After weeks of teasing his audience with cryptic allusions to “The Plan,” on Saturday, Glenn Beck revealed key aspects of a new strategy he claims will help restore constitutional sanity to American government.
It won’t.
Given a perfect opportunity to embrace the concept of Jeffersonian federalism and state sovereignty, as a check against the federal leviathan, Beck instead opted to push self-help seminars all over the country to teach ordinary folks “community organizing.”
Which is fine, but woefully insufficient. Without a solid intellectual alternative to Washington, D.C.-dominated politics, all Beck’s legions are likely to do is get riled up and vote a bunch of Republicans back into Congress.
A bunch of Republicans that will still have no reason whatsoever to acknowledge the fundamental constitutional limitations on federal power.
Pardon me if I’m less than thrilled about partying like it’s 1994 all over again.
According to Beck’s website, these seminars will culminate in a rally on August 28, 2010 in Washington, D.C. at the feet of – who else? – Abraham Lincoln.
The irony of hosting an event designed to promote the Constitution at the feet of one of its worst enemies is so painful it's almost poetic.
Abraham Lincoln? You mean the Great Centralizer?
The president who shut down newspapers, imprisoned political opponents, and suspended habeas corpus?
The one who waged an illegal, avoidable war that killed 620,000 Americans to prove the right of peaceful secession doesn't exist in a nation founded on that very principle?
Right, that Abraham Lincoln.
Let me be fair: Glenn Beck has been on point about a lot of things. He clearly has a knack for finding stories no one else is willing to report. But no plan to restore our Constitution can succeed unless it focuses on state sovereignty.
We don’t need new politicians in Washington, we need less power concentrated there in the first place.
America has been heading down a path of destructive centralization for more than a century and a half. Until we decide that freedom itself is incompatible with a one-size-fits-all government (either Right or Left), we will continue to be pillaged by elected national monarchs from both political parties.
Once again, Glenn Beck seems to have blown a chance to use his very prominent platform to make that case.
Photo Credit: AP/Alex Brandon
Comments
Josh,
You seem like someone on our side. I don't know if you've watched/listened to Beck for long, but the last thing he advocates for (and his audience knows it) is more Republicans as usual.
And if you had listened to Beck for more than a few minutes, you would know that he has been advocating for education for years. He has a list of books he's asked us to read and begged us to educate ourselves. We've done that.
The purpose of these seminars will be to learn how to use that knowledge to actually affect the change that we want to see in DC. No more of the 'bipartisan corruption that has brought us to this brink' as he put it.
As for the Lincoln thing....he did want to preserve the Union! We do too. We want to refound it and preserve it...
Hope you'll join the effort!
Gigi,
Don't drink the Kool aid on August 28.
I agree with Gigi. Glenn's doing a great job and as far as I can tell, he's the only one doing the majority of the work. I think he needs more help and less negativity.
If you don't think Beck has blown his chance to fix things, watch and learn. You are WAY off base on this one.
It sounds like everyone agrees there is too much corruption in DC. I don't fault Beck for what he is doing nor do I have a problem with the article suggesting it may be a wasted effort. The author raises some good points regarding electing more corrupted politicians who will go back to sleep once they get our votes. Though state sovereignty is the ultimate answer I don't see how it can be achieved while the federal government has such a strangle hold on our lives. I don't know if Beck's plan will work but at least he is doing something. Hopefully, it sends shock waves through The Hill and works as planned. But if not, then perhaps it can indirectly help by starting a "grass fire". One can only hope.. for our Country's and our Future's sake.
Gigi et al.,
I have paid attention to Glenn Beck for several years now, and I'm well aware of his insight on many issues.
My point is that the principle of federalism (state sovereignty, the Tenth Amendment, states' rights, or whatever else you want to call it) is the only thing we can use to shrink the federal government back down to its constitutional footprint.
It will never shrink back on its own no matter who is in power in D.C. Even Reagan failed to shrink it.
I don't know that federalism isn't part of Glenn Beck's "Plan," but considering that he is hosting a rally at Lincoln's feet, I can't imagine he intends to discuss the Tenth Amendment.
Unless Beck is totally ignorant of Lincoln's abominable constitutional record, which I doubt.
It doesn't take much digging to realize that Lincoln was the Constitution's enemy, not its friend. Look at his dirty deeds, not his pretty words.
“Adherence to men is often disloyalty to principles.”
– John Taylor of Carolin
Gigi, I have been listening to Glenn for years, am an Insider and have read the standards: 5000 Year Leap, Common Sense, etc., but think you miss Josh's point. The point is not that any of the education is wasted or that 9/12 was not God given genius, the point is we can ONLY expect to have limited government when we re-assert the checks and balances of Federalism. The solution is not simply to elect cadidates to national office that espouse conservative values. Washington chews them up and spits them out because the incentives are all wrong. The solution is to enable citzens at the state and local levels to govern themselves as provided for in the constitution.
Glenn is very, very wrong about Lincoln. I suggest you might read "The Real Abrahoam Lincoln" (kind of linke "The Real George Washingtion, etc., Glenn has touted). (Trust me I have recommended the same to Glenn but have had no response).
Gigi, I have been listening to Glenn for years, am an Insider and have read the standards: 5000 Year Leap, Common Sense, etc., but think you miss Josh's point. The point is not that any of the education is wasted or that 9/12 was not God given genius, the point is we can ONLY expect to have limited government when we re-assert the checks and balances of Federalism. The solution is not simply to elect cadidates to national office that espouse conservative values. Washington chews them up and spits them out because the incentives are all wrong. The solution is to enable citzens at the state and local levels to govern themselves as provided for in the constitution.
Glenn is very, very wrong about Lincoln. I suggest you might read "The Real Abrahoam Lincoln" (kind of linke "The Real George Washingtion, etc., Glenn has touted). (Trust me I have recommended the same to Glenn but have had no response).
Just what are Beck's credentials? Why are you people listening to a drunk rambling on and on. Geez, there's nothing like a reformed......So you are all willing to pay huge money to and listen to some guys opinion. Like dirty harry said, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one.
Why weren't you people complaining about all of this crap when Bush was in office? Because they will destroy you or kill you, thats why. You just don't argue with the republican establishment if you want to live.
Josh Eboch, you are one of the very few anti-GBers that has actually made a rational argument. Hats off to ya. I actually appreciated what you said. It's a wonderful thing when instead of lies and smears like most of the lefties, you actually done good. You might want to sign up for one of those GB seminars. I gotta go with GB on this. The Dems and Reps have been screwing us for too long. If Glenn is successful both will be gone. If not then you were right.
Beck is clueless re: the TRUE American view of law and government. Listen, please, to my radio show about him at our site. Comments welcome.
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
One thing Josh, without the civil war there would still be slavery. Slavery is a very bad thing. GB isn't pushing for that.
Klatoo,
Did you know that between 1800 and 1860, dozens of countries, including the British Empire, abolished slavery peacefully?
Did you also know that President Lincoln completely ignored peace delegations that traveled to D.C. from the Southern States, both before and after Fort Sumter?
There is no doubt that slavery was a bad thing, but was the avoidable slaughter of 620,000 (black and white) Americans any better?
If Lincoln had really wanted to free the slaves, he could have followed the example of the rest of the world and done so peacefully at a fraction of the cost that was required to subjugate the South through force of arms.
Why did Lincoln choose war over peace?
Well said - at the very least you are prompting a CONVERSATION on the subject rather then bashing. I support the discussion, we are going to need "all hands on deck" to have a logical way out of this. The fact is power comes from the individual, not the government. Someone, (anyone) needs to use some logic. GB may not always be right, but he serves food for thought. It is important for the individuals to be educated on history and self-reliance - that I agree with.
But don't be too hasty to judge the plan...he is saying it is a "100 year" plan, not a 4 year plan. United we stand, divided we fall.
Chris, yes everyone has one but there is no reason you have to be one. Many folks were complaining about the size of the federal government and its intrusive proclivities under Bush. This problem didn't start with Obama and the Democratic congress but they are bringing it to us at WARP speed. Try making comments that show you have thought about what you say and stop behaving like a nine year old trying to sound all-grown-up by slinging insults and personal attacks.
I have to say that I would love to get behind the GB phenomenon (at least the part about decentralization). The problem I have is that most of his supporters also are conservative regarding civil liberties. This is not in agreement with the founding principles of this country. For example, how many of his followers also voted to ban gay marriage? Is this adhering to the principles of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? My point is that some traditional values, such as federalism and checks and balances, must be preserved. However, that doesn't mean we also should maintain traditional values in areas such as civil liberties simply because they're traditional.
Also, all of this negative talk about lefties needs to stop. Those on the left are not evil. They simply have a differing world view. This diversity of thought should be embraced, not criticized. After all, the framers of the Constitution were made up of lefties and righties, and they managed to craft a brilliant document.
David,
I love when lefties say things like " all of this negative 'talk' about lefties needs to stop".
We'll stop when lefties stop pushing socialist agendas and ridicule and attempt to personally destroy anyone who dares to get in their way. In other words, we'll stop when you stop and not one moment sooner!
"Jeffersonian federalism" is a term utterly devoid of any historical meaning.
Please stop writing articles if you don't know what you're talking about. We have enough people doing their best to mess up the country with ill-informed opinions already.
Josh:
Is there any historical basis to say that the South would have given up it's slavery economy voluntarily?
Because the Dred Scott decision, Bleeding Kansas, and the attack of Charles Sumner on the floor of the United States Senate all suggest that your knowledge of the antebellum period is as poor as your knowledge of the founding fathers.
It's true, Jack, that two hundred years ago, "federalism" meant something somewhat different than it means today. But then so did "liberal."
Good thing I know which audience I'm writing for, huh?
Jack,
I know how much you love Wikipedia, so I'll quote it for you:
"Another movement calling itself 'Federalism' appeared in the late 20th and early 21st centuries...which is characterized by a gradual return of power to the states..."
In that context, Jeffersonian federalism would be the use of Jefferson's doctrines of nullification and interposition to achieve the goal of returning power to the states.
Got it?
Let me know if you have any more questions.
Beck, the Multi-Millionaire could have afforded to give away Insider Memberships, any of his books as well. But he chose to sell them to you instead. Do you hear me idiots??? he SOLD them to you. The only thing GB really cares about is making them dollars by the multi millions. This is the Clown who was making fun of mentally challenged people on "Moron trivia" and "Jepratardy". You've been blindly following a man who has no education in history or politics. You've been bamboozled by a man who claimed that Obama's America was going to be an oligarchy. What?!?! Like the last eight freakin years wasnt?
You are all the blindest, mindless kool-aid drinkingest sheep that ever bought books.
With a name like that.....we are the idiots? Get over yourself. You may think you can spew this venom because you are in the majority by congress numbers only? You are in the minority of the country.
eric,
if i was in the minority, McCain would be the president. :)
you need to get over your hate, ween your self from the kool-aid, realize you worship a multi-millionaire, and grow up. At least Rush had the balls to admit that he was in it for the ratings last month.
"I'm doing my show for ratings. I want the largest audience I can get because that's how I can charge the highest advertising rates, which means what else do I want? Money." ~ Rush Limbaugh
GB/eric drinks the kool aid - see comment to Chris. We each have one, you too apparently want to establish you are one. Adulthood will probably prove to be difficult for you.
Josh:
You seem to be writing for an audience devoid of background knowledge, in which context your statement certainly makes sense.
"Jeffersonian federalism", however, makes no more sense than "Socratic Christianity", for an example. Jefferson was not around when the second and ill-named federalist movement began, did not participate in it's founding, or put his stamp on it, or in any way associate with it, being somewhat dead at the time. Thus attaching his name to the latter school in the hopes of stealing some sort of varnish of credibility from one of the founders is nothing but a cheap political trick.
Jack,
Seeing as how "federalism" has come to mean exactly that philosophy of state sovereignty which Jefferson espoused so passionately, there is no doubt in my mind that he would be honored to have himself and his political doctrines identified with this modern movement toward self-government.
But by all means, continue to be rude and inflammatory without offering an opposing solution of your own. I'm sure that strategy must be working well for you.
Why don't you give me an actual name to address?
You have no knowledge of me or what I stand for. Obama promised change. A lot of people wanted change, a lot of people voted for him. The quicker you realize people will flock to the truth the quicker you can get over your minority ideals.
This KID who wrote this trash is a complete liberal moron. He will realize as he grows up that his ideals now are a pathetic stance based on victimology. May he die from the "Illegal Alien" flu.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!