Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Not so white as advertised

Posted by on Aug. 31, 2010 at 1:18 PM
  • 8 Replies

Glenn Beck crowd: Not so white as advertised

Many creeds, colors in attendance refute charges of racism against rally

Posted: August 29, 2010
7:10 pm Eastern

By Anita Crane
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


Restoring Honor attendees (Photo courtesy of Tim Hester and Karla Kuykendall Hester)

WASHINGTON - Hundreds of thousands of Americans - of many creeds and colors - made what ended up being a pilgrimage of sorts to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., for Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor rally.  Catholics, other Christians and Jews spoke to WND on site, many celebrating the themes of faith and reliance on God proclaimed from the platform.  

As WND reported, Beck proclaimed the purpose of the rally, saying, "It has nothing to do with politics; it has everything to do with God."  Beck, the Fox News TV host and a professed Mormon, urged his fellow Americans to live according to the Christian virtues of faith, hope and charity. He asked everyone to enter into 40 days of deep prayer, an obvious plea to imitate Jesus Christ's 40 days of prayer and fasting in the wilderness. Beck also preached the Christian philosophy that the common good starts with individuals, and therefore, he said, Americans need to begin by examining their souls.

Just what is the real deal about America's racial obsession? Find out in "Negrophilia," personally autographed by the author!

Paul and Jeff Strange, father and son, came from Bloomington, Ill., with their friend Tom Morgan. Just prior to the formal presentations, Jeff Strange spoke presciently:  "I came here to try and improve myself as an individual, because I think we need to restore our character in this country," he said. "We need to restore the character of our leaders, and we need to start electing virtuous leaders.  "We're in big trouble, and it's time to do something about it," said Strange. "We came out here to be with thousands of other people to take a stand, to change ourselves and our country."

Different faiths, different colors


Day Gardner (left) and Alveda King at Restoring Honor rally

The crowd itself included veterans, parents, disabled Americans, people of all ages and - contrary to some criticism leveled against the rally - attendees of many races and ethnicities. Day Gardner, president of the National Black Pro-Life Union based in Washington, D.C., for example, stood on the platform with Alveda King as she recalled her uncle Martin Luther King Jr.'s historic "I Have a Dream" speech.

Before the multitudes assembled Alveda King proclaimed, "If Uncle Martin could be here today ... he would surely remind us that as brothers and sisters, united by one blood in one single race, the human race, we are called to honor God and to love each other."  Praising the entire rally, Gardner exclaimed, "It was phenomenal!  "It felt great to be up there with all these wonderful leaders, the black pro-life leaders from all over the country," Gardner said. "I was extremely proud of my sister in Christ and my dear friend, Dr. Alveda King. ... Seeing her walk out where her uncle and her father were 47 years ago - my eyes welled up, and I had a lump in my throat, because we have come a really long way."

 Ron Miller enjoyed the rally with friends from his home state of Maryland.

"I've attended and spoken at several tea party rallies, but Glenn Beck's rally exceeded my expectations," observed Miller. "The others were like pep rallies to fire up the team before it takes the field. Restoring Honor was a revival, calling us to honor those men and women who gave everything they had, including their lives, to defend us. Beck got it right when he asked us to get down on our knees and repent to God for the salvation of our nation."  Miller, a black Christian and author of "Sellout: Musings from Uncle Tom's Porch," told WND he's been outraged by claims reported in the media that the tea parties are racist and that Beck's rally was somehow a slap against Martin Luther King Jr.  "Those naysayers who compare us to the Ku Klux Klan are despicable," Miller said. "By making such a ludicrous comparison, they have revealed themselves to be morally bankrupt, so they no longer warrant a hearing from Americans of good will.


Abraham Lincoln impersonator Gerald Bestrom from Hastings, Mich., at Restoring Honor rally

"Americans of many races were given prominence on stage for the world to see," Miller continued. "I was moved to tears by Dave Roever's heartfelt prayer at the end. What a beautiful sacrifice he made, and what a tower of grace he is to stand before us today as a testimony to perseverance, courage and love."

Roever, whom Beck introduced by recounting the Navy veteran's inspiring recovery from a disfiguring injury in Vietnam, led a prayer for the nation. Afterward, he spoke to WND about the enormous gathering.  "I think it's made about 90 percent of the politicians in this city very nervous," Roever said. "Some of them are tremblin' in their offices right now because this is a statement - not only to D.C., but to the whole country - that we're not going to be satisfied with the status quo."

 Roever said he wants all politicians - from the president to lawmakers to activist judges - to know that many people are fed up like him: "There is so much corruption, back scratchin,' deals made," he stressed. "The No. 1 issue bothering me is that they know their time is short, so they ramrod anything through Congress, and it's more difficult to repeal a law than it is to get that law made.  "They're hoping their agenda will survive, but I don't think it will," said Roever. "I've never seen my country like this. I didn't go to Vietnam and get my face blown off, my fingers blown off, my body damaged and wounded beyond repair for what this government's doing right now."

 

by on Aug. 31, 2010 at 1:18 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-8):
RachaelMac
by Bronze Member on Aug. 31, 2010 at 1:22 PM

Me thinks they doth protest too much.

SxyMartini
by on Aug. 31, 2010 at 1:28 PM

3 African Americans? LOL 

SxyMartini
by on Aug. 31, 2010 at 1:30 PM

How many where there in total? 300,000? so yea ok we got 3 blacks and 299,997 whites. I know their math skills aren't the best but come on!!!

norwegianwood
by Platinum Member on Aug. 31, 2010 at 2:01 PM

 Yes. It's so easy to throw the suggestion of racism out there, so you can then decry any effort to prove it wrong as either insufficient or as just more proof of 'tokens' etc. Here's an idea. Why not ask yourselves a few questions:

1) Without actual evidence of racist rhetoric from the majority of the groups of people, do you really have a leg to stand on with your intimations? I mean, shouldn't you support the intimation with some actual fact?

2) Is outcome alone proof of racism? Point: IF you could show that ethnicities were not in huge number BECAUSE they were being DENIED entry into the cause/group, then you might be able to say so. But to PRESUME that low numbers are PROOF of racism is failed logic on its face....how can the movement be held to account for whether or not other ethnicities agree with them? Isn't the logic being put forward by you who claim 'racism', suggesting that a political or ideological stance cannot have merit IF it doesn't gather support from x, y and z group? Isn't THAT racism...somehow "I" am NOT legitimate or to be taken seriously because of MY race or because some other ethnicity doesn't agree? How freaking LAME is that? What on earth does it have to do with the legitimacy of a POLICY? Are some ethnicities to be deemed to KNOW MORE about policy and the right direction to go? That just sounds like the flip side of Jim Crow to me.

P

bullony
by Silver Member on Aug. 31, 2010 at 2:11 PM

I think a lot of people can probably hitch on to the Libertarian concept of the tea party, but I think they are not able to sufficiently draw the appropriate mix people, because their protests often have groups of people who are derogatory to the race of the president.

I also wonder where all these people were when the bush administration was grabbing at our privacy.  There is talk about putting something together to help the needy among us and people are up in arms, but when the government is allowed to trample on our privacy nothing was said and it was unpatriotic to speak out.  If there is truth behind this tea party I want to see them continue into other administrations, because government isn't going to become less.  Each administration inserts themselves into our lives into areas that they are interested in.

The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.


`Alvin Toffler`

RachaelMac
by Bronze Member on Aug. 31, 2010 at 2:31 PM


Quoting norwegianwood:

 Yes. It's so easy to throw the suggestion of racism out there, so you can then decry any effort to prove it wrong as either insufficient or as just more proof of 'tokens' etc. Here's an idea. Why not ask yourselves a few questions:

1) Without actual evidence of racist rhetoric from the majority of the groups of people, do you really have a leg to stand on with your intimations? I mean, shouldn't you support the intimation with some actual fact?

2) Is outcome alone proof of racism? Point: IF you could show that ethnicities were not in huge number BECAUSE they were being DENIED entry into the cause/group, then you might be able to say so. But to PRESUME that low numbers are PROOF of racism is failed logic on its face....how can the movement be held to account for whether or not other ethnicities agree with them? Isn't the logic being put forward by you who claim 'racism', suggesting that a political or ideological stance cannot have merit IF it doesn't gather support from x, y and z group? Isn't THAT racism...somehow "I" am NOT legitimate or to be taken seriously because of MY race or because some other ethnicity doesn't agree? How freaking LAME is that? What on earth does it have to do with the legitimacy of a POLICY? Are some ethnicities to be deemed to KNOW MORE about policy and the right direction to go? That just sounds like the flip side of Jim Crow to me.

P

The number of people of other ethnicities is not proof of racism. The words coming from their leaders are. See Andrew Breitbart, Pamela Geller, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck. Not just in reference to blacks, but mostly to muslims. Isn't it telling that this movement attracts these kind of people? If the Tea Party is all about fiscal conservatism, where were they a couple years ago?

norwegianwood
by Platinum Member on Aug. 31, 2010 at 3:02 PM

 

Quoting bullony:

I think a lot of people can probably hitch on to the Libertarian concept of the tea party, but I think they are not able to sufficiently draw the appropriate mix people, because their protests often have groups of people who are derogatory to the race of the president.

Can you supply me some evidence of that? I have been to two tea parties and the first 9/12 event, and I saw ONE incident of racism...ONE sign that I felt 'crossed the line.' So, percentage wise, how does that impugn the entire crowd?

I also wonder where all these people were when the bush administration was grabbing at our privacy.  There is talk about putting something together to help the needy among us and people are up in arms, but when the government is allowed to trample on our privacy nothing was said and it was unpatriotic to speak out.  If there is truth behind this tea party I want to see them continue into other administrations, because government isn't going to become less.  Each administration inserts themselves into our lives into areas that they are interested in.

This comes up regularly. Something to consider here: it is NOT the comfort zone, generally, for conservatives to protest in the streets. They 'typically' are the ones referred to as the 'silent majority' who 'cast their opinion at the ballot box' and who don't often speak to pollsters etc. So, they were 'vocal' in their 'norms' when they challegned Bush on Meyers by writing their congressmen/women etc; they were vocal on immigration in the same manner, not protests, but through calls and letters; they were vocal in the 06 election either refusing to vote AT ALL or by voting in a Democrat because the Republicans were spending too much etc. If you listened to talk radio you would have heard the VERY VOCAL outcry AGAINST the first bailout and EVERY one since....trouble is that their representatives were not LISTENING to them anymore. Their calls were not having an effect; the spending kept climbing; the bailouts kept reaching new and different industries; and finally, after the stimulus plus a second TARP spending bill, they had had ENOUGH of not being listened to. I think you WILL continue to see them more willing and ready to demonstrate when they are not listened to on particular issues. That particular pandora's box has been forever opened I think. In any case, these people will not protest every little issue. It's just not their style, and they won't protest IF they are feeling that the government is listening. So, it may not be at a level you will think is 'the same'...but you cannot just make a sweeping assumption on if they don't do it with the next admin, then it must have been race. Because IF they manage to sufficiently change the House and Senate and begin to feel that they have representation in the federal government, what would be the reason?

P

 

norwegianwood
by Platinum Member on Aug. 31, 2010 at 3:03 PM

 

Quoting RachaelMac:


Quoting norwegianwood:

 Yes. It's so easy to throw the suggestion of racism out there, so you can then decry any effort to prove it wrong as either insufficient or as just more proof of 'tokens' etc. Here's an idea. Why not ask yourselves a few questions:

1) Without actual evidence of racist rhetoric from the majority of the groups of people, do you really have a leg to stand on with your intimations? I mean, shouldn't you support the intimation with some actual fact?

2) Is outcome alone proof of racism? Point: IF you could show that ethnicities were not in huge number BECAUSE they were being DENIED entry into the cause/group, then you might be able to say so. But to PRESUME that low numbers are PROOF of racism is failed logic on its face....how can the movement be held to account for whether or not other ethnicities agree with them? Isn't the logic being put forward by you who claim 'racism', suggesting that a political or ideological stance cannot have merit IF it doesn't gather support from x, y and z group? Isn't THAT racism...somehow "I" am NOT legitimate or to be taken seriously because of MY race or because some other ethnicity doesn't agree? How freaking LAME is that? What on earth does it have to do with the legitimacy of a POLICY? Are some ethnicities to be deemed to KNOW MORE about policy and the right direction to go? That just sounds like the flip side of Jim Crow to me.

P

The number of people of other ethnicities is not proof of racism. The words coming from their leaders are. See Andrew Breitbart, Pamela Geller, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck. Not just in reference to blacks, but mostly to muslims. Isn't it telling that this movement attracts these kind of people? If the Tea Party is all about fiscal conservatism, where were they a couple years ago?

 I basically answered that with the previous poster, but I would like to find out from you what asking that question is supposed to prove? I mean, it's the type of failed logic that says, "Rain makes things wet. You are wet. It must be raining." ie it doesn't take into account all the OTHER factors that could 'make a person wet'....

P

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)