It's easy to say things are bad and we need to turn to God. You can say that any time. That's the problem I have with his message. It's so vague that it can always apply. I'm not trembling by it. In fact, I'm mostly astonished that people listen to him at all. As far as I can see, he's simply a pitch man that is lining his pockets with money extracted from good people that are desperate for a positive message. But that's all it is...a message that is so obscured that it doesn't really matter what he says, as long as its positive.

Here's the thing. I've read many, many messages on this site and I still have not found a reason to believe that the ideas expounded here would be something I would follow. Despite the straw men that are bantered about, if you're not a tea party member or a conservative, it does not mean you're 'afraid' or you don't love your country or you don't know what it means to get up every day and go to work.

I have a full time job, I pay my taxes, and own several guns. I don't care what race you are, what sexual orientation you are, and whether or not you go to church. I believe in the death penalty (no matter the cost), and I mostly see good in people.

I do not trust Glenn Beck, because I think his whole mission is a ruse that is all about him. If his message was so positive and benevolent, then why does he constantly pitch for Goldline? I think in the end, his spiel is about separating his followers from their money so he can paint himself as a crusader for what is right. I am not against anyone profiting on their message, but I am against someone wrapping themselves in the flag for profit. That disgusts me.

There may be a visceral reaction to this message. I am not trying to anger anybody. What I am saying to those that post on this site is if you want to make a difference, then you have to convince people like me why what your ideas are better than what's currently being put forth. Simply saying "we need to turn to God" is not good enough.

Oh, and as far as "waking up"...I'm already awake.

Yes, they bankroll conservative groups, including the tea parties. Unlike Rupert Murdoch, however, they do not believe in transparency and do not grant interviews. Their aim is to protect their industries from government intervention (mainly environmental, as they own, among other companies, Georgia-Pacific).

We're talking major money here.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?stor... http://www.kochind.com/About/default.aspx

I was still pondering over your phrase "THE BLACKS," then I saw your avatar and I got it.

The federal constitution overrides ALL state constitutions and their amendments. If a federal judge deems a state law unconstitutional in regards to the US constitution, he/she can invalidate the law. That's an integral part of our system of checks and balances. All three branches have equal power: executive, legislative and judicial. It does not matter what the people voted on. It's either constitutional or not. This is to prevent local majorities from violating the basic rights that are outlined in the constitution. Of course, this is always subject to interpretation, which is what this judge did.

Now, what's like to happen is the opinion offered by the federal court in San Francisco will ultimately find itself at the Supreme Court, which is the final stop of opinion in the judicial branch.

No amendments to the federal constitution can be "unconstitutional" because by definition they are part of the constitution.

Nobody on this thread pointed out that GS has already paid back the money they got from the bail out, with interest. Taxpayers made money on the deal.

Pot heads aren't into heroin. Heroin addicts are.

Exactly. The pledge is still recited. I hate distortions. At my daughter's HS graduation a couple weeks ago, the whole audience said the pledge.

We do drill on shore. And I can guarantee you that even if we allowed total unfettered access to on shore drilling, there would STILL be off shore drilling. There is lots of oil under the sea. There are over 4000 rigs in the Gulf of Mexico alone.

You seem to imply that if only we drill on shore (there has to be oil first), that the off shore drilling would stop. It won't. Hmmm, the only other person I've heard use this logic is Sarah Palin.

I thought I'd seen everything on this site...but advocating the use of DDT...that takes the cake. Wow. Just wow.

Careful...that's an opposing point of view from somewhere other than Fox Entertainment. This won't be received well on this site.