Beck v. Blumenthal

Neither Rush nor Ingraham have a mention of this on their site today. Does that seem strange, given how huge it was?

I emailed this to both of them (and think we all should):

HERE IS MY EMAIL:

Michelle Malkin wrote about this (Beck v. Blumenthal) yesterday. To me, it is more significant than Rick Santelli's rant. I'm amazed that there is no link or mention on your site today.

I'm a huge fan of yours and I'm thinking: please don't make me wonder if you would withhold mention of such a significant item because you are worried about competition with Glen Beck.

Beck will take enormous heat for this. Should we rally around him?

Also if you see any potential of Beck's 912 project in helping the country would you please mention it? If not I'd hope it is because you know of something better for us to rally around.

Either these two Beck items are important to our country or they are not.

Your delay or lack of emphasis leads me to conclude either:
1.These Beck items are less important to the country than I thought.
2. They are worth supporting but you withhold because of personal or competition concerns.

PLEASE if it is the latter I ask you to put country first. Many will respect you for it. There is such a need for all of us to rally together!

Respectfully,

Jon Schmidt

Beck v. Blumenthal

Neither Rush nor Ingraham have a mention of this on their site today. Does that seem strange, given how huge it was?

I emailed this to both of them (and think we all should):

HERE IS MY EMAIL:

Michelle Malkin wrote about this (Beck v. Blumenthal) yesterday. To me, it is more significant than Rick Santelli's rant. I'm amazed that there is no link or mention on your site today.

I'm a huge fan of yours and I'm thinking: please don't make me wonder if you would withhold mention of such a significant item because you are worried about competition with Glen Beck.

Beck will take enormous heat for this. Should we rally around him?

Also if you see any potential of Beck's 912 project in helping the country would you please mention it? If not I'd hope it is because you know of something better for us to rally around.

Either these two Beck items are important to our country or they are not.

Your delay or lack of emphasis leads me to conclude either:
1.These Beck items are less important to the country than I thought.
2. They are worth supporting but you withhold because of personal or competition concerns.

PLEASE if it is the latter I ask you to put country first. Many will respect you for it. There is such a need for all of us to rally together!

Respectfully,

Jon Schmidt

Beck v. Blumenthal

Neither Rush nor Ingraham have a mention of this on their site today. Does that seem strange, given how huge it was?

I emailed this to both of them (and think we all should):

HERE IS MY EMAIL:

Michelle Malkin wrote about this (Beck v. Blumenthal) yesterday. To me, it is more significant than Rick Santelli's rant. I'm amazed that there is no link or mention on your site today.

I'm a huge fan of yours and I'm thinking: please don't make me wonder if you would withhold mention of such a significant item because you are worried about competition with Glen Beck.

Beck will take enormous heat for this. Should we rally around him?

Also if you see any potential of Beck's 912 project in helping the country would you please mention it? If not I'd hope it is because you know of something better for us to rally around.

Either these two Beck items are important to our country or they are not.

Your delay or lack of emphasis leads me to conclude either:
1.These Beck items are less important to the country than I thought.
2. They are worth supporting but you withhold because of personal or competition concerns.

PLEASE if it is the latter I ask you to put country first. Many will respect you for it. There is such a need for all of us to rally together!

Respectfully,

Jon Schmidt

Beck v. Blumenthal

Neither Rush nor Ingraham have a mention of this on their site today. Does that seem strange, given how huge it was?

I emailed this to both of them (and think we all should):

HERE IS MY EMAIL:

Michelle Malkin wrote about this (Beck v. Blumenthal) yesterday. To me, it is more significant than Rick Santelli's rant. I'm amazed that there is no link or mention on your site today.

I'm a huge fan of yours and I'm thinking: please don't make me wonder if you would withhold mention of such a significant item because you are worried about competition with Glen Beck.

Beck will take enormous heat for this. Should we rally around him?

Also if you see any potential of Beck's 912 project in helping the country would you please mention it? If not I'd hope it is because you know of something better for us to rally around.

Either these two Beck items are important to our country or they are not.

Your delay or lack of emphasis leads me to conclude either:
1.These Beck items are less important to the country than I thought.
2. They are worth supporting but you withhold because of personal or competition concerns.

PLEASE if it is the latter I ask you to put country first. Many will respect you for it. There is such a need for all of us to rally together!

Respectfully,

Jon Schmidt

We need to have at least 50 million people rally around the 9/12 project by 3 years from now (or sooner!).

Why?
There are roughly 55 million registered Republicans. There are roughly 72 million Democrats. And there are roughly 42 million registered independents.

We need 50-75 million by 3 years from now to gain the clout we need to reshape politics. This is our best shot.

Either 9/12 must succeed on this level or we will not be able to "surround them".

We need to believe this growth is possible. We need to shape our strategy with this goal in mind.

1 WISH:

To have at least 50 million people rally around the 9/12 project by 3 years from now (or sooner!).

Why?
There are roughly 55 million registered Republicans. There are roughly 72 million Democrats. And there are roughly 42 million registered independents.

We need 50-75 million by 3 years from now to gain the clout we need to reshape politics. This is our best shot.

Either 9/12 must succeed on this level or it will fail.

We need to believe this growth is possible. We need to shape our strategy with this goal in mind.

Romneys Health care plan went through a lot of change from a liberal legislature.

We all need to unite with the 9 12 project so we'll have the best chance of reversing stuff in 2010...unless anyone has a better idea for unification of conservatives.

Agreed, but what would it hurt? It can only help.

Do you think it was harmful or helpful for me to post the following on a Romney site:

POST:

I have not heard much reaction or discussion from any one to Glenn Beck’s 912 project. This is puzzling to me.

I think the people on this site could be a huge asset to 912 which needs all the momentum it can get to succeed. (Or please recommend a better effort to organize people.)

Timing might be a huge factor. Uniting now might help us clean congress in 2010…in time to reverse damage that is being done.

Is there something holding this group back?
(Glenn Beck’s endorsement of Palin? Glenn’s site competing with this site? ….?)

What are we feeling on this?

I’m just thinking that it might be more important to put the country ahead of some of the things holding us back… for the sake of the success of a movement that seems most likely to make a difference.

THE MODERATOR REPLIED:

Thanks for weighing in everyone.

As regards the 912 project, I haven't done anything with it only because of time constraints and because the news from this dysfunctional administration is flying in so fast, it's hard to keep up with everything!

SO:
BUG SUCCESSFULLY PLANTED IN EARS ON THIS SITE. I think this can only help... it would be huge if we all did it.

Then we just contact whatever large group we think might be good to unite with us and reason with them. Persuade them of the potential of rallying around these principles.

e.g. We need to comment on NRO blog. Email Tony Perkins. Call/email Hannity, Ingraham, Medved, Savage, Hewitt, etc. etc. Challenge them to examine their statesmanship.

There is strength in these amazing principles. Let's convince as many of these forums to rally as possible. If Rush sees the potential he may even rally as well.

Then just contact whatever large group you think might be good to unite with us and reason with them. Persuade them of the potential of rallying around these principles.

Comment on nro blog. Email Tony Perkins. Call/email Medved, Savage, Hewitt (who all disagree with each other on a lot...and I love that!), but who all agree on most of Glenn's principles).

What can it hurt?

Also we should be very careful before we decide to bar a group from associating with us. Let's focus on common ground and I think the rest will sort itself out. There is strength in these amazing principles. Any one who agrees should be welcome.