Someone tell Glenn Beck

The United States Pledge of Allegiance:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Emphasis mine.

Glenn Beck is just obsessed with this. Yesterday he kept playing a clip of Minnesota 4th Congressional District representative Betty McCollum, who was leading the Pledge of Allegiance on the senate floor, and was silent for the “under God” part. Beck was appalled. You know, one more piece of evidence that progressives hate religion, want to ban it, and have contempt and all that.

Well, the words “under God” weren’t added to the Pledge until 1954, 50 years after it was originally written by Francis Bellamy, a Christian Socialist— you know, one of those who believes that the Bible preaches social justice, and adheres to a liberation theology philosophy, both of which Beck denounces as evil, anti-Christian, and anti-American.

This is all on Wikipedia, and others have already raised the same questions. If I were Glenn Beck, I’d try to stick to arguments that wouldn’t make me look so willfully ignorant and confirm the criticisms I receive constantly from the media. How does he still have credibility with his followers? Why… are people so stupid?

This entry was posted in Politics, Religion, Socialism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Someone tell Glenn Beck

  1. Clarence says:

    Beck, like Limbaugh has his points occasionally.

    So does Michael Moore.

    But yeah, Beck’s a demagogue for the right. He’s not fair or balanced in how he editorializes on things, and he strikes me as both more of a boob AND as more ignorant than Limbaugh.

    Now as to our current understanding of the “no establishment” clause of the first Amendment. Let’s just say this understanding has changed over time, and leave it at that. Beck is right that it’s changed over time. What he’s not understanding -or more likely doesn’t give two shits about – is that the US has never been a Christian theocracy , nor have we ever required people to say the “Under God” part of the pledge, or (one might argue whether this is good public policy or not) even to do the pledge at all. Some Jehovah’s witnesses were the subjects of a famous case about this in the 40’s or 50’s, as they don’t believe in pledging any allegiences to a government of humans, but instead believe they owe their loyalty solely to their God.

    As for why he still has followers? I might ask the same about some forms of radical feminism or people who still have faith in Obama and the Democrats, or who believe in Creationism.

    Sometimes it’s willful ignorance. And sometimes one has beliefs and thoughts and concerns and if no one else is addressing those concerns and fears…well, where are you going to go?

    • April says:

      Beck, like Limbaugh has his points occasionally.

      So does Michael Moore.


      sometimes one has beliefs and thoughts and concerns and if no one else is addressing those concerns and fears…well, where are you going to go?

      Indeed. I listen to conservative talk radio every day and do occasionally hear about things that were not covered anywhere else. Usually, I look into it and find that Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, or whoever has spun the living daylights out of whatever issue it was that they brought to my attention, but regardless, they do in fact address issues that other outlets are unwilling to address. What’s unfortunate is the lack of credibility that any heavily-biased commentator gives themselves and their adopted movements when they spin facts into unrecognizable rhetoric and spew hate and fear all over the place. This goes for both sides.

  2. David K says:

    If I were Glenn Beck, I’d try to stick to arguments that wouldn’t make me look so willfully ignorant and confirm the criticisms I receive constantly from the media. How does he still have credibility with his followers? Why… are people so stupid?

    I know the spirit in which those words are said, and everyone left or right has Brechtian moments where they think the government should dissolve the people and elect an new one that has some damn sense but I think Andrew Sullivan has it right here:
    “[Beck] is taken very seriously by those who follow him, and the trouble is, because large swaths of America just can’t begin to take him seriously, his supporters feel utterly condescended to and marginalised, which makes them angrier… what you have is an intensely angry and motivated core of people and the reaction to them is intensifying their anger.” 12.00

    what can be done about this situation? well, I wouldn’t start from here…

  3. Let’s just be clear on one thing: IT WASN’T THE MORMON GOD, which is Glenn Beck’s God. I used to think Mormon-baiting (or any other type of religious-baiting), was simply WRONG on the face of it. Glenn has made me change my mind. We have to do whatever we can to decrease his influence and (hopefully) precipitate his imminent flip-out.

    David, you’re right, and that’s why we have to hit it and hit it HARD: Glenn Beck is a stealth Mormon end-times theorist.

    Ask the Tea Party fundies: Are you party to Mormon end-times scenarios being propagated as TRUTH to the general public? Because if so, you are willfully participating in heresy.

    Here in Tea Party/BJU-land, I have found this an airtight argument against Beck. In fact, the only one that brings them up short, makes them blink, stops them in their tracks.

    Hit it, and hit it hard.

    • David K says:

      Daisy, if you think that “Glenn Beck is a mormon nutter” is a killer line, then (non-mormon) godspeed to you, but my fear with that is:
      the Tea Party phenomenon is caused by a number of political, cultural and economic factors, and if the Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin heads are cut off, then like Hydra more and uglier heads will grow back in their place. Beck seems to me to be a guy who does his stuff out of conviction (no-one is that good an actor) but I’m sure there are plenty of cynics working at FOX who are just waiting for a show of their own, and in return for ratings $$$ will push all the same buttons and a few more….
      I think the Democrats really need to develop a strategy to engage with those people who, like Sullivan says, “feel utterly condescended to and marginalised” by the very respectable and establishment liberalism in the USA. I suppose the good news is: this will be far easier after the election, when the lunatics get their place on the asylum management board and deliver absolutely nothing in return.

    • Jim says:

      A lot of Tea Partiers are fundamentalists. The Fundametalists have a very clear line on Mormonism. This is not a matter of debate for them. In fact this what sank Mitt Romney’s campaign, right when iot was gathering speed.

      This is a really big vulnerablity for Beck. these people do not get along well at all. I mean bloodshed-and-pogrom not getting along well.

  4. I think Beck’s appeal could not easily be replaced at this historic place and time… in short, it would take too long to build up that kind of following again. We must do the Lonesome Rhodes thing and “deactivate” his influence.

    Keith Olbermann is always calling him Lonesome Rhodes too, you might want to check out the old Elia Kazan movie “A Face in the Crowd”:

    I propose we do something similar to Beck, or I hope someone does.

  5. Jackie says:

    Wow, so you “conservatives” are so hell bent on getting Beck and his “moronic” sheep out of the way, all while making personal attacks on his religion and his fans. I guess the argument to stick to the real issues and not following the left’s intolerance was lost on you. The utter hatred portrayed by people for Mormons alone baffles me, but this confusing venom towards a commentator who does his OWN thing astounds me.

    So what that he was bothered by the omission? Many people were bc it portrays the prevalent mindset among the left in America. What’s it to you?

    • April says:

      Beck (and those like him– especially on the thread on The Blaze regarding the LWM issue) act(s) as though we should all be required to say the Pledge, AND the “under God” part, regardless of whether the person actually believes in “god.” That is ridiculous. And McCollum can easily be Roman Catholic and still not believe that she should say it, since the government is not supposed to establish any religion. “God” is a religious idea and requiring anyone to acknowledge the theory that there is a deity when they don’t want to is unconstitutional.

    • Jim says:

      Actually jackie, hatred of Mormonism, or any other heresy of its kind and popularity, is quite conservative. it goes back right to the time of the apostles. Conservative enough for you?

  6. Jackie says:

    Oh, I guess you aren’t conservatives, I was mistaken, it makes more sense now.

    • David K says:

      If Beck can be up in arms about someone who doesn’t want to undermine the secular republic by using the McCarthy-era “under God” in the pledge of allegiance, then I reserve the right to be unimpressed by Beck’s under-researched emotionally-incontinent ravings about the constitution “hanging by a thread” and the con-artist cult that provides his intellectual foundations (such as they are….)

  7. I don’t care which God Glenn Beck follows, but he cares which one WE follow (or if we follow one at all). He says the “problem” with liberals and leftists is that we have “moved away from God”… thus, I think it is reasonable to ask which God he refers to.

    He brought up God, we didn’t.

    And his followers are mostly Christian fundamentalists, not Mormons. He is well aware of this, so why is he pushing it? I think because he really does believe the White Horse Prophecy (see above link) and thinks he is destined to convert large numbers of people to the LDS.

Comments are closed.