Update: Glenn Beck Gets Religion, Wrong

By
March 7, 2010

Update: With more history on the mis-quote.

Right up front, for the Beck Heads who have already dismissed the importance of this before even reading it, you're wrong, too. Beck claims George Washington as a passion of his. He has a multi-person research staff and makes millions doing this shtick. Yet, he ignorantly puts words in Washington's mouth, words that Washington never spoke, or wrote?

BECK for March 5, 2010 GLENN BECK, HOST: Welcome to THE GLENN BECK PROGRAM. (…)

But let me give you the words of George Washington, "It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible." You know what? There was one thing the kids in this video had right. Our educational system is failing them.

And if you as a parent do not fill that void, fill that void with knowledge and information – nature abhors a vacuum. Barack Obama – his progressive propaganda fringe – they will fill it. They will fill it.

And now Beck's conducting an American Revival tour with at least some religious overtones? What a convenient mis-quote, far from his first. Glenn Beck is doing precisely what he rightly accuses the Leftists of doing, filling heads with mush when it suits his purposes. Only he's doing it from the other side of the political spectrum. And that's wrong, as well as potentially disastrous for the Right.

We need to reject demagogy in all its forms. And if Beck can't clean up his act given all his resources, then we have to reject him. No agenda will prevail to good effect with an ignorant buffoon leading the effort.



AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
Comments:
  1. FeFe says:

    Van Jones approves this message. “I pledge allegiance to plant Earth…”

  2. Sherri says:

    You very obviously have a vendetta against Beck. He misquoted Washington with one of the MOST oft misquoted lines (by your source) and you label him as an “ignorant buffoon.” You, Dan, need to get yourself straight. Why do you persist in this misguided effort to tear down both Beck and Palin? The two people who have done the most to wake people up in this country? You, Dan, are a sad sad little man.

  3. Huey says:

    So.
    Is he an “ignorant buffon,” or is it a “convenient mis-quote?”
    Really, make up your mind here. Either he made a mistake or he is purposefully mis-quoting for his own (in your view) self-serving purposes.

  4. From WallBuilders.com
    http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126
    2. It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible. — George Washington (unconfirmed)
    Although the modern secularists avoid his numerous religious maxims, Washington’s views on religion are easily documented. He often spoke on religious themes, to include the ruler of nations, the light of Revelation, and the symbiotic relationship between the Church and the state. There is overwhelming evidence to support this thought as belonging to Washington. However, since the quote has not been documented to date, it appears unlikely to be found. Too much research has been done on the life of Washington to see the prospect of a new quotation.
    There is a very real possibility that the quotation has its origin in an 1835 biography by James K. Paulding. In a description of Washington’s character, with supporting quotations, Paulding declares Washington to have said:
    “It is impossible to account for the creation of the universe without the agency of a Supreme Being. It is impossible to govern the universe without the aid of a Supreme Being.”
    The similarities are obvious; a paraphrase of these quotes could have easily generated the words in question. However, we have not been able to trace Paulding’s cite to a more scholarly reference. He offers no footnotes. For an extensive selection of Washington’s religious sayings, see the Maxims of Washington: Political, Social, Moral, and Religious, John F. Schroeder, ed. (Mount Vernon, Virginia: The Mount Vernon Ladies Association, © 1942). (The book has also been reprinted, albeit in a slightly different format. We recommend the older versions.)
    ———————
    This shows that it isn’t as far fetched as Riehl seems to think it is. I don’t think you can call it demagogy though. Perhaps he misquoted Washington, but that probably came from him on the fly and not his research team. He’s read alot of books and my guess is that he’s read it along the way. Even a simple search of the web shows that many people believe that he said it. A misquote doesn’t represent demagogy.

  5. Dan Riehl says:

    A quote is a quote, RS. Sorry – but it fully fits the definition of demagogy imo. A serious man does not put words into the mouths of the Founders. Why so many seem content to except Beck insulting them that way is beyond my ability to comprehend. Anyone who genuinely admires them should want their words and opinions treated with reverance, not the clumsy mistreatment of a showman, or circus clown.

  6. Kentucky Colonel says:

    Talking about scraping the bottom of the barrel- A post trying to create a controversy where none exists. Riehl, this is the kind of crap post I’d expect from the PuffHo, MM, or the douchebag Alan Colmes.

  7. david r says:

    Beck is a hate monger. If his views were suddenly the norm, we would be little different than the intolerant society in power these last 30 years in Iran. I have no use for him, Olbermann, Maddow, et al, and there are days when Sean Hannity makes the list. This demonization of the other side is what has paralyzed Congress. I think it all started with the Robert Bork hearings. Read the comments on Huffpo. It’s giddy fun to hate the other side. No need to be informed, or think critically. All you need is be politically correct.

  8. Perhaps I am biased a bit in this, but I don’t think his intent is to “insult” the founders as you put it. A mistake is a mistake, but why does that make it demagogy? You imply with your claim of demagogy that he either doesn’t care that he was wrong or did it on purpose. I think neither are the case here and I think he would readily correct it if someone brought it to his attention.

  9. Xiaoding says:

    Would any of the posters here, attribute a quote to George Washington, in a speech, that they had not confirmed in advance? Especially, given the vast history of mis-quotes and false quotes in American history?
    I think not. Yet some fall over themselves backwards making excuses for an idiot, covering themselves in moronicity.
    it was announced, just yesterday, that lefty blogs are declining in popularity. And why is this so? Because of a lack of CREDIBILITY.
    When you lose credibility, you are doomed.
    Mr. Beck needs to apologize immediately, or serious, honest people will no longer listen to him.

  10. Xiaoding
    Beck reads all the time. He’s read a ton on George Washington and perhaps he was quoting what he read in a book that got it wrong. Why are you so quick to insult him over what seems to be an oversight on his part?

  11. Inge says:

    I totally agree with you, Dan.

  12. newrouter says:

    mountain meet mole hill

  13. DJ says:

    I think people like Dan Riehl who attend Ron Paul & John Birch conferences shouldn’t really be questioning beliefs of others.
    Dan Riehl needs to disavow the 9/11 truthers that he attended a conference with before he condemns anybody else.

  14. Huey says:

    So. Just to make sure we’re all on the same page here.
    This is a “false quote” because we have no proof Washington said it?
    Or, is it a “true quote” because we have no proof that Washington didn’t say it?
    Let’s see. Is it in keeping with what Washington MIGHT have said? Well, if the internet quote police are correct, then it may have come from a description of Washington’s character (supported by quotes) his biographer (some 175 years ago) in which the biographer claims that Washington made the following statement:
    “It is impossible to account for the creation of the universe without the agency of a Supreme Being. It is impossible to govern the universe without the aid of a Supreme Being.”
    Hm…even in the debunking article cited above (again here for convenience: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126 (one of the few sites which classifies the offending statement as UNCONFIRMED rather than the impossible to support classification of FALSE) the SIMILARITY between the UNCONFIRMED statement and the one ATTRIBUTED to Washington by his biographer cannot be denied.
    So, is it more likely that someone who made one statement which is quite similar to another actually MADE the similar statement or that he did not? How many times do we say essentially the same thing over the years to different people but in different formulations?
    In other words, how difficult is it to believe that someone who lived close in time to Washington (and was a close friend of Madison), who could (and did) speak to those who knew Washington personally and intimately, who could read the papers and letters of those who knew and corresponded with Washington — got it right?
    Sigh. So fast to denounce on such slight evidence.

  15. Dave in Alaska says:

    Brainy Quotes, George Washington:
    It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.
    George Washington
    Oh crap, now BrainyQuote needs to fix their mistake too.
    It appears Washington’s understanding of God’s providence in the leading of our nation, was clear in his mind.
    No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.
    George Washington, First Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789
    Glen Beck may have misquoted from an information source however, he relayed George Washington’s intent.

  16. Warren Bonesteel says:

    Glenn Beck has a better clue than most MSM pundits, but he does have a few pieces of the puzzle in the wrong places.

  17. Kentucky Colonel says:

    Riehl, this post of yours defines demagogy more than Beck’s crime of possibly getting a quote wrong. Have you jumped all the people who have mis-quoted Franklin when he talked about giving up liberty and freedom for safety?
    Demagogy? You betcha, but you’re the guilty one.

  18. Dan Riehl says:

    Look, asshats, what I’m seeing is a lot of ignorance from Beck defenders. Suddenly a quote need not be a quote, the words of the Founders are free for anyone to make up when it pleases them. Frankly, you people repulse me for your lack of standards and integrity all because you are transfixed with some matinee idol with a bad haircut.
    YOu should be ashamed of yourselves and would be, were you not so quick to embrace ignorance because you get a tingle up your legs. Yopu’re no better than Chris Matthews in that regard. My only regret is that you align yourselves with the Right, as I do.

  19. harkin says:

    Why the hate and name-calling instead of benignly stating that Beck repeated an oft-used misquote? ‘Putting words into the mouths of our founders’ implies intentional misrepresentation without any proof. This is much more befitting Kos or LGF than this site.
    There’s something deeper going on here.
    Love reading Riehl but the “buffoon” and “circus clown” blasts are beneath him.
    Look at Beck’s recent answer to Van Jones’ “I love you” statement and you’ll realize Beck wishes to communicate instead of smear or censor. Great job, Beck!

  20. Bee says:

    Dan,
    You need to email this site and tell them to correct this right away!!!
    George Washington, “It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.” You know what? There was one thing the kids in this video had right. Our
    http://thinkexist.com/quotes/like/it-is-impossible-to-rightly-govern-a-nation/347682/

  21. Dave in Alaska says:

    Posted by: Dan Riehl
    Look, asshats, what I’m seeing is a lot of ignorance from Beck defenders. Suddenly a quote need not be a quote, the words of the Founders are free for anyone to make up when it pleases them. Frankly, you people repulse me for your lack of standards and integrity all because you are transfixed with some matinee idol with a bad haircut.
    YOu should be ashamed of yourselves and would be, were you not so quick to embrace ignorance because you get a tingle up your legs. Yopu’re no better than Chris Matthews in that regard. My only regret is that you align yourselves with the Right, as I do.
    It appears you like to use Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals Dan, instead of honest debate. Why the hate?
    5. “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.”

  22. Kentucky Colonel says:

    Riehl, why is it that anytime someone disagrees with you, you resort to name-calling? As far as I can tell, it hasn’t been determined whether Beck got the quote right or wrong. It looks like he either got it right, or he may have been guilty of quoting from a book that paraphrased what Washington actually said.
    How is it that you seem to be able to read Beck’s mind to determine his intent? Why don’t you share with us as to where you got your amazing mind-reading abilities?
    I think this post is just another example of you going off the rails and then being too pig-headed to back off. For some reason, you seem to do this every so often.
    If there ever was an example of the term, “when you point a finger, there are three more pointing back at you”, this is it. Give it up. You’re looking pretty silly.

  23. wtfci says:

    therightscoop: Glenn Beck regularly trumpets the “The 5000 Year Leap”. On his FNS show when he stacks his books to start urging viewers what to read Skousen’s book is typically lifted.
    The book itself is nearly a wholesale fantasy. The number of fictions in the book is huge.
    I would like to think that Beck has been informed about the fiction in Skousen’s work, but I seriously doubt it.
    Frankly, I don’t mind Beck when he’s just asking questions and interviewing guests. But when he starts to go out on his own he’s skiing down the truth slalom hitting hitting every other flag.

  24. Warren Bonesteel says:

    If it is not recorded in Washington’s own words, in his speeches, letters and writings, attributing any such quote to him is dishonest, at best. Any defense in using a false quote and attributing it to anyone is an outright lie.
    If an earlier author makes such an attribution, his sources must be referenced or his own credibility comes into question.
    Dan is quite correct on this one. …although his response to reader’s ignorance is a over the top, his frustration is understandable.
    In spite of their own protestations,in spite of evidence to the contrary, in spite of the Founder’s own words to the contrary, many conservatives want/need/desire the Founders of this nation to be pro-theocracy.
    refer:
    Logical Fallacies, cognitive biases, rational ignorance, category mistake, et al. see also: sacred cow.
    refer also:
    Online Library of Liberty
    Liberty Library of Constitutional Classics

  25. Warren – Who wnats the founders to be pro-theocracy? Most of them believed in God and it carried into their political and personal lives. And the ones who didn’t believe in God at least had respect for it.
    But that’s a far cry from a theocracy.

  26. wtfci,
    I’ve heard him push the 5000 year leap, but know nothing about the book otherwise. I’ve not read any books he has pushed but I do watch his show regularly. I really don’t find him to be dishonest, so when I read Riehl’s over the top analysis of a potential misquote, I tend to think he is quite unfair in his analysis of Beck’s intent.
    I think it’s great to point out mistakes, but the man hasn’t even been on the air since he quoted Washington to even answer his critics. Maybe he’ll address it. I emailed it to him myself earlier so we’ll see.

  27. Huey says:

    Dan. You do understand the difference between an “unconfirmed quotation” and a “false quotation,” I hope?
    You do realize that it is not Beck who “put words” into Washington’s mouth, I hope? Rather, at some point, someone else either correctly or incorrectly attributed these words to Washington?
    Just because a statement isn’t contemporaneously recorded for posterity doesn’t mean it wasn’t said – unless you’re of the opinion that every word Washington said uttered was recorded so that later “quotations” are capable of verification.
    I can certainly make a stronger argument that this statement is one which Washington MIGHT have made than anyone can that it is one which is INCONSISTENT with Washington’s beliefs — unless you’re going to argue that those statements which we know he made are not accurate.
    I agree that Beck shouldn’t have used this quotation. Those “resources” you mention (likely, actual people who provided to him the quote without adequate research) should have discovered that the quotation was UNCONFIRMED.
    Unlike you, however, I don’t ascribe to Beck any base motivation for use of the quote, rather, I assume it to be an ERROR — and likely not even HIS error — but one of his minion’s.
    He SHOULD correct this error now that it has likely been brought to his attention, stating that the subject “quotation” is one which is not capable of confirmation and SUBSTITUTE one which has the same essential meaning which is a confirmed quotation.
    But, that’s ALL that is required to make this right.
    To anyone who is rational and reasonable on the subject of Beck, anyway.

  28. Huey says:

    Warren: To claim that someone who is possibly in error to be “dishonest” is to ascribe to that person a motivation which is unknown. When one knows that Beck’s motivation is unknown, yet ascribes that motivation to him anyway, THAT is “dishonest.”

  29. Dan says:

    Don’t vevr, ever use wikipedia as an authoratative source for anything. It is only a good jumping off point. Wikipedia is notorious for … doing what you are accusing Beck of doing, changing history to fit the last editors purpose.

  30. Well, if Wikipedia says so….
    Seriously, mistake on your part because Washington included the WORLD and didn’t point at just America – if any of this is accurate.

  31. Xiaoding says:

    therightscoop:
    “Beck reads all the time. He’s read a ton on George Washington and perhaps he was quoting what he read in a book that got it wrong. Why are you so quick to insult him over what seems to be an oversight on his part?”
    Because he’s a major figure, who has read a ton on George Washington. That’s why. Is he serious, or not? Serious people, in the public eye, do not misquote the father of our country.

  32. It’s not like Beck made up this quote. It’s in various sources of quotes on the internet, such as
    http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_washington_2.html
    http://thinkexist.com/quotes/george_washington/
    http://www.quotesby.net/George-Washington
    I’ve used the quote myself: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/02/graph_of_the_day_for_february_15.html
    So accuse us of sloppy sourcing of quotes. So much for BrainyQuote.
    Can Your Highness recommend a reliable source of quotations that is online?

  33. CK MacLeod says:

    If Beck doesn’t check himself, he’s going to wreck himself, and take some people with him, if it’s not already too late. I don’t always agree with Dan Riehl (don’t even always agree with myself), but he’s got this one right – and this mistake is typical of Beck’s approach, not an isolated incident by any means.

  34. Mondo says:

    “Why so many seem content to except[sic] Beck insulting them that way is beyond my ability to comprehend. Anyone who genuinely admires them should want their words and opinions treated with reverance, not the clumsy mistreatment of a showman, or circus clown.”
    The Left is not the part of the blogosphere that knows that attacking Beck–or Palin–over any little misstep is good for business.

  35. Rocks says:

    Wow, this is some thin gruel here. Are you going to go after Cary Grant impressionists who say “Judy, Judy, Judy” next? It certainly sounds like something Washington said. It’s a pretty big reach to automatically suggest malicious intent on Beck’s part.

  36. ROCnPhilly says:

    Wow! Wikipedia as one source and an atheist site dedicated to debunking quotes mentioning Christianity as the other! So it must be true? Are you serious?

  37. Rocks says:

    Because he’s a major figure, who has read a ton on George Washington. That’s why. Is he serious, or not? Serious people, in the public eye, do not misquote the father of our country.
    Posted by: Xiaoding | Sunday, March 07, 2010 at 07:26 PM
    Really? That’s it? That’s the beef? He’s a radio and TV personality. He’s not a Professor or Historian.

  38. Dave in Alaska says:

    CK MacLeod….
    Who is he going to take with him and where will they be going? Can you say in all honesty, that had you heard the quote, or “misquote” spoken or written by anyone other than Glenn, that you would have claimed that person’s demise?
    It isn’t as if Glenn made up the quote. You do understand that don’t you?

  39. Kentucky Colonel says:

    CK MacLeod, did you not see that a number of sources attribute that quote to Washington? When you’re writing, how many sources do you use to affirm that something like this is correct?

  40. shawk says:

    You’re right. The quote is wrong.
    It’s actually a paraphrase of John Adams.
    What’s your point? That God is bad or unneeded?

  41. Rocks says:

    The point is they don’t like Glenn Beck and will grasp at any straw discredit him apparently. One, you are giving Beck for too much credit and two this has a very Derangement Syndrome feel to it. Let’s hope Beck doesn’t get Babe Ruth’s 1929 batting average wrong next time or the entire sports world will have conniptions.

  42. Danielle says:

    Dan Reihl is in the last throes of a LGF style meltdown.

  43. CK MacLeod says:

    Kentucky Colonel and Dave in Alaska, if you’ve read much of the prose of the period and were passingly familiar with Washington’s life and writings, you’d know to be suspicious of the quote. If you look at the verified and authentic statements others have supplied above in which Washington wrote of divine providence or divine agencies, or for that matter of scripture, you’d know that the quote looks fishy – the whole thing, including the split infinitive and the raw reference to the Bible, reads as modern.
    And I submit that it’s not too far from what Beck does when he starts going through the weirdo-Commie = Van Jones = Stalin = Hillary = McCain = Obama trip, or some of Beck’s other favorite ploys – “fake but accurate” in the service of emotionalism.

  44. A.C. McCloud says:

    The opponents are over there on the left trying to take over health care, tax the air, and grant citizenship to illegal aliens largely using subterfuge. Beck is trying to stop them. And they are trying to stop Beck. This is tiny in comparison.

  45. newrouter says:

    “Commie = Van Jones = Stalin = Hillary = McCain = Obama”
    nice collection of statists you got there

  46. datechguy says:

    I think a better quote to use would have been John Adams:
    We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.
    You know Dan I don’t think we were properly introduced at CPAC, my Bad indeed.

  47. ROCnPhilly says:

    So to bottom line, the take away here is:
    Glenn Beck misquotes George Washington so he is an ignorant buffoon, potentially disastrous for the Right and we all should reject him.
    I sure hope I got that right.

  48. Ron says:

    If a guy gets a quote wrong, which could happen to any of us, he should correct the record if and when he can. It does not matter who points out the error.

  49. Rocks says:

    “if you’ve read much of the prose of the period and were passingly familiar with Washington’s life and writings, you’d know to be suspicious of the quote.”
    And you have some reason to believe Beck has? Is it against the law to quote Washington if your aren’t?

  50. Dave in Alaska says:

    CK Macleod, you are not making your argument stand up at Hot Air either. Take a look at our Founding Father’s quotes. I gave you a link.

  51. bastiches says:

    …and SUBSTITUTE one which has the same essential meaning which is a confirmed quotation. Posted by: Huey
    That’s the problem. It may not be possible to do so. The Founding Fathers may not be so easily wrangled for religious pedagogy.

  52. All you George Washington scholars (who can smell an inauthentic quote), please go to this source as an example:
    http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_washington.html
    and tell me which of the 58 GW quotes are authentic and which are not.
    After that, tell us benighted folk how we are supposed to know the difference. (That is, without becoming GW scholars ourselves, who would be familiar with his syntax, etc.)
    None of you better ever say “Play it again, Sam” either.
    And while giving Glen Beck grief for copying a quote from a source of quotes, but not verifying it himself, recall that the Boston Globe thought a GI Joe doll was a real US soldier captured in Iraq and that Reuters thought clips from the movie Titanic were of real Russian submersibles under the North Pole.
    For 101 such screw-ups by “trusted” media, see here:
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/media_dishonesty_matters.html
    This is 100% nothingburger.

  53. philfl63 says:

    Demogogy is just another form of rhetoric. It was demogogy that got the few patriots to fight for the American Revolution. Remember, four out of five colonists were loyal to the British crown. Anyone who thinks they can reason as a “compassionate conservative” in the face of Godless leftism is a fool.

  54. jcrue says:

    it is sad how many on this thread have implied, it’s on the internet, so it must be true type thinking…..

  55. Dan….Dude!
    You’ve got your panties all in a twist over Beck giving a quote from Washington that may or may not be true?
    Really?
    Man, that’s quite a dark, slick, rocky path to travel…especially for you.
    Dan, don’t you remember that you did the SAME EXACT THING to Beck back in Sept 09?
    I called you out on it here:
    http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/glenn-becks-reichstag-moment.html
    and here:
    http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/10/huffpo-is-partly-correct-on-beck/comments/page/1/#comments
    As of today, months later, you have not provided one iota of proof to support your accusation even in the face of mountains of evidence that you were wrong.
    Now, today, you’re in a twist about something that may or may not have been said almost 300 years ago.
    How about you work on that Sept 09 thing in order to restore some of your credibility before worrying your pretty little head about Beck, eh?
    Oh, yeah, in case something “happens” to those pages and the comments…I’ve got screen shots of all of them.
    Nasty response from Mr. Big Bad Blogger Man in 3, 2, 1…..

  56. Dan Riehl says:

    “You’ve got your panties all in a twist over Beck giving a quote from Washington that may or may not be true?”
    He’s done it to Jefferson, Washington, and there are other instances as well. Anyone who claims to be enthralled with Washington and invoke him so much in front of millions of people without the integrity to tell his research staff to get it right is a buffoon who doesn’t care deeply abouty much at all.
    He should pass out amonia to his fans so they can cry along with him when he shows what an ignorant ass he, and unfortunately, they seem to be.

  57. Thomas says:

    “The two people who have done the most to wake people up in this country?”
    Palin hasn’t done jack. Well, except endorse McCain.

  58. Dave in Alaska says:

    Really Thomas? Can you say “Death Panels”?

  59. Thomas says:

    Wow! You mean Palin was the only person in the country to figure out that health care would be rationed and in the hands of bureaucrats???!!!
    *rolling my eyes*

  60. Buzzy says:

    Couldn’t help noticing about half way through the comments that Dan the Man, having run into a little opposition, decided to take the high road and refer to skeptics as “Asshats”.
    Well, I have never heard Glenn Beck assign that particular designation, or any remotely similar, to his detractors.
    Stay classy Danny Boy. That is if you are capable.

  61. Tony says:

    I am not entirely sure what all the lamenting is about. However, I would like to point out that any time politics and religion are given to each other in marriage the marriage invariably fails. How is it that a politician can spout off about religion and get a rise out of so many and not one of those who stand up to cheer him / her own will question his / her credibility in spouting anything religious at all? Seriously, what do religion and politics have in common? How about nothing! In this case it would seem that we are portraying Glenn Beck in a bad light because he got religious when in fact we should be putting our blinders on and letting that particular dog have his day. I am not a Glenn Beck supporter nor do I care for politicians but I must admit that I am amazed at how something like this drew so much ire.

  62. higgins says:

    Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Hancock, Henry…so many of our founding fathers were men of deep faith, followers of Christ Jesus. I’ll let you figure out which quote goes to what founder:
    “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
    “We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!”
    “God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?”
    “For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests.”
    “It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.”

  63. Conservativeagainstobama says:

    yes someone who willingly attends paulian conferences should not be calling someone a demagogue unless they want their hypocrisy exposed

  64. Dan Riehl says:

    Typical worthless attacks. Because I dare to question Beck’s ignorance by misquoting Jefferson and Washington, suddenly, I want God out of the public square and am a paul bot, or a libtard plant.
    HA really should try to help their commenters get out more. I’ve done more to support Palin than they ever have – and to call Obama out for precisely what he is.
    But don’t let that disturb the echo chamber you came from. I don’t tolerate stupidity to keep my comment numbers up here. If I ever start doing that, I’ll be part of the problem, not the solution.

  65. Conservativeagainstobama says:

    HA is an echo chamber that allows people to disagree…………..that makes sense in an alternate universe

  66. Dan Riehl says:

    “that allows people to disagree”
    No, it’s an echo chamber that likes to stir the pot to drive up comments. But it stops short of saying what needs to be said for fear of losing commenters. And it’s far from the only one. That’s just never been my style. I say what needs be said and let the chips fall where they may.
    Don’t you have anything better to do, like go comment on a McCain blogette troll post over there, or something?

  67. Avg Jo says:

    This authentic Washington quote could have served as well…
    Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
    (from Farewell Address)

  68. TexasDude says:

    “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports.”- In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labour to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
    ‘Tis substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of Free Government. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric. ”
    – From George Washington’s Farewell Address
    http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/farewell/transcript.html

  69. TexasDude says:

    “The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes. Should, hereafter, those who are intrusted with the management of this government, incited by the lust of power & prompted by the supineness or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution and violate the unalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction & sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable–and if I may so express myself, that no wall of words–that no mound of parchmt can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other”
    – Draft fragment of the George Washington’s Undelivered 1st Inaugrial Address
    http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/inaugural/fragments.html

  70. DJ says:

    On the whole, GB probably does more good than harm, I’m thinking. Gotta hand it to someone who can draw that kind of audience when the topic is American History…somewhere my high school social studies teacher is smiling.
    That said, I find it stunning how much stealing of material he does. Critics of his will call it proof that he is dishonest; fans will claim an honest mistake (eye of the beholder and all that). I’m absolutely positive he listens to Mark Levin’s show every single day, for example.
    But he might have outdone himself last week. Anyone who listens to Mark Levin for any number of years knows that when he clears up a complicated matter, he announces to the “backbenchers” or “the criminal front group Media Matters” that he is going to repeat his point for their benefit. So when they claim the point as their own the next day, they get the facts straight.
    So during one of his shows last week (maybe the education one?) GB makes a point and he repeats it “so the progressive bloggers get it right when they write about it tomorrow” or something to that effect. LOL I almost fell off my chair.
    All that he needs to say now is “There, I said it!” LOL

  71. Sissy Willis says:

    Some of the hotheads here could take a lesson from Bill Whittle, whose recent viewing of the faded document that is the Declaration of Independence prompted him to write out the entire thing longhand, a transformative experience. http://bit.ly/agSDrP
    Then, for comic relief and to clear their “heads,” they might want to check out the London Sperm Bank’s new logo (not entirely SFW): http://bit.ly/aqvxUS

  72. bob says:

    George Washington said in his Farewell Address (1796): “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness – these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in the Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the opposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

  73. bob says:

    On May 12, 1779, Washington addressed the Delaware Indian Chiefst:
    You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above
    all, the religion of Jesus Christ.
    These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.
    Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise
    intention; and to tie the knot of friendship and union so fast, that
    nothing shall ever be able to loose it…I pray God He may make your Nation wise and strong.”

  74. Careful here folks… Sounds like some of the “reasonable conservatives” posting here are undercover ACORN operatives, trolling this site with the standard “I’m conservative but these ideas are crazy…” disinfo talking points. They’re everywhere now, since they found a way to subvert the funding ban and have their checks rolling in again…

  75. Chris says:

    “Asshats”, Dan? Wow… what’s with the hate? People disagree with you and you automatically label them with laels like ignorant and “asshats”? How sad and pathetic.

  76. chris says:

    just for the record i have never even seen beck’s show, so i have no reason to defend him. hopefully that will damper your urges to call me an “asshat” or something equally clever. if beck didnt quote washington exactly thats only because washington said it much better:
    Page 5: On Religion and Government, Public Debt and Taxes
    OF ALL THE DISPOSITIONS AND HABITS WHICH LEAD TO POLITICAL PROSPERITY,RELIGION AND MORALITY ARE INDISPENSABLE SUPPORTS. IN VAIN WOULD THAT MAN CLAIM THE TRIBUTE OF PATRIOTISM, WHO SHOULD LABOR TO SUBVERT THESE GREAT PILLARS OF HUMAN HAPPINESS, THESE FIRMEST PROPS OF THE DUTIES OF MEN AND CITIZENS. THE MERE POLITICIAN, EQUALLY WITH THE PIOUS MAN, OUGHT TO RESPECT AND TO CHERISH THEM. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense
    of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

  77. Tim in STL says:

    I give Dan credit for call Beck on this. A few months ago, here in St. Louis I, and many other people, rightly criticized Bryan Burwell of the St. Louis Post Dispatch for attributing racist quotes Rush Limbaugh.
    http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/E196145D80764B2F86257648000EF26B?OpenDocument
    Defenders of Burwell spouted the same B.S. that Beck’s defenders are spouting. Burwell was a lazy journalist in his article, because he wanted to believe the false Limbaugh quotes. The same goes for Beck, he wants to believe the Washington quote is true and that is good enough reason to not perform his due diligence in reporting.

  78. maverick muse says:

    Scholarly research always CONSIDERS THE SOURCE prior to reproducing a fabricated quotation as if credible. True scholars do not fail to exhaust original documents in order to establish credibility of their own work as a scholarly resource. Reading current publications by popular personalities is not true research except to quote them within the context of their own background studies and research. Anecdotal stories are not historical facts.
    Convenience and comfort are the enablers of revisionism.
    Bravo, Dan Reihl.
    Conservatives do not revise records, nor do they support revisionism. Conservatives research all the historical background from original documents, correspondences and journals.
    Revising records to “update” is what neoconservatives do. And for the record, neoconservatism began with Leninists who evolved progressively through American politics into the Republican Party in order to permeate the “conservative” agenda corrupted, supporting Big Government these last few decades especially, with more bureaucracies that infringe upon more Constitutional Rights of citizens while erasing the bounds limiting federal powers and the separation of powers. Studying the early 20th Century Progressive Movement, it did not simply tackle the Democrat Party in order to monopolize power, but the Republican as well. It was not the Democratic administrations that sponsored the creation of the Departments of Education and DHS or “czars”. These unconstitutional socialist obscenities intruding on Liberty were established by neoconservative Republicans. Our Constitution has been ignored by revisionists in both major parties who augment federal powers beyond decency. The perverted American Dream is exemplified by the likes of Geithner, Soros, Holden and Holder walking and widening the path that Bush founded.
    The problem with personality cults is that the followers haven’t done their own scholarly research prior to joining, and eschew contemplating how they may have been mistaken. It is not humility, but self-righteousness that is a blatant characteristic of Beck, even when boasting self deprecation. If a person were to research all that Beck has represented on one topic alone, that person would see that Beck’s inconsistency matches Obama on any issue.

  79. Texpat says:

    Brainyquote, thinkexist and quotesby are unreliable in that they fail to cite a source for any of their quotes. I would never use any of them for anything I publish, period. I certainly would not go on national television or radio relying on their accuracy or veracity. Likewise, I never use Wikipedia as a source unless I can verify it in at least two other places.
    Dave in Alaska (7:31 PM) recommends marksquotes.com which, in fact does provide written sources for verification on their quotations.
    Dan Rhiel is correct in criticizing Glenn Beck. One can speculate whether a quotation is accurate, but without attribution, either in writing or a first person quotation (still hearsay), that speculation is meaningless.
    It is quite possible, and perfectly likely, George Washington said he hated turnips. No one knows because there is no record of such a thing, but people don’t go around quoting Washington on it just because it cannot be disproven.
    There is no such thing as kinda, sorta right when proposing to be accurate about what others said or wrote, particularly when they are not here to confirm or deny.

  80. TexasDude says:

    Thing is, though, George Washington’s thoughts regarding religion and government are well known and the quote, while maybe not accurate (or maybe), is in line with his thinking as evidences by his own words!

  81. Texpat says:

    Texas Dude
    I was born and raised in Texas, lived there for 47 of my 57 years. No one quotes me with accuracy because they it is “in line with my thinking” or maybe or whatever or something your second cousin is dreaming about. You either quote me exactly or not at all.
    I tolerate anything less from no one.
    Are you kidding me ? Just where is it in Texas you live that people think that way ? It is certainly no place in the state I have ever been and I have traveled through all 254 counties in my life.
    If you think I or George Washington or anyone else of integrity will put up with such silly nonsense, you have got another thing coming, son.

  82. Tom says:

    Like the riehlworldview.com, but this post was pretty lame.

  83. ROCnPhilly says:

    President Obama:
    “Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill, which reduces most people’s premiums and brings down our deficit by up to $1 trillion dollars over the next decade because we’re spending our health care dollars more wisely. Those aren’t my numbers. They are the savings determined by the Congressional Budget Office, which is the nonpartisan, independent referee of Congress for what things cost.”
    The only problem is that the actual number is $132 billion.
    We need to reject misrepresentation in all its forms. And if Obama can’t clean up his act given all his resources, then we have to reject him. No agenda will prevail to good effect with an ignorant buffoon leading the effort.