By The Right Scoop


Beck opened the year with a new theme song (included in the video) and a monologue that should set the tone for the year. He’s got a new attitude and he’s ready to set a new course that begins with the refounding of America, which will be a fundamental transformation.

He appears to read from this for the most part (with embellishments) and at the end adds more to it. He went long in this first segment and that’s why it’s 17 minutes.

Enjoy!

***

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop

Trending Now

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • Diamondback

    Soros says “Americans must get used to the New World Order.”

    I say:

    We ARE getting ready for the NWO George!

    We’ve been stockpiling battle weapons and billions of rounds of ammunition for two years already.

    Bring on those Blue Helmets.

    They make might fine targets.

    Just sayin’

    • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

      Um, didn’t you meant his for the headlines thread?

      • Diamondback

        Oops! I don’t think you had the comments opened at the time I posted this.

        You can move it if you like, I don’t know how (other than copy and paste).

        • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

          I can’t move it. Sorry.

  • Diamondback

    Soros says “Americans must get used to the New World Order.”

    I say:

    We ARE getting ready for the NWO George!

    We’ve been stockpiling battle weapons and billions of rounds of ammunition for two years already.

    Bring on those Blue Helmets.

    They make might fine targets.

    Just sayin’

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UJLLKPIA6RZIUJL3LKR3WUBD3Y Humphrey Ploughjogger

    Why does America need to be “refound” or “fundmentally transformed?” When did this country lose it’s way? I have yet to once take a history course in college or read a book that states what day or event caused us to lose our way. And why do the far right nationalists and dominionists that falsely claim to be the inheritors of the Reagan revolution hate this country and the Constitution?

    Sure America has it’s share of problems.But where have we ever failed to overcome them and make this country a better place?

    Yes, most Americans are ignorant about our history, but people like Beck and Barton are part of that problem.Any serious student of history knows and can easily point out all their mistakes and often times,lies.Like that American “exceptionalism” is not a founding principle.No one had even heard of it until a French aristocrat coined the phrase in the 1830’s.Not a single Founder ever believed in such a silly statement.As for Enlightenment,isn’t that something the reconstructionists fight against as the reactionaries they are.

    But maybe Beck has come to his senses and he will only have actual historians on his show.That’d be a welcomed step forward as it relates to teaching Americans actual history.

    • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

      I doesn’t matter who Beck brought on. They would all be discredited just as you feel Barton has, even though he can back up everything he says.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UJLLKPIA6RZIUJL3LKR3WUBD3Y Humphrey Ploughjogger

        Barton’s facts have been exposed and refuted time and time again.He is not even an accredited historian.He has even admitted to making up quotes.His website has a page with quotes he can’t prove that any of the Founders actually said.If Beck had on a historian such as Alan Taylor or Joseph Ellis,how would they be discredited? Just these two example are regarded as experts in their fields,have won countless awards, and their works are sited time and again in serious works of history.I can’t find one example of Barton’s work being sited by a serious historian.

        • Anonymous

          My opinion of Barton aside, his allies and actions show very clearly the reason why Barton is not cited in academia (a dirty word to people like him). The attempt is not made present these ideas in academia at all, but to politicians, the lay-public, and the judiciary.

          Barton has allied in the past with the Discovery Institute, and both share an almost identical idea of a step-by-step plan of how to disseminate their ideas.

          They come up with an idea, they sell it to the people who WANT to hear a reinforcement of their own beliefs, they then use those people’s support to reach politicians or court cases to have their ideas enacted in judicial ruling or legislative mandate.

          That is not an honest academic battle of ideas, it’s disingenuous activism on par with what they routinely condemn.

          As for Beck’s remarks about enlightenment, he was saying “enlightenment,” not “THE Enlightenment.” He had a very different meaning in mind, I think, but that’s a guess on my part.

    • Diamondback

      This is not the Huffington Post. You’re obviously lost. Go spew your idiocy elsewhere please.

      Thank you.

      • Anonymous

        Exposure to contradicting points of view is healthy, it removes one from a radicalizing echo-chamber and gives the opportunity to examine the claims of others and ourselves.

        It also gives the chance to have a dialogue and potentially convince someone who doesn’t quite agree. That’s why I enjoy coming here, I agree with people maybe half of the time, but there is always a good exchange of ideas/opinion. It even civil most of the time, lol.

        • Diamondback

          Dan,

          I believe I had replied to HumphreyPloughwhatever.

          I have personally checked out Barton and Beck on several occasions and subjects and have found them reliable. Even if I were to find a mistake here and there, it would not change my confidence because we ALL make a mistake now and then.

          Therefore, you cannot convince me otherwise.

          I just don’t like it when people make comments and claims without providing evidence to back them up.

          And, by the way, what makes you think I would put any confidence in a liberal troll academic? They’re a big part of the problem in the country and are primarily responsible for the rewriting of history and distortion of historical facts. In other words, academics are totally unreliable and untrustworthy.

          • Anonymous

            All history has in it a degree of interpretation and bias from any instant we raise it from the level of basic dry irrelevant numbers and names to the point where we are to apply it’s lessons to present events.

            There are always also new pieces of the story coming to light. When this new information is anything but a complete reaffirmation of the present consensus then it must be taken into account and the present understanding is to be shifted according with it. This process is revising or REWRITING or REVISIONISM. It’s a legitimate process of compiling records of history. We will never know every detail, so when we stumble across something knew we must update to account for it.

            Interpretations are like opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one, but not all opinions are equal, some are better supported. People are free to their opinion but it should be acknowledged as such, to declare personal interpretation as objective truth is hubris.

            If Barton were an honest historian he wouldn’t make appeals to the layperson and politicians, he would publish, present and argue his findings. The conspiracy of liberal academia is overblown, from personal experience.

            That of course, is my subjective opinion, and I may be attributing the process of historical consensus to something too similar to the scientific community.

            Academic isn’t a dirty word, either, you get your information from academics the same as Humphrey(Mickey), you just don’t like the ones he cites.

        • aleon

          Your point is well taken by “me”, and I agree. But after all is distilled, into the very essence, it is a collection of individual responsibility that we as individuals must be responsible for ourselves and thus become the collective. Opinion is based on a vast myriad of influence, but as Glenn states, we are at a cross road. We either come together as a collective of like minded people, or we submit as the oppressed. The line is being drawn, and the masses are taking sides. It is time that the majority is determined, and the direction forward is charted. Glenn has decided which side he is on, and is rallying his base of, like minded, people to join him to take a stand. He has obviously garnered a very large and expanding constituency in hopes of capturing the majority, and projecting that into the future. It is we who agree or disagree that will determine the outcome.

          • Anonymous

            I think you present a false choice, collectivization or submission. Unfortunately collectivization is ultimately submission in it’s own right as the individual is lost to the arbitrary whims of the collective which shift as often as the tide.

            The third option, if that is indeed the presented choice, is to not play the game, and I will abstain, even to the detriment of myself.

  • Anonymous

    It was a pretty invigorating segment, I’ll give him that. Believe whatever you want Mr. Beck, so long as it leads to more freedom for everyone rather than the imposition of one set of ideas on everyone else.

    Happy New Year.

    • aleon

      You either believe in individual responsibility and freedom, or live under the imposition of one set of rules. I think Glenn made his point.

      • Anonymous

        You’re correct, it’s one or the other. Glenn however has a pretty bad record of consistency regarding this, one minute he advocates the personal responsibility necessary for freedom, then the next he advocates the State adopting his his idea of the Christian norms for the rest of us.

  • grim89

    I’m getting sick and tired of people claiming that history is a science. History is a social science there for the scientific method is applicable only to the facts as in ware and what happened. All the other bull written in most history books is just a theory that the author came to after studying the facts. Which can’t be proved or disproved since we cant perform experiments to test it you know the thing that science is based on REPEATABLE CONTROLLED EXPERIMENTS. The fact that historians agree on something isn’t science.

  • Garysgig59

    2 Chronicles 7:14 (New International Version)

    14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

    All we do outside of God’s will is destined to fail.

  • Anonymous

    You think Becks employees all get together to form a really big ladder to help him get up on the high horse he rides? I once injoyed some of the information he presented, but he’s never seemed like the sharpest knife in the drawer, but developing a 7 step self emprovment program in cohorts with a celiberty-rehab shrink, and Oh yah the book that “He” wrote ($$Ka-Ching$$) along with the other dozen”He”wrote last year(right). I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again, If this is the kind of intellectual fire power we’re counting on to turn back the tide of unconstitutional goverment “We Are Screwed”.

  • Josie

    This was fabolous rs, thanks for posting it. Great way to start the New Year.