Freedom vs. Free Stuff: Why are some areas more charitable than others?

Those who listen to Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama most likely believe think that Republicans hate the poor, that people who oppose raising taxes on the rich are greedy and don’t want to help those in need, and those opposed to Obamacare don’t care about sick people - right?

While those are all great surface-level talking points for a Democrat trying to win an election, they’re wildly inaccurate.

The latest in a long line of evidence disproving this comes from a recent study showing that red states give more to charity than blue states:

“It seems those in the U.S. who back Obama for president are among the least generous when it comes to supporting charities.

While a recent Democrat ad had a conservative government pushing granny over a cliff in her wheelchair, it turns out Red states, those with a Republican/Independent conservative base, are more generous to charities.

Conversely, the surveys shows those in the U.S. who back Obama for president are among the least generous when it comes to supporting charities according to a new study published Monday.

Eight states that supported Sen. John McCain over Barack Obama gave highest share of their income to charities. Conversely, the seven least generous states went for President Barack Obama in 2008. The study was done by Chronicle of Philanthropy from its latest survey of tax data from the IRS for 2008.

Residents in Utah, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, Idaho, Arkansas and Georgia, all backers of McCain in 2008, gave the most to the needy. Utah topped the charitable list at 10.6 percent of income.

The states that gave the least to charitable causes are Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire – all Obama supporters in 2008.”

This morning on radio, Glenn analyzed this survey from a different angle than most people will.

“The eight states that gave their highest share of their income: Utah, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Georgia, Idaho, what do they all have in common?” Glenn asked this morning.

They’re all religious states.

Glenn reminded listeners that we have a choice: freedom or free stuff. As Americans look at the problems that lie ahead and the choices the tough choice that will have to be made, the places in the country with the most charitable giving are the areas that will maintain freedom.

“You better live around like-minded people,” Glenn told listeners, “because those in New England will be the first to despair. They won't see the charity in their own circle…The states won't be able to take care of it people will have to learn it all over again.  They'll have to learn I am my brother's keeper not the government.  As these states become more and more desperate they will claw for more and more free stuff which will cause them to be less and less free.”

“I think you should look at this poll in a way of where to live,” he added.

Glenn, who has lived all over the country, most recently Connecticut and New York City, knows first-hand that the south and the mountain west are the places where he is surrounded by like-minded people that take care of each other.

“They will fight the hardest for freedom,” Pat added.

“If you look [at the study], the regions of the country that are deeply religious are more generous than those that are not,” Glenn emphasized. “Two of the top states Utah and Idaho have a high percentage of Mormons, who have a tradition of tithing.  And the rest of the top 10 is the Bible belt. That tells you something.”

Not only does this study give insight to where like-minded people are, Glenn noted that it also tells us why Americans should be standing firm for the Biblical principals in America’s founding and not fold to the increasing attacks on Christianity around the country.

A second study Glenn used to back this up is a list put together to help college professors understand the people they’re about to be teaching. The latest is for students entering college this fall – the majority of which were born around 1994.

“Kurt Cobain, and John Wayne Gacy have always been dead. And they have always lived in cyberspace.  This one is amazing.  I don't know why this is true.  The Biblical sources of terms such as "forbidden fruit," ''the writing on the wall," ''good Samaritan," and "the promised land" are unknown to most of them,” Stu read from the list.

The terms from the Bible are what Glenn was touching on by bringing up this list.

“Most of them are no longer being taught the Bible,” he said. “We are not teaching the Bible.”

Glenn noted the ramifications of a generation not understanding the meaning of these terms.

“Forbidden fruit – so in other words something that looks delicious might be delicious to the taste.  Might smell good, might seem to be good.  It might seem to be good for you, but it's forbidden because it unlocks door you do not want to unlock,” Glenn said. “The forbidden fruit if you can't understand that story of forbidden fruit.  How do you teach?  There are some things in capitalism you don't go down that road.  It might seem like a good deal.  The business school doesn't teach this.  Do they make money in the end or not.  Sometimes it's the forbidden fruit.”

An entire generation was changed by one politicians definition of what sex is just a few years ago with Bill Clinton, it’s concerning to think about the effects these factors will have on this generation on young adults. Looking at the states are Glenn mentioned from the study on charity and the concentration of religious individuals living in them,  the growing attack from the media and the far left on conservative Christians is not likely to take the country in a positive direction.

“Think of a society, of what a generation becomes, without these phrases and knowing what they mean.”

 

 

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip below:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.