Conservative radio personalities Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are systematically perverting the history and meaning of the U.S. Constitution.
Both Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Beck are relatively intelligent individuals, but they both suffer a blind ignorance that is driven by their mutually shared agenda - A Theocratic United States of Greed, Gluttony, and Sloth.
There are a number of concepts that these two must attempt to establish, in the American psyche, for them to fulfill their stranger than fiction 'Ayn Rand meets Thomas Paine meets Pat Robertson' agenda. First, they must attempt to establish that America's Founding Fathers were Christians. Second, they must attempt to establish that those Christian Founding Fathers designed our Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution, to establish, with permanence, a "Christian Nation". Third, they must cast doubt on the science of Evolution and cast as credible, the pseudo-science of Intelligent Design.
All of these conceptual assertions are patently false, and must be refuted, and corrected, with great vigor. Their defense of Christine O'Donnell's recent moronic statements about Evolution, Intelligent Design, and the separation of church and state, is a perfect example. It exposes their monumental ignorance (not the same as a lack of intelligence) concerning the Founders, the Constitution, and the science of Evolution.
Popular VideoThis judge looked an inmate square in the eyes and did something that left the entire courtroom in tears:
Popular VideoThis judge looked an inmate square in the eyes and did something that left the entire courtroom in tears:
Take a look at this video of O'Donnell's debate with Chris Coons in the New Jersey senate race, held at the Widener Law School. It's over at YouTube and titled "Christine O'Donnell Shows Stunning Ignorance Of First Amendment in Debate With Senate Opponent Coons". Pay very close attention to the video at around the two and a half minute mark. The question that O'Donnell asks is met with stunned disbelief, and a lot of laughter. O'Donnell had had, yet another, Palin moment. Christine, bless her "I'm not a witch" heart, thinks that that audience, full of very intelligent law students and professors, is laughing with her, not at her. Her naiveté, evidently, is boundless.
Here's Limbaugh, later that same day, defending O'Donnell's idiocy. . .
RUSH: Back to Delaware here. I'm reading this story today, and it makes it out like Christine O'Donnell did not know that the First Amendment forbids the establishment of religion by government. My first reaction when I read it was to call somebody. I said, "What the hell is this?" I said, "This can't be. I'm not going to call anybody. This has to be an out-and-out lie." Here's a partial sound bite from a debate this morning in Wilmington. At the Widener Law School during the debate ba-da ba-da ba-da, a discussion of evolution and creationism, after Coons said, "Private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that religious doctrine doesn't belong in public schools." Christine O'Donnell and Coons had this exchange about "the separation of church and state."
COONS: And one of those indispensible principles is the separation of church and state.
O'DONNELL: Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?
COONS: It's in --
IDIOT LAW STUDENTS: (laughter)
COONS: Excellent point. ...
LAW STUDENTS: (laughter)
COONS: Hold on. The First Amendment establishes the separation, the fact that the federal government shall not establish any religion?
You can read Mr. Limbaugh's entire transcript at his website, where he titled the segment, "Media Twist O'Donnell-Coons Exchange on Church and State".
After watching the video, did you note that candidate Coons did not say, "In the Constitution are the exact words 'separation of church and state'?" This is a critically important point to understand concerning Mr. Limbaugh's ignorant defense of O'Donnell's ignorance of the Constitution.
Here's Limbaugh's opening defense . . .
"And she said, 'Are you telling me that's in the First Amendment?' What she meant was, 'Are you telling me separation of church and state is in the First Amendment?' It's not! Christine O'Donnell was absolutely correct. The First Amendment says nothing about "the separation of church and state." This is a modern and incorrect description of the prohibition of the establishment of a national religion, pure and simple. And the left has taken this to say that religious people cannot be in government and that you can't teach something like creation in the schools while you can teach evolution, because evolution isn't religion but creationism is. Intelligent design can't be taught because that's a religion. Evolution isn't."
Earth, to Mr. Limbaugh. The term "separation of church and state" is a truncated, paraphrasing of the sentiment that resonated throughout the Constitution and, more specifically, the sentiment the Founders addressed (using other words) In the first Amendment of the Constitution! Your argument that those exact, precise words cannot be found in the Constitution, is tired, old, and specious.
If Rush Limbaugh had been paying attention in his 8th grade American History class he would have learned that James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution" and two term, fourth President of the United States, disdained, with a passion, the intermingling of religion and government.
"It was the Universal opinion of the Century preceding the last, that Civil Govt could not stand without the prop of a Religious establishment, & that the Xn religion itself, would perish if not supported by a legal provision for its Clergy. The experience of Virginia conspicuously corroborates the disproof of both opinions. The Civil Govt, tho' bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, Whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State."
(James Madison, letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819; from Jack N. Rakove, ed., James Madison: Writings, New York: Library of America, 1999, pp. 726-727.)
See what I mean? Limbaugh is purposefully distorting Madison and the other Founders' intentions, concerning the "framing" of The United States of America, to match and comport to his own agenda.
"To get God out of our culture, to get God out of the schools, to get God out of everyday life. It's to try to say that the Constitution prohibits God, that's what they want the interpretation of the First Amendment to be. The Constitution does not prohibit God. I mean, for crying out loud, look at the Declaration, acknowledged as one of our founding documents. We are all 'endowed by our Creator.' "
Good grief, here we go again with that good old "endowed by our Creator" ploy. This is where Rush tries to establish the "America is a Christian Nation" meme, but it's yet another argument from ignorance. Thomas Jefferson's use of "our Creator", in the Declaration of Independence, does not support the argument that America is a "Christian" nation. It only suggests that, at the time of the writing, the primary Founding Fathers of the United States of America were Deists. Note Jefferson's use of the term "Nature's God" in the Declaration - he did not reference "Yahweh", nor did he reference "Allah". Instead, he used the title commonly used by Deists to describe their concept of an omnipotent, supernatural entity.
Limbaugh continues his warped explanation of the "endowed by our Creator" phrase in the Declaration of Independence.
"The reason for this phrase in the First Amendment was where were these people fleeing? England! The Church of England. Henry VIII established a religion so he could get divorced. Pure and simple, he wanted to get a divorce. Religion said, 'No.' 'Okay, I'm going to make my own religion. Screw you! I'm gonna behead somebody. Screw you!' They were fleeing religious persecution. The scary thing is that a bunch of dummkopf, dingleberry law students and audience at a law school laughed at the correct portrayal of what's in the Constitution."
Did you notice that, in the version of the O'Donnell-Coons transcripts that he published on his website, he labeled the half-dozen audience laughter sequences with this identifiier "IDIOT LAW STUDENTS"? Clever by half. Limbaugh's argument, that O'Donnell was right, and that that audience was filled with "a bunch of dummkopf, dingleberry law students" is ridiculous, and Limbaugh actually knows that. Why is a man like Mr. Limbaugh so comfortable making such ignorant arguments? Greed, plain and simple. He knows that only his faithful dittoheads lack the critical thinking skills to spot the ignorance, and that they will buy that snake oil, in a heartbeat. But heh, it's those "dittoheads" that put jet fuel in that G550, right?
Here's how Mr. Limbaugh closed out his argument from nuttiness . . .
"She's assuming that everybody is as smart as she is. She's assuming that everybody's as informed as she is. That's the mistake many of us conservatives make: We assume everybody knows what we know. We assume everybody is as informed as we are. That's why I say it was really scary that these lamebrains at that law school laughed at the absolute correct assertion that she made."
There you go. O'Donnell was brilliant. It was everyone else at that law school debate that was unintelligent. In the real world, it's the students in that audience that didn't laugh, if there were any, that should scare America.
Mr. Limbaugh's ignorance of the Constitution, and the science of Evolution, should also alarm all critical thinking Americans. Just look at the enabling influence that personalities like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have had on states like Texas. The Board of Education in Texas was "enabled" by Limbaugh and Beck's popularity, to corruptly revise their history books to fit the agenda that they share with these two science challenged knuckleheads - "The Theocratic United States of Greed, Gluttony, and Sloth".
Which, brings us to Glenn Beck. This clever, but equally ignorant Charlatan, is as confused about the Founding of America, the Constitution, and the science of Evolution, as Limbaugh and O'Donnell are.
Poor Glenn is so confused about America's Founding, that, when he picked the heroes to worship, for his version of a "Theocratic United States of Greed, Gluttony, and Sloth" agenda, he chose Thomas Paine and Ayn Rand. As a Pantheist, who has a great respect for Jeffersonian Deism, all I can say is "Thank Nature's God for Mr. Beck's ignorance". Mr. Beck, single handedly, has opened the door, for secular America, to freely quote the written and spoken words of Paine and Rand - all of their words.
For example, did you know that Glenn Beck's hero, Thomas Paine, once said the following about the Judeo-Christian Bible?
"As to the book called the Bible, it is blasphemy to call it the Word of God. It is a book of lies and contradictions, and a history of bad times and bad men. There are but a few good characters in the whole book. The fable of Christ and his twelve apostles, which is a parody on the sun and the twelve signs of the zodiac, copied from the ancient religions of the eastern world, is the least hurtful part. Everything told of Christ has reference to the sun. His reported resurrection is at sunrise, and that on the first day of the week; that is, on the day anciently dedicated to the sun, and from thence called Sunday — in Latin Dies Solis, the day of the sun; as the next day, Monday, is Moon-day."
(Thomas Paine, letter to Andrew Dean, 1806; from Philip S. Foner, ed., The Complete Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. II, New York: The Citadel Press, 1969, p. 1484.)
Or, how about this example?
SECULARIST: Whoa! How cool is that? Heh everybody, check this out. Did you know that there's a video, on YouTube, about Glenn Beck's hero, Ayn Rand, talking about how people that believe in God, have a "psychological weakness"? Yeah, really. It's called "Ayn Rand on Religion".
While the ignorance required to make those hero choices is amazing, Beck's idiocy when it comes to science, and the Evolution-Creation debate, is "nuclear" ignorant. This is totally my favorite idiot thing that Beck said this week. Like Limbaugh, he was addressing the O'Donnell's "Duh... That's in the Constitution?" kerfuffle. He actually said . . . no wait, seriously, this is no lie, he actually said these words, in public, out loud . . .
"I haven't seen a half-monkey, half-person yet." - Glenn Beck
O'Donnell's kerfuffle has brought these two science-challenged clowns out of the closet, and on record. They don't understand that human evolution is a fact, supported by millions of facts, and that the Theory of Evolution simply addresses the "mechanisms" that resulted in those millions of facts.
The implications of this are staggering. The two men that are herding the leadership of the Grand Old Party of America, believe in the Creation story of the Bible. That means that they are Biblical "literalists". They believe the Bible, word for word, front cover to back cover. These two intellectual clowns, who argue that Global Climate Change is a scientific "hoax", think that the evidence, available to humankind, supports a literal interpretation of the stories in the Bible. Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, Jonah surviving for three days in the belly of a great fish, you name it, they're now on record supporting it.
Yo, scientists of the world! Limbaugh and Beck have disproved your Theory of Evolution. You know, that theory that is fundamental to all of science? So, either erase your current science books, and start from scratch, or pack up your computers, your calculators, and your test tubes, and go home. Rush and Glenn have all this "how the world works stuff" covered.