What is wrong with you?

This is complete and utter nonsense! You have this about as ass backwards as any thinking individual can.

"I'm disappointed in the Beck show lately, because he has made such an effort to focus on the need for the country to embrace the Gospels... rather than focus on the need for the country to take responsibility for individual actions... and for his continued ambiguity in commenting on "social justice" as a bad thing.

The Catholic faith (which he regularly refers to in his commentary) says that social justice means that we, as individuals, MUST maintain a high level of participation in and awareness of the broader, more general condition of society, rather than simply looking at where "I" am in the scheme of things. If more of America supported a charitable organization with regular donations of time and resources, or offered the charity themselves in some manner, then the Federal government wouldn't be called upon by liberals and progressives to do it instead. The very act of "giving" makes us a stronger, more vibrant society, while simply dismissing the problems of the poor and suffering as "someone else's problem" (i.e. the Government) detracts from our society."

Let me pull this apart ...

First off, if you don't like his insertion of a religious tone as of late, FINE. That's your particular taste, you cringe when he goes there, others do not. He is attempting to "restore honor" as he sees it, by restoring the guiding principles of the Founding Fathers. And religion, divine providence, was a fundamental aspect of the Founders character, thus the recent religious over tones from Beck. I mean, here you have sat complaining that liberals, the ACLU, etc try and eject God from the public square, and yet here's a man that flatly announces he doesn't have all the answers but proudly exclaims he turns to his faith for strength, and perhaps America as a whole should too, and you sit cringing, or whatever it is you do when Beck says the name "God." But "whatever", back to what I was saying ... Religion has been a personal journey of his played out on his very public show. As a multi-year listener, I happen to know this. But as I said, if it's not your cup of tea, no problem. What is a problem is specifically this: "If more of America supported a charitable organization with regular donations of time and resources, or offered the charity themselves in some manner, then the Federal government wouldn't be called upon by liberals and progressives to do it instead." Excuse me? Have you seen the per capita stats on charitable donations of Americans versus Europe? Or anywhere else? Lets put it this way - we are Oprah, they're Jerry Springer, it's not even close. The disparity between ourselves and France is a particularly huge chasm (and I might add, "red states" donate more per household than "blue"). Domestically or in terms of personal donations abroad, the numbers are all out there, undeniable - the US of A is the MOST CHARITABLE peoples in the history of man.

With that said, you have the equation backwards. It isn't that if Americans would give more that their government would do less. It is plainly evident to me that if government did less, Americans would give more. And as an aside - if Americans gave "more", liberals would not stop calling for government intervention/assistance. That's ridiculous. Do you REALLY believe a huge, sustained, jump in charitable donations (money, time, energy, any form) would really dissuade progressives from their agenda? Seriously? Come on. But back to what you have backwards - government spending tax dollars on social programs have made us more jaded then we otherwise would be. How many times has the phrase, "my tax dollars, hard at work" been uttered at the sight of trash on the road; or hookers/drug dealers operating unmolested by law enforcement? Or a man with a cardboard sign being looked at as a motorist mutters, "can't he get into some job training program?" The entire concept of government provided social assistance has suppressed personal charity. We figure, "that's what I'm paying taxes for", so why pick up the trash yourself? Why form a neighborhood watch? Why give personal assistance to a homeless man? And the proof is in the practice - Western Europe has a lavish social welfare program compared to ours (so far anyway), and their charitable donations are a pittance to ours. They have had the tax dollars so beaten out of them for every imaginable program under the sun that not only do they not feel financially inclined towards charity, but generationally they have had it drilled into them that the charity of their fellow man is exclusively the domain of government. If government would back off of its center role in Europe, and quasi-central role here, private charitable activity would sky rocket, I have no doubt. After all, why feed your hungry neighbor, that's what food stamps are for, right? So don't you DARE lay the reason government has expanded social programs at the feet of "uncharitable Americans." Quite the opposite is true - had government not muscled in, the charity of individual Americans would be higher then it is even now (which is still pretty damn high compared to other first world nations). We shouldn't give more so that government will do less. Government should do less so we will be inclined to do even more.

On social justice - do you see anti-Catholics behind every corner or what? Beck goes out of his way to quote the Pope. He goes out of his way to make PERSONAL CHARITY one of the three central themes of both his television and radio programs - have you not seen the red and blue images of Washington, Jefferson and Franklin that read at the bottom (one on each) "FAITH, HOPE, CHARITY"? They are a permanent fixture on his television program, just behind him in every shot. They were at the rally, and you can get tees of their likeness on his site (& paintings which he auctioned off for the 8/28 event). His entire critique of "social justice" is centered on the way progressives pervert it into "collective" justice, or government dictated social justice. His food storage efforts, of which vendors specializing in that sector advertise on his show via his personal pitch, is replete with the suggestion that it is up to YOU to feed those around you, your family, your neighbors, anyone you can if the "worst" happens. It is up to YOU to grab the flash light and say, "this way." Not government, not the "next man", YOU. In other words he has continually espoused just the type of personal responsibility to preform charity on your fellow man as you did above. Yet you rip him as if being opposed to "social justice" as politically defined by the left (along with "living wage", etc) is tantamount to opposing personal charity, and the efforts of the Catholic Church.

Now I realize full well that the Catholic Church uses the term "social justice." But unfortunately they have lost the battle of definitions in the world of politics, at least when it comes to that term. That term has been co opted (if not flat out hijacked) by the Left. They scream it in demand that government do more to doll out equality of outcome, and "level the playing field." It is THAT "social justice" that he, and I, and countless millions oppose. The fact that Beck has gone out of his way to compliment the Catholic Church, gone out of his way to define the sort of political social justice he opposes, and the fact that he has gone out of his way to advocate the duty of personal charity means that a person of your intelligence should have not made the mistake you did in your last, accusing Beck of not "understanding" what good Catholics mean by the phrase, and bristling at his critique of the term itself.

And while we're at it. You have become, thoroughly, a Conservative in the political sense circa 2010. Now let me tell you something - you're going to have to make peace with the fact that you have more in common with Limbaugh, Hannity, Levine, and Beck then any other personality in the American media landscape. You do realize that don't you? Yet, you take any and every opportunity to still cling to the idea that you are the "average" or "moderate" American whom has little to nothing in common with a Limbaugh ... then you go on to espouse about 98% of his ideology. Face it - THEY are your new political home. Make peace with it, accept it, embrace it. You ARE NOT a moderate. YOU are a conservative. YOU have more in common with Rush then ANY individual with a (D) after his or her name ... so quit trying to find something, ANYTHING to disagree with them on as you desperately search for any degree of separation betwen yourself and those you once loathed ... hehehe.

And by the way - you wanna pick on my boy? My LDS bother? Then get it right next time.