Podcast#1: The Ugly Truth (Part I)

Mark Glenn of “The Ugly Truth” interviews Keith Johnson of “Revolt of the Plebs”

                        >>>>CLICK ON THIS LINK<<<<

From“The Ugly Truth” website:

“One of the sharpest knifes in the drawer, the brilliant writer/political analyst/commentator Keith Johnson of Revolt of the Plebs FINALLY joins the program to talk about the latest trojan horse affecting the “truth movement”–The Tea Parties.”

Published in: on September 27, 2010 at 11:48 am  Comments (2)  

Shut Up! You’re Disturbing the Elite

by Keith Johnson

So many warnings, so many solutions, and so many people who couldn’t care less. 

LONG AGO:  A man named Noah (the conspiracy theorist of his time) warns his people that a great flood is fast approaching.  His preparations for the event are largely dismissed as crazy, and he is constantly the subject of ridicule and mockery.  Even as the heavy rains turn torrential; the people continue to laugh, eat, drink and dance…right up until the water level rises high enough to sweep them all away.

1912:  As the RMS Titanic takes on water; word spreads among the passengers that they must prepare to abandon ship.  Many refuse to board lifeboats because they are convinced that the vessel cannot sink.  Some stay in the lounges to socialize while others return to their cabins and fall fast asleep.  The lifeboats aboard the Titanic have the capacity to accommodate 2/3 of the passengers, but many of them are sent away nearly empty because some people refuse to take the crisis seriously.

1913:  While treasonous politicians conspire to relinquish control of the U.S. economy over to European central banks; Congressman Charles Lindbergh, Sr. warns:

This Act [the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Woodrow Wilson] signs the Bill; the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalized. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed.  The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill.  The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on, depressions will be scientifically created.”

His warning is ignored, and by 1929, America falls victim to its first “scientifically created” depression.

PRESENT DAY:  The United States has entered into yet another “scientifically created” depression—brought about by the same unsound money policies—controlled by the same corrupt banking cartels. 

Somewhere in America; a young man wearing an “End the Fed” T-shirt stands alone—across the street from a Federal Reserve Bank—shouting the prophetic words of Thomas Jefferson through an amplified bullhorn:

“If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.”

Many passersby snicker while others stop to stare.  A marked police cruiser pulls to the curb and demands that the young man leave the public sidewalk.  He reminds the officer of his first amendment right of free speech and peaceful assembly.  The officer reminds him that he couldn’t care less.  He pulls a Taser from his utility belt and fires two probes into the boy’s chest—sending him to the ground—where is subdued, and then loaded into the backseat of the cruiser before being hauled away.

Among the gathering crowd, few gasp in disbelief but are afraid to say a word.  Others point and laugh while the rest join in a morbid cacophony of cheers and applause.

It is a scene that is becoming far too common.  Across America, peaceful dissent and protest is being met with brute force, while ordinary citizens stand on the sidelines watching in amusement as the face of their fellow countrymen meet the stamping boot of the police state. 

The Constitution has become a relic, and those who live by it are becoming a nuisance to those who would like to see it torn to shreds.  Word has come down from on high that these protests must end.  A new strategy to quell dissent is being deployed through mainstream media personalities, who have been given orders to reign in their flocks by controlling and limiting their mode of expression.

In the days leading up to Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally, the self-described rodeo clown instructed attendees not to bring signs or posters.  Most complied, some chose instead to bring flags or dress up in colorful “period piece” costumes. 

Weeks later, in a two minute segment of his Fox television program, Beck addressed his obedient flock and pleaded for them to abandon their signs and costumes altogether.  He referenced a new website by Think Progress, which Beck alledges was launched, “for the sole purpose of making you in to the crazy costume person, the racist or the conspiracy theorist. They are going to try to make you into anything that you are not.”

Instead of encouraging his viewers to be discriminating in the signs they hoist or the clothes they wear, he suggested that his viewers give in to the criticism.   Beck told his people to, “Dress normally” and to, “Take the signs down.”

He then shared about a conversation he had with his daughter, who suggested that she really didn’t care what people said about her clothing.  His fatherly response to her was, “well, other people do,” and then concluded by suggesting that the lesson for the day was: “Don’t give the media even a chance to typecast you.”

This is a clever psy-op using lots of double speak.  Beck is actually conditioning his people to be shamed over the use of signs, loud speech and clothing with political statements.  By instructing his people to avoid criticism, he is actually projecting that he concurs with the criticism itself.

Once these people accept that this behavior is a social faux pas, they too will join into the criticism and demonization of those who hold signs, use bullhorns or wear T-shirts with statements like “9/11 Was an Inside Job,” or “Don’t Tread on Me.”  

Beck also suggested to his viewers that instead of bringing signs, they should bring their children.   This is an even more sinister plan.  The idea here is to use children as a tool to further demonize protestors.  At certain events, Beck’s “quiet” minions will show up—with their sons or daughters in tow—and confront more passionate demonstrators and remind them to, “Keep it down– children are present.”  I’m sure you can envision how that will look on the evening news. 

But this strategy to quell dissent is not confined to the establishment right.  The establishment left has its own plan, ripped straight from the pages of leftist icon Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.”   Rule #5 of that book states:

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

On October 30, 2010—the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart and Stephan Colbert of the Colbert Report will be staging duel rallies in Washington D.C. to spoof Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally and the Tea Party movement in general. 

While we all enjoy good satire from time to time—even when the ribbing is done at our expense—these particular events should not be merely taken at face value.

The home page for Jon Stewart’s “Rally To Restore Sanity,” describes the event as,

“…a rally for the people who’ve been too busy to go to rallies, who actually have lives and families and jobs (or are looking for jobs)… Think of our event as Woodstock, but with the nudity and drugs replaced by respectful disagreement.”

Respectful disagreement?  This is sure a stark contrast to the liberal left that pioneered the explosive, ‘in-your-face’ anti-war, anti-fascist movement of the 1960’s and 70’s.  Today, the liberals seem to have no time for that.  But apparently some will at least be able to find the time to attend a mock rally of tomfoolery that serves no other purpose than to further alienate the left from the right. 

The page goes on to read, “We’re looking for the people who think shouting is annoying, counterproductive, and terrible for your throat…bring your indoor voice”

Yeah, God forbid that we annoy our oppressors with our grievances or scratch our throats while exercising our first amendment rights.  The reason we’re in the mess we’re in is because too many people have been using their “indoor voice” for too many years.   Silence and complacency are the only things that are counterproductive.  I shutter to think what might have happened if Paul Revere had been stopped midway through his midnight ride and convinced that his “shouting” was “annoying” and “counterproductive.”

The liberals have lost their mojo when it comes to demonstrations.  Their recent attempts to counter the Tea Party movement with a Coffee Party movement have thus far been an epic failure.  During the Bush years, there was at least some semblance of an anti-war movement.  But as soon as Obama took office, that all but disappeared. 

The popularity and effectiveness of Town Hall confrontations and Tea Party demonstrations has overshadowed the liberal voice.  Now, they are turning to more drastic measures by using ridicule to shame and silence their opposition.

Even some Tea Party groups, who many believe are free of establishment control, are starting to sound like they have been co-opted, and are preaching the same rhetoric as Glenn Beck.

Amy Kremer, chairman of the Tea Party Express, recently said, “The time has come for us to put down the protest signs and pick up the campaign signs and get engaged.  We have stood on the sidelines for long enough protesting.”

So now we have both the establishment left and right working in concert to stifle the steadfast American tradition of dissent.  The right will be cordial, the left will laugh and the criminals in our government will have nice quiet streets to travel down as they take this country straight to Hell. 

Published in: on September 20, 2010 at 9:59 am  Comments (29)  

Take a Second Look at Christine O’Donnell

by Keith Johnson

WARNING:  I’m going to be cruel.

Christine O’Donnell’s victory in the Delaware Republican primary may not be cause for celebration.  A Christine O’Donnell in Washington may just mean one more vote for endless war in the Middle East.

This statement was sourced from her 2008 campaign website by ‘On the Issues’:

Strategy to bring troops home from Iraq: it’s called victory

“Christine has a strategy for bringing our troops home from Iraq: It’s called victory. Past mistakes should not deter our need to stabilize Iraq so we can get our troops home. We can succeed in the future, but we must accompany our efforts with the honor and respect we’ve earned as a people. We cannot leave on the enemy’s terms. We must leave on our terms.”

Our Terms?  Take a look at what imposing “our terms” on the people of Iraq has done to that nation thus far. The United States invaded Iraq under the pretext of neutralizing Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.  In the process, the American military turned an emerging first world nation into a hellish, third world cesspit.  In the end, no weapons of mass destruction were found.  There was and will be no victory, and suggesting that America has earned respect and honor within the context of the Iraq War is an affront to the 1,366,350 slaughtered Iraqis and the 4,736 dead members of our American armed services.  Is this her idea of victory, or will that only be accomplished after we have shed even more innocent blood?

Remove the words “Tea Party” from the Christine O’Donnell equation and you may very well end up with your garden variety NeoCon patsy.  She has been on the political scene long before the Tea Party was even heard of.  In the last four years, she has made a run for the Senate seat on two previous occasions. 

During the 2006 race, Ms. O’Donnell agreed with two other Republican candidates that Iran was intent on developing nuclear weapons and that their government had actually benefited from the war with Iraq due to its close ties with Iraqi Shiite leaders. She was, however, the only Republican candidate to go one step further and assert that the U.S. should consider military action against Iran. She stated “You can’t negotiate with the Devil” and also asserted that China has a “carefully thought out and strategic plan to take over America.”  No, that wasn’t Sarah Palin saying those things…but it may just as well have been.  Keep in mind that ‘establishment’ incumbent Mike Castle was among those three “Republican candidates,” and even he was not ready to put his full support behind an attack on Iran.  That’s not to say that it isn’t nice to see Castle go—good riddance.  But, here is a question that I’ve posed once before:  What are we getting in return?

If this woman still embodies the kind of pro-war ideology that she spouts in her previous rhetoric—she will no doubt become a useful idiot to opportunistic war makers on Capitol Hill—who will exploit her religious beliefs to advance their imperialist agenda.  Upon her arrival in Washington, the Israeli lobby and the defense industry will routinely court her.  Give the charming, fatherly Henry Kissinger ½ hour alone with this naïve young woman, and she will be eating out of the palm of his hand and going out of her way to send your sons and daughters off to die in holy, Christian missions of conquest against the evil Muslim hordes. 

Has Ms. O’Donnell changed her stance on U.S. involvement in foreign wars?  If she has, I can’t find any mention of it.  When I go to her campaign website, I am delivered to a page that asks for a donation, but no information that will help me find out where she stands on the issues.  If I put her name into a search engine, I cannot find any reference to her position on war and foreign policy other than what I have already shared.

However, I did find plenty of information concerning her passionate crusade against masturbation, gay marriage, pre-marital sex and abortion.  I’ve also learned that she has strongly supported censorship and applying Biblical principals into all levels of public policy.  But even these issues don’t help us find out what she really stands for.  As recently as last night, O’Donnell seemed to be backpedaling on some of the more controversial positions she previously held in an attempt to clean up her image, or at least come off as less of a fanatical religious zealot.

According to this morning’s Washington Post:

“In her first post-primary debate against Democratic nominee Chris Coons, O’Donnell said she has matured since making controversial statements in favor of “sexual purity” and against masturbation in a 1996 MTV documentary. “I was very excited and passionate about my newfound faith,” she said about that period in her life.”

“O’Donnell said during the debate that she opposes embryonic stem cell research and abortion except if the life of the mother is threatened. But she said she would adhere to the Constitution rather than her personal beliefs if elected, and emphasized her views about taxes and the size and role of government over her opinions on social issues.”

I find this all a little too wishy-washy for my taste.  Is O’Donnell the kind of “go along to get along” politician who is taking up the Tea Party banner just so she gets into a position of power?  Fighting taxes and reducing the size of government are familiar themes that every Republican campaigns on.

I fear that Christine O’Donnell is just the latest in a series of disappointing Tea Party candidates who appear to be merely riding on the grassroots popularity of the movement.  How can you take any candidate seriously about ‘fixing the economy’ and ‘reducing the size of government’ when they support the very wars that have created the problem?  Ms. O’Donnell, like many other Tea Party candidates, seem to lack a basic understanding of how our economy works. 

One of the strongest rallying cries among the Tea Party movement is to take on the Federal Reserve.  They vow to audit it or abolish it altogether.  But if you support the war effort, you have to support the Federal Reserve.  If you interfere with their counterfeiting scheme, funding for these military adventures will cease overnight. In his article “The Hidden Costs of War,” Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) demonstrated that he has a complete understanding of how this works:

“Without the Fed’s ability to create money out of thin air, our government would be severely handicapped in waging wars that do not serve our interests. The money issue and the ability of our government to wage war are intricately related. Anyone interested in curtailing wartime spending and our militarism abroad is obligated to study the monetary system, through which our government seductively and surreptitiously finances foreign adventurism without the responsibility of informing the public of its cost or collecting the revenues required to finance the effort.”

Those who are serious about ending the Fed must be just as serious about ending these wars.  Campaigning to reverse health care and opposing tax increases are just part of the package, but you can’t cherry pick which pet projects you’ll allow the Fed to unconstitutionally finance. 

Sure, it’s refreshing to see the symbolic message being sent to the ‘establishment’ incumbents.  But while we can rejoice in watching longtime Republicans and Democrats losing their seats, can we really celebrate putting someone like Christine O’Donnell in their place?  I personally cannot give my endorsement to someone who I know will vote in favor of war.  Doing so would be equivalent to loading a magazine into a soldier’s rifle.  I refuse to play the ‘lesser of two evils’ card when lives are at stake.

What’s really going on here?  One must ask themselves why a virtual unknown is being given so much press.  There is no such thing as bad publicity.  Like Sarah Palin, O’Donnell is being hyped as a rogue element in the GOP, someone who will restore old-fashioned Christian values and rescue us from the fat cat Republicans that many working class folks have trouble identifying with.  In many ways, the Tea Party has become a remarkably effective recruitment tool for the GOP to attract fence sitters and disgruntled royalists who have lost faith in the establishment Republican Party.

This week, the Internet was buzzing over the pseudo-feud between O’Donnell and former Bush point man, Karl Rove.  During an interview with FOX News’ Sean Hannity, Rove said some very unflattering things about O’Donnell.

“I’ve met her. I wasn’t frankly impressed by her abilities as a candidate,” said Rove. “One thing that O’Donnell is now going to have to answer in the general election that she didn’t in the primary is her own checkered background. There were a lot of nutty things she has been saying that don’t add up,” he added.

“Why did she mislead voters about her college education? Rove asked. “How come it took nearly two decades to pay her college bills so she could get her college degree? How did she make a living?”

Many have concluded that this confirms that O’Donnell is the ‘real deal.’  After all, if Karl Rove doesn’t like her, then she must be good, right?  Rove may be evil—but he isn’t stupid.  He knows that he doesn’t enjoy a good public image.  Going out of his way to attack O’Donnell is the biggest endorsement he could give.  It gives her street cred.  Besides, look at the negative things Rove chose to harp on her about—her unpaid college bills?  This only makes her seem more ‘down to Earth’ to the average working class stiff. 

Now we find Sarah Palin coming out to endorse her and chastising Karl Rove for all those nasty things he said.  Don’t you see the game here?  The co-opted segment of the Tea Party has become an internal paradigm within the GOP.  Those who consider themselves Republicans, but have soured on the Party following the disasterous public relations nightmare that was Bush/Cheney, now have an alternative to invest their hopes and dreams in.  But at the end of the day—it’s still the GOP. 

Oh—and by the way—just this morning, Rove has reversed himself and is throwing his full support behind O’Donnell’s campaign.  That places him among O’Donnell’s other cheerleaders that include Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Bill O’Reilly, Michele Bachman, etc., etc., etc.

Does Ron Paul get that kind of support from the NeoCon establishment?

I rest my case. 

Published in: on September 17, 2010 at 10:33 am  Comments (21)  

The George W. Bush Memoir: Now Here’s a Book I Might Consider Burning

by Keith Johnson

Admirers of George W. Bush will soon have an opportunity to get inside the head of their dearly beloved neo-conservative icon.  His much-hyped memoir, ‘Decision Points’ is due out in bookstores on November 9th.   

We’re told that ‘The Decider’ has, “spent almost every day” writing what his publishing house calls, “a strikingly personal and candid account revealing how and why he made the defining decisions in his consequential presidency and personal life.”

Oh—the romantic visions this must conjure up in the minds of so many adoring fans.  Can’t you just imagine all of those sleepless nights Ol’Dubyah must have spent burning the midnight oil?  I can just see him now…instructing his house staff that, “I must not be disturbed” before locking the doors to his study and sinking into a big leather chair.  There he sits, alone and reflective, preferring to log his thoughts on paper instead of using a computer because—after all—he’s an old fashioned kind of guy.  Occasionally he will rise from his desk to step out onto the terrace.  There…he breathes in the cool night air and gazes up at the stars. He asks the good Lord to help him find the strength to confront his demons, and the courage to share with his fellow countrymen just how often he struggled with doubts before being forced to make tough and painful decisions.


Well, if entertaining that fantasy is what helps you get through the book—more power to ya.’   However, I prefer to entertain a more likely scenario.  Mine has a staff of ghostwriters chasing Ol’Dubyah around the golf course in a vain attempt to pin him down long enough to do some fact checking.  Can’t you just see him…shooting rubber bands at their head as he makes off-color remarks about how poorly they fit into their clothes?  Yeah, that’s more Ol’Dubyah’s style. 

But, according to a press release by Crown Publishers, we’re promised a more demure and accessible Bush, one who will be honest and direct in his writing as he reveals “intimate” and “unprecedented” details of his personal life.  We’ll learn what went into his decision to quit drinking, how he decided to give his life over to God (whatever God that might be), and about his relationship with members of his family.  Oh, how sickeningly sweet.

The forthcoming book also promises to bring “readers inside the Texas Governor’s Mansion on the night of the hotly contested 2000 election; aboard Air Force One on 9/11 in the gripping hours after America’s most devastating attack since Pearl Harbor; inside the Situation Room in the moments before launching the war in Iraq; and behind the Oval Office desk for his historic and controversial decisions on the financial crisis, Hurricane Katrina, Afghanistan, Iran, and other issues that have shaped the first decade of the 21st century.

Wow, that sounds like some ride, which is exactly what readers will be taken for if they choose to plop down $35 (plus tax) for this steaming loaf of bovine excrement.  I’m sure there are many who are waiting to do just that.  This book will certainly find its way to the New York Times bestsellers list, and you’re bound to find copies of this opus prominently displayed on the bookshelves of Burger King franchise owners; Wells Fargo branch managers; small town police chiefs, and all manner of suburban dwelling professionals who consider themselves to be upwardly mobile members of the elite. 

However, there is one morsel of truth that can be found in the aforementioned teaser.  These “issues” certainly “have shaped the first decade of the 21st century.”  But, come on, do they really expect me us believe that it was George W. Bush who made all of those “controversial decisions”? That will require some spin, especially in light of the fact that every move Bush made was in accordance with plans that were written out for him well in advance of his Presidency. 

In 1997, an assorted cast of villains created a Washington based think tank called ‘The Project for the New American Century’ (PNAC).  This group was—in large part—the brainchild of Paul Wolfowitz, who would later become the U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense under Bush and the architect of his Iraq policy.  Among some of the founding members—who would later be given key positions in the Bush administration—were Dick Cheney (future V.P.), Donald Rumsfeld (future Defense Secretary), and Richard Perle (future Defense Policy Board chairman).  Other members would go on to become highly influential leaders of the neo-conservative movement—like William Kristol—famed conservative writer for the Weekly Standard, owned by Ruppert Murdoch, who also owns international media giant Fox News.

The goal of this group was to establish America’s hegemony throughout the world and maintain global dominance through military force.  The way they planned to carry this out was outlined in a white paper entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century.” In it, they identified four “Core Missions” for the United States military: 

1.)    Defend the American Homeland

Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars

3.)    Perform the ‘constabulary’ duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions

4.)    Transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs”

All of these objectives had been in the planning stages for years, long before Bush Jr. came onto the scene.  While he was still busy making failures out of every company he was involved with in the private sector, it was Cheney and his gang of criminals who were busy making the “controversial decisions” that W. would later take credit for. 

As early as 1992, plans for military adventurism, into and beyond Iraq, were well underway.  At that time, Cheney was President Bush Sr.’s Secretary of Defense.  Following ‘Operation Desert Storm,’ Cheney collaborated with two of his top aides, Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby, in drafting up a post-cold war American defense strategy.  They came up with a document entitled, ‘Defense Planning Guidance.’ It maintained that the U.S. must assert pre-emptive military supremacy to “discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role” and to safeguard “access to vital raw material, primarily Persian Gulf oil.”  To this end, it was essential that the U.S. maintain a permanent military presence in the Middle East and to “keep all peacekeeping and rebuilding missions within the power of American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations.”

This would become the ideological blueprint for PNAC and the foreign policy objectives of a future administration they planned to control through an installed, puppet President. 

This is where our boy George emerges onto the scene.  Cheney needed someone he and his cohorts could trust and control.  George’s younger brother, Jeb, was already a key player in PNAC as a signatory to the “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” document.  Jeb was considered far more intelligent than George, but lacked the political experience and public recognition that his older brother enjoyed. 

Cheney put his full support behind W.’s presidential campaign and even headed his vice-presidential search committee.  After reviewing the committee’s findings, Bush concluded that Cheney was the man he wanted as his running mate.  Go figure.

Everything the PNAC group had invested in, hinged on the victory of George W. Bush over Al Gore in the 2000 Presidential elections.  George had to win by any means necessary.  So it was up to his brother Jeb—a devout PNAC operative and then-Governor of Florida—to tip the scales in his favor by illegally removing 57,700 Florida voters from the rolls.  And the rest—as they say—is history.

Once the PNAC President was installed, all that was needed was a ‘catalyst’ to put their plan into motion.  A reference to this scheme was revealed in Section V of Rebuilding America’s Defenses, entitled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force“, which includes the sentence: “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”

On September 11, 2001, they got their Pearl Harbor.  The decision to invade Iraq and Afghanistan was not one that was pondered upon in the mind of the idiot Bush.  This had been the plan all along.  In 1998, fifteen PNAC members were signatories on a letter to then-President Clinton, urging him to “undertake military action” to eliminate “the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction.”  The PNAC NeoCons had been salivating over Iraq and Afghanistan for years, and seized upon the 9/11 events to move their plan forward.

So just keep these “points” in perspective as you sit down to read how the “Decider” “decided” all of those “decisions” that have “decisively” flushed this nation into a despotic death spiral. 

Part II of this essay is on its way.

Published in: on September 14, 2010 at 9:36 am  Comments (31)  

Glenn Beck’s Theatre of the Absurd

by Keith Johnson

Start wearing purple wearing purple
Start wearing purple for me now
All your sanity and wits they will all vanish
I promise, it’s just a matter of time…
              ~Start Wearing Purple~
                              by Gogol Bordello

If you want to know the real purpose behind Glenn Beck’s expensive, heavily publicized ‘feel good’ extravaganza, you need only watch the first ten minutes of the speech he delivered on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

Dressed up in the NWO color of purple, and clutching purple speech cards in his hand (check out who else is fond of the color purple), Beck took center stage to issue marching orders to the thousands of gullible lemmings that attended his ‘Restoring Honor’ rally this past weekend.

Beck warmed up the crowd like any good, charismatic tent preacher would.  He opened with, “Something that is beyond man is happening.  America today begins to turn back to God. For too long, this country has wandered in darkness.”

After getting the women to tear up, and the men to jut out their chests, Beck’s motivational speech soon turned into a lesson in American history, that apparently began (according to Beck) when, “God’s chosen people were led out of bondage by a guy with a stick.” 

As Beck’s sermon unfolded, the very first person to appear in the background (and the very first person Beck introduced) was Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a strong critic of “liberal Judaism” and a controversial figure who has been linked to former lobbyist, con man and convicted felon Jack Abramoff. 

According to the Washington Post, Lapin’s specialty is “finding support in the Torah for what turns out to be the current Republican platform: lower taxes, decreased regulation, pro-traditional family policies.”  

Gee whiz. And here, all this time, Beck has been telling us that his event was not about politics.”  Go figure.

In 2005, Abramoff contacted Lapin via email and asked if it would be possible for him to produce phony credentials from Lapin’s group, Toward Tradition.  Abramoff wanted something like a “Scholar of Talmudic Studies,” or “Distinguished Biblical Scholar Award.”  Lapin was more than happy to oblige.

For a rally that promotes the idea of restoring honor to America, Beck certainly picked an awfully dishonorable Rabbi as part of his line up, don’t you think?

Beck continued by saying, “The chosen people listened to the Lord.  At the same time those things were happening…on this side…on this land…another group of people [Native American’s] were gathered here, and they too were listening to God.” 

This was less of a tribute to Native American’s and more intended as a subtle reference to Beck’s Mormon theology.  By now, two Native American Indians joined Lapin on the steps behind Beck.  Beck introduced them as the “direct descendants of the Native Americans that met the Pilgrims on the shores as they arrived.” 

There they stood, shoulder to shoulder with Rabbi Lapin.  How odd it was seeing two Native American’s standing in the vicinity of a man whose friend, Jack Abramoff, referred to his Indian clients as “morons” and “monkeys” in emails that surfaced during the Abramoff-Reed Indian Gambling Scandal.  But I digress…

The Indian couple was followed by Paul Jehle, a Christian pastor whom Beck introduced as “a direct descendant of those who arrived on the Mayflower.”

Are you starting to see the psy-op here?

Beck is implanting in the minds of his audience that this group represents the three stages of America’s birth. At one point during his speech, Beck turned to face the foursome, and pointed to them individually, as he went down the line, “God’s Chosen people” [the Rabbi]…”the Native Americans”…“and the Pilgrims” [the Pastor]

Is the picture now starting to come into focus?  Beck is linking Israel’s history with America’s history.  He wants you to never forget that the United States and Israel are one in the same.  This way, the next time one of his brainwashed minions hears of a homemade rocket falling on an empty lot in Jerusalem, or if an Iranian sailor accidentally steps on the toes of an IDF commando who is inspecting his ship, they will not just consider it an attack on Israel— but an attack on America itself.

We’re being prepped for war, folks—and everything about this rally, including all the references to Martin Luther King, was part of that sales pitch.  The GOP has a vested interest in getting on the good side of the African American community.  Why?   Because they need those young, black soldiers on the battlefield.  What better way to get their foot in the door than to invoke the spirit of the black communities most cherished icon. 

Talk about your defamation of character.  Using Martin Luther King as a poster child for your pro-Israel war rally?  Say what you like about Reverend King, but he certainly was not a war advocate like Beck and Palin.   During the 1960’s, MLK openly expressed his opposition to the Vietnam War on moral grounds.  He also said that the war drained much-needed resources from domestic programs. He was even more concerned about the percentage of African American casualties in relation to the total population. King was a leader in the anti-war movement who rallied other African Americans to the cause.

Listening to a warmonger like Sarah Palin talk up Martin Luther King was beyond surreal.  Before she addressed a list of US soldiers who were receiving awards, Palin gave this little ‘shout out’ to her new favorite Brother from another Mother:

“Over these grounds where we are so honored to stand today, we feel the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who on this very day, two score and seven years ago, gave voice to a dream that would challenge us to honor the sacred charters of our liberty – that all men are created equal.”

She then went on to suggest that the best way to honor MLK was to honor the military men and women who fought to protect his freedom of speech. 

“Now, in honoring these giants [George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King], who were linked by a solid rock foundation of faith in the one true God of justice, we must not forget the ordinary men and women on whose shoulders they stood. The ordinary called for extraordinary bravery. I am speaking, of course, of America’s finest – our men and women in uniform, a force for good in this country, and that is nothing to apologize for.”

It would have been just fine if Sarah Palin had stopped there—but you know Sarah Palin.  She can’t get through the day without making some whacked out comment that reveals what a raving lunatic she really is. 

“Now, I’ve been asked to speak today, not as a politician. No, as something more – something much more. I’ve been asked to speak as the mother of a soldier, and I am proud of that distinction. You know, say what you want to say about me, but I raised a combat vet, and you can’t take that away from me. I’m proud of that distinction, but it is not one that I had imagined because no woman gives birth thinking that she will hand over her child to her country, but that’s what mothers have done from ancient days.”

Did you catch that last part, Ladies and Gentlemen?  I hope so, because her message was loud and clear:  If you want to be right with God, and a great American patriot, you will do as Sarah Palin has done.  You will raise your sons to the tender age of 18 and then surrender them over to your government.  After all—as Sarah Palin reminds us—“that’s what Mothers have done from ancient days” 

The best way I can think of responding to that is by referring you to one of my favorite movie quotes from the Adam Sandler comedy, Billy Madison:

“What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

Beck and Palin are laying the groundwork for a GOP comeback in November.

For a brief spell—the Democrats were sent in like a direct-action Special Ops team to force through legislation that the GOP also wants, but can’t sell to their conservative constituents.  The wars have continued, but at an idled pace.  However, as soon as the Republicans take power, those wars will kick into high gear, and new wars will grow out of those.

But you can’t have a war without soldiers, and right now soldiers are in short supply.  The government wants to avoid a draft as long as they can because they have learned their lesson from Vietnam.  Drafts bring bad publicity, protests and reluctant soldiers returning from the battlefield to share their horror stories with the world.

So that’s why the Pentagon decided to sponsor this pricey recruitment campaign—an infomercial if you will—for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines.  But the target audience, for this thinly veiled marketing campaign, was not the virile 18 year old who will be expected to do all the fighting.  This propaganda was aimed directly at Mom and Dad, to convince them that it is the patriotic duty of every red-blooded American parent to rear their sons and daughters in preparation for military service.  Do that—and the government will reward you, and your children, with showers of public admiration and all the bragging rights that go along with it.

These lavishly produced celebrations of war are being used to promote a culture of military worship like that which flourished in the former Soviet Union, and can still be found to exist in places like North Korea.  If this frightening trend continues, we may very well find our daughters being encouraged to issue white feathers (a symbol of cowardice) to men not wearing uniforms—a common practice, to encourage men to enlist in the British Army, during World War I.

Of course, many of those who are peddling this war propaganda don’t hold themselves to the same standard.  Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Neal Boortz, and countless others have never served in the military…but they sure expect your children to serve.

Sarah Palin (whose son is a combat veteran) is an exception to this rule, but only because she is one of the few pundits who believes in her own rhetoric.  This is what makes her so effective…and dangerous. 

Some say that Beck is cast from the same mold.  On the surface this may appear to be true.  But psychologically, they are as different as night and day.  Beck is not a psychopath—he is a sociopath.  Psychopaths believe that they are doing God’s work, while the sociopath believes that God works for them. 

One of the best films to ever come out of Hollywood is, ‘A Face in the Crowd.’ Andy Griffith plays Lonesome Rhodes, an opinionated, backwoods country-western singer who is discovered in a drunk tank by a local talent scout.  Rhodes gets a spot on a local radio program and becomes an overnight sensation due to his folksy charm and engaging personality.  Soon after, he lands a television program and amasses a huge following as well as multiple sponsors and endorsements.  Before too long, Rhodes becomes the most powerful and influential entertainer on the airwaves.  This leads to him being introduced to Worthington Fuller, a political candidate who asks for Rhodes assistance in getting elected.  Rhodes becomes his media emissary and helps him to gain a significant lead in the national polls. Riding high off this victory, Rhodes confides in one of his intimates.

“Rednecks, crackers, hillbillies, hausfraus, shut-ins, pea-pickers – everybody that’s got to jump when somebody else blows the whistle. They don’t know it yet, but they’re all gonna be ‘Fighters for Fuller’. They’re mine! I own ’em! They think like I do. Only they’re even more stupid than I am, so I gotta think for ’em.”

It becomes obvious—to those closest to him—that Rhodes public persona is merely an act, and that he is actually an egotistically driven manipulator with Machiavellian political aspirations.  Rhodes uses everyone around him in his pursuit of fame and fortune—and has utter contempt for his audience—seeing how easily they can be deceived.  This resentment gives him an air of superiority over others and an unrealistic sense of invulnerability…and this is what leads to his downfall.  During the closing credits of his television program, his confidant purposely arranges to switch on the audio to his microphone so the entire nation can hear what he really thinks of his audience.

“Shucks, I sell them chicken fertilizer as caviar. I can make
them eat dog food and think it’s steak. Sure, I’ve got them
like this. You know what the public’s like, a cage full of
guinea pigs. They’re a lot of trained seals…I toss them a dead
fish and they’ll flap their flippers. Good night, you stupid
Good night, you miserable slobs.”

If you’ve followed Glenn Beck’s career, you can’t help but find a
lot of striking similarities between him and Lonesome Rhodes. 
But whether they will share the same ending…remains to be seen.

Published in: on September 1, 2010 at 11:59 am  Comments (24)  

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 522 other followers