Posted on 09/02/2010 8:07:17 PM PDT by The Looking Spoon
This is it you guys! Like good ratings to the teflon MSNBC is made of the laughably low estimate on attendance for Restoring Honor wont stick, so lets pick out a few syllables about holding a sacred document that may not have actually happened to discredit the entire rally.
Restoring Honor was about...well, restoring honor. It wasn't a polemic, it wasn't in any way political. It was an affirmation of the values that made this country great in the first place. There's no way you can attempt to discredit that without looking like some lame liberal hall monitor.
How do we know he's lying anyway? According to the Mother Jones story (and I emphasize "story") someone would be in very deep
You know what? I actually don't freakin' care! If Beck didn't tell the truth...so what? How does that tarnish the basic goodness what Restoring Honor set out to accomplish or its message?
RIDDLE ME THIS LIBERALS... If Bill Clinton, of all people, advised married couples against committing of adultery would such an admonishment be incorrect because of its source?
It was a three hour event and the only time Beck was put on a pedestal was when the people being honored thanked him for having the event. So is this REALLY the best you got libs?
Like this latest grasp at straws would affect liberals' opinion of the rally if the words weren't uttered? Furthermore, they carry water for a vice president who thinks TV was Franklin Roosevelts opiate to the masses in 1929 WHEN HE WAS PRESIDENT....THREE YEARS BEFORE HE WAS ELECTED.
Then they have a president who once said we have 57 states! I don't know, maybe it was in jest, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when Beck gets it.
What message are they trying to convey anyway? Its cool if you're a liberal idiot and be elected leader of the free world, just don't be a conservative pundit that gets verbally carried away from time to time.
via Mother Jonesdoo doo stimulus if it was ever admitted that he touched a forbidden fruit of our history. So is Beck lying or is Susan Cooper, the spokesperson for the National Archives, covering someones rear?
:-(
The Looking Spoon is a conservative humor/satire/art/commentary blog, visit www.thelookingspoon.com to see more posts and art
I have no idea what this is about.
“I have no idea what this is about.”
Dittos to that.
Double dittos.
Wow! He didn’t hold the actual fragile parchment in his hands?
Just discredits EVERYTHING he said.
You people need better ammo, really. What color is the sky in your world?
Beck:
“I went to the National Archives, and I held the first inaugural address written in his own hand by George Washington.”
- - - - -
The woman at the National Archives (who wasn’t there, said ‘nobody but staff, handles the documents.’
Well, when I was at the WH, nobody gets into the Situation Room either, but the SS agent let us in, and I got to sit in President Bush’s chair!
Glad you said that. I thought I was losing it.
Hey if that broad in Hawaii wants us to believe she’s held the original Obama birth certificate, then I’ll also believe Glenn Beck held Washington’s original documents.
DUH????
"He's a great moment from the Beck Rapture, total crapture," Olbermann said introducing a clip in which Beck claimed to have visited the National Archives and held George Washington's handwritten first inaugural address in his hands.
"Little could Father Cough-Glenn over here know, but there are actually people at the National Archives to call him on his lies," Olbermann said.
According to the National Archives, Beck did visit and was shown Washington's inaugural address, but did not hold it.
"Those kinds of treasures are only handled by specially trained Archival staff," a spokeswoman said.
Could he have been using a figure of speech—not literally meaning that he held it in his hands? My bet is yes.
You just described Barry Obama
Let me get this right. I am reading the actual words on this thread, but not cradling them in my hands?
But would the persnickety gatekeepers of the nation's historical legacy at the National Archives allow some talk show bombthrower to put his mitts on a rare (and fragile) artifact?
Help me here. I can't find it. Where did Beck say he had the actual document from the Archives?
Oh, wait, it's Mother Jones.
Sorry, I just wasted bandwidth.
5.56mm
I don’t understand it either, but I thought it was late and I’m tired. Glad to know I’m in good company. :-)
Mega dittos IBTZ ?
By this idiot's standards, the Gideon Society would all be liars too for handing out New Testaments which they claim were written by the apostles of Jesus Christ.
"Kill the messenger". The left is so screwed up they find fault with anything good. They are so deep into evil they can't believe anyone is good.
Perhaps he “beheld” the speech with his eyes, that’s if a speech can be held or beheld 200 years after it was given. He could have held the draft of the speech I suppose. Which makes me wonder did Lincoln lie a Gettysburg when he said “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, . . .
It comes across much better at the original URL...sorry its confusing here.
The paragraph in bold was from the Mother Jones article I was was linking to that criticized Beck saying he held Washington’s inaugural address...everything below that was me commenting on the matter.
Like I said...its more clear at the original post because I can box out the quotes and separate them from the commentary.
Sorry righttackle44, I’m not trying to be the smartest man in the room. Just sharing a post I wrote and working with what I have. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.