Trumpism or Manhood? Glenn Beck Can’t Tell

Trumpism or Manhood? Glenn Beck Can’t Tell March 7, 2019

In this world there are sycophants and suck-ups, and then there are the next level grovelers that make even the most accepting of us cringe with a heady mixture of embarrassment and disgust.

These are the desperate bootlickers, so beholden to their drive to be seen as the ultimate Renfield figure to their chosen master, that there’s nothing too outrageous or demeaning. They go all in, dignity and self-respect be damned.

We’ve seen far too many of those sorts in the age of Trumpism.

The latest to go full Trashcan Man to President Trump’s Randall Flagg is TheBlaze TV’s Glenn Beck.

Beck has always been a little “on the edge.” He was, however, at least reasonably skeptical of candidate Trump before the 2016 election, throwing his support during the primaries behind Texas Senator Ted Cruz.

When Cruz refused to endorse Donald Trump at the 2016 RNC convention, Beck cheered his character.

When Cruz later rolled and offered Trump his fealty, based on the myth of a “binary choice,” Beck had harsh words for him, challenging him on his radio show in September 2016.

He even apologized to his listeners for his endorsement of Cruz.

“Do you have any new information that has made you say ‘Oh my gosh, he’s now not a sociopathic liar and now there’s suddenly a reason to believe him?'” Beck had asked Cruz on “The Glenn Beck Radio Program.”

Not satisfied with Cruz’s explanation, Beck delivered this to his listeners:

“That was so calculated that it was stunning to me,” Beck said. “I think I have to apologize and say, maybe, perhaps, those of you who said Ted Cruz is calculating and a smarmy politician, I think I may have to slightly agree with you and apologize for saying, ‘No, he wasn’t.'”

Beck was right.

He was right about Donald Trump. He was right about Ted Cruz.

His opinion of Donald Trump was the same that I’ve maintained from day one of Trump’s candidacy, to this very moment. There has been nothing revealed during that time to convince me that I was mistaken.

So what’s up with Glenn Beck, these days?

Beck has made an embarrassing dive into the deep end of the Trumpian cesspool, and the reason why is simple.

It begins with “mon” and ends with “ey.”

He’s found like so many of us have, that speaking the truth about this bare-butt emperor from a position on the right is not always profitable.

Believe me. I get it. I lost a solid paying gig when a certain rightwing media company determined that everyone under their umbrella would march in lockstep – or else.

No, they never said it outright, but the intent was implicit and the aftermath seen across the board bears that out.

Beck saw his own outlet struggling, so he did a bit of calculating, himself.

He’s gone into full red capped, MAGA-mania, and he routinely clowns himself in service to his new, orange overlord.

Principle? What principle?

On Thursday’s edition of his show, Beck launched into suckle-mode, lamenting the lack of truly masculine, virile role models in today’s society.

I’ll go ahead and say here that I am on board with that much of his rant. There is a lack of real men in the public eye, these days. That’s mainly because of the march towards total feminization of our society.

Men have been responsible for so much that is wrong, that the liberal media mavens who fancy themselves the conscience of the world have overcorrected and left little room for men to feel free to be themselves.

That happens anywhere that there is a degradation of morality. Part of the liberal overcorrection is to insist that women who lack moral fiber, themselves, should not be shamed for treating their sexuality as a party favor. Men who respond in accordance to those primal signals are then attacked, demeaned, and dragged over the coals.

Somehow, it doesn’t seem to occur to anyone in pop culture that maybe holding both genders to the same set of standards could work towards solving a lot of the societal problems we have today.

Both sides, men and women, have a role to play. They complement each other, when given proper balance and respect for their differences. Both are capable of immense good, or devastating levels of bad.

Both femininity and masculinity are lost arts, unfortunately.

Now with that out of the way, let me circle back to my point:

Glenn Beck has lost his mind.

Speaking on Thursday, he said:

There are no examples of men being men. James Bond. That’s it. A movie. There’s no male role models. Would you agree with that? So Donald Trump: here’s a guy who marries a supermodel, is like, ‘Yeah, I can make it with any model I want.’ He’s over the top, but he fights back, he doesn’t flinch… he is the almost cartoon of an alpha dog. You know what I mean? And I think because we have taken alpha dogs and shot them all, when he comes to the table there’s a lot of guys that are out there goin’ “Damn right!”

Beck is bucking to be an “A” student in the Lou Dobbs/Jeanine Pirro school if insanity.

So let’s just dissect this glorious rant of suck uppery.

First of all, let’s point out that Melania was never a “supermodel,” by the definition of the term.

She was a model. She was low level, at best, with some of her most viewed work being, um, “unsavory,” to say the least.

And “making it” with a supermodel, or any other woman is not the measure of manhood.

As for Donald Trump being an “alpha dog,” I dare say that’s an intensely laughable comparison.

He whines and lashes out at any perceived insult. That’s not fighting back. That’s puerile.

He grovels at the feet of tyrants and dictators, even taking their word over his own intelligence agents. That is not the behavior of a leader.

I’m going to go ahead and say that because of the lack of principle and actual manhood on his part, Beck doesn’t recognize it when he sees it, and at least attributing it to Trump keeps in the safety of the Trumpian pack.

So who are some examples of manhood that far exceed Donald Trump, Glenn Beck, and the trollish inhabitants of MAGAville?

Tim Tebow.

The Heisman Trophy winner-turned-pro-quarterback-turned-baseball-player is the epitome of both masculinity and grace.

He is self-controlled, gracious, giving of his time and efforts, lending his name and fortunes to the betterment of others.

He has backed hospitals to benefit underprivileged children in other lands, and his Tim Tebow Foundation (Please go here) has brought so much joy to special needs kids all over the world.

If his shining character isn’t enough to convince you, consider he looks as if he was carved out of granite.

OH, and Glenn – he’s actually engaged to marry a former, actual Miss Universe, not some back alley, peep show “model,” who needed a green card.

What about actor Gary Sinise?

There is no trail of broken marriages or scandals dogging Sinise’s heels.

He has used his fame from a long list of hit movies and television to return to the community.

With the Gary Sinise Foundation and his cover band, the Lt. Dan Band (named after his iconic character from the movie, “Forrest Gump”), Sinise has toured in support of our troops, entertaining those stationed abroad, raising awareness for the needs of vets, and offering an array of services to benefit those who have put themselves at the ready and in harm’s way to defend our nation.

You can check out all the good they do, here.

Or why name a “celebrity” man, at all?

Every day, there are men who get up, go to work, love their wives and children, and just have lives that are unremarkable, by the standards of a corrupt, Manhattan scam artist, or the people who put him on a pedestal.

They are, however, real men. They are doing what they’re supposed to do to keep our society rolling forward.

That’s the thing about real manhood. It doesn’t require a wide platform, but when it has one, it is used for good, not for self-aggrandizing. Not for attacking perceived “enemies,” or for seeking out the next, big grift.

Manhood and masculinity may very well be under attack in the world today, but it is not extinct, and if clingers like Glenn Beck think Donald Trump is an example of a real man, he’s part of the problem.

 

 

 

"Susan Wright never does her research before writing. NOAA officials announced that they TOLD President ..."

Trump Is Coming Unglued (and Somebody ..."
"Are we perhaps seeing a weakening power structure frantic to stay in control?"

Trump Breathes Blasphemy, so Where Is ..."
"In the Land Of Trumpers, the apples haven't fallen far from the tree."

Trump Is Coming Unglued (and Somebody ..."
"Trump has 5 more years to make you cry you lightweight wimp."

Trump Is Coming Unglued (and Somebody ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Politics Red
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • mersey

    I think Beck needs to buy another bag of Doritos and do some face painting again. He’s lost the plot…..biggley.

  • SemperFi56

    John McCain and George W.Bush had and have more manhood in their pinky finger than the orange Zod with will ever hope to.I guess that’s why Zod trashes them

  • Kelly

    My father is the only example of manhood I need. At 80 years of age, he is still working to provide for his wife, he always took care of his family, and never cheated in anyway. And he never wanted to date any of his daughters (if they hadn’t been his daughters). Just last night, my mom and I were talking about this. She told me that when my sisters and I were growing up, my dad was so concerned that he might be accused of something he went out of his way to make sure he never saw one of us changing clothes or the like. This is all the example of a real man that I need.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    VERY well said Susan.

    You have (I think) identified the single biggist problem of our society with this article: The loss of what it means to be either a true man or a true woman.

    Today’s females that are attempting to be dominate in the board-room or at the office simply cannot comprehend why no man wants them when their dominate behavior carries over into the bedroom.

    Real men (those with pride and dignity) are told we MUST submit to dominate females at all times. That does not work when we want families as female dominance in the bedroom and in public does not allow for femininity in the bedroom or in private, and thus there can be no desire on the part of men to protect and defend – much less be a part of raising children with a woman.

    I’m starting to see indications that a backlash may be starting among men that still have principles or that are able to develop principles as they are rejecting the oppression of feminism and racism and sexism and gayism, choosing to reject the culture of lies and deception that has become “the norm” and seeking out other individuals of similar honor and courage to bond with. Unfortunately for the women of this country, we simply cannot tell the feminist would-be dominatrixes from those that sincerely want love, affection, protection and respect and that are willing to show respect and love to their men.

    On the flip side (and I cannot speak for women but from a man’s perspective:), there is no need for a man to swagger and lie and show blatant disrespect just to prove that he’s a man. Throwing his weight around, abusing those smaller than he is or (worse) getting others to fight his battles for him as Trump used Cohen (the fixer)’s legal expertise) to send threatening legal letters to his opponents and his dirty-tricks/enforcer (Roger Stone) to physically threaten the lives of the families of those that would not capitulate to Trump’s demands.

    We see now just how weak and pathetic Trump’s pseudo-manhood is in how he has been totally unable to make a trade deal of with ANY of our trading partners, has been unable/unwilling to accomplish ANY of his major campaign goals (resolve the debt ? Have Mexico pay for a wall ? Put American manufacturing back on its feet ? Restore dignity and pride to the American people with a “great” country (a “great” country – not a laughingstock) ? Provide a permanent “fix” for illegal immigration ? Get an honorable resolution to the war against ISIS ? Support Israel and her right to survive ? End high taxes on businesses / individuals ? End Obamacare ?

    Trump has failed on all those issues because of his constant childish whining and his mistaken belief that the right combination of arrogance, ignorance, self-delusion and selection of the right boot-lickers for the right jobs to protect the putative “king” can make up for good leadership, a healthy and achievable vision of the future, and sufficiently strong morals and ethics not to take shortcuts or to abuse the process in exchange for a quick and temporary “win” that can be just as easily and swiftly reversed by the next president.

    On the female side, Hillary’s and Pelosi’s vision for America is just as scary if not more so as they envision a country run by feminism and competing hate groups where any voting block other than their own must be destroyed and using unconstitutional laws passed without debate or discussion (even if it means changing the rules of Congress) are certainly “fair game” to them because to them, ONLY the result matters – and the destruction of all that is good and right and proper in the process makes not difference.

  • chemical

    I thought it was Cheetos? Seems like forever ago.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I have the opposite experience. My mom and sisters like to tell and retell stories about how they believe my father molested them. With each retelling, new “details” seem to be remembered that did not exist in previous retellings. These stories get told (along with their beliefs that such actions are inherited by his sons) to the girlfriends and fiances of myself and my brothers, thus poisoning our relationships as well and making it virtually impossible for us to have normal relationships unless we keep our girlfriends strictly away from any discussions with our sisters or mother.

  • chemical

    The older Bush, maybe. 43 wasn’t half the man his father was.

  • mersey

    You’re right, it was Cheetos. The perfect shade of orange.

  • chemical

    I remember watching election coverage on 11/9/2016 — I woke up, turned on the news, saw Trump won, and Glenn Beck being reasonable on a panel on mainstream media. To us leftists, Beck is a joke — he’s kind of crazy, but he didn’t have that Breitbart or Infowars level of insanity.

    I thought I woke up in an alternative timeline or something.

  • chemical

    So, two things:
    1. I find it kind of hilarious that out of two manly men Beck picked as male role models, one is fictional and the other is a fat, stupid, crybaby idiot that has to pay women to **** him. This pinnacle of manliness got his rich father to pay off a doctor to get him a medical exemption to avoid Vietnam. Yeah, that definitely screams manly values like strength and courage to me. /eyeroll
    2. Most of the feminism Susan is attacking here is strawman feminism. This right here, from Susan:

    Every day, there are men who get up, go to work, love their wives and children, and just have lives that are unremarkable, by the standards of a corrupt, Manhattan scam artist, or the people who put him on a pedestal.

    They are, however, real men.

    …is mostly the same message I get out of left-wing feminist blogs, too.

  • SemperFi56

    That’s just plain nonsense.And we are comparing men to the orange Zod,W is head and shoulders above him in very aspect

  • SemperFi56

    But I see you are a leftst and hate W,but just think for a moment,you really think Zod is a better role model than W?really??

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    Both Bush men were good men.
    They were gracious, showed self-control, and were good husbands and fathers.

  • chemical

    No, Bush-43 is a MUCH better man than Trump is. Bush-43 was a bad president, and his service pales in comparison to his father’s. Hell, my military service pales in comparison to the older Bush’s.

    Although I think Bush-43 was a terrible president, I don’t think he’s THAT bad of a person. I even voted for him. He was a bad president because he surrounded himself with a bunch of morons, many of whom are now working for Trump.

    And credit where credit is due: He does a lot of philanthropic work in Africa, and that counts for something.

  • chemical

    And I’d agree. Bush-43 is a decent man and was a very bad president. His service pales in comparison to his father’s.

    Maybe I misstated this — I shouldn’t have implied that Bush-43 is a terrible person or anything, I’m saying he accomplished much less than his father did.

  • SemperFi56

    W was a very good president.He led the nation at a horrible time in its history.No he was not perfect,but he did good.Again,the topic is comparing men to the orange Zod.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    For the sake of this particular discussion, let’s keep it on the level of someone’s humanity – not their politics.
    Politicians make mistakes all the time, and not everyone is going to agree with what they do.
    There are some really core attributes of manhood, however, and that’s what I’m talking about.

  • JASmius

    This thought is going to be difficult to express without a coarse term here and there. But I’ll try.

    True manhood and healthy masculinity do not consist of nothing more than standing on the end of a pier, pulling it out, and dangling it all the way down to the waterline. Nor does it consist of spreading your seed as far and wide as you can, like a field of mutant dandelions in a hurricane. Nor is it being and acting like the human embodiment of that appendage you’re so overly proud of.

    True manhood and healthy masculinity consist of reining in those primal, hormonal urges and channeling them in a constructive direction – toward monogamy, family, bread-winning. They require self-control, not “flying off the handle,” not taking the easy way out, not taking short cuts, considering other people in addition to yourself. They mean character, dignity, honor, and integrity. They mean a realization that there is more to life than just “fighting,” and that when you do need to fight, you fight for something beyond just yourself. And they mean being secure in that masculinity, comfortable in your own skin, and knowing that you have nothing to prove to anybody.

    It’s the difference between fighting honorably and intelligently and fighting selfishly and stupidly. It’s the difference between true conservatives and “MAGA”. It’s the difference between, say, Ronald Reagan or Bush the father or Bush the son, and Donald J. Bonespurs.

    As for the newest Colonel Sanders impersonator, all I can say for Beck is that he, like Erick Erickson and Ben Shapiro, lasted a lot longer than the Limbaughs and Hannitys and Levins, who assimilated into #Cult45 almost immediately. I lost a local radio co-host gig almost three years ago for the same reason. It’s part and parcel of the terminal damage Trump has done to the conservative movement. It’s also why I’d call him the most spectacularly successful Democrat deep cover operative in American political history if I credited him with more than the mental wattage – and masculinity – of an eggplant.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Given that Bush 41 had no terrorist attack on US soil to contend with nor the fake outrage of the Democrats to deal with, Bush 43 had the grace and leadership ability to resist going to war until he had both an AUMF from Congress and a coalition (including Arab states) to fight with so there was no appearance of US (or personal) vanity or arrogance. This contrasts sharply with BJ Clinton’s and Obama’s personal wars in various parts of the world that sometimes came down to nothing but countries not passing laws suitable to the Obama personal sensitivities or Clinton needing a distraction from his domestic scandals. Both men almost never put together coalitions in the name of a principle nor did either explicitly state a “victory condition”, neither adhered to end the conflict once their unstated conditions had been achieved, but both were content to just let the wars drag on with no victory plans, no strategies and no end conditions. Both men refused to get Congressional authorization, but coerced allies into supporting them. Obama even went so far as to authorize (then classify and attempt to hide) drone strikes on countries we were (and are) not at war with or involved with in any way. Drone strikes against “terrorist groups” in Africa with a vague claim they were somehow related to ISIS – strikes that killed civilians we were not at war with and that had not requested our “help” were never approved by Congress (actually hidden from Congress) is as much or more of an abuse of the military than Trump’s “toy soldier” attitude has proven to be to date.

    You may not like some of the domestic policies Bush 43 conceded to because of his Democrat-controlled Congress, but as Commander-in-Chief and as the face of this nation seen by the world, he was much more of a leader, much more gracious and statesmanlike than either Clinton or Obama (Remember Obama’s “gift” of his collected speeches he sent the Queen of England on DVDs that are only readable on US DVD readers defined to be in “DVD area 1” by the copy-protection schemes of the time ? Remember Obama removing the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office, thereby insulting our British allies ? Bush 43 remained above such petty vanities.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Sir, I regret that I can only upvote your post one time.
    Thank you.
    EXTREMELY well said.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    You have a problem with me pointing out the average, ordinary guy doing the right thing as an example of manhood?
    The ‘strawman feminism’ or whatever you want to call it that I pointed out was the insanity that attacks men who act on their worst impulses, while also saying that suggesting a woman act like a lady is “sl_t shaming.”
    Sorry. If you’re acting like a sl_t, you need to be shamed!

  • chemical

    No, I was pointing out that the position that I blockquoted is what I hear from left wing feminist types.

    Let’s dig into that whole “Act like a lady / act like a sl**” bit. Exactly what behavior constitutes acting like a lady vs. acting like a sl**? Provocative clothing? Promiscuity? Flirting? It seems to me this is a rather subjective criteria.

    Even so, “acting like a sl**” has been the go-to rapist defense since, like forever. It makes women seem much less trustworthy than they actually are. That kind of language has real consequences, to the point where most sexual assaults don’t even get reported, because all the abuser has to do is claim the victim is a sl** and the hate-machine will do all the rest. It’s all a distraction, to get people to focus on the victim’s “bad” behavior, rather than the abuser’s. It worked for Brett Kavanaugh!

    I’m sure you act like a proper lady (whatever that means) and honestly hope no one gets the wrong idea and ever tries to assault you like that. But, hell forbid, if that ever happens, or has happened in the past, and you tell me about it, I’ll take it seriously and will believe you, and not going to ask about if you were wearing provocative clothing, or being flirty, or engaging in any other “sl**ty” behavior.

    Women deserve better, and should be never subject to sexual abuse. Even the sl**ty ones.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    If you don’t know how to tell the difference between a sl_t and a lady, then you either have never been around a true lady for very long or you simply don’t know any.

    The difference is obvious and definitive. To borrow from a statement I first heard from Cpt Kirk, a lady is capable of acting like a sl_t if necessary, but a sl_t can never act like a lady.

    Capt Kirk phrased it more like “A civilized person can impersonate a barbarian, but a barbarian can never impersonate a civilized person”.

    It’s also for other gorups of individuals: A conservative is capable of blending in with a group of liberals or progressives, but liberals and progressives will always stick out like sore thumbs in a group of conservatives. Christians can imitate Atheists (though why we would want to is beyond me), but Atheists can never successfully pose as Christians for very long without giving themselves away.

    The difference between a man and an aged-grade-schooler is similar. One has maturity, honor, self-control and self-confidence – the other relies on lies, threats, insults, arrogance and ignorance to “just get by”. The difference between a sl_t and a lady is similar.

  • chemical

    …but Atheists can never successfully pose as Christians for very long without giving themselves away.

    Ha! I managed to fool my own parents for years. When you attend church this Sunday, you will be attending with other atheists that for whatever reason, are afraid to reveal themselves as atheists. It’s not necessarily a large percentage, but it’s big enough that I can guarantee they exist in your church.

  • chemical

    Well said, sir.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    You clearly don’t understand the distinction I’m trying to make. Don’t fool yourself. I’m quite sure your behavior, body language and reactions gave you away (assuming your parents were practicing Christians). It’s also very likely that (because you apparently did not have Christian role models growing up (and church-going Atheists are not necessarily Christians so much as they are social pretenders), your parents may have been Atheists also, just afraid of openly admitting to being so to THEIR friends. Alternatively AS your parents, they simply refused to see what was before their eyes or were hoping that your behavior was “just a phase”….

    But keep believing you can pretend to be something you are not without being obvious to those that care to see what they are looking at – just be aware that you are not truly fooling ANYONE.

  • Alpha 1

    If the fawning media profiles are anything to go by, Muhammad Bin Salman is a charming, likable guy. That doesn’t mean he’s not the butcher of Yemen. My point is that In a position as powerful as the leader of a state, you can’t separate someone’s morality from their politics because their decisions affect the lives of millions of people. By lying America into the Iraq war George W. Bush made the choice to launch a war of aggression, which the judges at Nurmeberg called the “supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” He followed that up by orchestrating a worldwide campaign of torture. It doesn’t matter how personally pleasant or charming Bush is, he’s a horrible person who belongs in prison.

  • JASmius

    Capt Kirk phrased it more like “A civilized person can impersonate a barbarian, but a barbarian can never impersonate a civilized person”.

    Actually, that was Spock’s (paraphrased) line at the end of the Star Trek TOS episode “Mirror, Mirror”. Evidently, he was the only one aboard the Enterprise who could tell the difference.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Do you hate all Republicans just because of the (R) after their names ?

    Your posts always reek of far-left radicalism and usually contain a side-stench of feminism, anti-Christian hatred, anti-semitism or just old-fashioned anti-Americanism (where you blame America for everything from Global Cooling/Global Warming/Climate Change/Weather Patterns/Sea Level Rise to failing to blow you nose the last time you got the sniffles.

    Your hatred is getting tiresome and (quite frankly) your credibility is pretty much worthless among conservatives because your intense, irrational hatred of everything good and decent has destroyed any judgement you may once have had.

    OF COURSE you can separate a president’s morality from their politics. To think otherwise is to believe that ALL Democrats are “GOOD” and all non-Democrats are somehow immoral or “BAD” or vice-versa.

    Unfortunately, when you never consider the individual involved and the quality of the MAN, you will NEVER cast an honest vote for a LEADER as your vote for party-over-country will always be for the lowest possible denominator.

    I’m surprised you did not vote for the lifelong Democrat Donald Trump instead of the lifelong Democrat Hillary Clinton since you believe that a person’s character and politics are inseparable.

    It really does not matter anyway since you Trump’s Democrat-inspired policies must (according to you) be the cause of his abhorrent character instead of the other way around.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    You may be right about who said the line, but Spock was not the only one that noticed something “off” about the barbarians from the mirror universe. As I recall, by the time Kirk returned to this universe, all 4 had been locked up and were visibly snarling and screaming threats at anyone that would listen. I have never believed that the implication was that ONLY Spock could have detected as stark a difference as the show displayed between the normal Enterprise run on honor, service, integrity and respect for all life and the mirror Enterprise that was run on deceit, factions, assassination terror and punishment. I believe one reason Kirk was successful in “converting” the mirror Spock is that an appeal to logic and reason over emotion leaves little to no room for subjective re-interpretation of facts and that the mirror Spock had already realized that the mirror Empire was doomed precisely BECAUSE of the barbarous policies of the Empire.

    Thanks again for the correction.

  • Brian Orion

    Just, wow. And, all this time I thought Ted Cruz was a pathetic toady. Next to Glenn Beck, Cruz looks downright principled. It is plain to see the Trump cultists are the realest “cucks” in contemporary society.

  • chemical

    You misunderstand me. I call myself an atheist today because I stopped pretending. And I had plenty of Christian role models growing up — it’s just that they were all a bunch of hypocrites, selling a reward in the afterlife in exchange for cash, worshiping the Almighty Dollar… Sorry, I forget sometimes that means that they weren’t Christians, by your standards. A church full of atheists! Well, I’ve seen stranger things.

    I was born to a Christian family and raised Christian. We were at church every Sunday. I can’t ever remember a time in my life not knowing about who Jesus was. So when I lost faith during my teenage years, I was quite adept at faking being a Christian, because I only had my entire life to practice.

    Regarding your previous comment about Christians pretending to atheists: In my experience, they can’t do it. One of the Patheos Atheist bloggers is a Satanic Temple member. Since I hang out over on the atheist side a lot, I’m able to keep tabs on what the Satanic Temple is up to frequently (but likely to your surprise, I’m not a member). Anyways, a while back the Arkansas state government put up a 10 Commandments monument near the capitol, which is normally a thing that gets struck down by the courts, but they passed a law allowing religious monuments if they are donated and not paid for by the state.

    So, the Satanic Temple also donated a monument. It’s a Baphomet statue. If you didn’t know, Baphomet is a goat-headed pagan god that early Christians modeled Satan after. The point of this story is that, as you would figure, Christians protested the Baphomet statue fiercely, and TST had trouble finding a place for the unveiling ceremony.

    But they were able to secure a place for the ceremony. They made cards with the location of the ceremony, and you had to sign a waiver revoking your membership in any church and you were now a Satanic Temple member in order to get one. Apparently they made it as airtight as possible, but I’m not a lawyer. The ceremony went off without a hitch, and without a single Christian protester.

    Basically, any Christian in Arkansas could have ruined a Satanic Temple ceremony by pretending to be Satanic for all of like 5 minutes. They failed.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Why would a Christian want to pretend to be a Satanic temple member ? It’s not part of the Christian faith to force our beliefs on others. If they want to reject Christianity and as long as they do not disrupt or otherwise become obnoxious, all are welcome in a Christian church and at Christian ceremonies. Any cult that demands we denounce Christ or that demands sinful action as a “price of admission” is not something Christians would want to be part of.

    The main problem I have with Atheists and pagans is their insistence on participating in Christian events while bad-mouthing and loudly proselytizing their hatred of God, of Christians and of Christian values. Also their practice of going out of their way to prevent Christians from being able to practice our religion (example: FFRF). That is just obnoxious, rude and unnecessary, yet too many Atheists insist on being as obnoxious as possible in the apparent belief that being shockingly rude, ignorant and obnoxious will somehow reduce a Christian’s belief in Christ and His teachings or that Christians will suddenly reject their faith because of the loud mouths of Atheists.

    It would be like Trump claiming to be a model husband after 3 divorces and many mistresses as well as cheating on his current wife. No one would believe that Trump even knows how to be a man after such acts of cowardice and dishonesty/dishonor, much less a husband.

  • It’s hard to believe Glenn Beck still has an audience after all the baloney he has pulled over the years. But looking at the times we are in, it certainly comes as no surprise.

    IMO the only reason Beck was ever anti-Trump was because Ted Cruz’s campaign bought him off first via advertising space.

    1 Corinthians 13:11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

  • captcrisis

    The first thing my niece (age 24) says about Trump is that he must have a tiny penis. I don’t know if that’s true, and I don’t know if men who are ashamed of having a small penis really do act and talk that way, but he certainly fits the stereotype.

  • Mother124
  • Mother124

    Real men don’t brag that their [anything] is bigger than yours.

  • Mother124
  • Ellen Elmore

    I was a Glenn Beck junkie. I watched him on The Blaze TV, watched The News and Why It Matters on Blaze TV and listened to Beck’s radio show. But once he became part of the MAGA group, I stopped watching and listening to him. Money matters more to Beck than principles. He made a business decision rather than a heart decision. Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Ingraham and Erick Erickson are bowing down at the altar of Trump. Trump hasn’t changed since he first announced his candidacy. He is still the same crude, rude,narcissistic, pathological liar, serial cheater and an abuser of women. For the former conservative talk show hosts all that matters is Trump has an R next to his name. For me it’s not enough. I am always and forever #NeverTrump and #NeverDemocrat.

  • Fmontyr

    Yawn. Glenn Beck, I thought he had left the room as I hadn’t heard about him for several years. He was crazy deluded back then back then and it appears nothing has changed. He was selling gold and survival food and gear for the coming cataclysmic event. What is the purpose of featuring the opinions of an irrational “has been?”

  • fanodan13

    Kudos to Susan, for a well written story! “The latest to go full Trashcan Man to President Trump’s Randall Flagg is TheBlaze TV’s Glenn Beck.” I was drinking my diet Mtn. Dew at the time, and it quickly was expelled through my nasal passage! I forgot about Stephen King’s masterpiece, The Stand. Matt Frewer’s, character. However though, she’s accurate The pundits who resisted trump, until they needed him for ratings. I, sincerely hope they are muted in 2020. It’s like He doesn’t surround himself with quite enough yes-men in his berder paradise! Why on earth, after seeing and dealing with the monster that they gave credibility and free publicity too, would these ignorant folk, repeat the cycle?

  • Ronald Langdon

    HEY some people learn to put away their hate and bitterness for numerous reason However
    susan needs to repent of her sin of hatred and bitternessbefore she can ever change Kudos to Glenk Beck. Im sure the Lord will forgive her if she will humble herself instead of using Donald Trump to increase her famous little writings LOL

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Susan is an honorable, faithful, consistent, conservative in the truest sense of the word. She has the courage to speak out when speaking out is not popular.

    Why should she change ? Why would she want to ? No one really cares that you hate for no reason or that you worship at the alter of Trump because most of us here are more concerned with the character, honor, judgement, honesty and truthfulness of our leaders and with the truthfulness and judgement, and objectivity of our media rather than how arrogant and lewd the President can become while capitulating to every foreign negotiator and ignoring the good, honest advice supplied to his office in favor of his own bigoted and racist views.

    The fact that you support and demand that WE support your own bigotry and racism is not our problem. It is yours.

    I home you can eventually see yourself for the fool you are and repent of your worst characteristics. Jesus can help if you let him. Listen to His message sometime with an open mind. You might be surprised at the wisdom and reason you find in his teachings. The key is to keep an open mind and not pre-judge the teachings of Christ based on your own character weaknesses.

  • Ronald Langdon

    character, honor,truthfulness,judgement of our leaders!!!! You must be totally blind to the corruption that is being exposed in the obama administration. Also who is proving to be the Racists any more than the Dems with the vote on Anti_semitism. Writing only mostly anti trump issues merely shows that Susan is exactly like the fake news from MSM. There are a lot of things taking place that are totally opposite to her simple repeating of main steam media. I hope you are able to see when the truth is finally revealed. Y
    All of you call people names because you are really the ones that are racist. You need to read independent news and journalists that dont have an agenda or biased.

  • B alone

    At least Mr. Beck had the intestinal fortitude to admit he was wrong and move forward If you don’t agree don’t listen. don’t claim you’re a conservative if you don’t support a conservative. I will vote for anyone who is not left of center Trump was my last choice but he was far and away better than any leftist especially Hillary. Trump does not play well with others however, he has truly been a thousand times more conservative than even some republicans. Stop crying and realize he is doing well.

  • Isn’t it funny how Trumpkins always accuse everyone they are fighting with to be Democrats or some other crossbreed boogieman they have conjured up? No matter how many republican or Christian principles you cite to them showing they are the ones who have left the reservation, they still insist they represent true conservatism. It truly takes a remarkable kind of person to deny objective reality.

    Unlike traditional conservatives who practice ad fontes (Latin for back to the fountain/source), these oxymoronical postmodern conservatives choose to believe Trump is the uncontaminated source from which all conservative waters flow.

    An impostor’s biggest threat is being confronted by the genuine, so something has to be done with the latter for a successful fraud to take place. Hence the constant smear campaign to discredit practicing conservatives..

  • John225

    Republican voters are approximately 90% white and of that they are about 71% white Christian (down from 81% 2006). Democrats are presumably made up of the rest, the ethnic minorities, white youth and academia. This means that Republicans and Democrats are divided by race, religion and ideology. These are highly divisive subjects. So, when the Republican coalition and the Democratic coalition sit across the aisle from each other they just don’t understand each other. The population of voters hasn’t always been divided this way. During the 50’s things were much more evenly divided and white married Christian voters were a much larger demographic, approximately 80% and fell fairly evenly into Democrat and Republican camps.

    During the Obama years the white Christian demographic declined from 54% to 43% so white Christians became a minority group for the first time. That rather spectacular decline is a culmination of factors. There is the declining white population, compounded by the declining up take of Christianity, coupled with the continued alienation of sectors of society. Under 18 whites will be a minority by 2023 with all white folks becoming a minority around 2042. You can see how this could drive xenophobia and Nationalism. I think when Trump said he was their last chance he was referring to their declining political power due to demographic decline and his intention to tilt the playing field in the rights favor. With the polarization of politics, the media, the judiciary, and society in general the middle ground has become a desert, a no-man’s land between the warring parties.

    So over time almost everybody apart from some old white Christian folk have been alienated from the Republican camp. Why has this happened? Could it be negative attack politics? The 2016/18 race based attack politics and misogyny of the leadership will have had the effect of further alienating ethnic minorities and women. So many lines have been crossed to get here there are no lines anymore. Such things might win immediate elections by galvanizing the base into action but ignore the future consequences.

    This with the shrinking base is not good news for the GOP (or anybody for that matter). You know how desperate they have become when they are being inclusive of white supremacists and Anti-Semite hate groups. Their hail Mary pass is Trump and him degrading the pillars of democracy (the republic). If you want to know how bad things could have been, if Trump were a more competent leader, take a look at Hungary’s Viktor Orban and the one party kleptocracy he has turned his country into. Trump is like a less potent clone of Orban. Trump seems to be running Orbans playbook, but Orban achieved a super majority in 2010 allowing him to amend his country’s constitution and has been more successful in undermining the free press than Trump. In Hungary about 90% of the media is either state controlled or in the hands of an Orban loyalist. Orban is also a seasoned politician and political activist and so has a much beter idea of what he is doing. lest Democrat’s think this is all a right-wing problem Orban started out on the left and at some point, made a hard-right turn into fascism. The decline of Republicans will at some point hand a super majority to the Democrat’s. A political system needs a credible opposition to keep it honest. This won’t end with Trump. He is a symptom of a bigger problem.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    It appears to have worked in the instance of the Manafort sentencing. Trump’s constant attacks against Mueller seem to have either convinced Judge Elliot that Mueller is actually “out to get Trump” (as his charter indicates he should if of that’s where the facts lead him and it’s certainly where the facts have led him) or the Judge has now abandoned any pretense of fair-mindedness and has jumped the shark “Trump Train”. I’m watching to see whether the VA judge “throws the book” at Manfort as he/she has every right (and obligation) to do.

    No matter how old Manafort gets, the fact that he has lived for decades by defrauding the US government of taxes and actually laundering money for foreign (not necessarily friendly) interests and has actually working AGAINST our government to “EARN” his spoils actually argues AGAINST him being able to live out his remaining years in the luxury those spoils have given him (at least in a just society). Not to mention the credibility and political power he has with Trump and the GOP as long as he spends minimal time in jail. If he were to draw a longer (more appropriate) sentence (perhaps even the remainder of his life), it might set a precedent for others in DC that they just might NOT get away with their own anti-American, back-room deals and they should either leave the country now or risk also spending the rest of their lives in jail instead of in luxury.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I don’t believe your statistics or the “pidgin holes” you create to categorize voters.

    Evangelicals are not a voting block nor are your category of “Christians”.

    Voters have multiple priorities and a hierarchy of requirements for those that want their votes. The most popular vote-getter may not always be the one scoring highest on the the #1 issue but perhaps doing better on both the #2 and #3 (and perhaps even the #4 issue)….

    The other issue I have with your analysis is that it provides no analysis of the impact of morality (or in Trump’s case) immorality and blatant, bragged-bout corruption in the GOP that only came front-and-center with Trump.

    Your analysis does not address why the GOP lost so many registered Republicans in late 2016 & mid-late 2017 as Trump’s unhinged behavior could not be covered up by the GOP or his WH toadies.

    As the GOP base continues to shrink, the Democrat base is also shrinking. With luck, both will shrink into irrelevancy as both continue their march toward total government control on both the left (Socialism/Dictatorship) and the right (Faschism/Dictatorship).

    Though battered and bruised, the Constitution is still respected by a significant portion of the country (even if not those in DC). If Trump or the next Democrat moves too far away from it’s precepts, they may well find themselves dealing with a Military that decides to take action against a government that is out of control and that has forsaken the Constitution that every member of the Military has taken an oath to uphold.

    Military oaths are to the Constitution and the people of this country – not to a man or an office and include protecting against threats both foreign AND DOMESTIC.

    There is no time limit on the oath that military members take.

  • John225

    I do apologize if the simplistic analysis offended you. I do hate it when people think the understand someone based on a simple categorizations. I’m not sure how else to try and get a handle on it though. Trumps approval rating sits at a pretty solid 88-90% with republican affiliated voters. It doesn’t seem to mater what he does or what is going on that percentage doesn’t vary much. Do you think the drop from 81% in 2006 to 71% could represent your moral revolt against trump?

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Let me apologize for the length of this post. I wanted to supply rationale and examples to demonstrate/back up my various points rather than just state what many Trumpers will take as “hate speech”.

    My gut response is that I do NOT think the drop from 2006 is as much attributable to Trump as it is to Mitch McConnell and John Boehner’s campaigns to rid the GOP of conservative policies, small-government voters, and any elected representative that would actually attempt to vote in accordance with the GOP party platform of small-government, debt reduction, less spending, personal accountability and the reinstatement of character and integrity in Congress.

    I think the conservative voter rejection of and exodus from the Republican party in late 2016 and throughout 2017 (and still ongoing) has resulted in those that were left in the party becoming a higher percentage of support for Trump. I think the Republican party has now split (since 2016) (somewhere in the middle) with conservative (mostly Christian) voters realizing that the adoration and the following of Trump is at odds with Christian teachings and and values and effectively leaving the party and those that worship at the alter of Trump making up a higher percentage of the Republican party. I think this split has been building for some time as the Republican party has been moving more and more left based on the Republican progressives in control of the party apparatus and Congressional positions of party power. I think the GOP has moving left in order to chase the disaffected Democrats that have left the Democrat party as the Democrats have been driven more and more to the left by their socialist and communist and “victimologist” activists. I think the GOP has been comfortable moving more and more to the left because there is no party to the right of the GOP (conservative, constitutional right – not the banana-republic, dictatorial alt-right).

    I think that when the % of Republicans in favor of Trump increases it could mean either that Trump did something to please the “transactional supporters” or (at least as likely) that Trump has done something that causes another defection from the Republican party. I think the “transactional supporters” are the lukewarm party-is-all type supporters that play “good-Trump/bad-Trump” games where the objective is to protect the jobs of the people at the top of the party (no matter how corrupt) because it keeps THEIR political jobs intact (and them in their jobs). These “transactional supporters” will be the ones trying to say that there is no place for morality or ethics in politics and that the character of an individual is meaningless compared to a laundry-list of “successes” they’ll be happy to quote at length – “successes” that only exist in the minds of the GOP spin-doctors.

    As long as you are only looking at the % of REPUBLICANS that support Trump, you will have unrealistic indications of national support for Trump because Trump will ALWAYS lie to inflate his own popularity, his effectiveness, his accomplishments, etc. When Trump lies, those lies will be FAR MORE egregious and transparent than any previous president – even to the point of inventing “success-stories” with fictitious facts in support of Trump’s bogus claims. You will CERTAINLY get misleading information if you listen to any of Trump’s sycophants because they can always be expected to unthinkingly parrot Trump’s words and tweets.

    A better gauge of Trump’s support (I think) is the Real Clear average of polling on Trump’s job approval. Even that is (I believe) being manipulated by “Trump-friendly” pollsters, but it’s a good historical view of nation-wide average support for Trump over time. In that average, Trump’s support has been flat – never varying more than 2 percentage points and has never climbed back to the level it was at at his inauguration, and (if you compare Trump’s job approvals during his term-to-date with previous presidents, you’ll find Trump’s is (not only more flat and unchanging, but mostly well below their levels as well, indicating that for all Trump’s bragging about how popular he is and how much America loves him, his words are a lie.

    Another way to express my point is: Which is higher – 80% of 30% or 50% of 50% ? Answer: 50% (approval) of 50% (Republican voters in general population) = .5 x .5 = .25 (25% of all voters) while 80% (approval) of 30% (Republican voters in general population after defections) is .8 x .3 = .24 or 24% of all voters. Note that the Republicans will only tout the “increase” in Trumps’ popularity (within the GOP) from 50% to 80% approval (of Republicans) while the raw numbers of voters approving of him may actually have decreased by 1 % because of voters abandoning the GOP and registering as independents.

    Note also that the numbers above are purely hypothetical, but there is some reason to believe the defections will affect elections going forward. Specifically, during the mid-terms in several Senate races in deep, deep red states (Texas, Tennessee, Alabama, etc) where Democrats traditionally never even come within 20 percentage points of the Republican candidates the GOP spent lots of money and effort to eke out a win of 5 percentage points or less (Examples: Cruz in Texas and (IIRC) Marsha Blackburn in Tn). Furthermore, the GOP lost the HOR outright and throughout the campaign season, there were reports of SEVERAL big-dollar, traditional GOP donors refusing to donate to the GOP in support of the 2018 mid-terms. If the GOP major donors are defecting and the rank-and-file voters are defecting (as indicated by actual election results), can the claims of Trumps’ increasing popularity within the GOP be believed ? If so, how ? I think my example above may be part of the solution. In a shrinking GOP base where Trumpist purity and lockstep of belief is now mandated, approval of anything Trump does almost HAS to go up because all critics are driven out of the party, contributing to the further shrinkage of the overall party. As the party continues to shrink because critics and independent thinkers are being hounded out, the “purity” of support for Trump’s antics is virtually guaranteed to go up.

    Ask too, what it really means to be registered as a Republican. What limits and privileges accrue by registering Republican vs Independent ? I think the answer changes based on whether your state is a closed-primary state or an open-primary state.

    In a closed-primary state, you MUST register in the party to vote in that party’s primaries. This does not say you HAVE to vote for that party’s candidates in the general election nor does it state that you cannot vote in a party primary, then either leave the box blank or vote independent in the general election (all of which I believe occurred in large numbers in the midterms).

    In an open-primary state, there is no correlation (or even checking) to see how you are registered, making party registration a mere formality and essentially a useless metric for calculating potential voter support. Personally, I’m registered Republican here in IL (an open-primary state), but will likely never again vote for a Republican candidate after a lifetime (over 30 years) of voting Republican. That does NOT mean that I will likely ever vote for a Democrat either, so the “binary argument” can be discredited right now. The primary reason that I will likely never again vote for a Republican candidate is that for the past several elections Mitch McConnell has been trying to drive conservative candidates and voters out of the party, refusing committee assignments or positions of power in the Senate to conservative candidates. The 2016 elections where the RNC party apparatus openly, blatantly, and in total contradiction to their own party convention bylaws and by obvious strong-arm and mafia-like tactics (death threats, physical man-handling of candidates to prevent them from registering protests / votes in time to be counted, etc). There were also dirty tricks pulled in on national television such as turning off the anti-trump delegation microphones, and refusing to count votes when requested after unclear voice votes. After such a display that the GOP had likely selected their candidate well before the convention and that the work of the many people that put time and effort into updating the party platform and attending as delegates was not just ignored, but rejected was such a blatant act of – not just rejection of conservative principles when they rejected what appeared to be their conservative base, but intentionally embraced Trump’s Democrat and corrupt history. Then we find that after the inauguration, Trump winds up hiring many of those same most senior RNC “representatives” that were responsible for ramming his nomination through the convention.

    The show of banana-republic election “fixing” and vote-tampering that occurred at the GOP convention was enough to cause me to swear off ever voting for a Republican candidate again – when I realized that this has been coming for over a decade as both Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have been trying to rid “their” party of any and all conservative representatives and ideals while moving more and more left in the quest for more voters, confident in their belief that constitutional and Christian voters as well as those believing in small government or expecting morality and ethics in Republican candidates would never abandon “their” party out of fear that the Democrat boogey-man would get elected. All they had to do was to crank up the rhetoric of fear of Democrat socialism and how it will destroy our country because they believed that Republican thinkers would rather have Republican progressive (socialist), big-spending, big-government polices rather than Democrat (socialist) big-spending, big-government policies. As long as the GOP made sure to TALK about small government, they’ve felt free to DELIVER big-government, big-spending laws, and regulations – often as bad or worse than what the Democrats would have delivered. I think a very large number of Republican voters (and donors) came to the same conclusions I did after the 2016 convention and closed their purses and refused to check the Republican box on their ballots. After seeing the unthinking, blind sycophancy from the Congressional GOP since Jan 2017, the traditional pattern of disapproving voters “coming around” and supporting a president that was doing a “good job” has not materialized – again as shown by the 2018 mid-terms. My belief is that the GOP will likely never return to its former size and will continue to shrink into irrelevance.

    If there’s any good news for conservatives in this, it’s that the Democrat party is also moving too far left and disaffected (moderate) Democrats are abandoning the DNC, but will not be voting for Republican (socialist-lite) policies as long as Trump is “leading” the Republican party. If I’m right (and I believe there’s evidence to support my positions), then there will be a LARGE chunk of reliable voters (and donors) that are ready to (or have decided to) “jump ship” from BOTH parties because of the increasingly radical positions and attitudes taken by those in control of the political party and (at least in some cases) the belief that corruption in DC is only continued and encouraged if a Presidential nomination can be “purchased” prior to the party’s convention with promises of WH jobs as Chief-of-Staff or “Senior Advisor to the President” or other high-level, high-status bribes. Now that the GOP has proven that it’s senior party leaders (Rience Priebus in this case) can be “bought off” with promises of of WH jobs and the DNC already has a history of cronyism in their politics, there is less and less reason to donate or vote for a party based on convictions or party platform / candidate promises that are so obviously made in bad faith.

  • Annemarie

    Susan has it right. There are lots of men and women who just go about their lives, quiet successes, but maybe not the way the world defines it. They live according to a moral code, not according to society. But we never hear about them and because they’re quiet it’s easy to forget they exist. Some of them are religious. some humanists, some are feminists, some not. Doesn’t matter. Good human beings, all.