Monthly Archives: March 2010

Warren Redlich Speaks

Warren Redlich, who owns the campaign domain for the Christine O’Donnell’s 2008 Senate campaign website gives us the scoop on his interactions with the O’Donnell team.

Comment by Warren Redlich on 13 March 2010 at 8:04 am:
Hi – I’m Warren Redlich. There isn’t much of a connection. Here’s the short story:

One of my hobbies is acquiring expiring domain names and “recycling” the websites. One of my favorite types to acquire are old campaign websites.

I typically restore as much of the old site as possible and call them “legacy campaign websites.” It’s a little bit of my own contribution to history, and a little bit of self-promotion – I put links from the sites to other sites that I own.

In some cases I also value the potential political speech in case that candidate runs for something again (if I don’t like them I can criticize them effectively). Usually those are for candidates in my area – philsteck.com and traceybrooks.com are good examples.

So I did this with the christineodonnell08.com domain name, winning a GoDaddy auction in February of 2009. At a certain point she or her campaign team noticed.

They’ve contacted me a few times over the past 13 months. They were not polite. On more than one occasion they have threatened to sue me. Since I’m a lawyer and I actually know what I’m doing, the threats were not scary.

I should note that no one else noticed this because, well, the site then looked mostly as it did before. And I had offered to post a prominent link to her new campaign site. That offer was ignored.

Then something changed.

They filed a copyright notice with GoDaddy. This shut down the site. I give credit to GoDaddy, because they make it easy to respond to the copyright issue and they restored the site very quickly.

Since I am no longer able to preserve the history of the campaign – it would violate their copyright – I put up new content. The current site is the result.

So what does this mean?
A. Her campaign team is not very smart. They let the domain name lapse which is a somewhat common mistake, but the best campaign teams know better. I know this because I hunt them and some of the most desirable old sites keep getting renewed.

B. They are also arrogant, and unwise. If you’re going to threaten to sue a lawyer, you better know what you’re doing.

C. They don’t think ahead. What did they think was going to happen when they filed the copyright notice?

D. All of these point to something else. They never tried to understand me. It never occurred to them that I believe what I’m doing has value. They never considered my investment in the site (mostly time but also money). They never tried to work with me – something I was willing to do.

So what does that say about their candidate?

Warren

What I think it says – amateur hour. But we already knew that, didn’t we.

Thanks Warren for sharing your story.

I Have The World’s Smallest Violin

My violin weeps for Bart Stupak. He went from the U.S.’s most important Congressman to irrelevant. He went to a publication that has only the Democratic party’s best interest in mind, the National Review Online to have a pity party complain:

Sitting in an airport, on his way home to Michigan, Rep. Bart Stupak, a pro-life Democrat, is chagrined. “They’re ignoring me,” he says, in a phone interview with National Review Online. “That’s their strategy now. The House Democratic leaders think they have the votes to pass the Senate’s health-care bill without us. At this point, there is no doubt that they’ve been able to peel off one or two of my twelve. And even if they don’t have the votes, it’s been made clear to us that they won’t insert our language on the abortion issue.”

According to Stupak, that group of twelve pro-life House Democrats — the “Stupak dozen” — has privately agreed for months to vote ‘no’ on the Senate’s health-care bill if federal funding for abortion is included in the final legislative language. Now, in the debate’s final hours, Stupak says the other eleven are coming under “enormous” political pressure from both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). “I am a definite ‘no’ vote,” he says. “I didn’t cave. The others are having both of their arms twisted, and we’re all getting pounded by our traditional Democratic supporters, like unions.”

Stupak was not going to get what he wanted – which was to outlaw abortion. He should be happy, the Hyde Amendment is now going to be further codified into law and poor women are going to have trouble obtaining abortions. Stupak overplayed his hand by his continuing lies about the bill – lies so blatant that even mainstream news organizations like ABC ran pieces about how he’s lying.

Stupak should be a lesson for other Democrats – being a blockade to the Democrat’s top legislative priority does not end well for you. Now there’s lots of questions about Stupak’s connections to the Family and his residence at the Cheat Street House. He’s even attracted a primary opponent who is having great success with fundraising, Connie Saltonstall.

The New Adventures of Old Christine

This is probably the first, and last, time I credit Charlie Copeland’s blog, Resolute Determination, with a find, but this is just too hilarious not to pass on:

This is what you will find when you google the name “Christine O’Donnell.” The first result is a link to her 2008 campaign website. And when you click on that link, you find that Christine failed to renew her domain registration from her last campaign, and as such the site has been taken over by a personal injury lawyer from New York who is apparently not a fan.

Perhaps it is her sad, confused, even anguished face in that picture above, coupled with the fact that Christine has been living off what little campaign contributions she receives in her perennial runs instead of paying vendors and staff (which has returned to ruin the launch of her 2010 bid); but I am starting to feel sorry for her. But then I remember what horrible things she stands for and I quickly realize she is getting precisely what she deserves.

Perhaps the denizens of Resolute Determination can inform Charlie Copeland that on Christine’s new 2010 campaign site, which is masterfully titled “christineodonnell08.reimaginehosting.com,” (yeah, I know, it is not 2008 anymore, and I especially love the “reimaginehosting” touch), there appears the following picture, which certainly conveys an endorsement in my mind?

If Charlie Copeland does not intend to endorse Christine O’Donnell, I suspect a cease and desist letter is in order.

Why is Christine O’Donnell running for Senate?

The quick answer to that question is that there is a rabidly social conservative faction within the Delaware GOP that wants their voices heard in elections. That is fine, but why is Christine that faction’s representative or leader? She has so obviously failed at it and she has defrauded her backers by using their contributions for her own living expenses instead of campaign expenses. She has no experience in government. She has no experience in, really, anything of substance, and no, being a Fox talking head is not something of substance. So why is she the candidate of this faction? Anyone, and I mean, anyone with the same opinions is as experienced and as capable as Christine O’Donnell in running a campaign. David Anderson, for one.

And then we look at the personal cost of running. Christine O’Donnell obviously cannot afford this undertaking. She couldn’t afford it in 2008 and she can’t afford it now.

The only thing that explains her inexplicable determination to constantly run for the Senate is narcissism.

Give it up, Christine.

The Party of Vitter and Ensign

Via:

Dems to GOP: If you say Rangel and Massa, we’ll say Vitter and Ensign.

The DNC is up this weekend with this ad, apparently running on DC local cable channels, to remind the chatterers that while the repubs are working at their storyline, there isn’t much reason to give it much credit since their problem children continue to stay in office completely unchallenged by their leadership:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiyVIzdvKKA[/youtube]

Things Aren’t Always ‘Red’ and ‘Blue’ Concerning Family Values

The problem with social conservatism is that it backs good people into a corner, whether it’s Utah leading the nation in pornography consumption or the litany of Republican politicians who dip their wick outside their marriage bed. As much as we might enjoy the downfall of hypocrites like Sanford and other self-righteous politicians from the right, the social conservative agenda also has huge implications on real people.

In the “blue” states, where abstinence is pushed on to teenagers and contraception is limited, family values like divorce and teenage pregnancy are up. And it’s only getting worse as we recover from the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression. Conversely, it turns out the people who live in “blue” states are succeeding at marriage and “family values” more than the families in “red” states.

A new “blue” family paradigm has handsomely rewarded those who invest in women’s as well as men’s education and defer childbearing until the couple is better established. These families, concentrated in urban areas and the coasts, have seen their divorce rates fall back to the level of the 1960s, incomes rise, and nonmarital births remain rare. With later marriage has also come greater stability and less divorce.

But all is not lost as the authors of Red Families v. Blue Families suggest the following steps to alleviate the family values woes experienced in the “red” states:

(1) promote access to contraception – within marriage as well as outside it
(2) develop a greater ability to combine not only work and family, but family and education
(3) make sure the next generation stays in school, learns the skills to be employed, and cultivates values that can adapt to the future.

Booth in a Box

Sen. Joe Booth has been quite taken aback by the negative reaction from the people and from the Markell Administration over his .357 Magnum … er ah HB 357 bill. He has now taken to calling Governor Markell a liar.

Booth accused Markell of spreading misinformation, stoking the fears of preachers and anti-violence workers who staged the rally in front of a day care center. But John Thompson, a Delaware gun rights lobbyist who wrote the bill for Booth and Atkins, said on Tuesday that he did, in fact, intend for it to apply to the places Markell and the protesters fear would be forced to allow guns.

Hey Boothie, perhaps you and John Thompson need to get together and talk. Thompson, who is the head of the DSSA, an affliate of the NRA, said he intends the bill to gut all gun control regulations throughout the state of Delaware.

“This bill was written to reach any regulation by a state agency that would prohibit firearm possession or ownership,” said Thompson, a lawyer and the sportsmen’s association’s lobbyist in Legislative Hall.

So what happened here is that Booth let some freakin NRA lobbyist write his own legislation, and then Booth, the typical Republican that he is, didin’t do his homework. He doesn’t bother to actually read the legislation before he files it, and yet proceeds to tell the media and draft a bill synopsis that says the bill only applies to public housing agency. So who was spreading misinformation here, Boothie? And then little boy Boothie tells the teacher that it was really the Governor’s fault he didn’t do his homework, because the Governor didn’t call to remind him to do it.

“A simple courtesy call from the governor would have resolved any confusion about the bill,” [Booth said]. […] “It’s just a little unusual for the governor to stake out his claim without even discussing it with us,” Booth said. “Then again, the governor was in Germany, so he hadn’t had an opportunity to discuss it with us.”

You see, the problem here is that the only confusion about the bill that exists anywhere is in Booth’s own mind. The people who actually read the bill, and the person who wrote the bill, all agree that the bill guts all gun control regulations promulgated by the State of Delaware. Only Booth is confused, and that is because he didn’t read his own bill. Still, Booth continues on, stammering fast like a child caught in a lie.

Booth said any accusations that lawmakers were trying to sneak the bill through the General Assembly with deceptive wording are unfounded [except that they are well founded if you listen to the bill’s real author]. “I don’t think there was any sneaking,” he said. “What I think was sneaky or underhanded was giving a very liberal interpretation of the bill.”

This is rich!!! Once again, he is calling Jack Markell a liar, all because little Boothie didn’t read his own bill and because he had someone else do his homework, and he got caught. And unless Joe Booth thinks John Thompson and the NRA are now liberal organizations, the Governor’s interpretation of the bill is the actual interpretation of it. John Thompson and Jack Markell are in agreement as to what the bill says and what the bill does. Only Joe Booth, who didn’t write or read the bill, is left out in the cold here.

Now, you notice that John Atkins has been silent in all of this. And that is because he is a gun nut, and is opposed to all gun control regulations and legislation. John Atkins read the bill and was perfectly fine with it. And that is a perfectly legitimate position to have. It is the wrong position, but a position nonetheless. Indeed, many people downstate in Sussex County are opposed to gun control legislation. Say what you will about John Atkins (and I will say alot about the man), he is at least representative of those constituents in Sussex County.

Why isn’t Joe Booth? Booth has been running around like a chicken with its head cut off where this bill is concerned. He puts his name on a bill written by an NRA lobbyist and then is surprised that the bill overturns all gun control legislation? Really, Joe? As a Sussex County Senator, you have to wonder why Joe Booth didn’t go the Atkins route. He wouldn’t get in trouble with his constituents if he had gone all Second Amendment on our asses. So why is he dancing around?

Could it be that Joe Booth fancies himself a future in statewide politics? If that is the case, he knows full well that the bill as written won’t fly up north, where two thirds of the votes in the state are. And if that is the case, this whole episode shows that Downstate Joey is not ready for primetime.

A Quick Idea About Earmarks

As a belated follow-up to Cassandra’s wonderful post on Monday (yeah, the new guy’s sucking up. You got a problem with that?) that touched on earmark reform, I have an idea I want to throw out. This morning as I was doing my usual volunteer work (or I might have been in the bathroom — memory’s a bit hazy) I had an thought about earmark reform. While I like most of the ideas in Sen. Bennet’s plan, there is one that I think sounds better on paper than in real life, but I might have a solution.

The idea is best summarized by John McCain’s campaign promise of, “I will make them famous and you will know their names.” The problem with this is that publicizing earmarks is not a deterrent, it’s free campaign advertising. For the most part, Congressmembers don’t hide their earmarks, they campaign on them. They brag about how much money they bring home (even if they voted against it, right Mr. Castle?). The flaw in the idea of public shaming is that the only people that matter are the incumbent’s constituents. Those are also the people who benefit from the earmarks. It didn’t matter that the rest of the country saw John Murtha as a crook for all his pork-barrelling. The voters in his district saw him as a hero.

My idea is simply this — require a co-sponsor from another district on all earmarks (or maybe just larger ones over a certain threshold). This way, someone whose voters are not directly benefiting from the earmark can be held accountable. Earmarks themselves are not inherently bad. Very many send money to worthy causes and projects. When this is the case, finding a co-sponsor for your amendment should be no problem. If, on the other hand, it’s just pure pork, then ideally other legislators would want to steer clear of it and it would go nowhere.

I don’t claim this is THE SOLUTION, and I’m sure there would still be a fair amount of mutual backscratching, but it might slow down bad earmarks. But since I haven’t seen this idea anywhere else, and I know I’m not that smart, there must be a flaw in here somewhere (besides the obvious that most politicians don’t really want to limit pork). Tell me where I’ve gone wrong.

Chip Flowers’ Bold Plan

I have talked to Chip Flowers several times in the past at various political events. He and I have made small talk, or discussed small-time political analysis. After just a few minutes with him it is easy to see that he is a pretty nice guy. However, if you spend another hour with him, a new Chip Flowers emerges. This Chip Flowers is a guy with a deep understanding of how government works and can influence economic development. This Chip Flowers is a wonk that knows his stuff inside and out.

He wants to make changes. Last week, he released his bold plan called “The Flowers Framework for Restoring Prosperity“. At first blush, it appears to be a big government plan to add an army of financial warriors to the states payroll. It isn’t. The plan is a realignment of financial services already employed by the state, but spread out and operating independently and sometimes at odds with each other. Chip has confirmed to me that there are no net new hires in his plan.

Chip starts his long-form presentation with a discussion of the Treasurer’s sparse budget and description of services performed. The services performed are meager. Of the four responsibilities listed on the Treasurer’s website, one of them is office management. Seriously.

But Chip thinks that, like the US Treasury or the Treasurers of nearby states, the Treasurer can do more. The Treasurer can server as head of a financial center of excellence, providing financial advice and services to the many departments of the state. Will an investment in a public-private venture have long-term benefits to the state of Delaware or will the company seek funding from Virginia next year and switch states? Does a huge road project by DelDOT for a specific employer need make long-term financial sense? There may be people in DEDO or DelDOT that answer these questions now, but generally only to issues within their purview. The role of the Treasurer can be more of a holistic approach to economic decisions and policies.

There are certainly some hurdles that will need to be addressed, mostly on the legislative front, to make this plan a reality. That said, Chip believes that some of the potential savings that can come from this coordinated effort will help sway the legislative process and put Delaware’s treasurer more in line with the office of Treasurer in other states.

Friday Open Thread

TGIF! It looks like the wonderful spring-like sunny weather is not going to hold through the weekend, unfortunately. Let’s roll with the open thread.

Democrats overwhelmingly want to pass the health care reform bill. I understand how they’re feeling, I’m sick of the delays.

Roughly five out of six members of MoveOn favor passing the health reform bill in its current form:

Should MoveOn support or oppose the final health care bill if it looks like the plan recently proposed by President Obama?
Support 83
Oppose 17

That is a pretty resounding endorsement from the grassroots.

I know that some people here think that House Progressives could force the White House to push conservative Democrats to accept a stronger bill if the Progs refused to vote for anything less. However, if the Democratic leadership is facing two different groups of Dems demanding “give in to us or else we will kill the bill,” the leadership is just going to pressure the group whose constituency is more in favor of passing the bill as is. And clearly, House Progressives have both activist and in-district constituencies that are overwhelmingly in favor of passing the bill as is. So, the leadership will pressure the Progs as the path of least resistance.

There’s still a few progressive House members who are holding out on voting for the bill (Mike Capuano, Dennis Kucinich), however this is position is a small minority of the Democratic party. I think some progressives have been surprised at the reactions they’ve gotten when they’ve said they’re voting no

Overall, support for passing health care reform has gone up 7% in the last month. I guess opposition has peaked after people got a look at the alternatives Republicans are offering (status quo) and President Obama has made a PR push in the last couple of months. Remember – at least a third of the opposition to the bill comes from the left, who doesn’t think the bill goes far enough.

Unicorns, Ponies, Rainbows, Oh My

From our beginnings in the 18th century, the United States of America has been the underdog in the international scene. Though our underdog status has left us long ago, the American people have a penchant for rooting for the underdog that is exemplified in rooting for sports teams and characters in Hollywood movies. Some Americas even latch on to underdogs in the political arena in hopes to accomplish items in their civic and economic agenda. We have seen the far left shouting from the rooftops that health care reform is not going far enough. They site their hero Representative Dennis Kucinich as the underdog who can lead them to salvation. But this is just not the case.

Moulitsas [of DailyKos] argues that the congressman hasn’t accomplished anything at all, and — though I know I’m going to get slammed for saying this — I have to agree. Sure, it’s good to see a politician standing up for his beliefs and fighting for a point of view that might not otherwise be represented. But there are ways to do that and simultaneously be an effective legislator. Kucinich simply isn’t, and he’s never really tried hard to be. (You could also argue — I would — that the way he goes about things makes him pretty ineffective as a spokesman for his ideals.)

In fact, Kucinich has been a congressman since 1997 and only 3 pieces of legislation he has sponsored have become law. Wowsa. Simply put, you can’t call yourself a progressive if you move nothing forward. If I were a Republican, Kucinich would be my favorite Democrat Congressman — that’s how ineffective he is.

Harry Reid Eats His Wheaties

I’d like to start this post with a sincere wish for the rapid recovery of Harry Reid’s wife and daughter, who were in a serious car accident yesterday.

Health care reform looks more certain to pass any day now. One hold-up has been the distrust between the House and the Senate. The Senate is now an almost completely dysfunctional body and the House is worried that the fixes to the health care bill will not see action. There are now at least 54 Senators on board with reconciliation for the sidecar bill containing fixes to the Senate bill and Harry Reid has sent a letter of notice to Mitch McConnell that Democrats are going to pursue reconciliation:

Excerpts of Reid’s letter to Senator McConnell:

“While Republicans were distorting the facts in the health care debate and inflicting delay after needless delay, millions of Americans have continued to suffer as they struggle to afford to stay healthy, stay out of bankruptcy and stay in their homes. Thousands of Americans lose their health care every day, and tens of thousands of the uninsured have lost their lives since this debate began.”

“Many Republicans now are demanding that we simply ignore the progress we’ve made, the extensive debate and negotiations we’ve held, the amendments we’ve added (including more than 100 from Republicans) and the votes of a supermajority in favor of a bill whose contents the American people unambiguously support. We will not. We will finish the job.”

“As you know, the vast majority of bills developed through reconciliation were passed by Republican Congresses and signed into law by Republican Presidents – including President Bush’s massive, budget-busting tax breaks for multi-millionaires. Given this history, one might conclude that Republicans believe a majority vote is sufficient to increase the deficit and benefit the super-rich, but not to reduce the deficit and benefit the middle class. Alternatively, perhaps Republicans believe a majority vote is appropriate only when Republicans are in the majority. Either way, we disagree.”

“At the end of the process, the bill can pass only if it wins a democratic, up-or-down majority vote. If Republicans want to vote against a bill that reduces health care costs, fills the prescription drug ‘donut hole’ for seniors and reduces the deficit, you will have every right to do so.”

Do you get the feeling that Harry Reid is completely fed up with the Republicans’ dishonest whining to the press?

I want to let this part savor for a while:

Given this history, one might conclude that Republicans believe a majority vote is sufficient to increase the deficit and benefit the super-rich, but not to reduce the deficit and benefit the middle class. Alternatively, perhaps Republicans believe a majority vote is appropriate only when Republicans are in the majority. Either way, we disagree.

I love the sound of a smackdown in the morning.

Mike Gave Us Quarters

You will remember when I first came to Delaware Liberal, my new compatriots were kind enough to allow me to bring over a logo I used on my old blog “Daily Delaware,” the one with the Caesar Rodney quarter. I did not learn until many months later that our illustrious founder Jason330 was kind of reluctant to do that, since Mike Castle was the author of the 50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act of 1997 that created the 50 State Quarter Program, and since Jason330 was Mike Castle’s mortal enemy. I felt kinda bad about that.

I was put in mind of that after reading the latest Kavips:

If you haven’t followed closely, the local media is pushing for Castle. Which means … if you want change, Mike Castle is exactly the person you do not want to vote for.

If you like inaction, people who say one thing and vote another, and prefer someone who sells Delaware out in a heartbeat to the whims of the National Republican Party, then Mike Castle is your man…

If you have ever heard Chris Coons speak, you know he is the future of Delaware. Running New Castle County, is a thankless job… especially during a time of financial collapse. But for 10 years, Chris Coons has done just that… While Mike Castle was wandering the halls of Congress sort of like Spinal Tap lost in the labyrinth of passageways underneath their venue, Chris Coons was getting things done with less…

Sometimes you have not to look at what was accomplished, but at how much was accomplished out of nothing… and that will probably be the legacy of Chris Coons during this decade.

Chris Coons built something out of shrinking revenues. Mike gave us quarters…

Now that is a slogan. It must be something to spend nearly 2 decades in Congress, and your crowning legislative achievement is redesigning the quarter. Thanks Mike.

Tells

Last week Glenn Beck called on his cult like followers to investigate their church’s website to see if the word “social justice” anywhere. And if they found those words, they were instructed, nee ordered to leave their churches immediately. Because he says those words are code for Nazism and Communism. Yes, that’s right.

Glenn Beck called Jesus Christ a Nazi.

James Martin, S.J. in the wonderfully titled “Glenn Beck to Jesus: Drop Dead.”

Glenn Beck is, in essence, saying “Leave the Catholic church.” Or, if you like, the Catholic church is a Nazi church. (Which would have surprised Alfred Delp, Rupert Mayer and Maximilian Kolbe.) Or a Communist one. (Which would have surprised Jerzy Popieluszko and Karol Wojtyla).

But Glenn Beck is saying something else, which might get lost in the translation: Leave Christianity. Again and again in the Gospels, Jesus points to our responsibility to care for the poor, to work on their behalf, to stand with them. In fact, when asked how his followers would be judged, Jesus doesn’t say that it will be based on where you worship, or how you pray, or how often you go to church, or even what political party you believe in. He says something quite different: It depends on how you treat the poor.

In the Gospel of Matthew (Chapter 25) he tells his surprised disciples, that when you are meeting the poor, you are meeting him… Ignoring the poor, and ignoring what keeps them poor, is, quite simply, unchristian. Indeed, the poor are the church in many ways.

Now, I am a Catholic. So Christ’s teachings concerning “social justice” (a term, by the way, that was not coined by any Nazi or Communist or even a wide eyed Liberal, but by Jesuit priest over 160 years ago) are quite familiar to me. But I do not know how familiar they are to Protestants or Evangelical Christians. And I say that not in an accusatory tone but rather in an ignorant one, for I was not raised Protestant and I am not an Evangelical, I do not know what emphasis is placed on Christ’s actual teachings in a Protestant church or in Evangelical circles, but I will gladly take a lesson from any of our Protestant or even Evangelical readers. But truth be told, there has always been a schism between Catholics and Protestants over Church practices, rules and emphasis (i.e. Catholics place much more emphasis on Mary, Mother of Jesus), so I truly wonder if Christ’s teachings regarding social justice, or, concerning the poor, are not emphasized by Protestants.

And if that is the case, then perhaps that is where Glenn Beck is coming from, if he is even a Protestant or was raised one (I don’t make it a practice to know or even care about the religious backgrounds or preferences of anyone). If he is ignorant of Catholic emphasis on Christ’s teachings as I am of Protestant ones, then perhaps that explains this new tirade. If he is unaware that Jesus Christ, Son of God, actually cared about the poor; and instead sees the term “social justice” as some kind of code word for liberalism or some kind of plot by the latter to take over the church, then that would perhaps explain it. I am not sure why I am bending over backwards here to rationalize Glenn Beck, because I could just simply act like the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue and call Beck an anti-Catholic bigot of the first order and be done with it. And isn’t it a tell on Donohue’s part that we have not heard anything from him concerning Glenn Beck?

Speaking of tells, this whole episode concerning Beck v. Social Justice reveals many tells. Glenn Beck is pretending today to be some down-to-earth Populist/tea bagger, but the truth is, he is your run of the mill conservative Republican who disdains the poor and favors the rich. And this whole aversion to “social justice” or “caring for the poor” is a tell of that. It betrays Beck to his cult like populist masses, who supposedly are furious about bailouts of the banks and the rich and would favor some social justice of their own. And if teabaggers are not upset about Beck railing against the horrors of social justice (and it doesn’t appear that they are), isn’t that a tell of them?

Coming back to Glenn Beck v. the Catholic Church, Beck “doubled down” on his screed this week, as Steve Benen puts it:

Today, Beck returned to the subject, insisting that the notion of social justice is “a perversion of the Gospel,” and “not what Jesus would say.” He wasn’t kidding.

He went on to say that Americans should be skeptical of religious leaders who are “basing their religion on social justice,” and explained his fear that concern for social justice is a problem “infecting all” faith traditions.

Beck’s condemnations aren’t going over well in some faith communities. The Rev. Jim Wallis, a prominent evangelical figure and president of the Sojourners network, argued yesterday, “I don’t know if Beck is just strange, just trying to be controversial, or just trying to make money. But in any case, what he has said attacks the very heart of our Christian faith, and Christians should no longer watch his show.”

“Not what Jesus would say?” But, Glenn, he said it. “It is in the Bible!!!” as many of the radical right often say when defending their positions. And I am heartened to see that the Rev. Jim Wallis, a protestant evangelical, said what he said, for it means that this truly is not yet another division between the two denominations of the same faith. All this is about is one little ignorant man with a massive Napoleon complex, who fears the poor and black people, and will scream anything, literally ANYTHING, to get people to pay attention to him. He will even scream that Jesus H. Christ is a Nazi.

I promise this is the last (and first) time I will ever try to rationalize Glenn Beck. My brain hurts. Where’s the alcohol?