Glenn Beck, of Fox News, is against the following:
- $1.2 billion to provide summer jobs for those under 24
- Converting federal auto fleets to hybrids
- $89 billion for Medicaid
- $30 billion for COBRA extensions
- $36 billion for expanded unemployment
- $20 billion for more food stamps
- $1.7 million for the national park system [jobs?]
- $150 million for producers of livestock, farm-raised fish and honeybees [Honeybee colony collapse?]
- $2 billion for renewable energy research
- $6.2 billion for weatherization assistance
- $3.5 billion for energy efficiency and conservation block grants
- $3.4 billion for the state energy program
- $200 million for state and local electric transport projects
- $300 million for the energy-efficient appliance rebate program
- $400 million for hybrid cars for state and local governments
- $1 billion for the manufacturing of advanced batteries
- $1.5 billion for green technology, loan guarantees
- $8 billion for innovative loan guarantee program
- $2.4 billion for carbon capture demonstration projects
- $4.5 billion for the electricity grid
(Source: "Stimulus," by Paul Bartoswicz. A Journey in Life: Reflections Of A Common Man. February 8, 2009.)
Glenn Beck's list is much longer than that.
He did cite many things that are actually extremely dubious at best — things I would think that even the most mundane thinker would have vetoed for not being focused enough on creating good jobs as soon as possible while taking care of the Creation (God's gift to the whole of humanity that has collective responsibilities concerning the other creatures and life forms as well).
However, some of the areas above are simply about showing mercy. Where's Glenn Beck's heart? Where's his sense of mercy?
Unemployment and food stamps — what does he want to do, starve people? How soon would he put out his hand were he unemployed with no prospects?
He has his job solely because he sucks up to the plutocrats, such as Rupert Murdoch, who controls Fox News, and to other media moguls.
Look, many state and local governments are tapped out. Local charities are running out of food and in many instances, are actually turning hungry people away.
As for energy conservation and anti-pollution measures, what's his problem? Is he living under a rock? What's wrong with conservation and clean, alternative energy? Anyone with his exposure who is against those things is insane and frankly diabolically minded.
I'm not for coercion. I'm not for taxes. I'm not for the system of money at all. However, short of getting rid of the whole evil system, which I want to do, the people do need to eat in the interim. It is simply reprehensible of Glenn Beck to rail against food stamps, per se, and extending unemployment benefits. People have children. They had jobs that are evaporating. What does Glenn Beck want, Scrooge for President? Who is Beck, the incarnation of an evil character right out of a Charles Dickens novel? The hard-heartedness right on national TV is astoundingly evil. What is wrong with Rupert Murdoch that he supplies Beck with such a megaphone?
These people are antichrist through-and-through. They are as wise as serpents and even deadlier. What happened to Christians being harmless as doves? Rupert Murdoch actually professes Christianity. What hypocrisy! Woe hypocrites?
This is why I've devised the Christian Commons Project. We just can't depend upon coercive democracy to take care. We can't bring forth with people such as Glenn Beck retarding the movement of the Holy Spirit. The system of the United States is irreconcilable. It won't work. It hasn't. It's doomed to failure, because of the unrepentant and misguided and misleading, such as Beck and Murdoch, etc.
It is interesting timing. The last two days, my landlord and two of his workers have been going apartment to apartment replacing the old toilets with high-energy efficiency toilets that will use vastly less water per flush. Here I was thinking how that's the right move when I ran into Beck's list.
Now, I haven't asked, but if the landlord (who I happen to know cares deeply about providing affordable housing for the hardworking poor and others, who are just downtrodden) gets a tax credit, then the people through their elected representatives have said they want to reward water conservation. If he isn't getting a tax credit (unlikely), he's still going to be amortizing his investment via lowering the water bill that he pays. Anyway, he's saving water that even though we live in the somewhat rainy Seattle, Washington area in the U.S., is still a major issue. He's looking out into the future and sees reduced snow packs and even with more rainfall, still no rainwater-capture-infrastructure programs big enough in the works. That for instance is where the stimulus should head for one thing if ending global warming isn't going to be high enough on the list.
If Glenn Beck gets his way, the climate will become impossibly unstable. That's not the prophecy though. Glenn Beck loses. He's already lost, in fact. It's only a matter of time.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)