Saturday, August 28, 2010

August 28th, 2010

Forty seven years ago today, Martin Luther King Jr. stood on the steps on the Lincoln Memorial and gave his I have a dream speech.

Unfortunately, it's not 1963. And today, standing two steps down, the would-be Messianic moron Glenn Beck is giving his speech in which he promises to take back the Civil Rights movement.

Two things come to mind:

1. What the fuck was Glenn Beck actually doing in 1963? I have trouble believing it was standing up for oppressed folks.
2. This is exactly the reason that I become skeptical when people invoke MLK, Gandhi, Jesus, and other such peace-grokking dudes. Some of them really are... Well, no matter who's wisdom is dripping from his brainless mouth, we can always be sure that Glenn Beck will never, actually, have a brain.


Z. E. Accordino said...

To answer your question - On this day in 1963, Glenn Beck was a fetus. :P

Pallas Renatus said...

Too bad he wasn't taken care of then. He might have actually done the world some good in the form of stem cells.

Ron said...

Whether we agree with him or not, I think Glenn Beck has the right to make a speech on these steps and on this 47th anniversary of MLK’s speech. I am not commenting and will not comment on the wisdom of his decision to make a speech on these steps and on this date. I am only commenting very specifically on his right to do so. I don’t wish ill will on GB nor do I wish he had never been born because his opinions, which are different than others of us, add diversity and political debate to this great nation; it’s what our country is all about. As to him being a moron, he’s making more money than I am and probably most of the people who read this wonderful blog. I would think he has at least average to above average intelligence.

Two interesting things about this rally today: Alveda King, MLK’s niece, has supported GB’s event today and a Mormon was leading a rally that probably had many Evangelicals in attendance. Who knows, maybe they’re becoming more tolerant. Tolerance is good.

Jack Faust said...

@Ron: I think several issues need to be addressed. First, Glenn Beck's gathering today was an act of hypocrisy, not an attempt to mend our differences or come together in a new light.

In the last two weeks along, he helped instigate the furor over the Mosque "near Ground Zero." This despite the fact that the Imam he criticized as being "radical" was one he worked side by side with to promote the idea of a "tolerant Islam." ( )

Furthermore his keynote speaker, one Sarah Palin, recently spoke out in her support of Dr. Laura... and her "persecution" for dropping the word Nigger on radio three times. Yes, in that situation quite a bit was going on. But nonetheless, lets take a look at our two primary speakers, and what they've recently been in support of. (Dr. Laura/Palin article: )

I recently discussed this for a bit on EI.Net when I brought up the subject of tolerance and blogs, and noted that when the intolerant cry for tolerance... They are being hypocrites. And in this case, the hypocrisy may be sitting just beneath the surface, but it is.

Glenn Beck and Palin and all their other pals have the right to say whatever they want. They have the right to gather as they wish. Their freedom of speech is, indeed, protected. And so it should be.

But... No. This was not tolerance. This was something else entirely, made to look nice and played out before the media, world, and Nation in such a way that all I can feel is disgust. I wish I had a solution for that disgust, but in all honesty... I do not.

Pallas Renatus said...

@Ron: My comment was mostly a play on Z.E.'s comment. Jack's last two paragraphs are nearly exactly how I feel, and what I was going to say in response.

Ron said...

@Jack: Dunno if GB is being hypocritical or not. I didn't even think of his rally today until I saw your post (I generally don't do politics on the weekend). As far as evangelicals being tolerant, I still think it interesting that GB, a Mormon, has some support among them-I'm more used to that not being the case.

@Pallas: No problem. My response to Jack's post had a lot of play to it.

But here's the serious part: we as a nation are extremely polarized and it's getting worse. We can't disagree with one another civilly; we have to demonize, denigrate and wish harm on those whose political views we disagree with. Hell, I've seen long term friendships end over political disagreements. Both sides are becoming increasingly intolerant and hostile. Who knows, maybe it's because of this disaster of an economy, or maybe it's the result of political machinations by the political elites to divide us. Regardless, how long before our "hot" words becomes open conflict and this country comes apart? We all had better pay attention real quick.

But for now, I'm going back to watching my 'Boys get their asses handed to them by Houston. Jeeez!

Robert said...

Re: Tolerance.

Tolerance is NOT GOOD. Let me say that again. Tolerance is not good. How do I know? I know because the very man mentioned in this blog, a hero in my book, was not tolerant of the racist crap he saw in his world. If MLK was tolerant, nothing would have changed.

We have this knee jerk reaction to any provocation that we must be tolerant. I say nay.