------------------------------
    And there are literally hundreds of other quotes I could cite from the more prominent founding fathers that support me..
    Because we have a tenable and tangible problem here with The Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party, they do want to break the cross and kill the Christian and Jew.
    This country was founded on God. In God we trust. So help us God. One nation under God. Anyone who doesn't like it can pack their bags and leave for Iraq. Marxists by definition don't believe in God.

    I don't really understand what you're trying to get at. And I'm not going to prolong this discussion as what I said was my opinion and my opinion only. I don't and won't pretend to be an authority on religion. So you can say it for another time and place.
    As for the Glenn Beck speech, I think a bunch of old guys in the Senate just got a wake up call.
    His message was heard loud and clear, you can tell from the way that all the Lefty bloggers are criticizing him

    ReplyDelete
  13. Here's what I'm getting at, Mal, what you *mean* by bringing Jesus back into the schools. How would you implement it, what does it involve, what would you include?

    Most importantly, what would you do with all the non-Christian children in said schools?

    This country was founded on God. In God we trust. So help us God. One nation under God. Anyone who doesn't like it can pack their bags and leave for Iraq.

    So does this mean that the non-Christians either accept being marginalized and discriminated against... or leave the country?

    Does it mean that "everyone else" becomes second rate? I thought there was a specific in the Constitution about not establishing a religion...?

    And just to perhaps break the stereotype for you: I'm a Socialist (which is not by any stretch of the imagination a Marxist), and I'm very committed to my non-Christian, monotheistic religious beliefs.

    Which may go far in explaining why I have an interest in wanting to know exactly what people mean to do when they talk about 'bringing Jesus' into any kind of public institution.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Satyavati devi dasi said...

    Here's what I'm getting at, Mal,

    So does this mean that the non-Christians either accept being marginalized and discriminated against... or leave the country?

    Does it mean that "everyone else" becomes second rate? I thought there was a specific in the Constitution about not establishing a religion...?

    It surely doesn't mean that we bend over backwards and put Muslim pray rooms all over our schools, and in our Stadiums. And wherever the hell else they are putting them.
    and it surely doesn't mean that we bend over backwards and put Muslim Foot Baths in all of our parkway rest area’s etc.
    Our schools etc. are not meant to be based on the tenets of any particular people. We should not be responding to the prayer needs of Muslim students.
    I believe their religion says that when Muslims live in a country where the government is non-Muslim, then they must abide by that government's rules - and they are pardoned for breaking tradition because of this. Therefore, these people should have no problem with dealing with school as it is. If they do, then they can privately school or home school their children.
    Why would anyone yield some an ignorant position that "policies must not be tailored to any particular religion." Is that wishful thinking? Embrace reality!
    Haven't we gone far enough yet? We don't even wish our friends a Merry Christmas anymore out of fear that we may offend someone.
    We don't even recognize September the 11th anymore because of Obama and his Spineless, sniveling, cream-puff, milquetoast pussies.
    And now, how many Americans will die because Barack Obama decided to lawyer up the terrorists!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Our schools etc. are not meant to be based on the tenets of any particular people.

    Right. This means not meant to be based on Christian tenets, either.

    We should not be responding to the prayer needs of Muslim students.

    Right. And not to the prayer needs of Christian students, Baha'i students, Vaisnava students, Buddhist students, and so on.

    So basically, what I'm seeing here is that you've definitively contradicted yourself. On the one hand, you want to bring Jesus into schools, but on the other hand you acknowledge that our schools aren't supposed to be based on the tenets of any particular people.

    Or does this mean 'any non-Christian people'? I'm just asking that since you originally specified bringing Jesus into school.

    ReplyDelete
  16. GLENN BECK FOR PRESIDENT!

    Lets see, he would have to have daily news conferences which would get him into prime time...

    ...whew and imagine all the folks he would invite over for a beer!

    I SAY LETS PARTY!

    Its time for him to put his money where his mouth is!

    ReplyDelete
  17. malcontent: "In God we trust. So help us God. One nation under God. Anyone who doesn't like it can pack their bags and leave for Iraq. Marxists by definition don't believe in God."

    "In God We Trust" was put on our money during the Civil War.

    "So Help Us[sic] God" is not in the Constitution as an oath to be sworn, but merely a tradition started by G. Washington when he took his oath of office. It is absolutely NOT a requirement in the Constitution when swearing an oath of office.

    "One Natition Under God" was stuck into the Pledge of Allegiance during the 1950s while everyone ware afraid that there was a commie under their beds. The original Pledge of Allegience (composed by Francis Bellamy, a Christian SOCIALIST BTW) did not have those words in it.

    So none of those phrases were part of our nation's foundation.

    Not a ONE.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oh, and this too:

    Our Constitution upon which the laws of this land is based does not mention any god in it whatsoever.

    It begins: "We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union..."

    Our laws are based upon "We the people..." Not any god.

    ReplyDelete
  19. When God runs for president I will be more than happy to vote for Him.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't think Gingrich is gonna go for the GOP nomination in '12.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Glenn Beck did a great job pointing out the problems and providing reasonable directions for solving them. As a self made man who did everything he could to destroy himself, hit bottom and then work to pull himself out; he has a lot of common sense and clear lessons that can be used to teach others.

    The fact that most people don't want their sins exposed and will do anything to tear down the one who exposes them makes Glenn a huge target. I can tell by those who have commented here, that he has definitely got under the skin of many.

    Like him or loath him, he has a knack of saying things that need saying. Sometimes things just need to be brought out into the open so that a solution can present itself. Besides even truly horrible people have good ideas. Hitler created the Autobon. We owe our highway system to this idea.

    Yes, even a person who took himself to the lowest point, can turn themselves around and become a great person. True repentance is an amazing thing. Rather then grow and become a stronger character in the end, most would rather blame all their failures on others and never except responsibility for their lives.

    You got to admire someone who is willing to put it all out there.

    ReplyDelete
  22. the malcontent Reads these comments, sighs, laughs, ignores, says to himself, "another nonsensical, cockeyed, absurd cop out by the USUAL gang of 3.

    Grins, and says to himself, " I guess this is what I get for spanking your mother with a hairbrush when she was pregnant"...and (then shrugs and walks away)...

    ReplyDelete
  23. malcontent typed:


    "I, like tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of Americans would gladly give me life for Beck if he instructed me to. If Beck were president, we wouldn't have to worry about Iran building any nukes, because we already have them and consequently there wouldn't be an Iran anymore."


    I certainly think those who try and engage this guy in reasonable dialogue have the very best of intentions but to take him and his 'arguments' as representative of rational discussion is sort of silly.

    He isn't serious and shouldn't be treated as such. Think polishing. Think turd.

    He is prolific though. Got to give him that.

    ReplyDelete
  24. ablur - Beck or Limbaugh could make the greatest, truest proclaimation on Earth and still be met with suspicion and dismissal.
    Why? Because they have been deliberately misleading and incendiary on so many other occasions, they have poisoned the well.
    The guy that calls embryonic stem cell research eugenics? Or the guy who calls every non-white in government a racist and then goes on to expound on some persecution complex of his that everyone hates him because he is white, American and "Christian"?
    He has lost the chance to develop any credibility simply by being just another media whore pandering for ratings and money.
    Pam - while you pulled some gems out of context, Beck also attacked progressivism as "a disease designed to eat the constitution." He went on to quote some obscure Communist Party brochure - from 1938 Rhode Island and then intimated that this administration is a marxist government.
    Also seems to have a problem with evolution, ignoring the fact that progressive ideology embraces the idea that the average person should have more control over their government and that government functioning should be efficient and rational.
    So far, doesn't sound like the "cancer of progressivism" is even involved in our government.
    He seems to think there is some sort of evil in evolution - the slow changes dictated by the environment and modernization which, I might add, gave us the development of multimedia that Beck takes full advantage of.
    Progressives have been responsible for the enactment of child labor laws, addressing social justice issues and the development of our national park system.
    While Beck laments the destruction of the constitution, he also proclaims that our rights are NOT given us by our government but that we get our rights from GOD! Of course, he immediately moves on to other topics without addressing what those rights are and how they will impact the Buddists, atheists, diests and other "non-Beck Christians" who are also American citizens. Hmmmm...
    While some of the quotes you pulled could be worthy topics of discussion among rational Americans, the rest of the tired old rhetoric,lies and mis directions did nothing but turn me off.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Arthurstone said...
    He isn't serious and shouldn't be treated as such. Think polishing. Think turd.

    He is prolific though. Got to give him that.


    "Think turd."?
    Y'all got alot of class

    ReplyDelete
  26. "I, like tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of Americans would gladly give me life for Beck if he instructed me to."


    Malcontent, you need to quit getting so excited!

    Glenn Beck couldn't even get a 100,000 to show up for the Tea Party Rallies...

    ReplyDelete
  27. Insert a "Sigh" right here!.

    Glenn was right...progessivism *is* a disease...a cancer. The joy and peace of complete ignorance is blissful.
    His speech was great, he said everything most people are too afraid to say out loud.
    Every time Beck puts out a book, it sells millions , he has millions of listener and millions of people watch his show.

    Compared to that bubble head big eared mental midget clown, who speaks every half an hour. Except for a few fringe liberals and an odd assortment of kooks and cranks who love spreading hate, no one even bother to listen to him anymore... He is such a lair that I'd even believe Tiger Woods before him.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mal: I like Glenn Beck, however, I don't agree with EVERYTHING he says just as I don't agree with EVERYTHING my own husband says! I don't think that makes me "ignorant". In my opinion it makes me rational because I believe it's unreasonable to think someone would agree with you all the time.

    And I'm not one of the millions who would die for him. I'll die for 2 people--my two sons.

    ReplyDelete
  29. So Beck is the phoenix rising from the ashes of his own destruction, and now he is the most intelligent man on Earth with the answer to all our problems. Sounds like a "B" rate science fiction movie from the 1950's.
    Beck gives his opinions, not facts, which I happen to disagree with. He gives hate, which he should be denounced for, not praised.
    No, he's not the only one, nor is it only one side, but we are talking about him now.
    How do you justify his hate speech? Unless you agree with his comments of hate, which you left that out in your post praising him.
    What responsibility do we as a nation have, to those through no fault of their own, have become just a waste product of capitalism?
    The people who played by the rules, worked hard, were honest, and are now incapable of taking care of themselves, because they are victims of a system.
    They did nothing wrong. They cannot just go out, get another job, and start over. If they could, they would be glad to do it.
    They are not in control of their own destinies. They are at the mercy of what the society has the ability to allow them to do, which is very little in our current situation.
    These millions pf people are not bums trying to live off the government, which is a life of poverty, just a higher level of poverty than they are in now.
    The kind of personal responsibility you talk about, is only possible in a society full of opportunity. There is little opportunity available in our country today, due to the failed policies of Republican leadership.
    Opportunity is not automatic. It's not just a matter of someone getting off a couch, and guaranteed a job. Hard work is only part of the equation.
    You cannot just tear down government and expect things to get better. Things would be much worse without government. I hear Republicans saying they want to tear down government.Government is the problem. Wrong. Poor leadership of government, is the problem. Leadership that has been in the hands of Republicans by a vast majority of time, over the last 40 years.
    How about Republicans taking responsibility for their mistakes in poor leadership of the country? They don't admit their mistakes, in fact they want now, the same policies that got us to this sad situation.
    They have not met your definition of repentance, so forgiveness is not called for. In fact highlighting their mistakes, is essential to not making those mistakes again.
    I guess because you are a Republican you call it the "blame game." It is just the facts of History.
    Why should I deny the true facts? Why should I listen to Republican who want to use the same proven failed policies?
    Why should I listen to guys like Beck who's message is that Democratic policies will destroy America, when the proof is, it's the policies of the Republicans over the last 40 years that have bankrupted America.
    I refuse to listen to Beck's obvious lies, and the hate he adds in. I question the intelligence of Americans who believe his oratory, when the facts to dispute what he says are part of the official public record.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Pamela D. Hart said...
    Mal:
    And I'm not one of the millions who would die for him. I'll die for 2 people--my two sons.


    Of course not Pam, that was just an expression, a allegory, a metaphor. Don't take it literally, it was not meant to be taken that way..
    And I don't agree with EVERYTHING he says either

    ReplyDelete
  31. And Tom is what you said anything like what Chris Matthews said With his "thrill up my leg" remark about Barack Obama's oratory. There's no doubt Matthews is among the loudest in the media when it comes to comparing Obama to Jesus whenever he talks about the Obamessiah.

    Or was that Bill Clinton that he was comparing to Jesus when Clinton made his first public appearance after his open heart surgery and Chrissy said...."Like Lazarus rising from the grave...!!"

    ReplyDelete
  32. Mal said:
    "another nonsensical, cockeyed, absurd cop out by the USUAL gang of 3."

    I was just trying to get a definitive answer as to exactly what you mean by 'bringing the teachings of our Lord and Saviour back into our schools'. Specifically, I was wanting to know how the vast millions of non-Christian children would fit into that.

    I never did get an answer... I think perhaps "COP OUT" would apply more to you in this case than it did to me.

    I haven't given up hope yet, though.. I'm hoping that you will enlighten me on this, because I really, sincerely want to know: exactly what does it mean to bring those teachings into schools, and what happens to the millions of non-Christian children in the process?

    Thanks in advance. This is too important an issue to cover up or distract people from.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Satyavati I believe that I answered you in my post of February 23, 2010 7:44 PM

    ReplyDelete
  34. After reading through your post dated 2/23/2010, 7:44 PM, what I found was a list of "what it DOESN'T mean"-several things you stated that we shouldn't be doing for Muslims.

    But what you never mentioned is what it DOES mean, and how it would be implemented, and how the non-Christians would be addressed when the 'teachings of our Lord and Saviour' are brought into schools.

    Now, I can give you the benefit of the doubt here if you can clear this up:

    Our schools etc. are not meant to be based on the tenets of any particular people.

    Do you mean by this that you've reconsidered your initial statement about your Lord and Saviour's teachings being brought into school, and that you've changed your mind because our schools are not meant to be based on the tenets of any particular people, and that you've changed your mind about it?

    A more clear way to ask the question would be to ask you whether you consider 'any particular people' to include Christians, thus meaning that our schools are not meant to be based on Christian teachings any more than any other.

    Waiting anxiously for your reply.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Wait no longer for my reply, though you may not like it. And you might say that I'm changing the subject... BUT!
    Satyavati. Let me say this... As parents in general we have a responsibility to teach and protect our children by giving them the necessary tools they need to be healthy and well adjusted individuals. So we depend on our schools to teach our kids right from wrong.. Especially if it can’t be taught in the home as it should be. Look Satyavati, I did not pretend to be a religious person and I am certainly not an authority on the subject. When I wrote this comment I had no intention of getting side-tracked onto the "Christian”controversy, but I lost sight for a moment of my purpose here. I enjoyed the debate, and there's a part of me right now that is fighting going back and answering all those questions. So if you don’t mind, I’d rather not discuss religion. This is something that I'd rather not get involved in. If I said something that offended you then, trust me I did not mean too. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  36. All righty then, fair enough. We can call this one done.

    This debate can be a good reminder that everyone needs to think about what they say and be prepared to back it up if necessary.

    People do tend to get emotional and just go off (I do this too) but it's really important in these debates to be accurate in making sure what we (all) say is what we mean.

    Cause otherwise you can find yourself really nailed into a corner you never really wanted to get into.

    ReplyDelete
  37. OK, you asked, so I'll tell you.
    If we open up prayer to every teacher's discretion, then each teacher will pray to their God. I'm just not comfortable with a Hindu, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist Monk, or a Witch Doctor, praying over my child or walking into the classroom and seeing all the kids on prayer rugs.

    ReplyDelete
  38. You're completely right.

    No one wants their kid to go to school and be taught some other religion. The Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists wouldn't be any more comfortable than you are to come to school and see someone praying out of someone else's scriptures over them.

    So the best answer is your first answer, and the constitutional one: that public schools don't have any business getting into teaching (or praying) in any specific religion, and to leave that to private schools and parents to take care of.

    And in that way, every parent can be comfortable and be personally responsible for their children's religious education... regardless of their religion.

    ReplyDelete
  39. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Shaw Kenawe said...
    So we depend on our schools to teach our kids right from wrong..--malcontent
    I don't think so. We depend on our schools to teach our kids literature, mathematics, geometry, history, biology, English, etc...
    Teaching kids right from wrong is what parents do. And maybe with the help of their religious institutions.




    Dear God, Nooooooooooooooooo!What part of :
    "Especially if it can’t be taught in the home as it should be"
    Didn't you understand?

    Anyone know how to be abusive in the Swedish language?
    This is getting to be so boring

    ReplyDelete
  41. He's got a point, Shaw.... if Mama is working three minimum wage jobs to make ends meet and only sees the kids for six minutes a day while they're asleep, and Daddy is sitting in jail for nonpayment... those kids aren't going to get much moral guidance at home. And so, in cases like these, which are unfortunately becoming more and more common, we do have to depend on the schools to give kids at least a basic sense of right and wrong.

    Not by any means ideal, but in a last-resort sense.

    And yes, hopefully these kids would have some sort of religious framework.. but you can't always count on that either.

    But Mal does have a point with this one.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Satyavati devi dasi said...

    He's got a point, Shaw.... if Mama is working three minimum wage jobs to make ends meet and only sees the kids for six minutes a day while they're asleep, and Daddy is sitting in jail for nonpayment.


    Humm, What a revolting development that is.
    This recession is even worse than I thought.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I disagree. Schools shouldn't be in the business of teaching morality, because then it becomes a matter of whose morality.

    For example, I would have no problem with a school teaching my children that homosexuality is part of the human condition, and that some families have two mommies or two daddies, nor would I have a problem with a school that taught my children that in addition to the predominant religion of this country there are other religions, and there are perfectly good people who have NO religion.

    How many people in certain regions of this country would be comfortable with that?

    ReplyDelete
  44. Tom Said - Leadership that has been in the hands of Republicans by a vast majority of time, over the last 40 years.

    If referencing the president this would be correct but we are looking at the wrong branch for the source of the problem.
    The Democrats have been in control of congress for 13 of the last 21 sessions in the 40 years. The Dems and Repubs split the house and senate 3 times and the Republicans controlled both only 5 times. That would include the 91st congress to present.

    Blaming the president for a failed economy and a failed government is looking at the tip of the iceberg. Congress is the body of destruction that has produced the havoc we are facing. They put in motion policy and legislation that has created the state of affairs we face.

    We need to elect better representation in congress.

    ReplyDelete
  45. It was Reagan's budget with Reagan's tax cuts that added 5 trillion dollars of debt. The Congress did not pass their budget, they passed Reagan's budget.
    It was Bush's budget with Bush's tax cuts that added 6 trillion to the debt. Congress did not pass their budget, they passed Bush's budget.
    Republicans have held the White House 21 out of the last 30 years. During that same time, the national debt has climbed from less than 1 trillion dollars, to 12 trillion dollars.
    The Congress takes its lead, from its country's leader, the President.
    In deference to his winning the election, the Congress votes for his policies.
    Until of course, this current President, where the Republicans are the party of no.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I'm still trying to parse 'Glenn Beck is a war hero'.

    Allegory, metaphor, 'expression' or a cry for help?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Setting the record straight on Presidential debt.

    G.W.Bush $803,424,990,821 over 8 yrs
    Clinton -$164,787,361,848 over 8 yrs
    G.HW.Bush $34,326,854,936 over 4 yrs
    Reagan $97,338,623,234 over 8 yrs
    Carter $462,596,259 over 4 yrs

    Clinton was the only one who reduced the debt.
    Considering the state of the economy after Carter, Reagan's debt was mild. (No it was not 5 trillion)

    I can't wait to see how Obama obliterates the debt threshold and the floundering congress who has agreed to it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I forgot to mention that they are all adjusted to 1984 dollars.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Setting the record straight?

    Where did you get your figures?

    I got my figures from The United States Department of the Treasury-Office of Public Debt, at this address:

    www.publicdebt.treas.gov/

    Please explain why (for purpose of debate) I should use any other figures, than the official U.S. Treasury figures?

    It shows Reagan took office with a 1 trillion dollar debt, and the debt today is almost 13 trillion.

    It shows Bush took office with almost 6 trillion in debt, and left office with a 12.4 trillion dollar debt.

    Records do not go up to today, but their records will calculate Bush's budget went through this year until Obama's budget becomes law.

    That is the historical way they figure President to President, and have since they have been keeping records.

    So officially, Bush's total debt will be closer to 13 trillion.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I should say, the national debt will be 13 trillion by the time they figure the total debt during Bush's two terms.
    That would make a debt of about 6-1/2 trillion during Bush's two terms.

    ReplyDelete
  51. The current national debt is As of today, it’s $10.8-trillion. The administration projects it’ll climb to $14-trillion next year and in 2013 wind up at $17.1-trillion dollars.Can’t wait to see what the lefties do to explain this one. They will try to ignore it no doubt,and of course they will tell you about Bush and reagan. That's a given

    Obama will add $4 trillion to the national debt during his first term

    I was reading a horrible statistic. It should frighten everyone as to how much (1) one trillion dollars really is. “A trillion dollars of $100 bills would stack to over 789 miles high…

    It is sheer lunacy to follow those economists that believe we can spend our way out of this mess. Can YOU spend YOUR way out of debt? That should be answer enough for any reasonable person. WE WILL HAVE TO PAY THIS BACK!! At least acknowledge this for what it is – a pure permanent power grab. “Health Care is only one leg of this.”

    In closing, let me give you two quotes that have never been more germaine to what is happening.

    “I BEGIN BY TAKING. I shall find scholars later to demonstrate my perfect right.” by Frederick the Great

    “It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost ALL AT ONCE.” by David Hume

    History is packed with those who thought “not us, not me”.
    And Obama will continue his course of ignorance unless he is stopped in his tracks.
    OK Dems. Does this make you optomistic for our future? Is this the change we need? Dont tell me about Bush. Lets talk about our future and what we are building for our children. Is this guy on the right track? Or is he doing what my conservative friends say. Just making us all dependent on a government so he can keep us in the slave quarters while he lives in the big house? That's what you wanted isnst it? Isnt that why you dummies voted for dummy Obama? Or, is that you voted for obama because you hated Bush?
    Have a great weekend iberal Americans, go out and buy yourself a new car. The Japanese need the dough..

    ReplyDelete
  52. I don't know if we can take three more years of this community organizer. with only one year in office and he has an amazing record so far. Four tax crooks for his cabinet, one drop out, two admitted commies, and the biggest spending plan to date. He has also about wore ot air force one family truckster cruising around the country making speeches

    Lets see,Pelosi flys around in her private jet, her and Reid are going to build the new Dinky Railroad between their states with bailout money, Poor ole Kennedys have to use food stamps, and I really fell sorry for that poor ole Harry Bird. I say lets give them all a raise!

    You brain washed libs better lay off the booze a for while, its starting to affect your mind again. Now go to bed and sleep it off.

    ReplyDelete
  53. To fix our problems in America the first step is we have to stop lying to ourselves… our economy and country can’t be restored until all offices in Washington have restored honor. Many of the problems we all face as Americans can be fixed and they will be. But they will not be fixed by the Government. We the People are going to be the ones this burden is going to fall on. We are going to do what all Americans have always done in times of trouble. We alway look out for each other, and help any way we can. This is what Americans have always done and always will. When we see someone in trouble, we don’t ask them if there a Democrat or a Republican. We just help. This is what has always made Americans different from the rest of the World.
    The recent collapse of our economy wasn’t brought about by you or me. It was by two Ruling Party Elites. Representative, Barney Franks and Senator Chris Dodd were key in forcing banks to follow policies that finally brought about their collapse from their Chairmanship positions on oversight committees. Where are the indictments for these criminal acts? We see people like Former N.Y.C. top cop Bernard Kerik getting 4 years in jail for lying and yet these crooks in Washington just get re-elected over and over again. Bernard Kerik did FAR less than what Charlie Rangel has done. And everybody know it.I personally don't care about charlies war record or his color,I judge him on what he has done and what he has done was steal and cheat!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Where did my numbers come from?

    Dr. Stephen Bloch

    Department of Math and Computer Science
    of Adelphi University (Very Liberal Politically, I might add.)

    Using the Department of the Treasury numbers Here is what he did.
    How much did the annual deficit shrink or grow? I assume that the deficit in a President's first year is almost entirely under the control of the previous President and Congress, so I subtract the deficit in a President's first year from the deficit in the year after that President stepped down (or, in the case of the current President, from the most recent deficit figures I have). This change in deficit is then divided by the number of years it took to achieve it.
    How much debt was accumulated over a President's term(s)? The previous approach, looking only at starting and ending deficits, doesn't distinguish between a President who oversees initially increasing deficits, then decreasing at the end (like Reagan) and a President who oversees initially decreasing deficits, then increasing at the end (like Carter), even though the former racks up more of a debt. So I computed the average annual deficit over a President's term(s). (Note: I computed this as an average of CPI-adjusted annual deficits, rather than as the increase in national debt divided by the number of years.)
    Since many of the items in the budget are multi-year commitments with considerable inertia (most obviously, interest on the national debt!), I recomputed the previous numbers, subtracting the annual deficit in each President's first year; in other words, how does the actual accumulated debt per year compare with what it would have been if the annual deficit had stayed where it was?

    By his accounting Bush would be treated unfairly but represented equally in the chart because Obama signed major spending items that Bush had no say over that effected his numbers. Not wanting to taint the data the system of processing is so reported.

    The data goes back to 1911. You may enjoy looking at the rest here.

    http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

    ReplyDelete
  55. Does this Dr. Block also consider the off budget expenses?
    All war costs during Bush's two terms, were off budget.
    Those expenses were passed through supplemental bills, and were not part of the annual budget.
    They amount to 100's of billions of dollars.
    A practice Obama has changed. Obama has the war costs figured into his budget.
    This is why there is a difference in the total national debt figures attributed to the Bush