So apparently Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity are forming an alliance…

Glenn Beck explained on his radio show today that he, Mark Levin and Sean Hannity are forming an alliance since they all feel the same way about our current batch of Republicans. Now I’m not exactly sure what this will look like going forward, however it is apparently a thing now. And Beck would also love to have Rush come on board as well as you’ll hear in the video below:

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.
  • It’s the Rebel Alliance vs. The Empire!

    We need to make sure hot chicks are involved though.

    #DanaLoesch
    @DLoesch

    • deTocqueville1

      LOL! I can think of several.

    • A Datum

      You forgot

      #SECupp
      #DanaPerino

      • Laurel

        No thanks on those two.

        • nibblesyble

          I agree!

      • Longiron

        Both are establishment RINOS. Perino was Bush press SEC. Cupp what did she ever do ??? She should be a lap dancer. No offense to LAP dancers.

        • crosshr

          and watching these two that I love reminds me of how much I love the OO7 girls, and can’t trust them for a swim suit.No offense swim wear 🙂

          • BearNJ

            Come on guys how did Andrea Tantaros not make this list??

      • kssturgis62

        An Atheist Rino and a GW Rino. Wow yeah that is conservatism. No thank you.

      • StandProudNow

        Dana Perino????????????????
        She’s a big Rhino!! Establishment all the way.

      • sarahsupporter

        ahem cough cough, Sarah Palin anybody???

        • Charles W. Leeds

          Hell Yes.

      • Garym

        Both of those ladies run away from conservatives when said conservatives are being attacked. No thank you.

      • RWrad

        Cupp maybe, Perino = 100% RINO

      • speakez6

        Perino sucks, a Bushie and not even terribly bright.

    • Conniption Fitz

      Michelle Malkin!

      • RWrad

        Coulter and Ingraham

        • Shootist

          Old and used up.

      • speakez6

        Solid choice.

    • Kenneth Leon Martin

      Judge Jeanine. Love that woman! She is fearless.

  • Longiron

    Get the king RUSH involved and the LIBS, DEMS, RINO GOP will kill themselves

    • RWrad

      Not sure they’ll go that far, but they’ll for sure shi* themselves.

  • New Dixie Nation

    We should all unite and split the country.

    • Conservative_Hippie

      LOL, I don’t think that’s the purpose.

    • A Datum

      What a silly response. Uniting is the only way to save this country!

  • Winger

    Also getting the ‘Chicks on the Right’ and Matt Walsh involved would be epic. They’re social media savvy who I think would help spread the word effectively.

  • Conservative_Hippie

    Great news!

  • A Datum

    AMEN! IT IS ABOUT TIME!

  • A Datum

    I’m thinking it’s time for a write-in campaign to flood Rush with emails about joining Glenn, Mark and Sean in this noble quest. The time is now!

  • DHardy

    Rush is so huge it really should be THEM Joining Rush….but I think it’s a good idea either way…

    • Longiron

      If RUSHBO gets involved their combined audience would be about 40 Million +. that can win an election IMO.

      • Conservative_Hippie

        good point!

    • Crassus

      Doubtful that Rush will ever join. With Rush it’s all about him. He can’t stand to share the spotlight with anyone.

      • Eleanor Baldwin

        Rush had better get on board. The first show to be chopped under the new “fairness” dictatorship will be his.

  • warpsix

    “Let’s roll”

  • nibblesyble

    Out of the three of them, Levin is the one that holds steady in his thoughts and actions, but whenever our side teams up it is cause for Praising the Lord!

    • crosshr

      Truly, Amen ! I’ll stay in prayer and carpentry. I’m 121% behind these fellas

  • Laurel

    Technically speaking he is a part of it since Rush has been hammering the GOP on the topic of conservatism vs. RINO’s for two decades. In reality Beck, Hannity, and Levin are just now catching up to Rush.

    Regardless the teaming is welcome news.

    • PhillyCon

      Actually, Rush has really been harping on the Republican Party lately. It’s nice to hear bc the Rove types don’t like it.

      • Laurel

        Yep but he has been against a lot of the idiots like McCain since I started listening to him when he was in Sacramento.

        • PhillyCon

          He made a point today saying “why does the Republican Party have to re brand itself if according to the politico the Dems have given up getting the House back in order to save the Senate?”
          It was a great point and a very subtle dig at the party. That’s what I like about him. He doesn’t have to hit you over the head to make a point.

        • $14280160

          I don’t think he thought much of Beck’s CPAC speech, though. Neither did Levin, I’m certain. I’ve heard from other people that Rush has been more critical of the GOP as of late.

          • Laurel

            He has always been critical of RINO’s but he now has stated unequivocally and undeniably that is what ‘establishment’ means and is. He has always distinguished the conservatives from everyone else and like Coulter he states without reservation Republicans snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
            However I do think Rush will always take 99% of the Republicans over any Democrat. He has a pretty clear pecking order.

      • RWrad

        Screw Rove and the horse he rode in on.

  • Conniption Fitz

    Heh. Hope Rush will join and these guys can make some noise to drown out the Sorry Soros media.

  • sDee

    How can Hannity do anything to expose the progressive republicans if he is at Fox?

    He must be leaving?

    • $73426719

      Pfffft. Yeah. Like he was supposed to be leaving New York?

  • wtd

    Inhale, exhale,inhale . . .pinch me to confirm I just heard a formal alliance between Beck, Levin and Hannity. . .with potential for Limbaugh joining . . .WOW! Now this REAL HOPE for REAL PROGRESS for the America I believe in,the America my parents risked life and limb to immigrate to sixty+ years ago.

  • kssturgis62

    Glenn and Mark okay. But not buying Sean.

    After a few years, Sean has lost it. He is not the Conservative that people claim him to be or that he himself Claims to be.

    Oh he stepped in it with Cuomo. Sean, Cuomo didn’t ever say you personally were not welcome in New York. but Sean made it about him. He was saying that none of us were welcome there as Candidates, Visitors or Residents. But Sean made it all about him.

    Sean has a panel of Congressmen after the State of the union, and oh he is just FAWNING OVER THEM. His eyes lit up like he was standing in front of Clark Gable and Carole Lombard.

    Does he hit them with Strong Questions??? NO. When he asks are you in favor of term limits, no one RAISES their hands, and he shows the backside, and only 2 raised their hands and he doesn’t tell us who they are.

    He is BEGGING THEM TO GET BEHIND 5 Issues and make the win happen. BEGGING THEM to quit bending to Obama and when are you going to take care of them.

    Glenn is Right. Sean has a Place, it is with the GOP. You know that same GOP that he loves and is best friends With Karl Rove in.

    • $73426719

      Sean’s problem is mushiness. Beck’s is pure hucksterism.

      • Laurel

        Very succinctly said!

        • Eleanor Baldwin

          But they have the microphones. We MUST get organized and united. MUST, MUST, MUST.

          • Laurel

            Valid concern. However we must not just put anyone as face forward because they have a microphone. Lots of people have one.

  • $73426719

    Beware Beck. He seeks alliances for his own ends, not ours. Again, beware Beck.

    • Agreed

    • Conservative_Hippie

      Confused….
      Are you saying Beck beware of someone or We should beware of Beck?

      • $73426719

        Put it this way. When I say “Beware Dog”, I sure ain’t warning the dog.

        • Conservative_Hippie

          okay got ya.

    • Crassus

      That’s more Hannity’s style iyam.

  • 2yves

    I think Karl Rove is the guy that got between these guys and caused a dispute. I think Karl Rove used Hannity quite a bit to be his mouthpiece. I am guessing the dispute may have been over who should be the 2012 candidate. I don’t really know but those are my guesses. I would like to find out what it was all about though.

    • A Datum

      I thought of Rove, but I don’t think it can be him for the simple fact that Levin and Rove don’t walk. And Glenn indicated that this mystery person was speaking to all of them.

      Also, I think this person would be someone you’d be less likely to suspect. Maybe a Michael Steele (who I have nothing against) or another talk show host lower down in the ratings. Maybe even an elected official.

      I’d like to know who it is, of course. But these are classy guys and I doubt they’ll reveal who did it.

      • Cindy Nowicki

        I was thinking it could have been Dick Armey. Dick was, for quite some time, an important part of the GOP. I’m sure he was friends with Sean and Mark over the course of the years.. He was also on the board of Freedom Works, (until he was fired) and had access to Glenn.

        This does somehow make sense to me.

      • Crassus

        My original guess was Bill O’Reilly who’s always been friendly with Glenn going back to Glenn’s CNN days and works with Hannity at Fox. The only problem with O’Reilly is that he and Levin have never been friendly.

    • Conservator1

      If I was to make an educated guess, I would look for another talk radio host or someone working in the industry. There are far too many possibilities to even attempt to make a guess. But it would be someone who communicated with the three hosts regularly. And that’s a good place to start.

  • Bill589

    United we stand at our strongest. I also believe Palin, Lee, Cruz, and other patriot leaders will form an alliance. They’ll decide who’s best in what capacity – including who to promote for President.

    The GOPe would love, like in 2012, a divided, splintered, TPMovement.

    I pray I’m right, but I don’t believe the GOPe will face disorganized patriots this time. Imperfect all of us, even our patriot leaders on the air and as politicians, but the strength of having the truth on our side and being united in cause – is why I firmly believe, ‘We win. They lose.’

    • A Datum

      I don’t know that the Tea Party was splintered in 2012 so much as it was underfunded due to the IRS attacks. Expect that to continue this year. Hopefully people are fed up enough that they’ll contribute even if their dollars aren’t tax deductible.

      • Bill589

        Maybe splintered is too strong a word. But we, including our leaders, never seemed to unite like we appear to be doing now.

    • Conservative_Hippie

      Palin, Lee, Cruz – Now that’s a nice alliance!

  • Stehekin912

    When I was in psychology class in school, our class was split up into groups. Each group was given a number of cut up pieces of paper equal to the number of people in the group. the pieces of paper were cut up squares. The assignment was for the class to reassemble the squares. The groups first checked their own pieces to see if they could make squares. When they found they could not make the squares on their own, they went out to the other groups, put their pieces together, and then as a class, made the squares out of the pieces.
    Time to make squares, class!

    • GaltLine

      It might be our variously shaped conservative, Tea Party, Independent, libertarian squares don’t jive with the Republican party puzzle pieces, but fit in with some other party. Constitution Party?

      • Stehekin912

        Could be!!! 🙂

        • GaltLine

          With the three or four uniting this could be a real negotiation. As principled conservatives we will not alter our puzzle pieces. The Republican establishment will alter theirs or go the way of the Whigs. More than just Dems should be worried.

  • LIBERTYUSA

    …then EL Rush BO will be on board for the 2016 Presidential Election,

    guaranteed .”

  • sDee

    I am not counting on anyone.

    We the people are truly on our own.

    We have to show up, contribute, volunteer, make calls and knock on doors to get true constitutional candidates through to their primary victory.

    • $73426719

      I CANNOT AGREE ENOUGH.

      • $12112543

        And I couldn’t agree too much.
        The Tea Party working on state legislature to increase the number of Liberty Amendment Conservatives is the most important battle.

    • Laurel

      BRAVO!

    • straight 510

      “We the people” can’t beat an established political party. We are not going to agree 100% with anyone. Conservative vote is split at least three ways; republicans, libertarians and tea party. We need to come together or give the election to far left dems again. America cannot afford to do that.

      • Kenneth Leon Martin

        Every day more and more Americans are claiming to be Independent. There is a reason for that. They are fed up with the political posturing and gamesmanship. The truth is, run a real candidate, keep the elections halfway legal, and conservatives win by a landslide. The problem is, Republicans are doing everything they can to give the election away again. We need to clean house this cycle. No traitors, no Rinos, no fakes, or sellouts. We have the numbers. We just have to stop being lazy and watch the elections to stop the cheating. We can take this country back, but if we compromise our principles in doing it, who are we to get upset when our politicians do the same?

  • crosshr

    Truly there’s strength in numbers, still we do need all the faithful few. I am glad these fellas decide to take this direction, for as we see now, the rinos already have a set plan of things their way. SO, let’s PLAY BALL ! shall we ?

  • johnfromjersey

    Folks, I believe that 2014 will be the last chance to peacefully take America back from the hands of those who wish to “fundamentally transform” her. If we the people sit on their butts this time, the only alternative will not be pretty.

  • $14280160

    Glenn Beck at a talk-show convention:

    Here’s what happened: The talk-show people on the panel all turned on me and started to tell me how we had a “responsibility” to “teach” our listeners how “important” those Democratic primaries are.It’s that high-and-mighty, self-absorbed, self-important nonsense that makes me want to kill every talk-show host in America.And I’m not alone.Talk-show hosts in America, look out. The American public is about to pick up a torch and pitchfork and come looking for you.

    • Glen Beck’s a jerk. I really don’t pay much attention to him. He’s no Conservative, and he’s the weakest link, in any alliance.

      • $14280160

        I’ll give you that first point. I think he’s a conservative, but for some reason has wanted to curry favor with libertarians these last three years or so. If you’re talking about his attacks on Newt and whatnot, I don’t know what to make of that except for I definitely don’t think that Newt was the ultimate conservative and I don’t think he had a very good chance of winning. His attacks on him didn’t make sense to me though. As far as him being in an alliance, I never heard Beck say anything about Levin, and he occasionally plugged Hannity’s specials on Fox. If you’re referring to the Breitbart tiff, that’s another thing that puzzled me. I think both were at fault, (Beck more so than Breitbart).

        Basically, the point I was trying to make with that quote was how much Beck has changed and how lame he’s become. He’s changed a lot, mostly for the worse.

        • No, he’s not a Conservative, and many times has identified himself as a liberaltarian. He’s supported left wing assclowns like Ron Paul, and is even pro gay (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/glenn-beck-is-pro-gay-marriage/). I couldn’t care less about what he says about Gingrich, who isn’t a Conservative, either.

          • $14280160

            Pro-gay? What do you mean by that? The story you’ve linked to isn’t there.

            Beck is nowhere near Ron Paul libertarianism. He is rejected by libertarians all time and whines incessantly about it. He has taken Ron Paul to task a few times, though.

            • http://victoriajackson.com/10403/glenn-beck-pro-gay

              As for being ‘near’ Ron Paul, he’s still in the same, dirty pool, and, like I said, he’s a self identified libertarian, which I have ZERO respect for. His so-called repudiations of Paul are insignificant, in the light of his slobbering over him, earlier.

              • $14280160

                You’ll still have to explain to me what the video is about. I can’t view it with my setup. Beck’s position on gay marriage, though, has been for a while now that government shouldn’t be in the marriage business and as far as things go, gay marriage isn’t the biggest threat to liberty.

                You’ll be hard-pressed to find a bigger supporter of Israel than Beck which is one thing that you can’t say for Paul. I do agree that the libertarian label is fantastically stupid.

                • Laurel

                  Sorry but you are absolutely undeniably incorrect. As society unravels by defining deviancy down we will get less liberty in order to keep the peace. Making marriage a right, for any sexuality including heterosexual, not only gets government involved but makes all sexuality in regards to marriage a right.
                  Beck’s stance is that of a coward and moral relativist.

                • $14280160

                  What? How is getting the government out of marriage making marriage a right? George Washington and Martha didn’t feel the need to get their marriage approved from the government.

                • Laurel

                  Do I need to teach you civilization 101?! And yes they did get government involved since it was illegal to marry your daughter or sister or pet even back then.

                • $14280160

                  If you think that George Washington had a marriage license, you are mistaken. Lincoln didn’t have one either.

                  Still not sure how not having the government involved in marriage makes marriage is a right. The government recognizing gay marriage would make it a right. But the government staying out of the marriage means that the government would have no opinion on the matter.

                • Laurel

                  Their marriage was government sanctioned regardless of whether they had a slip of paper or not. The law allowed it.
                  If you are not sure how government involvement makes it a right then you not only do not grasp the arguments put forth by the ‘marriage equality’ crowd but then you also do not grasp how the law itself is applied to the public at large.
                  Really you sanction all forms of ‘marriage’ at all levels and don’t have the guts to say so.

                • $14280160

                  You’re misunderstanding me. Beck’s position is to get the government out of marriage.

                  What are you getting at anyway? Do you want to outlaw homosexuality?

                • CaMaven

                  No. It’s already against God’s law.

                • Laurel

                  Your question is absurd and ridiculous.
                  I know what Beck and all liberaltarians are getting at..and it’s absurd as well since government has always been involved in marriage not only in this country but around the globe since people started forming civilizations. A piece of paper has nothing to do with it what so ever and if it did then we wouldn’t have such a thing as common law marriage and Thomas Jefferson could of married Sally Hemmings.

                • $14280160

                  Your question is absurd and ridiculous.

                  No, I think what we have here is a failure to communicate. But, I kind of think I know what you’re talking about now.

                  I know what Beck and all liberaltarians are getting at..

                  No, you don’t. most libertarians are the complete opposite of Beck on this issue. Most libertarians actively root for gay marriage, i.e., more government involvement. Beck thinks that you shouldn’t need a piece of paper from the government to get married. Lars Larson, a talk show host in Oregon who is not at all a libertarian (he’s conservative}, has the same stance.

                  government has always been involved in marriage not only in this country but around the globe since people started forming civilizations. A piece of paper has nothing to do with it what so ever

                  So am I getting this right? You believe the same thing that Beck does, right? He thinks that you don’t need a piece a paper from the government to get married. That’s what you’re saying, right? If that’s not right, please clarify your position.

                • Laurel

                  Is there a reason you are doing a circle jerk and then trying to repeat my words ad nausea because you have nothing else?! How very Alinsky of you.

                  What I am telling you, Beck, and all of the other Liberaltarians is government has always been involved in marriage. Your stupid ridiculous evidence of ‘George Washington and Abraham Lincoln didn’t have a license’ is not evidence since their marriages were sanctioned by the government and the law. Yes we had marriage laws on the books. Civilization has had marriage laws long before anyone ever came to this continent. Rome was the first to give rights to women in regards to marriage.

                  As to Beck and what he believes, and Larson and what he believes…SO?! Unlike you I do not formulate my opinions based upon the opinions of others. I can and do think for myself. I don’t turn on the radio or spin the dial to formulate an opinion or pluck it out of the head of another…but you go ahead. It is apparent that is why you lack even a rudimentary understanding of civics, Western Civilization, and then must twist and contort, and go on to extrapolate and supplicate even further.

                  Anyone stating the government has no business in marriage is a nitwit of the highest caliber and a complete coward. Government has always been in the business of marriage because it is marriage and family that is the basis for civilization and the continuance of it including keeping it stable. It is in the interest of government, especially a government of ‘We The People’ to have a stable society that continues on.

                  As to the law…piece of paper notwithstanding, and I am presuming you are correct that George and Abe didn’t have license, the government was involved. Marriages by law had to be witnessed for starters. You could not marry a person of color. You could not marry a sibling or parent. You could not marry an animal, so on and so forth. So yes government was indeed involved in marriage. And remember the government had to recognize that marriage by any and all standards so the things like children and inheritance were also recognized.

                • $14280160

                  The only reason I cited Larson was to disprove your belief that it is sinister libertarians who want the government out of marriage. As I said before, most hardcore libertarians fully advocate for gay marriage.

                  Getting the government out of the marriage business means that it should be replaced with something like civil unions that one can enter without regard to gender or familial relations. In
                  other words, strip it of its moral, romantic, and historical connotations. If two brothers want to confer upon one another the
                  benefits of what is currently considered spousehood, they would be
                  allowed to without (social) expectations of intimacy, monogamy, and
                  whatnot. (totally ripping off some commenters comment here).

                  Do I hold that view? eh, kind of, kind of not. Needless to say, I’m not as fired up about it as you.

                • Laurel

                  Larson is a conservative in your opinion…nothing more. You cited him for gravitas otherwise you wouldn’t have cited him at all. Unless one has done very specific research to reach a very specific well supported conclusion citing another is what gangs do when they have nothing else. “Well so and so agrees with me!” Sorry but that doesn’t fly with me…ever. There was not a single thing in your citing him or Beck that could be construed as academic. Most that take the stance that Larson and Beck has, take it becuase they can’t stand the heat of being called a big meanie.

                  Once again…Government has always been in the marriage business. ALWAYS! Saying the tired old line of ‘getting them out’ is naive at best and ignorant at worst. Government has always regulated marriage since it is the best interest of government to do so. The purpose of government is to seek the continuance of a stable productive society. Marriage is a big part of that. Government regulates marriage by restricting who can and cannot get married and what marriages are recognized in regards to the law due to things like property, inheritance, and taxes. You cannot and will not ever remove government from marriage.

                  I’m fired up because you keep coming at me with nonsensical arguments that are devoid of history and reality. If you are going to make the case for gay marriage formulate a better argument based upon factual information otherwise you wasting my time.

                  And you can try and take the emotion out of the civil union argument all you want but the gays put it back in since civil unions passed twice here in California and that wasn’t good enough. And what is this stupid statement? “strip it of its moral, romantic, and historical connotations. If two brothers want to confer upon one another the
                  benefits of what is currently considered spousehood, they would be
                  allowed to without (social) expectations of intimacy, monogamy, and
                  whatnot. (totally ripping off some commenters comment here).”
                  That has got to be the dumbest thing I have seen written yet. So you are all for incest are you…good to know. Apparently you don’t realize the legal implications of sex either. Ever hear of consummation laws?! You also don’t understand the impact of not being monogamous has on the mental as well as the physical. You think your positions are new but in reality they are not. the world has evolved to it’s stance on marriage due to the mistakes already made of the past. Homosexual marriage is not a new debate by any stretch since the Romans and the Greeks had it as well.

                • $14280160

                  Slow down, I didn’t say anything about endorsing incest. Talk about using Alinsky tactics. All I’m talking about is contracts where people get to inherit certain things, perhaps in order to avoid government taking those things. Now moving away from your incest assumptions, I don’t need the government to decide my (hypothetical) marriage is a marriage. They could label it as person A and person B for all I care. And if people wanted to get married, they could go to their churches and that would be good enough for them. Do I think that this is all going to happen? No, it’s probably not happening. Knowing it’s not going to happen, I will vote against gay marriage every time it’s on the ballot. I’m fine with giving them civil unions, but not with calling it marriage.

                  I do agree with you to an extent that Beck is being a coward, because he has not copped to being against gay marriage for quite some time, he usually just says “get the government out of marriage” and doesn’t really discuss it further. I am fairly certain that he would vote against gay marriage if it were on a ballot though. He has been playing a game as of late where he tries to con libertarians into believing that he’s one of them. Why, I’m not sure.

                  As to everybody else who holds that position being a coward, I don’t agree. That also doesn’t make them some socially liberal libertarian. As I’ve just said, when gay marriage is on the ballot, I’ll vote against it every time, just like Larson (who, by the way, does the most research on topics out of any of the talkers I listen to, you should call him on his show or listen to him some time). You can hold that position, knowing that it probably won’t happen and then argue against gay marriage. So if I’m in an argument with a liberal about gay marriage, I would preface my argument by saying ideally the government isn’t the one who decides what my marriage is called. Then I would go on to say why I think it’s OK to deny gays marriage.

                • Laurel

                  You made a few assumptions…starting with Larson. I have listened to him and still do upon occasion when I have time. You made another assumption…you accused me of Alinsky tactics. No Alinsky here just went off what you wrote. Now if you failed to communicate then that is on you…not me. BTW…if you understand the legal definition of marriage ALL of the steps required to recognize a union as a marriage, why those steps are there, you would of never ever put yourself in the position of being accused of incest.

                  Redefining marriage for the entire world for the purpose of dodging taxes is about as greedy as it gets. Why not just change tax laws since that is much easier.
                  Government doesn’t decide what your marriage is called. The people or the population do…government is just what carries it forth, especially a government of ‘We the People’. furthermore if you want to have any kind of marriage for tax purposes then you just brought government back into it.

                  So once again…we are back full circle in that you cannot get government out of marriage and if it is on the ballot you most certainly can’t since the purpose of having a ballot, in this country anyway, is to put forth policy, laws, and elected officials. So yes dear…you absolutely need the government to recognize your marriage especially if you are going to argue for marriage tax exemptions, unless of course you don’t know the origin of taxes and purpose of taxes.

                  My suggestion is you and Larson find better wording about government and marriage. Beck is just trying to be Solomon and split the baby in half because he is a coward. My next suggestion is you go and educate yourself to formulate a better argument because talking marriage and not needing the government to recognize it because you want tax benefits is contradictory at best and downright stupid at worst.

                • Kenneth Leon Martin

                  Just a few points to clarify, since it seems no one knows the history of the government and marriage here. Until after the Civil War, marriages were church business, and there were no public records kept by the government. During reconstruction, licenses were used to keep track of Rebels movements once back home. The money generated became so great that even Northern states adopted it as a revenue stream. The greatest use to government was in keeping track of individuals, thus started the loss of our freedoms. For thousands of years, only churches kept up with marriage, until they figured out how to use it to control us and generate income.

                  Just a short history on marriage in America. BTW, I only know this because I am an ordained minister and did the research out of curiosity.

                • Laurel

                  Incorrect.

                  Records were kept in things like family bibles etc. Government recognized those records. Ship captains as well as judges also recorded in their logs marriages as well as deaths.

                  Your research is incorrect and also defies common sense. How else do you think property was recognized and passed down to the inheritor? How did widows gain recognition as such and receive rights in accordance? How did first born inherit property? All of that begins with government recognized marriage whether a paper recorded it or not. Remember people had to have witnesses as well which served also as a record.

                  And BTW…it was in the 1960’s that government really began to get involved in marriage. Up to that point marriage licenses were obtained by a justice or a minister.

                  I have no doubt of your Civil War era documentation but there is much more to it than that.

                • Kenneth Leon Martin

                  You are correct in most of what you wrote. I was referring to when the government got involved in what had always been a church matter previously. Churches did keep accurate records of marriage, along with birth and deaths of locals who at least had family who attended. Prior to the Civil War, government had no interest in these things. It was only during reconstruction that the government got involved. Then, it was originally about control, up until they figured out how much they could make selling marriage licenses that actually registered the marriage. The government I am referring to is the state government. Remember, all those jobs were filled by carpetbaggers at the time. Obviously, this was only the start of government intervention in private matters. It got much worse as time went by.

                • Laurel

                  Thanks for the clarification.

                • CaMaven

                  As long as entitlements are contingent upon marital status, the government is in the marriage business.

  • MiBones

    I am going to take a wait and see attitude. If they try to diminish Sarah Palin and her endorsements, they are out.

    • Eleanor Baldwin

      Can’t imagine Sean or Mark allowing that.

      • MiBones

        Hopefully you are correct.

    • John Urban

      Palin diminished herself with her recent full-throated defense of the traitor John McCain.

      • MiBones

        Sarah has always been gracious to McCain. He is the one who brought her to our attention. She distinctly mentions where they disagree. Everyone knows she will always be gracious to him but she still stands on her beliefs which is returning America to a limited constitutional government.

    • notsofastthere

      I’m sure you can’t mean that if they don’t accept 100% of Palin’s nominees that you’ll tune them out. Even in marriage or partnerships no one agrees 100%. Sarah is not beyond making an error in judgement. Perfection is not possible on this earth – we take some of the pie not the whole pie.

      • MiBones

        Perfection is not possible on this earth, but graciousness is. Many pundits, who have disagreed with her, have been dismissive and catty. Few, have been professional about it.

  • kara515

    Finally! This is FANTASTIC news! Mark Levin and Glenn Beck are brilliant and courageous, and together, with the tea party and other public tea party figures, we will be UNSTOPPABLE.

  • jayo

    Such a really good idea to split away from the GOP – NOT – We have GOT TO have a big tent or Hillary will be in for eight years and she will rule like Obama has and no one will try to impeach her – just like they won’t Obama – they are protected. Let us please just focus on what we agree on like dislike of Obamacare and smaller govt/lower taxes. Also, build a fence on border – if we fight among ourselves for every damn thing we are Sure is right, and don’t give here and there – the US is doomed. The Tea Party and GOP have a lot in common — find those things and get along. It is too important that we win the Senate and then the Presidency and start to turn this thing around!

    • Sentinel

      If the Tea Party and conservatives don’t save the Republicans – especially because of the damned GOP Establishment, then it’s time to let them die. Let’s see how 2014 and 2016 go. If we uproot the corrupt, then I agree, unite under one tent. Hopefully, we can remove the cancer in that party.

      • jayo

        I am just terrified of someone like Akin running as a tea partier – I am sure the dems and Soros are going to push and finance some really “out there” candidates but they will “claim” to be such good tea party people and then they will say or do something just incredibly stupid. I believe if someone besides the “former witch” would have run in Delaware and a really good GOP against Harry Reid last time — we would have had two more republicans in the congress. That is REALLY something to think about. IMO

        • StandProudNow

          “I believe if someone besides the “former witch” would have run in Delaware”

          But they didn’t. Had Rove and other’s not sabotaged her we would at least had someone in the Senate voting with us MOST of the time instead of the marxist there now.

          Can not control who will run. The PEOPLE need to decide. Not Rove and his ilk.

          It is up to us to encourage those we feel would be good candidates to run.

          But then, the people decides, they find a candidate, but the PARRRRTY does not come out for that person. No funds. No help campaigning. Nuth’n. NO help from the party who’s member selected the candidate……

          Lonegan in NJ is a PRIME example of the parrrrrrrrrty pizzing on it’s members by not supporting their candidate. Cuccinelli is another prime example.

          Anyone wonder why people are leaving the party in DROVES??

        • PhillyCon

          DE is a blue state. So it was an uphill battle from the get go.

        • Sentinel

          Interesting point about Soros or libs voting for a faux conservative. Regarding Reid… he won through blatant corruption: bussing in union members, vote tampering, etc. He should not be in the Senate… but right now, cheaters seem to prosper. Hopefully we’ll fix that in 2014 and 2016.

  • aznative

    Why are we allowing Washington DC to continue its illegal existence against our constitution?

    Why are we allowing illegal agencies?

    Why are we allowing the IRS to continue to exist?

    Why haven’t we the people shut down all federal agencies within our states sovereign borders?

    Why haven’t the states protected their own sovereignty by removing illegal invaders?

    Why aren’t we the people ignoring all the illegal regulations and illegal laws by this congress and administration and illegal 4th branch of the government and putting industries back online and creating jobs for the over 100 million unemployed? Congress nor the federal government create jobs. It is time to start opening businesses again and ignore the illegal federal government. We need to restore our freedom to prosper. And abolish the federal government now.

    There are a lot of empty office and retail space and industrial in this country because of this corrupt leadership in DC. It is time to cut DC off from the rest of the nation and end it and put Americans back to work. This imposter in the White House can no longer be allowed to sign one more illegal order. He does not represent this nation. It is time to freeze DC’s assets and put the money back in the coffers. Cut off all foreign aid and no more illegal borrowing from foreign nations.

    The states involved in the Keystone pipeline need to go ahead with it. We need to be independence of terrorist nations (Obama’s mentors and friends). Obama is a traitor to this nation on every level. He is guilty if high crimes and treason along with many in his cabinet and congress. It is over!

    It is over. We need to restore our freedom and God given liberty inspire of these criminals in DC.

    2014 Americans putting Americans back to work.

    I dare Americans to ignore obamacare, ignore Washington DC, ignore the corrupt IRS and the rest of these federal agencies. This nation does not need them. We existed before them. It is over.

    We can no longer allow the illegal DC to continue. They no longer represent our nation.

  • poljunkie

    If it’s another way to get conservative messages heard- great.

    BUT we cannot rely on anyone to do anything for us.

    It’s up to us to be the change. (Before it’s too late.)

  • Sentinel

    This is place where we can say, “The government built this.” Because of the lies, corruption and tyranny, alliances like this are necessary. Throw Rush in and they’d be almost unstoppable. I see this as positive.

  • Conservator1

    I wasn’t aware of the rift between Beck, Hannity and Levin, so take my opinion for what’s worth -not much. If such an alliance is to occur with Rush, then Mark Levin should be the one to reach out. I doubt Rush would respond positively to a request from either Sean or Glenn.

    Levin is definitely on much higher rung of the latter. As a scholar of the Constitution and having served in the Reagan administration, he’s the only one who has the gravitas to get Limbaugh on board.

    • LibertyLinda

      Limbaugh has already endorsed Levin’s “Liberty Amendments” as a real Constitutional solution to what is going on in our Government right now.

  • oic

    I know Hannity and Levin are close personal friends, not sure about Rush and Beck

    • bluerose75

      You must not listen to Levin alot? Rush is his idol…it was Rush who paid for Levin’s heart surgery….yes Rush, it was Rush who promoted Levin way back when before he filled in for Sean when Sean was away. Levin was friends with Rush before Hannity. He stays with Rush when he goes down to South Florida. Oh no Rush and Levin have been close for along time! As for Hannity it was Rush back in 2000 and 2001 that gave Sean his National Audience when he allowed Sean to fill in for him…that is how Hannity became so well know and how Ailes found Hannity for Fox. People may not remember but when Fox started out they advertised on Rush all the time to increase their name….Hence why Rush appears on Fox when he wants all the time. Sean will tell you that he only listens to Rush on the radio and Levin.

      So Rush is the King and he rarely aligns with anyone because that is just Rush….you can count on two hands the number of Guests Rush has had on his show. But he will say something. Hannity and Levin are his very good friends. And when you bring Rush if he will the news goes everywhere.

  • barry soetoro

    Can we arrest and prosecute the MOSLEM FOREIGN AGENT WITH ZERO FORMS OF I.D. WITH 5 ALIASES CURRENTLY KNOWN AS ‘OBAMA?’

    Look at the scars/seams all around his head. Are those ‘afro’ sections implants or theater-wig toupees?

    • barry soetoro

      If we’re stuck with him, can I borrow his STOLEN Connecticut-issue SSN #042-68-4425.

  • odin147

    I bet it will require more subscriptions to the blaze.

    • StandProudNow

      Come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Stop the nonsense!! We’ve got a country to save.

  • StandProudNow

    Can we COME TOGETHER and fight our ENEMY instead of getting caught up in a buncha Bruh-Ha??

    We’ve got a country to save!! If these 3 and Rush got onto the same page, it could literally turn an election.

    So. Let us find where we can agree and LET’s MOVE!!

    Quit the petty stuff!
    (And in comparison to what would happen if we lose in 2014 and 2016 it IS petty.)

    • Olde Rose

      Gotta recruit Larry Elder and Laura Ingraham to the Cause.

  • bluerose75

    Indeed the current GOP is pathetic outside Cruz and Lee and some in the House. This alliance will be very intriguing….I love Levin and IF RUSH would help the audience would be much larger and very much INFLUENTIAL…already the Establishment hates Rush, Levin and Beck…Hannity to me played too cozy for too long trying to get them on his shows which I feel hurt his credibility….if he is serious then eliminate interviewing the likes of that Irish Punk Ryan, with his Dem wife, stop bringing on Bend Over Boehner or that Clown Cantor or Moses McLame and start calling them for what they are….WORTHLESS, COWARDS and DECEITFUL!!

  • Bill in Tennessee

    Hannity, Levin, and Beck WOULD make a formidable team, if they come together for the right purpose…namely, saving America. Let’s just hope it’s NOT for selling books and Blaze subscriptions, we’ve certainly had enough people cashing in lately.

    • John Urban

      Do even 500,000 people watch The Blaze?

      • palintologist

        He had bigger numbers than CNN had — about a year ago. His subscription base is huge and growing every day. I have a subscription and it’s better than anything else on cable.

      • STQ

        If they’d put him on Cable, Fox may be Bye Bye.

      • joyfulgiver

        Yes, and you should give it a look! The Blaze TV is more than just Glenn Beck. He has put together a whole network of programs that are going to take over the mainstream media networks. Give it a try, 14 days are free. But don’t limit yourself to just the GB show. Check out the new Dana Loesch Show on Fridays, she is amazing. Real news after the GB show and Wilcow are excellent sources for news and commentary. It’s really worth your time! We cancelled our home phone so we could continue our subscription :o)

    • CaMaven

      Let’s see if they participate in Operation American Spring on 5/16/14 and bring a few million people with them.

    • David Zuniga

      Exactly. Until Americans understand the difference between Popular Sovereignty and media entertainment (driven by advertising, PERIOD…make no mistake), we will continue to follow media personalities around, instead of thinking for ourselves and being self-governing.

      http://www.AmericaAgainNow.com/is_conservative_talk_our_poison

      Americans have been trained for generations, to respond to entertainment above all else. It’s been brutally effective.

  • plectocomia

    We need a 3rd party, the country would react to candidates who represented the conservative, the moderate and the progressive, The two party system is a dismal failure.

  • MiBones

    It will be interesting to see what this alliance does with endorsements when you have several candidates running as a conservative. Remember 2012. Romney’s people managed to divide and disperse the Republican base.

  • Robert Johnson

    A great beginning! They’re doing what the Marxists did 60 years ago. Now if they can get another 100 million sleepy, brainwashed, zombified Americans to join in…good luck to everyone!

  • LibertyLinda

    It’s about time! I’ve been screaming for this since before the ’12 elections when we should have all come together. This kind of alliance will be very effective. Yes there is some duplication of audience, but there are many that do not hear all of them. It needs to happen.

    • notsofastthere

      Ditto that! Each is independent, have their own mission, success and audience. It’s about time they join and fight a common cause together. Rush may have too big an ego – hope not. Together they can change a nation for the good.

  • JoeTulsa

    I’m glad this is finally happening.
    Glenn is right, all three have their own strengths.
    Yay!

  • JoeTulsa

    Glenn is great on the cultural front.
    Mark Levin is the legal/political/historical expert.
    Hannity is fearless, bold, a gentleman, and a great host and mediator!

  • rjcylon

    3rd party. Rush/Palin get on board with that, it’s over for the RNC and the GOPe.

    • Guest

      Who said a Third Party?

    • notsofastthere

      Don’t need a 3rd party, just bring the R’s back to their roots. Change from within.

  • Cassie

    It’s Savage….to the tee…..he is spiteful and vengeful and calls Hannity wall banger and not sure what his hatred of Levin is, I don’t like to listen to savage anymore…..I think he’s said negative things about Beck but don’t remember specifics.

    • timsrighty

      I stopped listening to Savage a long time ago.

      • STQ

        I like Mike. He occasionally gets too brash, but he is a no BS’r.

        • Cassie

          Hey STQ, savage is AGAINST the second amendment….ummm, or do you not listen to that aspect of his dribbles? He hates guns!!

          • STQ

            He is? Michael Savage on the Second Ammendment….http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPM3dn_GmNU

            • STQ

              don’t know who put this together, but he sounds Pro-2nd Ammendment to me.

              • notsofastthere

                A Google search brought up a bunch of articles and bloggers saying Savage was anti-gun. I didn’t believe it and glad you found his broadcast on Youtube.

                • Dr. Strangelove

                  I did a little search myself and it seems to me that Savage does have some anti-gun sentiments.

              • $14280160

                I think he was being anti-gun during the Trayvon Martin case. Might have sided with the controllers when Sandy Hook happened as well.

            • Cassie

              sorry, this is a bullshit commercial from 2 and 1/2 years ago…..savage HATES GUNS….he’s a liberal asshole California nutcase…..he hates the true patriots in the “alternative media”. He hates America……

              • timsrighty

                I was sorta with you at the start but not now.

        • timsrighty

          Brash is one way to put it. I think he is hateful Let the libs own the hate. We on the right must rise above the hate.

          • STQ

            Well, sometimes, yeh. But I guess I kind of forgive him, because of his upbringing and I think he has a tender heart somewhere in there.lol…have you heard him talk about his disabled brother? I think he is probably a very brilliant man. I did here him yell at a caller a few weeks ago because of not doing it right when they came on. That was uncalled for and I didn’t like that. But anyone who is trying to beat back this ‘Communist’ takeover of our Country, I don’t easily throw overboard!..and I appreciate plain talk.

        • BS61

          Savage reported the Keystone connections as if it was news GB didnt report on FN 5 yrs ago

    • STQ

      I wish he wouldn’t do that. But still, he says a lot of good stuff and I’ll take them all.

    • stevesharkman

      weiner nation sucks!

  • STQ

    Sounds delicious to me! I wonder if Sean will be leaving Fox here pretty soon. Does anyone know how Seans ratings are in his new time slot? Maybe he interpreted that as a demotion. Sean may be too Conservative for Roger Ailes. Maybe Sean will do a show on Glenn Beck T.V….Maybe he will run for Office. Sean is great.

  • M beaty

    Two thumbs up!!!!! Now if we can all work in our own communitys to help this trio ! We have to get our America back !

  • mike2000917

    Hannity came out for amnesty last year. Why trust him?

    • $73426719

      Bingo

  • Amjean

    OMG! Sounds good until Beck does something stupid or clownish (as he
    is apt to do).

    • Dr. Strangelove

      I do that, too. Sometimes I wonder if the years of continuous substance abuse have affected cognitive functions.

    • V103115

      Define “stupid and clownish.”

  • Shootist

    Beware Republicans, Inc.

  • Awesome. I would love to see them start a new network that surpasses FOX. FOX has become a republicrat station.

    I wonder who was telling stories about the others to each of them. Had to be someone they knew in common.

  • heypaisano

    Food for thought, If Rush gets on board then they would have the clout and the money to say buy CNN whereby the C would become the Conservative News Network with each of them doing their radio shows live on CNN.

    Would anyone doubt that They would beat Fox in the ratings war? Can you imagine O’Reilly’s reaction to being the doormat of cable?

  • BS61

    good! Its not as if the Patriot station where I listen dont push amnesty ALL day!

  • JohnCraven

    The GOP Big Whigs have always used conservative radio and tv personalities as vents for the strong conservative base whom the Big Whigs have been dumping on and dismissing and undermining for years.

    This has always been the service that Rush and Beck and Hannity and Levin and others have performed for the GOP which allows the Big Whigs to keep moving left and in favor of Big Government policies and programs which are diametrically opposed to the conservative views of the base of the Republican Party.

    But it is no longer working.

    Just yesterday, a fine conservative fellow called up and said he considers himself an independent after long ago joining the Republican Party when Reagan became president because as he paraphrased Reagan “it isn’t that he left the Republican Party. It’s that the Republican Party left him.”

    This young conservative told Rush that he held his nose and voted for McCain and he held his nose and voted for Romney and he’s tired of holding his nose and voting for these candidates that the Republican Party keeps putting up to the dismay of people like him.

    Of course, Rush couldn’t help but say he understood and then he professed to not know why the GOP does what it does to hurt its base and disenfranchise them.

    Personally, I’m tired of Rush saying he does not know why the GOP leadership does what it does to hurt the base of the party. I’m tired of Rush saying that the GOP is “afraid” of being called this bad name or that bad name or accused of this evil dastardly deed or that evil dastardly deed as a reason for why they are destroying their own base. It is not fear that’s making them do these evil things to the base of the party. The Big Whigs of the GOP are “Vichy French” to quote myself. They are not “Free French” who would fight for something more than themselves.

    The Big Whigs of the GOP have profited mightily and stand to profit even more for pushing forward the Big Government agenda of the Marxist Democrats and Big Government republicans like the Bushes and the Karl Rove’s of the party.

    A lot of money gets stuffed in the pockets of the GOP leadership for it to be worth their while to undermine the TEA Party and all conservative initiatives and trash people like Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin.

    The GOP is as Jesus once said of the pharasees: “whited sepulchres filled with nothing but dead man’s bones.”

    It is not a new tv show or radio show that we need Beck and Hannity and Levin and Rush to put forward – IT IS A NEW PARTY WE NEED – not a new Republican Party but A NEW PARTY – based on our founding principles, based on the rule of our Constitution and inspired by our Declaration of Independence, based on returning our nation to the control of the people of this nation through the States Constitutional Convention ammendment process for our Constitution to put a stop to the evil that’s engulfing us at every turn.

    Our founding fathers did not try to change the Parliament or seize Parliament from the control of King George because they knew that was a bridge too far. That would be a truly impossible dream. They chose instead to set themselves free from an uneven yoke of tyranny by the Crown and did so through the Declaration of Independence. And look at what they accomplished – the greatest nation on earth built on the best Constitution ever written and approved by mere mortals thanks to “Kind Providence” as George Washington often said.

    Yet somehow we can’t seem to set ourselves free from the uneven yoke of the Republican Party and its Big Whigs. As long as the conservative base of the Republican Party remains shackled to those who control the party and who promote things like amnesty and fail to defund ObamaCare the Conservative Movement will whither on the vine and die.

    We need a new party for conservatives to hang their hopes and dreams upon Beck and Levin and Hannity and Rush. We need to leave the GOP to its own demise and stop trying to save a party that doesn’t want to be saved. If it wanted to be saved why is it pushing amnesty?

    It’s our country that needs saving not the GOP. We need to let go of it and start fighting for our nation.

    John Craven
    New Orleans

  • aryaba

    Get behind a true Constitutional candidate and I might get excited.

    • iaintlyin

      suggestion(s)?

      • aryaba

        Ron Paul, but he was marginalized in the last cycle. I don’t trust his son, Rand or Ted Cruz.

  • sallyjohanna

    We need every American patriot we can get in this fight to save our great nation! The people need to vet their candidates with one sentence…Are you for restoring the Constitution and upholding its principals and laws without fail?

  • Clarence Rigali

    I will not trust nor support Sean Hannity until he formally apologizes to the people of California for backing Arnold when we had Tom McClintock (an actual Conservative) who was running for Governor at the same time. Had Hannity and others put their weight behind McClintock, California might very well be an American state instead of occupied territory. Hannity should be ashamed of himself.

    • ernst1776

      Sorry, it’s time to move past it. Enough of our ‘difference’ and more of our commonality. We are Americans, imperfect yet awesome! We are the only f-ing people on earth who are FREE and it’s time to start being a free people again. Free people are free thinkers.

      • iaintlyin

        Similar thoughts, we have a good chance of picking apart any one that either steps forward or is prodded. I dig this sight and its regulars, the most informed and civil of any sight, but theres never a unanimous choice. Any name mentioned always winds up with a rear end full of warts. At some time we may have to put up with one or two of these warts. Hopefully Beck, Hannity and Levin can help us parse the goods and bads about each in our party SOON and we can get a locomotive started. I’d love to hear Wilkow get on the bandwagon too.

    • WayneJ

      Seriously? …..In Ca…..you seriously think Ca. might very well be an American state….buwahhahhaha. The mass of idiots you have for voters and politicians….. you are getting what you deserve….just like America is getting what it deserves. When you have idiots pulling the lever, what do you expect. Maybe it is time to go back to a poll test….just saying

      • Jane Dough

        So “we get what we deserve?” We voted to cut off benefits for illegals … the courts overturned the majority. We voted to ban gay marriage, TWICE … again, the courts overturned the majority.

        Illegals openly vote out here, it’s no secret. But any state that tries to stem the flow from Mexico faces the wrath of our federal Justice Department.

        Other than sarcastic derision, what’s your solution, Oh Armchair Savior?

        • WayneJ

          It is not the bills you vote for ….. it is the leaders you select….Moonbeam for instance

    • MeanieHead

      People in California should just jump into the ocean and give up. You put Jerry Brown in AGAIN. Talk about not learning from the past mistakes.

  • ernst1776

    I don’t really think this is about votes or candidates and who is better then who. It’s about Liberty! I might not be the best person to run government but I am the best person to run my life, consequences included!

  • spin43

    Hannity, along with Palin, gave us McShame for another 6 years. Levin supported Hatch, the fraud from Utah, who, along with Romney and the Rove Bushites, are trying to destroy Mike Lee. Beck’s radio show is terrible.

    • iaintlyin

      people are no damn good! look it up (bit o’sarc)

    • boats48

      So, I guess you don’t agree with these folks! Just what would you recommend?

    • A Datum

      Let’s see…Hannity and McCain are no longer talking to each other. Levin regularly blasts Hatch for fooling him and pretending to be a conservative when he isn’t (and Levin has vowed never to be fooled by Hatch again), Levin speaks out in support of Mike Lee and against the attempted destruction of Mike Lee (and he’s promised to help stop it in any way he can). Levin also regularly eviscerates Karl Rove on his show.

      Your accusations are without merit. People make mistakes. We’re trying to correct them now. Join us or get out of the way.

    • V103115

      Here’s who you hate, in no particular order: Hannity, Palin, Beck, Levin, for assorted transgressions and errors in judgement. It all goes back to the thought of being without sin and casting stones. Right now, it’s about saving a way of life, of rallying people to do this and by your way of thinking, there has to be a Stepford-like candidate/media personality to do this.

  • spin43

    Found Ben Shapiro podcast last week. Very good when not talking Seahawk football.

    • MeanieHead

      He’s in Seattle, why wouldn’t he talk about the home team???? Duh!

  • Thomas J.Stratford

    They need to be a little suspect of Beck, since he has been going off the deep end for a while and likes to hang with lefties, and atheist propagandists such as Penn Gillette.

    • MeanieHead

      My mother is a pro-Obama person. That doesn’t mean that “I” am off MY rocker. I’m still conservative (and she hates it).

    • RighteousCrow_JustCaws

      Walid Shoebat had some disturbing observations on Beck last year. We can hope he is evolving in the right direction now.
      Here’s that piece, posted on TRS: http://therightscoop.com/audio-walid-and-theodore-shoebat-on-glenn-beck/

      • Bill589

        I have reservations about Beck, but not because of ‘Walid Shoebat’. I have a lot more reservations about Walid Shoebat after what he(?) wrote the other day.

        My church does NOT suck. I only know the one article, but in that article he was an arrogant divider of the Church. Lowest of the low.

        • RighteousCrow_JustCaws

          My impression was that Shoebat was building a case to illustrate his frustration with getting no help to save Christians in the ME.
          Granted, he took a winding approach; but I’ve never had cause to doubt his motives.
          It would have to be inconceivably hard to stabilize coming from his background.

          • Bill589

            Yes. But he didn’t need to lie about and insult my church to make his point. I guess he believes he knows what my calling and what my church’s calling is. My church does great things with God’s guidance – and it is NOT what he says our calling must be.

            Some Churches may be called to help brethren in the ME. Mine is called to do other great things. I don’t need someone (even unknowingly) working for The Divider against what we are called to do.

            Churches, like families, and political patriots – are strongest when we are working together united in cause. My church is a good force in this evil world. I don’t want him stripping even one of us away because he makes one of us think he’s not already doing God’s work.

            Somewhere in the OT it says to pray for wisdom if we want it. I’ll pray for that, and I’ll pray for Walid and/or myself, to be corrected as needed. But as I view things now, that article’s conclusion was dead wrong.

    • Stephen Bogan

      How could Glenn Beck say he ws a fair host, if he doesn’t allow the left to give their talking points? And how do you expect him to properly refute leftist ideals if he doesn’t first present what those ideals are? Even Rush Limbaugh likes to have liberals call in to his show, and he’s very gracious to them, while he cleverly destroys their “logic” with reality.

      • Gray Panther

        “Even Rush Limbaugh likes to have liberals call in to his show, and he’s
        very gracious to them, while he cleverly destroys their “logic” with
        reality.”

        You do realize that this is a skill not readily acquired or we’d be witness to others besides Rush who can do this; to my knowledge though, Rush is the only one.

    • V103115

      Maybe if you did a little homework on Penn Jillette and Glenn Beck, you may come to understand the relationship a bit better.

      There’s a series of interviews here with the two of them. Of course there is disagreement but there’s also a lot of respect for each other’s beliefs and opinions which, IMHO, is sadly lacking in a lot of media today.

      http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/11/05/penn-jillette-on-technology-breaking-of-out-the-system-and-fear/

      • Thomas J.Stratford

        Sorry, try again, I’ve listened to Gillettes podcast, and obviously you and Beck have not, he is an unashamed Obama supporter, has a bizarre definition of ‘faith” that is intellectually dishonest at best, and cannot defend the “humanity” he feels for his fellow man, without admitting that “humanity” is born out of the advent of religion.

  • Gray Panther

    I doubt seriously that Rush will join this happy little group. He is more moderate than these three; plus, his ego is as big as all out doors & he would never share the spotlight with anyone else.

  • cattastrophe

    I don’t trust any of them when it comes to recommending a pick from among presidential hopefuls. Their all on the same page when it comes to dissing Obama and liberal Republicans so what’s the deal with joining forces. I hope Rush tells them to bug off. Their better with each having an independent take that’s how you get different perspective on the same issue. I see no advantage allowing Beck in we don’t need a Paul for president.

    • Arson Wells

      Rush is very good friends with Hannity and Levin. As a matter of fact Rush and Hannity talked Levin into going to radio. Levin himself says Rush is his mentor. Levin has been on Beck’s program and vice versa. Therefore, I think you need to conduct a little research before poo-pooing the idea in my opinion.

  • cattastrophe

    Conservatives can take over the Republican party with info no politician will ever tell you.

  • RighteousCrow_JustCaws

    Anyone listen to Lars Larson? http://larslarson.com/

  • PVG

    THIS IS AMAZING! AN ANSWER TO PRAYER!!!! WOO HOO!

  • If true beware – Mark Levin is too smart to be snookered – but I do not trust Beck –

  • Bill589

    Patriots, as imperfect as we all are, including us with radio shows, are uniting to save our Republic. When I hear these patriot leaders talk about working together, and when I hear that Palin, Cruz and other patriot politicians talk to each other behind the scenes, it helps me have hope.
    United in our Cause, we stand at our strongest.

  • Ben Ghazi

    Sorry, remember Hannity supported amnesty last year, He’s proven over and over to be a Karl Rove Est. RINO. and can’t be trusted. What’s most important to him is his RATINGS, not loyalty to the Conservative movement like Rush and Levin.

    • Bill589

      I agree. Ratings are #1 for Hannity. He was slow to embrace the TPMovement too, until it was shown to be popular (good for ratings).

      But, whatever the reason, if now he will unite with patriots and fight on our side, that is a good thing. Another voice proclaiming the truth – which the truth is all on our side – will only help our Cause.

      I agree we should be suspicious of some because of past behavior, but there are truly repentant souls in the world, and if they start fighting consistently with us now, I think we should accept their help – hopeful that, through time, Hannity and other imperfect patriots, will earn our trust.

      • Guest

        2nd your agreement, we need all the help we can, while I don’t trust Hannity and feel he’s in it for himself …I will support the Team effort for the conservative cause.

      • B-Funk

        Dittos. We have to hold these people’s feet to the fire just as much as our politicians. I’m glad his eyes are finally open. As Beck says in the above clip, we have to put our arms around people as they finally get it.

  • ForMotionCreatv

    I will NEVER trust Glenn Beck again. My eyes were opened to his snake oil culture during 2012. Done.

    • Bill589

      I thought his show on FOX was very good, and that’s basically where I know him from. I’d like to know what Beck did in 2012. I’ve read other people are mad at him about the 2012 election too, but haven’t figured out why there is so much ANGER. If it’s hard to explain ‘in a nutshell’, Is there a site where I can read about it?

      • ForMotionCreatv

        You need to research Rove, Ralph Reed, Norquist; how they took control of the moral majority of the Reagan era. You need to research Liberty University which had Glenn Beck and Mitt Romney speak at commencements 2010 and 2012 respectively, but didn’t have Sarah Palin as guest speaker until the end of 2013. You need to research Mark DeMoss an exec at Liberty University who was pushing for Romney since the 2008 election cycle. What does all this have to do with Glenn Beck? Go to YouTube to research where he cleverly manipulated (IMHO) voters toward Santorum, calling him ‘the next George Washington.’ You figure it out from there. Conservatives need to be a lot more aware of who the GOP-E stalking horses are next go-round.

        • B-Funk

          Manipulated voters? He’s a talk show host on the radio and an internet television station. Of course he had his feelings, but people went out and voted the way they wanted. He may have influenced people- myself included- but he can’t make you change your mind. I voted for Romney, but I preferred Santorum and a whole bunch of other people. Your argument against him is kind of silly.

        • Bill589

          IF GB was involved in that type of corruption, then he is a traitorous saboteur – the lowest of the lowest. “IF” being the important word.

          I think it depends a lot on if he was clear who he supported, and logically and Honestly argued
          why. If he did this, than he may merely be a patriot who was (in our opinion) very, very wrong in this 2012 judgement. (Though I would have voted for RS over the original author of Ocare whom the GOPe stuck us with.) Also, did GB diminish other candidates only logically and Honestly?

          Regardless, there are several other things I have read about, that makes me think GB has earned some suspicion – and so I think all involved should watch him closely. But while watching him, I’ll be happy for the strength he adds to our side in this war, and be hopeful he’s improved his judgement.

          • ForMotionCreatv

            Here’s one instance (there’s another, worse one which I’ll look for):

          • ForMotionCreatv
  • Hot_wings

    I already knew Levin and Hannity were all but joined at the hip. (Calls in his show once a week or so) but Beck ? What’s next ? A merger with Bull O’Really ?

  • B-Funk

    It’s about time the talk people started uniting.

  • Socialism is Evil. Organized.

    This is a lamp that I’ve found useful for eluding the dark and despotic march of most of mankind: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0094KY878