0 votes

Goodbye Glenn Beck

It's all over.

On his radio and television shows, Beck suggested any church promoting "social justice" or "economic justice" merely was using code words for Nazism and communism.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

On Strong's websites he has

On Strong's websites he has the capacity to give proof of his statements and opinions where Beck isn't really. It reminds me of anybody who feels strongly about their thoughts on things; they have a tendency to not even bother studying another side because they're so confident they have to be right. Maurice Strong has spent decades promoting the environment, and doing what he can to help ensure the most beneficial natural environment possible for future generations. Glenn Beck spent a show trying to reduce Strong's reliability and called the global warming concerns a Maurice Strong conspiracy. What I find sad is that many of Beck's followers did online queries to back Beck up, but most likely never bothered visiting Strong's webpage's that demonstrate how every little thing Beck said isn't supported by any facts.

Fair point.

It's the rare person who investigates someone's own words before rushing to condemn them on someone else's say-so.

I must say though that my background in biology has not warmed me to the claims made by Al Gore and others about Earth's impending doom from an essential plant nutrient, CO2. Tests at the Environmental Research Laboratory in Tucson demonstrated that crop plants are more productive raised in elevated CO2 levels. Ice core samples and other records in nature allow us to correlate mean global temperature with prevailing CO2 levels and guess what, there is no correlation.

To the deep ecologists I say, Gaia is far more resilient than you know. Try not to fret so much.

New Hampshire and Ecuador.

I'm sure Maurice is a nice

I'm sure Maurice is a nice guy... NOT!

Go Back 2 yrs and look at what Glen said then..

Thats what I tell most people that are taken in by his bull. When they do they see I'm right. Glen Beck has never had an original idea and most of his ideas right now Ron Paul has espoused for years.

Sarah Palin is the solution for Beck isn't she?


Diagnosis of the problem is one thing. The cure is something else.


Spot on! Thanks! ;-)

"I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies." ~ Chris Floyd

Have you seen those gagging Founder pictures he has up?

I saw them on a youtube clip then again when the Judge sat in for Beck and interviewed Rand Paul. Pandaring trash. They don't even link the most notable attributes of the right founder appropriately, they are just fuzzy 'noble' words like 'honor' etc haphazardly assigned.

I know that isn't nearly as bad as his saying he is libertarian but that the GOP should vote for ROMNEY, but it bugs me.

Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesnt want to hear -RonPaul

Speak of the Devil

Chicago Cardinal espouses Marxism...


Popes too. Whatever works to

Popes too. Whatever works to keep the pope ahead in the game.

I am not Beck fan

However, after reading the Pope's recent encyclical a while back; I will have to agree. Couched in all of this nice talk was the message of "shared economic resources" and the necessity of one central economic figure controlling and doling out the wealth. There is certainly a fine line between promoting the Christian philosophy of sharing what you have with those less fortunate and the forced coercion of making others do it.


The lip of truth shall be established forever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment...Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are His delight. Prov 12:19,22

I would agree if I didn't

I would agree if I didn't understand that Beck's purpose is to divide and discredit our movement.

Ventura 2012

I agree

I agree

I agree with...

healthnut on this one....at this time Beck has a point...

“The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn't understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had." - Eric Schmidt

Regardless of one's position on these matters.....

...this is a classic example of the need to define one's terms before discussing them.

Clearly, "social justice" does not mean the same thing to all parties involved. Yet many are now up in arms over the TERM, and apparently without any compulsion whatsoever to compare definitions first.

When Glenn Beck (whom I do not trust) uses the term, is he not referring to socialism and the governmental-controlled redistribution of wealth? But when churches use this, are they ALL referring to the same thing?

(Yes, I'm certain that some of them are, as it is well documented that certain denominations have petitioned the US Government to give away funds to charity. But is this what all of them mean when they use the term?)

If by "social justice" one means "charity", then how did the word "justice" and "charity" become interchangeable? And if by "social justice" one means the government-controlled redistribution of wealth, how is that "just"---to take away from him who earned, and to give it to him who did not? Further, how is the word "social" justified when the word "economic" is much more fitting? Indeed, it is not the redistribution of CHARACTER or FRIENDSHIPS or SOCIETIES, but the redistribution of money that is in view. (Don't get me wrong; I find nothing "just" about the government-controlled redistribution of wealth--by any name.)

My main point is that in these examples, it is fairly clear that the term "social justice" is being used against the plain meaning of the words involved....as if ALL parties using it perceive the need to "spin" for some reason.

When a term does nothing other than to sound good, we must wonder even where it came from. When it cannot be broken down into definite parts that relate to the various facets or characteristics of that which it ostensibly describes, there's likely some funny business going on.

And how instructive it is about the sad mental state of the nation that so many are caught up in ardent controversy without the slightest apparent compulsion to define the terms first.


Catholics Will be Upset With This

sorry to say but the Catholic Church has a LONG history of Cardinals and Bishops supporting marxist and socialist figures in Latin America, Africa, the US and Europe.

To them, "social justice" means what Beck implies it means...socialism.

Sometimes the rich DO oppress the poor

sending out death squads to kill/disappear any peon who squawks about his treatment in the salt mines. Of course,it's not very Christian to kill the pigs (in the name of 'social justice' or anything else), but I can understand the sentiment.

I'm not a Catholic, but I do know that Catholicism has factions

inside of the Holy See.

The last Pope was fiercely against socialism and communism.

However, he did believe in "ownership" and thus gov't.
----He espoused "free-enterprise"

The current Pope will be different.....and so on.

Did you know that the Franciscans kicked St. Francis out of his namesake Order; while he was still living, hahahahaha.

There is no such thing as a "united" Catholic Church.

Real Definition of "Charity"

Glenn Beck knows more about charity than Harry Reid, who needs to pay more attention in Sunday School class. True charity requires volition on the part of the giver and gratitude on the part of the receiver. Their church understood this when the LDS welfare program was established.

When the government extracts taxes from us unwillingly to provide largesse to their voting base, that is not charity. It is extortion. Just look at Barack Obama and Joe Biden's gifts to charity 0.0013 percent of their income. Compare that with Glenn Beck or Mitt Romney's gifts to charity (11 to 13 percent).

It is always easier for politicians to reach into someone else's pocket to display their "social justice". That's the problem with using "other people's money" (OPM). It is misplaced moral priorities


Bears repeating...

True charity requires volition on the part of the giver and gratitude on the part of the receiver.

When the government extracts taxes from us unwillingly to provide largesse to their voting base, that is not charity. It is extortion.

Too bad "they" don't trust us to not only GOVERN ourselves, but GIVE willingly!

The colonists gave "aid" to the crown according to their ability ... the parent government then dared to shift the tax burden from "home" to the productive colonists, whose trade they already had a monopoly over ... BIG MISTAKE ... they showed their cards as they were trying to PROFIT from violating their natural rights to the FRUIT of their own labor...

I just want to know why?

After how Fox News treated Dr. Paul during the presidential campaign,why any Ron Paul supporter would even watch that channel, much less an idiot like Glenn Beck is beyond me.

Who cares what Glenn Beck says? Why is his opinion important about anything; or for that matter, any of the Fox News talking heads? WE caught them lying, cheating, and twisting Dr. Paul's message over and over again. So why would anyone think things have changed at Fox, because Glenn Beck moved over from CNN? Wake up people.

I am conservative. I believe in the Constitution because it

provides "SOCIAL JUSTICE". I suppose some here want social injustice.
Could it be that when they talk about social justice they mean what is just. Social injustice is when the congress and the white house give all kinds of subsidies to a favored few by stealing taxpayers money and giving it to a select group of corporations who in turn give huge bonuses.
Social injustice is when washington give huge tax breaks for companies to move manufacturing jobs overseas.
Social injustice is when the President is trying to push through a health care plan the will make billions for the health insurance industry,increase the burden of taxes on the average citizen and not improve our health whatsoever.
Social injustice is when the congress by their actions cause our citizens to lose jobs here.
So I want social justice! I want congress to make it easy for small businesses to create manufacturing jobs here in the US. I want reindustrialisation here in this country. Congress is responsible for creating an environment that cause jobs to be created here. Not that they the government should create the jobes but allow us the people to do so by removing all the obstacles they have placed in our way.
So when you hear people ask for government to create jobs they mean to change the poilicies which are driving jobs overseas to what will create jobs here.
It means to stop subsidising the so called too big to fail corporations and support our country and it's Citizens.

Finally!! Some real discourse on the subject!!

I'm so glad to see that.

I was afraid this would continue to devolve along the lines of people talking past each other with one side simply repeating talking points and sound bites.

I don't have time at the moment for a reasoned response, my apologies for that. But I'm glad to see some have taken up the gauntlet of real discussion of differences of opinion.

In short, have some churches strayed from the original teachings? Most likely. Can this be remedied? Absolutely.

Is Beck or his suggestions the remedy? Positively NOT.

Social justice hurts those it intends to help,

The Catholic Church was successfully infiltrated by a couple thousand communists - all recruited by one woman (who later converted to Catholicism and told all). There surely were many more recruited by others. We need to focus attention on socialistic, progressive and communistical tendencies in the Christian churches, so that libertarians, conservatives, and all limited government types can avoid the trap that is being set in the name of God.
Social justice means roughly the same thing to 99% of people. It implies a framework of laws that will bind some (the advantaged) and give favors to others. What else could they mean? If one means charity, one doesn't say social justice. Social justice implies a sweeping change imposed on society. It really means a liberal progressive government or UN program. If you see a bumper sticker that says "Work for Social Justice", do you really think they mean give to charity? It's a rallying call, understood by all. It means, in their heart of hearts: punish the oppressors, give power to the oppressed, using the only apparatus that can do the job - government and force. Unfortunately, these well-meaning people are stupid, in that they don't recognize that mankind grows stronger in the face of adversity, and weaker when propped up.
Why are the Jews so strong? They are the most oppressed people of all time, but they became stronger and smarter because no one held their hand in all the countries they faced antagonism in. Why do Japanese, Taiwanese, East Indians and others do better than Anglos here, without social justice? Civil rights laws have made whites more tolerant, but blacks more bitterly racist - this according to the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson (Bond.org). Support structures have only weakened and impoverished people. Social justice will create the opposite of its intended effect, as it always has. It's a natural law.
Let people face and overcome adversity and hardship, and they will end up stronger and smarter than you and me. But with social justice in place, it will be you and I that get stronger and smarter. I guarantee it.

The worst reasoning.

"Why are the Jews so strong? They are the most oppressed people of all time, but they became stronger and smarter because no one held their hand in all the countries they faced antagonism in. Why do Japanese, Taiwanese, East Indians and others do better than Anglos here, without social justice?"

There ARE laws that give these people a leg up because they are immigrants. There are billions of Federal scholarships that are based on the recipient's nationality. Now , if you notice, second generation immigrants do no better than the rest of us because the government grant are taken away.

Social justice by the religious definition is the highest work of a human in God's eyes. Getting an agency of the government to do it is NOT social justice. Social justice requires voluntary self sacrifice. It's a shame that neo cons have deliberately misused the term in the last 10 years.

Jim Wallis

is correct. I have always admired - though not necessarily agreed with - him.

But this will die down and Beck will emerge from the cesspool once again. What is this guy thinking?

Part of Beck's subversive job is to divide Christians / Liberty

From time to time he will spew crap to act like a "Libertarian" while offending regular church going conservatives.

Carlson Tucker has the same role for MSNBC. His job is to drag liberty leaning conservative with prostitution, drugs and other vice.

Being pro-liberty does not automatically mean you like to do drugs and prostitutes. It just means that you are wise to the money/death rackets that grow up around government prohibition.

Carlson and Beck want the everyday Christian to be offended and to falsely associate liberty conservatives with wickedness. In reality it is those coreporate special interests and their kings that seek profit from the prohibition that support Carlson and Beck. Their cheif goal being to strip us of our freedom and enslave our children over the long-term.

Christian Socialism has deep roots in this country

Glenn Beck puts himself in trouble when he says "any church" that says they teach "social justice" is using code words for Nazism or communism. It depends on the definition. I also don't believe that all churches teach it with the historic biblical understanding (personal interposition on behalf of the oppress, not governmental mandated handouts).

I agree with him that many churches are teaching socialism through Liberation Theology. Wright's church is an extreme example of this kind of teaching. In an earlier post, "context, context, context" was important. It is important here also. If you read what Beck was saying the day before, I believe he's referring to what I would call Christian socialism. Later,
Beck also clarified his statements.

I would like to continue flushing out the church's role in all this. I would hate to think that the following quote by Schlesinger is true, however, I've listened to quite a few sermons and many have strayed from the biblical truth or teach such simple and useless stories that the congregations remain feeding on milk. Heb 5:12, 1 Cor 3:2,3.

Freedoms are lost because of many extreme worldviews-- atheism,Judaism, Islam, etc. as well as misuse of Christianity. We here seek to remedy the freedoms threatened and lost by rooting these freedoms back to where they belong-in the Constitution and the principles that founded it.

"Among all the trades, occupations, and professions in the country, few can produce as high a percentage of Socialists as can the ministry." - From Arthur Schlesinger in his book"The Politics of Upheaval".

View the following locations and see why many clergy are socialists. yes, they are and the WCC is not sinless in its involvement of promoting socialism. Notice now how many of the churches are voicing their opposition to Beck and that's because he's hitting close to the truth in their worldviews and agendas.




I know Glenn Beck does not have all of the correct answers. He frustrates me as he does many of us here on this website. Yet, I like it when he stirs the pot and in this case I think its being stirred in the right direction.

We all on this site have differing opinions which I've read and can't agree with, but we can agree with the principles of freedom. Beck is pointing to the churches but I say its also the seminaries which have been infiltrated with the teaching of false doctrines to present/future pastors their theology and many of the socialistic untruths.

From the article Glenn stated what he thought were differences of social justice....."Like most Americans, Glenn strongly supports and believes in 'social justice' when it is defined as 'good Christian charity,'" he said. "Glenn strongly opposes when Rev. Wright and other leaders use 'social justice' as a euphemism for their real intention -- redistribution of wealth."

Common ground against those who hate freedom can be had, but bypassing opportunities to flush a socialist structure into the open should be avoided. Call out the liberal churches, including their seminaries.

As the hearts of the people go, so goes the churches. As the heart of the churches goes, so goes this country.

The night is far spent, the day is at hand.
And those who have not heard shall understand.

Glenn Beck is a totally

Glenn Beck is a totally irresponsible, selfish individual who could care less about the collateral damage from his ill-conceived bomb shells. Folks that defend him and his foolishness are naive at best and cynical at worse. Each one of us have a different or slightly different belief system. The First Amendment of the Constitution works for all of us regardless of our individual beliefs as long as those beliefs do not infringe on the beliefs of others. Remember "freedom of religion"? What you do and say in your church is your business.

His reference to "code words" says it all. That term, similar to "racist" and "antisemitic" is used to create suspicion and discredit the target audience. His mission in this instance is to create controversy and discord among his audience to generate buzz to boost his ratings. The sooner he loses his TV and Radio platforms, the better.

code words are bogus

Just like neocon is not a code word for jew.

These are not code words either.

agree with Beck by all means, but . . .

this is all a diversion. At this point, what difference does it make? The man is a divisive element.

Why doesn't Glenn Beck discuss the youtube video put together by the DHS . . . that is on this site at this moment?

Why doesn't he discuss these sorts of things?

Because THOSE things really matter. Socially and economically there is no justice for 95% of Americans at this time, whether it's possible to define what it means or not--

justice of any kind has disappeared, from the courts, from communities--stolen from *us* in the night by banksters and bureaus--

whether it is moral or ethical to try to help people or not, whether using political (by force) means or volunteering--

so, this is a distraction--something which makes those who believe they are still 'free' resent people they see standing around in tattered clothes and people they see who have a different skin color, etc.--

and a moot point--

and Beck knows that, but he knows that this can stir people up and keep them from thinking about what really matters, such as finding out the truth about *their* circumstances--

so I believe.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--