Beck: Progressives Are "Enemies Of God"
Glenn Beck recently claimed that his show "hasn't been about hateful rhetoric." But on both his Fox News show and his radio program, Beck routinely goes far beyond criticizing the viewpoints of those who don't share his political ideology; unlike any other well-known political commentator, Beck actually claims his political adversaries are "enemies of God."
Beck Claims His Show "Hasn't Been About Hateful Rhetoric"
Beck: My Show "Hasn't Been About Hateful Rhetoric." From the January 21 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: And as I explained earlier this week, it is up to the individuals to solve the problems. That's kind of the history of the two years that we've been on Fox. It hasn't been about hateful rhetoric. It hasn't been about anything. It has from the very beginning been about solving the problem, the riddle about what is happening and what is the best way to do it. And I don't come to you as a guy who has the answers. I don't come to you as a guy who says I know everything. I don't. I clearly don't. I'm not a guy who says I get it right all the time because I clearly don't. But we try because I do believe that it was the Age of Enlightenment that gave us this enlightened document. We've lost the light. The documents haven't. We have. [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 1/21/11]
Beck Professes Against Claims That God Is "On Our Side": "He's Not On Our Side, We Have To Be On His Side." From the January 21 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: Divine providence is different than manifest destiny. This means that no matter what happens, good or bad, if we do the right things, if we -- if we look at things and say it's going to be OK, as long as we're in tune with him. He's not on our side, we have to be on his side. Once that happens, no matter good or bad, no matter what happens we're going to be fine. [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 1/21/11, via Nexis]
But Beck Frequently Demonizes Progressives As The "Enemies Of God"
Beck: Progressives Have "Tried To Destroy" God. On the January 21 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, Beck stated that the Founders sought to promote enlightenment, empowerment and entrepreneurship. He added:
BECK: There are another set of founders in America -- the founders of the progressive movement. They know this system as well. And they also know all thought is creative. So now let's just quickly look at what they've done. They have distanced God from people. They have discredited him, distanced him, made him into a joke, denied his existence or, at best, just confused him with social justice and everything else -- just confused him.
Jeremiah Wright is a political organization. That's not a church. That's for community organizing on politics. That's not a church. It certainly doesn't say empower the individual. It says empower the state and the state will provide justice for all. That's a political movement. So they've confused God at best and tried to destroy him everywhere else. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 1/21/11]
Beck: Progressives Are "Enemies Of God And Enemies Of Man's Freedom." During a segment on the July 14, 2010, edition of his Fox News show, Beck attacked "San Francisco radical Van Jones," liberation theology, President Obama, and Andy Stern. Beck also claimed "Michelle Obama told us exactly what Obama was going to do" when she said, "We're going to have to change our tradition, our history." He added:
BECK: We learn from our mistakes. We can't change our history into something that it wasn't, but it's happening. We've got to grab onto the truth and cling to it, but what is the truth? Well, the truth about the civil rights movement isn't the Black Panthers and the threats causing Congress to pass the civil rights, that's bull crap!
God did it, by working through people and inspiring people like Martin Luther King, and C.L. Jackson. And yes, white people like Bobby Kennedy and dare I say it, oh, my Gosh, I'm going to set the world on fire with this -- Roger Ailes.
I think he spent some time in the civil rights movement. He was with Martin Luther King a couple of times, people from both sides of the aisle, people of all kinds, all races, different levels of participation.
God led the cause because he is against oppression. But he does not conspire to work through hate groups. Stand up, stand together, stand with the truth. Stand with God. That is the one thing that they cannot fight. That is your only weapon is God. And he wields it, not you. You just stand behind him and just let him be your shield. It's the one thing that they don't have on their side. Now that's a pretty wild comment to make unless you go back to Saul Alinsky.
Do you know what the dedication says? Do you know what the front page says of this book?
Put it up here, "Lest we forget at least one over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical from all of our legends, mythology and history and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins, or which is which, the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom."
You put this together with collective salvation. May I quote the pope? Put the pope, Pope Benedict, here is what he said about collective salvation: "Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes not divine but demonic."
Stand with God, America. Stand with God. He will be our shield. These are not enemies of ours. They are not enemies of ours. They're enemies of God and enemies of man's freedom. He'll work it out. You just stand where you're supposed to stand and be peaceful. [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 7/14/10, via Nexis]
Comparing Progressives To Satan, Beck Says They "Have Replaced" God. From the January 12, 2010, broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: If you believe in the, you know, the war in Heaven where a third of the angels were cast out and all of that stuff, it was about man's choice.
CALLER: Yes.
BECK: And he would provide a savior and Satan's plan was hey, I'll save everybody. Give me the credit. Give me the credit, I'll save everybody. I'll make sure that everybody returns home. It's going to be fantastic. I'll -- just take away their choice and give me the credit. Well, gee, I think that plan was rejected, and that's because God knew that failure was important for growth. He knew that we would fail and he would provide the failure so when we hit the bottom we would have a chance -- we would know there was hope for the only thing that really matters and that is redemption. Eternal redemption.
But the progressives have so cut out God. And I showed you yesterday on television and last week on the radio that they have replaced God. They're taking -- rights are now created by Congress. Rights are not given to us by our Creator. They're created by Congress. They are taking the role of God. And so they're taking away our suffering. They're taking away all of our pain, all of the opportunity to fail. People look at failure in exactly the wrong way. Failure is the starting point of real, true success. If you don't fail you really don't have a lot of wisdom. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 1/12/10]
Beck To Guest: "Any Doubt In Your Mind That The Progressive Left Is Coming For The Kill On Religion?" During the October 15, 2010, edition of his Fox News show, Beck said of the Tides Foundation and George Soros:
BECK: I just wish we were a government-funded entity so we wouldn't have all these commercials because you just missed a fabulous conversation. We are talking about the "Story of Stuff Project." This comes from the Tides Foundation. Spooky dude George Soros. One world government. Yes.
He's now going into your churches. Ask your pastor or your priest or your rabbi. If you see anything like this going to your kids, run for your life. You are in the wrong church. I mean, unless you're environmentalist that worships, you know, Gaia or whoever it is now.
"Let There Be Stuff," a spirit-filled response to a consumer-crazed world. I want you to know that we do consume an awful lot. We consume -- we are worshipping a different god. Many of us, we are worshipping the god of stuff, the god of a logo or a label. We don't need it. We don't need it.
You know a society is screwed up when people will stand in line for the new cell phone that they -- they already have a cell phone. They just want that one. We are a little screwed up as a society.
Cal Beisner is here and David Barton, also with me. And we're talking about this upside-down world where we're now being taught in, not just schools, but now, in churches and synagogues. Any doubt in your mind that the progressive left is coming for the kill on religion?
CALVIN BEISNER, FOUNDER, CORNWALL ALLIANCE: Absolutely. Absolutely. And part of the reason is because traditional Christian faith and biblical faith in America has been the most resistant to the whole progressive agenda.
BECK: Yes.
BEISNER: Poll after poll has shown the people who have been most skeptical about things like, oh, catastrophic, man-made global warming, or about other environmental hypes and scares have been those people who assert the greatest belief in the Bible. [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 10/15/10, via Nexis]
Beck On Van Jones: God Said "I Shall Rebuke The Devourer For Your Sake." From the April 20, 2010, edition of Premiere Radio Networks' Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: I was telling you about Van Jones, and I said, do we run with this? Do we run with this because we don't know for sure, but all evidence -- and I don't know if we can verify this, this, this, but look at the connection here. Most of it we did verify. Some of it we couldn't and we never put on. But I believe them to be true but I don't say them because I couldn't nail them down. What stopped me from saying "I can't prove these things but"? I said to Pat -- I said something's wrong. What do we do? We both prayed. And we went home and both of us prayed again and then we both opened up our scriptures unbeknownst to each other until the next morning.
And I couldn't wait to see Pat because I had an answer. I said, you won't believe what I found. And he said, wait, wait, wait, me first about our conversation yesterday. I looked in Malachai. Look it up. Malachai 3:11. I'm paraphrasing -- I'll shall rebuke the devourer for your sake. To me this message was clear: "He's not an enemy of yours. How dare you think he's an enemy of yours. Freedom comes from me, God. Freedom, your rights, belong to me, not you. I will rebuke anyone who tries to devour them."
[...]
BECK: Read Ephesians 6:11 to 17, Ephesians 6:11 to 17. It's what we have to do. It's where we have to go. And it's what will save us. Use faith as your shield and put on the armor of God, and he will rebuke the devourer for our sakes. [Premiere Radio Networks' Glenn Beck Program, 4/20/10]
Beck Alleges 95-Year Progressive Plan To "Put A Poison Into Our Church." From the May 18, 2010, edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: No, no, no, no. We're going to correct its meaning tonight.
If you have a pencil and paper, get it out, because you're going to need to write stuff down tonight. You're going to learn stuff that you probably have never even really noticed. Then you are going to start noticing all kinds of stuff.
You have a priest, a pastor, a bishop, a rabbi -- you get them on the phone and tell them right now: Turn on the Glenn Beck program.
Progressives knew about 1915. They knew that they couldn't get their agenda through, because of three things: people knew the Constitution. Americans talked about it in 1915.
People loved the founders. We knew who they really were.
And the third one, people went to church. They had to put a poison into our church. Well, they've done it. I expose it tonight, and I give you the cure as well. [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 5/18/10]
Beck Attacks Obama And Progressives: "When You Pervert The Gospel Of Jesus Christ, You Are Evil." From the August 23, 2010, edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: We're being pitted against each other on religion. And I want you to know this is -- this is part of the strategy. This is why we brought up Sojourners and Jim Wallis and Reverend Wright and I told you about social justice.
I told you that our religions are being hijacked. Religion plays a huge role in the progressive movement. You must have religion. If you can beat down religion -- why do you think that they've chased God out of the public square? And now Nancy Pelosi is talking about God all the time. That you have the president talking -- bashing the Bible. Who's Bible are we going to listen to now? And then talking about faith and religion. Why do you think this is all happening?
It's critical, it's critical. And these people -- and let me just -- let me say this. When you pervert the founding documents I think you're a pretty bad dude. But when you pervert the Gospel of Jesus Christ, you are evil. And when you know you intentionally are doing it for power and control and money and a hidden agenda, and you lie, cheat, and steal every step of the way to do it, you are evil.
Now let me show you Jim Wallis. Jim Wallis is a guy from Sojourners who has led a campaign against me. They are trying to pit our religions against each other. They are trying to -- I stood at the feet of Abraham Lincoln yesterday. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." They must have us at each other's throats.
I've told you before that this is George Soros money, that this is nothing but a hidden progressive agenda, that social justice as understood by Jim Wallis and Jeremiah Wright and people like him, it is evil. He claims that there is no money coming from Soros. If I saw my name smeared on the Internet one more time on this, I mean it became laughable, because people actually believe George Soros isn't involved in this. [Fox News' Glenn Beck, 8/23/10]
Beck: "You Need To Get Behind Him Because They Are Enemies Of Him." From the July 15, 2010, broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
CALLER: Hello Glenn. I just want to thank you for your letting all of us know and bringing light to the fact that, you know, these people with this particular ideology are not our enemies. They are our Heavenly Father's.
BECK: Yes they are.
[...]
BECK: So what was it that woke you up this? Or have you just been -
CALLER: Well, I'm a man of your faith. And, you know, I've been thinking that and, you know, I've talked to people, but when you said it it was just like a relief to me that this, you know, I need to do what I need to do, you know.
BECK: Yeah. And you don't need to fight; you need to get behind him. You need to get behind him because they are enemies of him. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 7/15/10]
Beck Suggests Environmentalism "Replacing God" With The Earth. From the May 12, 2010, edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: They're now looking at absolutely everything, and the environment is the key. The environment will control -- because remember, what we're talking about is the Earth replacing God. Earth is the most important thing. So it's more important to save the Earth than it is even to save people. The Earth makes the decisions for us. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 5/12/10]
Beck: Progressives Have "Almost-Complete Plan" To "Destroy Our Faith." On the May 24, 2010, edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, Beck said, "freedom is on the run," and attacked progressives by saying they have an "almost-complete plan," through social justice, to "destroy the Constitution, destroy the Founders, and destroy our faith." From the broadcast:
BECK: Back to what I taught you on the 1915 progressives. They figured it out. They knew they couldn't do everything they wanted to do in 1915 because we were too tied to the Constitution. We were too tied to the Founders. And we were too tied to our churches. And so they changed history. They went in and all these progressives in the universities, they started to change the history books. They went into our faith with something called social justice. That is from the progressive movement.
Now you may not interpret it that way in your church, but you've got to understand the roots because that's what it is. It's redistribution of wealth. It cannot be found in the Bible, it cannot be found -- do you have the audio of what Bill Clinton said over the weekend? That everything is unsustainable and unequal. Excuse me? When were we -- at what point did we all decide that we're going to make the world equal? All men are created equal. It's what you do with your freedom, and right now freedom is on the run. It's -- it is a almost complete plan: Destroy the Constitution, destroy the Founders, and destroy our faith. What part haven't they done? What more do you need? [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 5/24/10]
Beck: "The Policies That Are Being Enacted In Washington" Are "Enemies Of God." From the July 19, 2010, edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: If you were at the American Revival on Saturday, that ain't nothing -- that is nothing compared to what you're going to see on 8-28. Make sure you join us. Forty days and 40 nights. It is not about politics, because quite honestly, we are not dealing with politicians. These are not -- the policies that are being enacted in Washington -- they are not enemies of ours. They are enemies of God because God is about freedom. God is about equal justice, not equal stuff in our homes. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 7/19/10]

















I put Glennda more in the category of something like gangrene, air pollutants or poor gas mileage.
Btw, what does Beck, if you will excuse the expression, think about enemies of Allah?
Go to hell, Glenn.
-----------------------------------
IMHO
However, they will not be "crispy." The Nine Layer of Hell is filled with ice.
---------------------------------------------
;)
The worst thing that could happen to Beck is for his audience to learn he is a Mormon. Notice how he doesn't advertise it but also notice how he verbalizes hard right evangelical ideology. You would think he would be proud of his religion and let his sheep know about who he is. He's mentioned it before, but it seems obvious to me that he purposely distances himself from it as much as he can. It's his downfall. It's the reason Romney will have such a hard time getting the GOP nomination. Religious bigotry is the achilles heel of the Republican Party. Unfortunately, noone on the left has the gonads to go ahead and play them against each other using religion. Let me tell you though, they wouldn't blink an eye to do it to Democrats.
Ya think many would judge that it still is?
So he's the world's most boring man on "coke". Far too funny.
Simply pointing out the truth should do the trick. Nice and civil.
So, I like to think Beck is going to Florida which is way worse.
I know this is a fairly tame observation in our heated political atmosphere. I just never cease to be appalled that there are cultural forces attempting to increase ignorance. I'm not particularly religious, but I understand (from a macro perspective) why it exists. And what Beck is doing is true to only one aspect of religion: that it (like any institutionalized hierarchical system) can be used to exploit and hurt its members.
In my revised version of Hell, Glenda will have to find the Biblical truth then go around and make up to all the people he / she / it has hurt. That would be hell for him / her /it.
At this point isn't Beck just a liability for Fox?
-------------------------------------------
...but not FOX.
Of course, the same people will tell their audience that totalitarian secular states commit their atrocities "in the name of Atheism", which makes the Good and Evil theme even more convenient.
They have also repeatedly shown that any proof that he is wrong or lying will be flatly ignored.
Like war recreationists? Hmmmm...
I guess Glenn Beck is evil.
Funny how Beck became a Mormon, given that Joseph Smith did just that!
http://preview.tinyurl.com/joseph-smith-S-Park
No reason to think he's an extremist or a fanatic.
"It hasn't been about anything."
A lie and which contradicts the other nonsense he says.
I noticed that too but then in the next sentence, he went on to try to explain what it IS all about which brought me to my idea about his cocaine addled brain.
Often as not the man is a rambling, incoherent fool! How on earth do his listener/viewers overlook that little flaw and actually think of him as an 'educator'?
I guess that's a reflection of their own intelligence and consistency of critical judgment?
In their own anger and confusion they love what they hear!
Anyone read The Book of Mormon lately? Uh, I don't think Mormonism is a divinely revealed religion like Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, etc., Glennie. Some would argue that Mormons have done much to distort God and his true Prophets. Get a grip, Glennie.
Set aside that polls show that the vast majority of Americans claim to be religious, polls that the religious right love to cite. Based on our electorate being pretty evenly divided, that would imply that most progressives are religious, meaning they love God.
The rest of us have no feelings one way or another about their God.
But look for this theme to be well-used following the murders in Arizona. I've already seen several articles and Youtube videos focusing on Jared Loughners supposed atheism.
The problem with these attacks by the religious, as neatly as they work with their "God-hating" narrative, is that nihilists like Loughner, in my opinion, fall on the opposite end of the spectrum from typical atheists, further away than normal religious people.
Genuine atheists don't care about God, any more than they care about leprechauns. We have morals and ethics that are independent of any supernatural judgement.
Religious people love God, but can find themselves questioning God in times of trouble or confusion. They can feel betrayed by God.
People like Loughner have the most extreme feelings about God. They hate that there is no God to control them, and don't see a purpose to life because of their missing God.
It's the main reason that, although I use it as shorthand, for lack of a better term, I don't really like the word "Atheist". It implies something missing.
I have rather mixed feelings about your post.
Let me begin by stating: I am a devout LIBERAL Christian. The reasons I believe are not important here, but, I do believe for good reason. It is because of my Christian faith that I am a liberal.
The fundamentalists are welcome to their beliefs, but, their hatred of any one who disagrees with them is reprehensible. They are controlling and they twist the gospel. They cater to sick minds. for example "The Left Behind" series. Meant for sick minds and a total distortion of the Bible.
I do agree with them on one point, one I think Liberals did not notice until late: There is a cultural war going on for the heart and soul of America. I agree, but, they are on the wrong side.
I do find it funny that they hate science, but, use the latest scientific gadget to get their message out. the have a special hatred for biology, but, if they get sick, well take them to a hospital and get the latest care.
In my world, even if you don't believe, God still loves you. After all God knows there are man good reasons not to believe.
It seems to me that progressives don't believe in limited government and are of the opinion that Congress' powers are expansive.
Of course you are correct. But, as Mag seems to admit, he has read very little about the Founding Fathers. Like most Beckers, he gets all of his information from one source.
Progressives today believe in the constitution and what it stands for. Republicans/teabaggers - not so much.
And by the way, the constitution set up a SEPARATION of powers. There was nothing in there about "limited government" so you can toss that catchphrase in the trash where it belongs.
http://www.progressiveliving.org/politics/definition_of_progressivism.htm
This is completely OPPOSITE of America's constitution of INDIVIDUAL liberty. No, progressives do NOT beieve in the constitution except to use it...to destroy it and replace it with tyranny.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh...
So whats the punishment going to be Judge Arturus?
I have to ask, are you stupid? Because what you just pasted is what that web site states is the progressive view of conservatism. Oh wait - you aren't stupid, just disingenuous like many othe cons here. Why else would you feel the need to crop that paragraph from the original, which I'll paste the WHOLE graph...
Oh and further up that post we have this...
Fuller Definition
You all lie so effortlessly...
You got off to a pretty bad start here because I don't know of any "progressive" who espouses what you seem to think they/I should espouse.
They did a lot more, look into it.
Article I: You could has a gun, and not to paying lotsa taxes, and praise jesus. The End.
The Founders were the progressives of their time, as they belived the power flowed upwards from the governed not downwards from the governors.
- I haven't even made it to Lincoln yet. I'm still reading a ton about the Founding.
"The Founders were the progressives of their time, as they belived the power flowed upwards from the governed not downwards from the governors. "
- And that's not at all how Congress treats the country today. Congress puts themselves at the head of a pyramid with the state governments, the local governments, and finally the people all groveling at its feet for tax money.
Yes, this one sentence explains all of your previous posts.
We provide for the common defence of Iraqis, and I would surely like to have someone show me where in the UNITED STATES Constitution that is provided for.
Promoting the general Welfare I would think should include ensuring that ALL Americans have access to those things that actually promote their welfare, you know, things like adequate health care, nutritious food, clean air and water, etcetera.
The Blessings of Liberty seems to be taken by some to mean "I can do what I want, and f#@k anyone that is harmed, as long as I have mine".
Of course, when Reagan racked up enough debt to last well into the 21st century even if we did NOTHING new, he began the screwing of our Posterity, and George W was happy, with the help of a majority Republican Congress, to continue that screwing.
Do you really want to play this game? You guys are so pitiful. You are trying so hard to portray the founders and the beginning of this country as these perfect people who lived in a perfect government. It's the basis of your entire political philosophy. You want to convince people that by accepting your policy ideas we can return to the perfect world of the founders and 18th Century America. You idiots simply dismiss historical reality relating to the vast inequalities that existed in this country and continue to exist. Well let me tell you, its wasn't conservative policies and ideology which eliminated slavery. It wasn't conservative ideology which led to the Civil Rights legislation. It wasn't conservative ideology which ended child labor, prohibited monopolies, gave women the right to vote, ended land ownership as a pre-requisite to vote, gave us interstates, clean water, etc, etc, etc.
You conservatives live under this delusion that we can only obtain perfection by either returning to the past or standing still. The ignorance of conservatives never cease to amaze me. why don't you go ahead and tell us what conservatism has done for this country besides take it to the brink of destruction?
MagCynic is still in high school. At least I hope so. For his sake.
"I haven't even made it to Lincoln yet. I'm still reading a ton about the Founding."
...I would be willing to wager middle school, or possibly late elementary. I don't know many people who haven't studied Lincoln making it so far as early high school.
Of course, one has to wonder, if these folks truly believe that the Bible is, in fact, God's own words dictated to and written down by men, why are women allowed to speak in public, among other contradictions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/25/chris-matthews-michele-bachmann-balloon-head_n_814033.html
If that link does't work just google Matthews Bachmann Balloon Head.
The Founding Fathers didnt speak on all topics with one voice. If I remeber correctly Alexander Hamilton had a different take on General Walfare. A term like General Welfare is a typicall example for a term used that can be interpreted differently.
So please, do us a favour and accept different takes on the Constituion. The Constitution changes over times, has been adjusted and will continue to change.
Personally, I had a huger issue with the Bush Administration that imho violeted the Constitution in taking away human rights while I think Healt Care doesnt take anyone huma rights away and falls for me under General Welfare.
- No it's not. The Founders set it up as a fixed document with fixed powers. The ONLY way to change it is through the amendment process. The second you consider it a "living" document, Congress no longer becomes limited by the Constitution. Instead it is only limited by the imagination of the one interpreting the document.
The Founders set it up as a fixed document with fixed powers.
Lying about "THE DOCUMENT" isn't going to get you into Teabagger Heaven.
I recommend having a one-on-one session with your high school government instructor. You've got alot of misconceptions to get rid of. Think of it as "constitutional therapy".
For a couple of hundred years, scholars, lawyers,professors, philosophers, politicians, writers - some of the greatest minds on the planet- have been debating and interpreting the constitution.
But every right wing numbskull with a couple of hours of beck U. believes they have it all figured out.
One of them recently posted at this site that the document should not be interpreted. It should be obeyed just as it reads.
It's so child-like, it's almost cute.
Um... No it isn't. Article 3 says that the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of legal questions. It wasn't until Marbury v. Madison that the SCOTUS got authority over interpreting the Constitution.
Normally, Foghorn, I like your comments. I suspect Mag's obtuseness is driving you to distraction at this point and screwing up your usually thoughtful posts.
What do all the constitutionell lawyers do all day? They surely cant be discussing the Constitution since you just enlightened me it´s not open for interpretation and discusssion.
On a sidenote how do you suggest in the future the Supreme should make decisions. Build a time machine and bring the Founding Fathers back, maybe? But I am telling you, the Founding Fathers
would also have to interpret their own words.
And if you think a document written by men, white men, could speak for eternity without issue, you are totally misguided.
And thus the health care law is constitutional.
- It's not though. Obamacare doesn't actually provide anything. It is a regulation. And, even then, it isn't a Constitutional regulation because it is not interstate commerce. There are laws and rules specifically set up to prevent people from purchasing health insurance from different states.
You are referring to universal health coverage that applies to everybody across the nation with no government mandated qualifications. If you are a citizen, you get health care. That's it. I wouldn't like that and I think it would end in failure, but at least THAT would be Constitutional.
" The constitution is not open to interpretation! It means exactly what I see when I interpret it."
I don't even think they're being dishonest, I think they really are that self-absorbed.
But also this:
Then I would say you don't have the faintest idea what Progressives stand for. Maybe we should examine what you think we believe in.
That said, you know what would be? Medicare for all!
If the prerequisite for federal taxing and spending is that it be for the general welfare, then there's no question that Medicare for all would be totally constitutional. Even if we forced it on people. I say scrap the mandate, go back and craft some real legislation that puts everyone on the government plan, then negotiate your way to a public option.
Its what they should have done in the first place.
Huh? That's a flat out bald face lie. And now you come here and play Constitutional scholar and thankfully interpret it for us? Thanks but no thanks. Again, this ideology of people like you in which you have this delusion that the founders were perfect people who had beliefs just like you is ridiculous. Now, your whole charade is that we must return to the America the founders wanted. First of all the founders were a very diverse group of men. Some like Hamilton felt that a strong central government was paramount to our success. To dismiss this reality is delusional. Secondly, whether you like it or not, government has done wonderful things for this nation sir. It sure wasn't limited government and conservative ideology which ended slavery, or enacted Civil Rights legislation, or gave women the right to vote, or ended child labor, or ended monopolies, or oh....what's the use? There is no changing your delusional thinking about the founders and 18th century America. It's an exercise in futility.
Is it? Answer me this. What can't the Congress do in the name of the General Welfare?
Regarding your question, All I can tell you is go read Article 1, Section 9.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION ABOUT LIMITED GOVERNMENT.
It's a teabagger term. Please toss it in the garbage. Thanks in advance.
Talk that didn't make it into the constitution?
I've provided quotes that back up my assertion. The least you could do is back up your beliefs.
There was NO mention of "limited government".
You're conflating two entirely different definitions of limited.
You've provided nothing but generalizational pablum and limited this limited that crapola.
So I ask you: Please provide the EXACT quote in the constitution that provides for limited government.
That Beckerism is a tough religion to live with, I can tell. You have to keep twisting yourself into pretzels just to keep from admitting your prophet is a degenerate liar with nothing but profit as his motive.
The ideas that do not get used are scrapped, not held in abeyance until someone can dredge them back up and claim that they were intended to be in there. Of course the person who birthed the idea intended for it to be used, but when he put it forth for consideration, it was not adopted.
Why else do you think those things weren't in there? Maybe they ran out of parchment?
They're not the same thing, idiot.
And if you are still in high school, accept my apologies for calling you an idiot.
Please explain.
Too funny.
Do you believe the Founders were for a limited government?
I don't, because limited government does not appear in the document. And I prefer to follow the document rather than some random quotes the founders may or may not have said.
Your turn.
Really, your problem, besides a really shallow understanding of the history involved, is trying to stick your hand up the butt of the framers and make them all say the same thing in concert. The number of widely different opinions represented in the Constitutional Convention numbered roughly the same as the number of delegates. There's a reason the Constitution is so vague and open to interpretation, it's a mass of concessions and compromises that only barely received enough support to be ratified.
Wow. Just....wow. I cannot believe the level of arrogant ignorance it must take to maintain that kind of belief system. That Beckerism is rotting your mind and your soul, Mag. Give it up while there is still an ounce of hope for you left.
You do realise that the framers of the Constitution voted, argued, and came to consensus on what would be included and what would not, and the quotes that you dredged up didn't make it in, right?
Do you believe that the ideas of INDIVIDUALS that DID NOT MAKE IT INTO THE CONSTITUTION because they were not consensus ideas should be used to interpret it now?
They in no way implied or envisioned "small government".
The Constitution specifically says that Congress can lay taxes and make laws for, among other reasons, to promote the General Welfare. The clause is currently considered a limitation on the taxing and spending power of the Congress, designed to ensure that taxes were only levied for purposes that benefitted the whole country. The question of whether or not a tangible benefit manifests from Congressional action is the sole province of the Congress to determine. As the plain language of the clause has no other limitations upon it, random quotes from dead guys don't matter. The words of Madison, Hamilton, and Jefferson carry no legal authority. The only thing that matters is what's to be found in Article 1, Section 8. And what's to be found there confers great power upon the Congress to lay taxes and spend to promote the General Welfare.
Many of the framers of the Constitutions were supporters of limiting STATE power. They saw the neccessity of a strong central government in many instances.
But hey, educate yourself and believe what you want. Just don't try to sell the distortion as truth.
The idea has always has always been about balance, not about "Small Government, or Limited Government"
That's what Beck is saying. You seem to agree with him.
How do you justify your beliefs against the Constitution?
Nah, where I come from you get your *ss kicked for talkin' smack about a person's patriotism like that, so f**k off. And stop whining that I'm rude, you were being a jackwagon and got what you had coming. Deal with it.
I mean seriously, who do you think you are acting that way? Simply because we reject your rightwing perversions of the common good, you think we are anti-contitutional? You're just a p-rick.
I came from the farm, we worked the land; loved our land and took care of it. We helped our neighbors and family; made sure they never went without when we could help.
That's how I view America, that's how progressives see America and our government. We are in a partnership to lift up one another. We believe in effective government, mutual responsibility, broad prosperity and a better future. We believe that our government is there to protect us from the elite domination of big business and empower us to succeed by providing a world class education and healthcare. If you can't get with that, don't you dare try to tell me that my beliefs are against the constitution.
Jerk.
Take the federal minimum wage laws for example. Congress has the power to regulate commerce amongst the several states. If I'm employing everyone from the same state, how can Congress have the authority to mandate what I can and cannot pay them?
These are the sort of principles I'm referring to when I say progressives don't believe in the Constitution.
But, yeah, get all butt hurt about your assumptions of what I'm saying to you personally.
How can progressives not believe in something that doesn't exist?
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LIMITED GOVERNMENT IN THE CONSTITUTION.
These are the sort of principles I'm referring to when I say progressives don't believe in the Constitution
Like Roundhouse said, you're a jackwagon, pr*ck, and a jerk. And a clueless constitutional scholar.
The Federal minimum wage was upheld by the SCOTUS because the power to regulate of interstate commerce also includes the power to exclude goods and services produced with substandard wages. You don't really have a leg to stand on, here.
Look. This isn't the same country it was in the 1800's. Our founders knew that progress would be made and wrote our constitution in broad terms with that evolution in mind.
I'd be willing to bet that you'd use the same argument concerning unions today. I bet you'd try and tell me that, since 19th and 20th century progressives instituted child labor laws, workplace safety laws, minimum wage laws and overtime laws we no longer need unions to protect workers rights. Think about it.
That's a ludicrous hypothetical given that monopolies are rightly illegal. But I'd have to say that the general welfare of your workers outweigh your individual want to pay them dirt wages.
Where is that in the Constitution?
Agains stop denying reality, why is everything on the right true? theyhave shown they are failures in so many ways:
Security
Economy
Diplomacy
Conservation
Limiting corporatism
Etc...
I've listed a ton of examples about each topic before and I will again if you want.I just don't feel like repeating myself.
Once was a time when lending a helping hand was the rule not the exceptionable.
So why so much hate for those that want to lend a hand to the less fortunate, there for the grace of god go I, is a phrase that comes to mind.
Oh by the way I don't believe in organized religion, I don't need a carrot hung out in front (christian heaven, jihad's 40 vigins) of me know that leading a good life is reward enough.
Suddenly everyones a constitutional scholar. Good thing the agenda of the neolibertarian align so perfectly with the billionaires and multinational conglomerates.
Keep the government weak.
It's just to bolster your opinion you want to claim the constitution....but you don't really seem to know that much about it.
1) That you could accurately describe the beliefs of progressives.
2) That you could accurately argue the constitutionality of those beliefs.
I'd bet you really don't know very much about the Constitution. Like most wingnuts, to it's just a prop.
- Try me. I would place my knowledge of the Constitution against yours any day.
You said that the views of progressives are unconstitutional.
I said you wouldn't be able to accurately describe the beliefs of progressives, or to accurately argue the constitutionality of such beliefs.
Your response? I know lots about the konstitooshun. See, that's called deflection. You should Google that like you've Googled everything you "know" about the Constitution.
You know, I am by no means a Constitutional Scholar. I have taken the time to try and objectively inform myself on the issue but I'm by no means an Alan Dershowitz.....In fact, I doubt I have 1% his Constitutional knowledge. At any rate, I don't know the scope of your knowledge on this issue but I can tell you that I have learned from you. Thanks.
who's a good boy? who's a good boy? MagCynic is a good boy! yes he is, oh yes he is! sick 'em boy! sick 'em! what a good boy.
who's a good boy? who's a good boy? MagCynic is a good boy! yes he is, oh yes he is! sick 'em boy! sick 'em! what a good boy.
who's a good boy? who's a good boy? MagCynic is a good boy! yes he is, oh yes he is! sick 'em boy! sick 'em! what a good boy.
who's a good boy? who's a good boy? MagCynic is a good boy! yes he is, oh yes he is! sick 'em boy! sick 'em! what a good boy.
See? I'm creative, too. We're all creative. Hooray!
-Did you go to school in Constitutional law?
-Did you go to school in Constitutional History?
-Did you got to school in political science focused on constitutional theory?
-Or are a person that is self educated? If so what books did you read, did you vet all your sources? Dod you think you could write an articles of 3000 words that would be able to stand up to scrutiny?
-Or do you simply seek sources that agree with you?
-Or do you feel you are right?
Just because you think you understand something doesn't mean you do. Often times people are blinded by ideology and would rather "interpret" documents to suit their own beliefs.
The whole point of the strawman falicy is to exaggerate the argument to the point that it's absurd and easy to counter.
so MagCynic will you be joining Beck at the next
W.B. Church rally ?
Beck can hold the " GOD Hates Progressives " sign
while you rub his shoulders
You are truly and azzhole.
Reported: OFF TOPIC.
We know, Mag. You have proven over and over and over again that your reading has been very limited.
Yeah but you can't find your a$$ with both hands and a map, so...
You have to get over this idea that the founders were some kind of monolithic, single-minded entity. Ever read the federalist papers? They disagreed a lot. Especially over the general welfare clause in article 1, section 8. Washington, Hamilton, and others supported a broad interpretation of the clause, involving greater congressional scope, while Madison and others favored a more narrow interpretation, which would further limit congressional authority.
Jefferson wrote that "The laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised."
Turns out the Supreme Court sided with a broad interpretation. Matter settled.
Anyone with a brain can see that Beck is ill.
So, Glen Beck, who is a Mormon, has condemned himself by his own words as "evil."
WINK!
What/whose G_D is he talking about? I'm fairly certain some Christians don't consider Mormonism a religion and they certainly don't always equate the Christian G_D with the Mormon G_D.
Beck's goal is to have himself and listeners appear to be on G_D's side. It is away to have "AUTHORITY". It is as if Glenn Beck is speaking for G_D in this instance, or has access to G_D's mind. This is a way of controlling the narrative and framing it.
The Christian Bible, the Hebrew Bible and the Qu'ran all specifically tell their followers to hate atheists and Idolaters. Also, if you look at american evagelicals/fundemnetalists like Falwell, Pat Robertson, Reverend Moon, etc... They blame all tradgedies on our nations lack of faith, for sinning, etc...
This was the way the ancient priests in paganism explained fires, earthquakes, etc...It is common practive that I had thought we had out grown. Opppssss.
Instead, God, who is much crueler than Obama, is the one he blindly follows
Living wage is supported by the Catholic Church. Universal health care is supported by the Catholic church. Even the right to unionize is supported by the Catholic church.
And the Catholic church opposes the death penalty, and opposed the invasion of Iraq.
IOW, Beck must be anti-Catholic.
Use that.
Could you be a little more specific?
(The reason I ask is that Alqaeda tell us the same thing - though they don't make any 'progressive' distinction.)
I am so confused.
Enlighten me.
There are many discrepncies between Progressive Ideology and the Bible. There is no such thing as "collective salvation" except for people who create such language in order to promote their own agenda. God wants a personal relationship with each individual. Never does Jesus say to give your money to the government so they can take care of everyone. He says for the individual to serve or to give for the glory of God, not gov't. Jesus also said you need to work to earn your keep. If you don't work-you don't eat! Jesus wants to you to turn to Him for you needs, yet Progressives want people to look to the gov't for to take care of their needs. If God created us with free-will, why do you think he would design a system of gov't that calls for certain people to make decisions for us? Certainly the Creator of the universe would be better suited for that job than a government employee!
How could you have read everything in this thread and post something so idiotic? I mean fairly early on we have this from a liberal...
So why would such a good christian lie?
Hmmmm...
Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.
You're just the christian taliban.
Let's start with Verse 15..Paying the Imperial Tax to Caesar
15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16 They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. “Teacher,” they said, “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax[a] to Caesar or not?”
18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
21 “Caesar’s,” they replied. Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
22 When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.
Before you quote the scripture that you admit are unfamiliar with it's best to know the context of the verse.
You're trying to trap just like the Pharisees did. They know the law but they didn't know the heart.
Christian Taliban? Name calling only happens when someone is too emotionally involved and doesn't have the logic to stand on.
Really? You seem to want a nation that is a christina theocracy. Please illustrate how your desire to have "christina nation" is different than the taliban wanting a muslim theocracy.
Jesus was a liberal. The biggest liberal that ever lived.
You wrote:
Jesus also said you need to work to earn your keep. If you don't work-you don't eat!
Funny, I don't remember that passage in the bible: "Thou shalt work to earn you keep. If thou dost not work, then thou shall starve".?!?!
Then again, I'm not a bible thumper. Can anyone help me?
Again, progressivism and Christianity have nothing in common. Tweek the language a little and to people unfamiliar with the Gospel will actually believe you'll go to heaven just for being "good".
So you believe in a God who sends people to heaven or hell based on their 'public profession of faith in Christ'. I guess all those who died without doing this are going to hell. So you believe in a God who loves to torture people. There is no hell. God would never be like that. Hell is a new testament and medieval invention. The old testament speaks of Gehenna (a waiting place). No hellfire and brimstone there. Good old Paul in the NT strikea again.
I couldn't agree more. If you can find this creator, could you have him get in touch with us? Until then, that government employee will have to do.
"If God created us with free-will, why do you think he would design a system of gov't that calls for certain people to make decisions for us? Certainly the Creator of the universe would be better suited for that job than a government employee!" - Nanny
Jesus was an anarchist? That's a first. OK, now I'm back to laughing at you.
This is not correct, but, in fact, is the opposite of what the Jesus character advised in the bible.
Jesus taught His followers to go out and preach and to live off of the charity of others.
Luke 10:4 - 8
There are many discrepancies within the Christian Bible, the Hebrew Bible and any sacred text.
Funny Jesus said all kinds of things many were quotes from other people like Rabbi Hillel and Shammai.Infact, the Golden Rule is one of the quotes that is thought to be Hillel's
And, what if progressives don't beleive in G_D. That does not necessitate that they "hate" G_d or are "G_d's Enemies". Though the Bible does say atheists are scum, so does the Qur'an. But those same books are plagued with many errors so...
Also, the question of what being "free" mean is debatable. AM I free to play guitar or cook on the Sabbath..NO, Am I free to believe what i want? ....No...For a G_d that you claim gave you "free-will",He sure wants you to bow and follow alot.
Free-will is now something all chritians beleive in.
The people responsible for what became our constitution worked together and made what they thought to be the best compromise at the time. It codified the principle that only land owning, white men could vote. So for many years, ten percent of the population had a say in how our government was to function.
And to scream every day that every bit of progress comes from the private sector ignores the fact that if that were the truth, we'd still be living in company towns and shopping at company stores. Our kids would be working the night shifts in mines and factories and our life expectancy would be 50 years.
To say that the private sector would have benefitted anyone other than the owners of industry is a delusion.
I'd love to find out how many people who hold these views can trace their families history and say that everything everyone of their ancestors earned in their lives had noting at all to do with government.
There is no one whose family has been in this country for more than 75 years who could make that claim and be telling the truth.
And you can count me among those who are enemies of the god to which Beck refers. He is an evil bastard.
How can anyone claim to be a follower of Jesus Christ and hold the views that people like Beck, Palin and Limbaugh have towards their fellow man?
Do they know who said the following?
"Whatever you do unto one the least, you did to me."
It is simply baffling. Isn't it?
But then people have been killing people over god and gods since recorded time. Christianity has just as bad a history as Islam. ALL religions become a human heirarchy of power, with varying ( convenient)
interpretations of their scriptures.
It is one thing to be personally inspired into a better life by spiritual teachers and principles. It is quite another to twist those principles to control and dominate others.
NO IT IS NOT BAFFLING AND THE SOONER YOU STOP BEING BAFFLED THE BETTER.
I'm not just saying this in hyperbole or to score points. We have to realize that we're dealing with psychopaths and narcissists in the clinical sense of the word.
But unless we've done some real research into what psychopaths and narcissists are and how they interact with people, those words will be mere abstractions floating in our 'baffled' brains.
The sooner we realize that psychopaths actually have a part of their emotional brain that is biologically dysfunctional, the sooner we realize that we are dealing with something that is intrinsically evil.
When this realization sinks in, we will stop wasting our time merely repeating the obvious over and over, ad nauseum. We will realize what doesn't work with these people, namely, any form of reasoning or appeal to standards of right or wrong. It will dawn on us that we will be in a fight for our very lives.
First; Google Psychopaths and Narcissism and learn all you can stomach about them.
Second; realize that even though psychopaths are about 1% of the general population, they become concentrated in positions of power, whether they be in Political, Economic or Religious hierarchies. The higher the position, the more likely it is that its holder is psychopathic.
Third; come to the realization that since our world is ruled by their kind it is absurd to believe that we can weed them out one at a time.
The rest I leave up to your imaginations.
I am curious, with the zenophobia present in the conservative masses; how can they reconcile this fear of the foreign with the knowledge that Faux Knews is foreign-owned??? I know Murdoch "converted" to an American but that was a shotgun wedding conceived for his abilty to legally buy U.S. television stations, wasn't it? Isn't it once a royalist, always a royalist? Does Faux Knews really represent American interests or some darker malevolent foreign influence??? Ohhh! I am scaring myself!!! "Honey, be a dear and warm a glass of milk for me!"
Hitler and the Nazis were progressives
The progressive George Soros is a nazi collaborator