The long holiday weekend gave Glenn Beck some time to reflect on his life's work and the state of the world and write out an incoherent schematic of all the steps it will take for him to save it, which he posted on the massive chalkboard in his studio on yesterday's program.
As he explained, God has given him a huge variety of tasks, including completely redesigning the media, preparing and strengthening families, protecting Israel, defending the Constitution and liberty, and even finding new sources of energy, all of which he concluded can only be done once he has first reformed our system of education and fundamentally changed our culture.
The only problem is that Beck doesn't know exactly how to do all of this ... yet, but it will get done:
Scott Lively dropped in on "Focal Point" today, mostly to discuss developments in Uganda, but also to provide some insights on his plan to run for Governor of Massachusetts, which he apparently thinks he can win by creating a third party coalition by merging anti-gay Religious Right activists with "the grassroots of the progressive movement":
On his blog, Lively has posted a manifesto explaining how this new coalition would work as Religious Right activists leave the corporate GOP and set about "plundering the 'Progressive' base" by winning over Blacks, Hispanics, libertarians, environmentalists, and labor unions:
Why will ethnic minorities join us in the first place, before we’ve been able to prove ourselves champions of true social justice? We will make a simple appeal to the thing we most share in common. “Our Bond Is Family!” There’s our pitch and strategy in bumper-sticker simplicity. The typical African American or Hispanic person is generally more Christian and pro-family than the average American (as are the Russian, Eastern European, East Indian, African and Asian immigrants). RINO Republicans could never build a bridge to these minorities because they don’t share these values. But we can and should.
The illegal immigration issue has unfortunately distracted both conservatives and Hispanics from the interests we hold in common, but from my experience I think most Hispanics who are legal citizens would gravitate naturally to the Republican Party and not the Democrats if our agenda were centered on family rather than fiscal matters (especially if we had our own social justice platform). Frankly, I’d happily trade any number of pro-abortion, hate-America White liberal suburbanites for the equivalent number of pro-life, pro-family working class Hispanic citizens. We’d be a much stronger country for it.
We should reach out to moderate and conservative-leaning environmentalists as well. Environmentalism is another movement we should rescue from the Marxists and rebuild on a Christian foundation. Our responsibility to be good stewards of the earth is a central tenet of Christianity, and we are certainly much more capable of fulfilling this duty in a balanced manner than the Marxists are. (Not to mention that we would do the world a great service to steer at least some portion of this powerful movement away from power-grabbing globalist goals such as Agenda 21 and “global warming” and toward authentic environmental needs.)
One key point in this arena that deserves immediate, urgent advocacy is opposition to genetically-modified foods. RINOs would never take this position for fear of alienating agri-business and mega-corporations like Monsanto, but we conservatives should.
Environmentalists might at first seem to be an impossible constituency to recruit, but Christians share an important common ground with them: an embrace of the natural and rejection of the unnatural. The most important concepts in environmentalism — bio-diversity, eco-systems, and the inter-dependence of species — rest on the clear “natural law” presupposition (central to Christianity as well) that there is an existing order in nature that should be protected by human beings. We also share a distrust of the corporate giants whose myopic pursuit of ever greater profits represents the greatest threat to the environment.
If we craft an appeal based on our common preference for the “natural” over the “artificial,” and frame this as a logical basis for deciding social policy in every area, we suddenly have a powerful unifying theme for our entire slate that could win every intellectually honest environmentalist to our side: the natural value of life vs the unnatural termination of unborn babies, natural marriage vs. un-natural homosexual unions, God-given liberty vs. man-made Statism, commerce among real persons vs. that with artificial corporate “persons,” natural foods vs. genetic experiments, a return to family farms and rejection of agri-business, a return to natural remedies and rejection of Big Pharma, etc..
While we’re plundering the “Progressive” base, lets not forget the labor unions. There’s nothing inherently evil or unbiblical about labor unions. The evil comes from the Marxist ideologues and organized crime elements who control them. Union members were the heart and soul of the so-called “Reagan Democrats” who crossed party lines in droves for Reagan because he sincerely espoused Christian values. This is a natural constituency for a newly Bible-centered GOP. The only reason we don’t have them now in any significant numbers is that the corporate giants don’t like them (for obvious reasons) and continually foster hostility against them among the Republican rank and file.
Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips emailed members today an article by tea party activist Dan Short, reminiscing about America before the 1960s when major civil rights laws were passed. Short attacks critics of the GOP’s inability to reach out to people of color for supposedly ignoring older white Americans, whom he claims have the “highest level of American patriotism in this nation.” He says older white Americans are the real Americans because they lived before the “anti-constitutional legislation of civil rights” and the end of the country’s racist quota system on immigration, and now resist our “communist elected leader.”
Our journey into destruction!
Is it not interesting to hear that the Republican Party is too old, and too white? As if this is some subset of our society that isn’t cognitive, and with the highest level of American patriotism in this nation.
Let’s see, those who are American, who lived in this nation before the insanity of the immigration policy of 1965 went into effect; before the absolute inanity of the War on Poverty; before the anti-constitutional legislation of civil rights, before the anti-constitutional legislation of racism, as in affirmative action; who lived when American history was taught, before the intrusion of the Federal government and the department of education; who understood that in this nation the constitution is the enumeration, the restriction, of the power of government; and that our nation is built on the idea that government is a necessary evil, not the god little (g), or as it was said recently that the president is our “lord?”
If one is an American, who understand what it is to be an American; is not the sadness it is the older ones, those who learned the wonder of this nation? Those who also have at one time or another placed their most valuable wealth, their own life, in harm’s way to preserve this nation; to keep the light of liberty bright and shining.
Is it not sadder yet that today we have so many who know nothing of this nation; know nothing of our society; know nothing of our wonder; know nothing of our exceptionalism, our wonder that it is only those from this nation’s past, with that understanding realize the extent of this nation is under attack.
Today we have a communist elected leader—while our press, our citizenry, and our institutes of preserving this nation refuse to acknowledge that reality—then is it not obvious it will be those who know; those from when this nation mirrored its design are the only ones who will seem to be so out of touch, yet the only ones with any knowledge or the realization of what is disappearing—perhaps never to occur in human history.
Televangelist John Hagee warns that America is in decline because of the size of government and same-sex marriage. The right-wing pastor who has claimed that the U.S. will face God’s judgment for electing “a leader who is for men marrying men” told his Cornerstone Church that Americans are beginning to experience “tyranny” and the loss of divine favor: “America does not have purity when men marry men and women marry women, it does not have purity.”
This morning on AFA's "Today's Issues," Tim Wildmon took issue with the prevailing wisdom among conservatives and Republicans that the party needs to do a better job of reaching out to minority voters if it wants to win future elections, saying that there really isn't much point in trying to do so because African American voters will always vote Democratic and there is nothing the GOP can do to change their minds.
As for Hispanic voters, Wildmon asserted that most of them care mainly about getting amnesty for their fellow Hispanics ... plus, "they are used to a socialist form of government in Mexico, which is big government welfare programs, so that is what they're going to vote for":
Linda Harvey of Mission America this weekend interviewed Mark Harrington, the anti-choice activist previously with the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform and now with CreatedEqual, to discuss how Obama won re-election while at the same time arguing that the majority of Americans oppose reproductive rights. They argued that Romney would’ve won if voters made abortion their top voting priority, even though exit polls found that 59% of voters said abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Harvey and Harrington eventually concluded that people who supported Obama and the ‘Democrat party’ no longer have a “functioning conscience” and were simply inviting God’s wrath upon themselves and America at large:
Harrington: We have passed over this line when it comes to people having a functioning conscience. We may have passed to a place that maybe we won’t see returning, at least for a generation, at least that’s the way I see it.
Harvey: I think, yeah. You look at this and you say: what kind of wrath are you calling down on yourselves with that? God help you. This is so heart hardened and so cruel, these are human beings and you’re saying ‘hey, it’s fine.’
Harrington: The Democrat party, their party platform this year was brazen by taking out God and then putting it back in and have people boo, taking the ‘safe, legal and rare’ out of the abortion plank and then the rejection of Israel and Jerusalem as its capital, then the support for homosexual marriage. This is a change, now it’s overt. It’s no longer, ‘we support these things kind of in the background.’ Now it’s front and center, it’s who we are. When you put Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood at your Democrat National Convention as one of the main speakers, we have reached a different place in the Democrat party.
Harvey: And God is not ignoring all this.
Harrington: No, He’s not.
Harvey: He lives and He has been patient with us and I just shudder for our whole nation. It’s not just these people that support that, everybody is going to reap some of this.
Voters in Maryland and Washington this year voted to affirm their state’s marriage equality laws after anti-gay activists collected enough signatures for a referendum to overturn them. Mainers also approved marriage equality, reversing a 2009 “citizens’ veto” of the state’s marriage equality law, and Minnesota voters defeated a GOP-backed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
But since opponents of marriage equality went 0-4 on Election Day, now Star Parker of CURE is angry that voters had a say at all.
One significant development in the recent election was votes in four states approving same-sex marriage initiatives. Until now, all previous state referenda to approve same-sex marriage – 32 of them – failed.
The Wall Street Journal editorial page – a place where conservatives usually turn for intellectual capital – saw this as cause for celebration.
According to the Journal, marriage definition should come from voters, not from court orders. Americans, they argue, have “shown themselves more than capable of changing their views on gay marriage the democratic way.”
In other words, our definition of marriage should follow process, not principle. Let voters decide.
While Parker mocked the Journal’s editorial board for its “let voters decide” message, that is the exact same sentiment her allies in the Religious Right have expressed: Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage clearly stated that “we support letting voters decide this issue,” and Jeremy Dys of the Family Policy Council said “voters know that there is no legitimate reason not to let the people vote on the definition of marriage.” Apparently, anti-gay activists are only okay with voting if their side wins.
Parker went on to compare voting to legalize same-sex marriage to voting to enact slavery, arguing that they are both “evil” and lead to “moral chaos”:
In the 1850s, Stephen Douglas proposed solving the dilemma of whether slavery should be permitted in new states by suggesting that they should just vote. What could be more American than submitting the question of slavery to the democratic process of each state?
To this Abraham Lincoln observed: “God did not place good and evil before man telling him to make his choice. On the contrary, He did tell him there was one tree, of the fruit of which he should not eat, upon pain of certain death. … I should scarcely wish so strong a prohibition against slavery in Nebraska.”
Lincoln’s rejoinder to the idea of “popular sovereignty” – that states should vote to determine if slavery would be legal – was that there are core truths – truths that define right and wrong, good and evil – that precede the democratic process.
To reject this premise is to buy into moral chaos, which is what we are approaching today.
The claim that somehow it is a sign of a healthy, free society that by way of the vote we can rewrite our language, our dictionary, our oldest, time-tested traditions is a sign of how lost we are.
Same-sex marriage advocates argue that their efforts will save the embattled institution of marriage. But this takes a symptom of the disease and calls it a cure.
As American society has become more self-centered and materialistic, family and marriage have been imploding.
To deal with the crisis of the collapse of family and marriage by redefining what they are is the sign of a society losing its way.
Fortunately, America is still a free country. Individuals can make their own choices about how they choose to live.
But taking personal choices to deviate from our social standards of right and wrong, true and false, and decide to change those truths and standards, so that nothing is any longer considered deviant, is a bridge to nowhere.
On Friday's "WallBuilders Live" radio program, David Barton and Rick Green hosted another "good news Friday" broadcast during which they traditionally discuss "good news from around the country that the media doesn't report!"
During the broadcast, Barton commented on the various marriage victories during the recent election, seeing "good news" in the fact that, despite the wins, polls show that most Americans still do not support marriage equality ... which is a claim that should probably be taken with a grain of salt seeing as it came from Barton who repeatedly and falsely claimed that marriage equality only won in three out of the four states where it was on the ballot, asserting that "traditional marriage" was victorious in Minnesota:
There is some good news. There are some storm clouds, we saw storm clouds election night. You look at the marriage amendments; three of the four marriage issues went down. In Minnesota, it almost went down, it was like a 50-50 prop; it should not have been that close that marriage is a man and a woman, but going down in Maine, and going down in Washington, and going down in Maryland but preserving barely in Minnesota.
While we did lose three of the four states and almost lost the fourth state, nationally the support is still high. A poll done on election day found that sixty percent of Americans strongly support marriage as a man and a woman.
It's a rhetorical victory for same-sex marriage proponents because they say "hey, we won three out of the last four states that voted on this." Yeah, with about 50.5% support, you know, barely.
There's no compelling victory here, but nonetheless it's regrettable we lost those three states but at the same time you still have nearly two to one support for traditional marriage in America.
As we shared with you following the election last week, and as you’ve probably heard ad nauseum from the media since then, despite our best efforts, a majority of Minnesota voters rejected the proposal to secure the definition of marriage in our state constitution.
After looking at the results here and in other states, it is clear that we were swimming against a powerful tide that swept the entire nation. Our opponents raised vastly more resources from gay marriage activists across the country who were determined to make this the year their unbroken losing streak would end. They enjoyed the support of the elite in politics, the media and entertainment. And, perhaps worst of all was that many evangelicals, including some prominent pastors and faith leaders, either refused to support the amendment or just remained silent.
Obviously we are very disappointed in the outcome, but we have no regrets in making the effort. Marriage as the union of one man and one woman has served Minnesota well. As our opponents frequently pointed out, marriage remains the union of a man and a woman even after last week’s vote.