On his radio broadcast this morning, Glenn Beck told some story about how, last week, he had rescued a lost sheep that had disappeared from his ranch over a year ago and, in typical Beck fashion, he saw it as some sort of allegory for the nation about how God allowed President Obama to win in order to ensure that the Tea Party remains awake and saves the nation and ultimately rescues all the “lost sheep” in America and blah, blah, blah.
While telling the story, Beck made an absolutely remarkable statement in passing when, around the 3:45 mark, he speculated that if Mitt Romney had won the election, he too might be pressing for military action in Syria “because, in the end, we all found out that he was the progressive.”
Just think about that statement.
During the campaign, Beck spent every day telling his audience that Romney’s performance was divine providence, that his victory was going to be a massive mandate and a work of God and that Romney was a modern-day George Washington and Abraham Lincoln:
But now Beck is dismissing him as just another progressive.
If that is true, then why was Beck so enthralled with him during the election? Just where was Beck’s self-proclaimed “gift” for being able to look into someone eyes and see their heart or his vaunted ability to see down the road and predict what will be coming our way?
Beck says Romney revealed himself to be a “progressive” during the final presidential debate, which took place on October 22. Yet two days after that, Beck was comparing Romney to George Washington on his radio broadcast.
If Beck knew that Romney was a “progressive” during the election, why didn’t he warn his audience instead of repeatedly likening him to towering figures such as Washington and Lincoln?
We have an archive full of examples of Glenn Beck saying utterly ridiculous things, but this current effort to rewrite his own history has to be one of the most fundamentally dishonest things he has ever said.