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. :-)
Fake but True is the liberal motto. Why the problem all of a sudden?
In other words, AN IDIOT.
I’m inclined to agree with that!
No problem. I wasn’t going to give mother jones a hit on the link so I didn’t know.
This is a stupid point of attack except for the fact that I was told by Glenn constantly that even a white lie would make me a bad American and part of the corrupt system. I listen 3 hours a day, every day and he was very pushy on this point. If this is true it really hurts his credibility on further issues personally.
No problem. You did a lot better than I could. :-(
The only thing you need to say to olbermann and mother jones is "Sandy Berger".
Oh yeah I forgot about Sandy Burglar! Good point!
Run with it. Send the royalty checks to that Jim Thompson guy.
The lefties must be so proud. All of the crap that has occurred in the past year and this is their big scoop. Better break out the Pulitzers!
Thanks for that link. My wife is looking for stuff to adorn the walls of our homeschool classroom (already got a cross, American flag, and Gadsden flag). I think our founding documents will be awesome additions!
I’m surprised Mediaite actually linked to the Right Scoop post that shows video of the FULL explanation of why he worded it the way he did...because the video is a fantastic rebuttal.
Maybe they’re counting on their readers to not be curious enough to see for themselves?
Nobody? I'll bet there's video of non staff handling documents on PBS, The History Channel... programs.
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!
Things like that happen all the time. I have a friend who, back in her prime, was able to do things like that. She'd bat her baby blues and no man could turn her down. Some people show so much enthusiasm, you just can't tell them no. You know it will be something they'll remember all their lives and tell their grandchildren about.
That’s their whopper? If he held or didn’t hold a document? Maybe Glenn just didn’t go into detail about what it takes to hold fragile documents. Maybe he didn’t go into detail that he was holding the device that was actually holding the documents. Did he even say specifically which documents he was holding?
I know he has quite a few original documents in his personal collection, I’ll bet he’s never actually touched some of them with his bare hands, but he has still held every one of them in some way.
A whopper would have been if nothing at all was written on the East side of the top of the Washington Monument...you know “where no man can see it”.
These guys got nothing.
Huh? If I’m understanding this correctly...are they nuts?
Is this for real? Am I missing something? What did he supposedly lie about? Again,are they nuts?
but Beck ? ....hell no !
“Sandy Berger” indeed! That was a smashing point! Why would we expect the government zombies at the Archives to be any more conscienctious and diligent than the creeps at SEC, who reportedly sit around all day watching internet porn!
This raises considerable questions about what might or might not have happened. Is it in some kind of a case? Could Beck have held it in its case, or something like that? Or could this "showing" have transgressed official guidelines?
I would note that Beck's words convey the impression that he said he "held it in his hands", but of course he doesn't say that. He just said he "held" it. I would have to assume that he felt justified in using the word.
Exactly.
Seriously though, this is really nit picking.
With everyone/groups making new alliances I think the entertainment factor pre Nov 2010 is going to be like a great display of Fireworks on the 4th of July. JMO
The document Glenn 'held' is surely encased or or maybe he 'held' it with his eyes. I mean if this is what the nitpickers at the unseemly Mother Jones have, well, they can go to hell..lol.
This illiterate idiot doesn’t understand the Founders’ words, let alone what Beck said.
Beck was holding the WORDS written by the Founders’ own hands. Not the piece of paper, but the WORDS. That’s what he said.
To be blunt, the paper itself has great historical value, but the words have far more value.
Those WORDS written by the Founders’ own hands can be held in ours. I could Google them right now. The paper? No. The words? Yes. Those very words they wrote.
If we don’t turn the tide, that won’t be possible faster than most can imagine. Faith in those words and the Word that inspired them is already enough for the obamanation’s administration to consider you a possible terrorist threat. Soon, possession of those words itself could be a crime unless we change course soon.
Fortunately, it looks like we are...
Zactly! “Held” with his eyes? “Held” in his heart? “Held” in the white gloved hands of the person working in the archives with his hands placed under that person’s?
Sheesh. If the Mother Jones idiot thinks s/he hit gold, it was fool’s gold. LOL.
Oooh, apparently he did claim to have held the document. Instead, it was brought out and he got to see it.
Wow. IMPEACH BECK! What, he isn’t President? And this “lie” pales in comparison to the lies obamanation spews daily? Who cares! Obama is on the “correct” side, so he cannot sin! Beck is eeeevvvviiilllllllll! He MUST be SILENCED! /hurl
One actual definition of “held”: to have or keep in the mind; think or believe: We hold this belief. See dictionary.com
So Beck could have literally held those documents.
What, parsing too much? Not nearly as much as “57 states,” “depends on what the meaning of is is,” and “my muslim faith”!
Well, precisely. That’s the point I was trying to make in my comments #42 and #44.
“I held the cab.” (Not in my hand!)
I’m telling ya. Those people are out of their tiny, twisted minds.
The Public Vaults display at any given time about 1,100 records-originals or facsimiles of documents, photographs, maps, drawings, film or audio clips, allowing you to see the raw materials of our American democracy. Documents range from important treaties and legislation dealing with grave matters of state to snippets of the fascinating stories of individual citizens such as letters to the President and citations for military bravery.
National Archives Interactive Exhibits Maybe it was this kind of "touch".
see also...
Devvy’s Alerts:
Beck @ the lincoln memorial Rally...
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.