Why are we even talking about Glenn Beck?

There once was a fellow named Glenn,
The most repulsive of men.
He hemmed, and he hawed,
He crowed and he cawed,
Til he rolled himself back to his fen.

"By dollars paid, the U.S. Social Security program is the largest government program in the world and the single greatest expenditure in the federal budget, with 20.8% for social security, compared to 20.5% for discretionary defense and 20.1% for Medicare/Medicaid.[5] Social Security is currently the largest social insurance program in the U.S., constituting 37% of government expenditure and 7% of the gross domestic product[6] and is currently estimated to keep roughly 40% of all Americans age 65 or older out of poverty.[7] The Social Security Administration is headquartered in Woodlawn, Maryland, just to the west of Baltimore."

Social Justice if we can continue to pay for Social Security. Social Ruin if we cannot.

Of course rightwingers aren't going to like Rev. Jim Wallis - the man is a flaming left-wing liberal....the very thing I like most about him. His evangelical Christian alliance is pretty much a secondary part of the equation in my view.

Of course that doesn't make him a Marxist by a long shot, even though it may be that we'll continue to see European style socialism grow substantially in the future. Healthcare reform, although imperfect in it's present form (not nearly equitable enough), is a significant step.

I predict that republican regressivism and obstructionist politics will eventually be their demise - or one can hope.

By then, Glenn Beck will probably have amassed sufficient monies so that he won't have to live off the land, with the rest of his fellow rightwing anarchists - who will be armed and very pissed off, but since they will refuse all 'government handouts' on principle, will probably need some of that Glenn Beck money to survive.

I guess we'll have to wait and see just how generous the Becker really is with his rabid fans.....or it may be we'll decide to tax the truly wealthy at the 70% level like they do in Europe, in order to finance all those socialist benefits for the rest of us.

BTW, God bless FDR & Harry Truman for bringing us Social Security!

When are we going to have a process for canonizing the truly great civil servants of the past that served the interests of the many, rather than the few?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Wallis

A question was put forth to you.
You never answered it.
You called Glenn Beck names, Spent a few sentences attacking him.
But you never answered the question.
I have seen this pattern over & over again with the left wing radicals like yourself, Susan Jacoby. A legitimate question is put forth to someone like yourself, and you will talk about anything, but you never answer the question.
Why?
Because you know what the answer is, and you don't like it. Glenn Beck is right. But you, as a radical liberal, can not admit that, so you do what every radical liberal does when backed into a corner. You call names, you lie, but you never answer the question.
I will believe Glenn Beck any day over you, or "Rev" Wallace. How can I trust a Rev that is an admitted Marxist?
Christianity & Marxism is like oil & water, they do not mix.

Why bring up fiction into these? Archaeologists have found that the story of the Jew Bible about the covenant that God signed with the Israelites has been plagiarised from an Assyrian text dated to 670 BC

http://indianrealist.wordpress.com/2010/04/15/source-of-bible-covenant-with-god-discovered/

Modern governments have programs to help the poor, the elderly, and the sick. Some think that makes government too big, some think it is not big enough. Some people think that too much help makes people dependent, others think that urgent assistance is necessary in the moment of suffering. Some say there is not enough money, others say we should not consider money. There is a general principle, not even a principle, but an evovled custom of government to care for all of the people with special assistance to those who may need it; the details of how to do this, and how much assistance should be made available, or how much money there is to accomplish this, is beside the point.

Many Christians say that governments should not do this, on principle, because Christians will do this. But they don't.

So, then, what is their suggestion?

'I prefer the term nontheistic for Buddhism. It hits the preferred middle path. There is no God but there is a transcendent reality and that reality gives meaning to the terms good and bad.'

You can prefer anything you want, but the Zen masters would have nothing to do with a transcendent reality, much less the concepts of good and bad. In a relativistic world, you can have all of these things.....but this has nothing to do with the heart of Buddhism.
______________

Lin Chi rejected the religions conventions of Buddhism and the philosophical and scholarly approach to Buddhism teachings. In his approach, Lin Chi stressed spontaneity, absolute freedom and emptiness:

"Many students come to see me from all over the place. Many of them are not free from their entanglement with objective things. I treat them right on the spot. If their trouble is due to grasping hands, I strike there. If their trouble is a loose mouth, I strike them there. If their trouble is hidden behind their eyes, it is there I strike. So far I have not found anyone who can set himself free. This is because they have all been caught up in the useless ways of the old masters. As for me, I do not have one only method which I give to everyone, but I relieve whatever the trouble is and set men free."

"Friends, I tell you this: there is no Buddha, no spiritual path to follow, no training and no realization. What are you so feverishly running after? Putting a head on top of your own head, you blind idiots? Your head is right where it should be. The trouble lies in your not believing in yourselves enough. Because you don't believe in yourselves you are knocked here and there by all the conditions in which you find yourselves. Being enslaved and turned around by objective situations, you have no freedom whatever, you are not masters of yourselves. Stop turning to the outside and don't be attached to my words either. Just cease clinging to the past and hankering after the future. This will be better than ten years' pilgrimage."

When you're really free, you can pursue social justice with the genius of real wisdom.........otherwise, write another book.

'I prefer the term nontheistic for Buddhism. It hits the preferred middle path. There is no God but there is a transcendent reality and that reality gives meaning to the terms good and bad.'

You can prefer anything you want, but the Zen masters would have nothing to do with a transcendent reality, much less the concepts of good and bad. In a relativistic world, you can have all of these things.....but this has nothing to do with the heart of Buddhism.
______________

Lin Chi rejected the religions conventions of Buddhism and the philosophical and scholarly approach to Buddhism teachings. In his approach, Lin Chi stressed spontaneity, absolute freedom and emptiness:

"Many students come to see me from all over the place. Many of them are not free from their entanglement with objective things. I treat them right on the spot. If their trouble is due to grasping hands, I strike there. If their trouble is a loose mouth, I strike them there. If their trouble is hidden behind their eyes, it is there I strike. So far I have not found anyone who can set himself free. This is because they have all been caught up in the useless ways of the old masters. As for me, I do not have one only method which I give to everyone, but I relieve whatever the trouble is and set men free."

"Friends, I tell you this: there is no Buddha, no spiritual path to follow, no training and no realization. What are you so feverishly running after? Putting a head on top of your own head, you blind idiots? Your head is right where it should be. The trouble lies in your not believing in yourselves enough. Because you don't believe in yourselves you are knocked here and there by all the conditions in which you find yourselves. Being enslaved and turned around by objective situations, you have no freedom whatever, you are not masters of yourselves. Stop turning to the outside and don't be attached to my words either. Just cease clinging to the past and hankering after the future. This will be better than ten years' pilgrimage."

When you're really free, you can pursue social justice with the genius of real wisdom.........otherwise, write another book.

I do not see how any religious view of what the Christians call "social justice" and the Jews call "justice" has bearing on public discussions of social services.

The fact that many people do is what we should be discussing. Religion and state were separated, theoretically, more than two hundred years ago. That religionists legislate, that presidents, including this one, consult Christian and Catholic leaders--these are the issues we should be discussing.

How is it that against the law, in spirit and in fact, we have religionists legislating?

JimZ1

Yes, agreed. Ignoring Glenn Beck would be like ignoring a melanoma on your arm.

Let us, please, leave religion out of the discussion of social justice; the record of the various religions and denominations regarding social justice for non-members is horrendous. Even today there is a missionary aspect to institutional help for those in need.

As to Beck, pfft.

We can turn to Kant's categorical imperative as a sufficient basis for the need for social justice.

What a bore. Did not read comments. Beck and religion--can you imagine a more dull combination. Time for sleep. It is more interesting.

Ignoring people like Glenn Beck, although tempting, is like ignoring a mold problem in your shower. At first, it starts as a speck on the wall and appears like it's not worth any extra effort. Then you condition yourself to ignore the growing problem. Finally, the mold is everywhere, and the only way to get rid of it is to tear the wall down.

Very nice! I think it's rather telling that the most insightful view on this issue is also the briefest. It doesn't take many words to call a spade a spade.

"The point being, everyone is entitled to a point of view .... particularly paid columnists!"

Perhaps it includes Glenn Beck as well.

I prefer the term nontheistic for Buddhism. It hits the preferred middle path. There is no God but there is a transcendent reality and that reality gives meaning to the terms good and bad.

John Stuart Mill is an okay substitute as a pragmatic approach to morality but without striving for the wisdom of the Buddha, self delusion and unforeseeable consequences can give rise to moral disaster using Utilitarianism alone.

I agree with you but I love Porky and Donald and find them infinitely more intelligent than Glenn Beck. Beck is a shill; he needs to be ignored. It is all an act to make money. No more Glenn Beck please.

'The Buddha was also an unmarried, childless atheist'.....according to legend, the first two are not true, of course. Whether he ever sought a divorce or paid child support is lost to antiquity.

The point being, everyone is entitled to a point of view .... particularly paid columnists!

As far as social justice and Buddhism go, it has often been said that without attaining a high degree of enlightenment typical of a bodhisattvha, individuals are unable to have an appreciable effect on the fate or destiny of either themselves or others....in other words, have no real free will at all, and are simply swept along by a myriad of causes, effects, and circumstances.

That said, capitalist societies over-compensate the few living at the top of the economic pyramid by vast degrees. The 'socialist' policies that bring ordinary folks Medicare, Social Security, and a host of other benefits are clearly an attempt to restore some semblance of balance to the phenomenon of disproportionate wealth that we live with on a daily basis in the USA.

Protecting/defending that wealth is what mouthpieces like Glenn Beck and his brethren at Fox News are very well paid to do.

The odds greatly favor the rich, powerful, and well-connected at every moment. Social justice is for the most part, the justice that one can afford.......

We are all living a life out of balance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi

'Since a childless atheist has zero stake in the long term future, why should we listen to her?'

The Buddha was also an unmarried, childless atheist - why should we listen to him?? Much less the unmarried, semi-mythical Yeshua of Nazareth...

In the mean time, Glen Beck is bought and paid for by Ruppert Murdock and company...a virtual windup doll for rightwing interests that speechifies reified libertarian, hyper-capitalist nonsense along with other and various highly paid 'droids employed by Fox News.

He is most certainly an excellent representative of the modern day republican viewpoint........

Dear Susan Jacoby and others:

Not only are you true to form on most of your books that I have read, but you are right on that the printed media take one minute to respond to people like Glenn Beck.

A person who belongs in a nut house is not always recognized by those they pass on the street!

I agree completely that we shouldn't be talking about Glenn Beck. In my opinion as a psychologist he is either a paranoid schizophrenic or the slimiest of con men. And he is extremely dangerous.

The reason we are talking about him is that the Washington Post will do anything to make money.

I think we listen to Beck because he has more viewers and listeners, and has sold more books than anyone on this panel.

If the NT supports socialism it must be a strange type of socialism: For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. (2 Thessalonians 3:10)

Btw., don't want to burst anybody's religious bubble, but what Jesus or Batman thinks about "social" justice is irrelevant.

This is a secular society. We have, theoretically, separated religion from state.

That said, Jesus' economy is referred to as Christian communism in secular literature. It should be needless to say that Marx is not implied in this construction.

Susan has it right in my opinion. We all of course have a right to our respective thoughts, but why would we spend any time trying to respond to Glenn Beck's illogical thoughts. He attempts these correlations of various ideas, and then suggests cause and effect, which defy any logic. Sadly, I think it is more a comment on our intelligence as a thinking community then it is on Glenn Beck. There are a lot of people out there who are looking for simple answers to these complex issues in our society, and seem to respond favorably to anything that clearly directs blame at either government or at this things called the liberal establishment. He's hit a multi-million dollar entertainment home run.

Steve Wernick's post on "social justice" is fairly clear, except that he is using the Christian (circum)locution, in consideration of his audience.

There is no Judaic equivalent for the Christian notion of charity. There is no justice other than "social" or, societal, justice. Hence, from a Judaic point of view, the phrase "social justice" is redundant. It alarms me that Christian theology does not get this.

Poverty is an INJUSTICE. It is MORALLY WRONG. IT is the MORAL OBLIGATION of Jews, and any other right-thinking people, to do what they can to end it.
-------------------------------------
God's requirements for building a just society

Q:Fox News commentator Glenn Beck claims that faith-based calls for "social justice" are really ideological calls for "forced redistribution of wealth . . . under the guise of charity and/or justice," and that Christians should leave their churches if they preach or practice "social justice."

Rev. Jim Wallis disagrees, saying social justice is a faith-based commitment "to serve the poor and to attack the conditions that lead to poverty," central tents of the teachings of Jesus and at the heart of biblical faith.

Who's right? How does the pursuit of justice fit into your faith? Is 'social justice' an ideology or a theology?

Hebrew has no word for charity. The word tzedakah, normally translated as charity, really means justice or righteousness. The not-so-subtle implication is that social justice is not a matter of ideology. It is theology. The Bible itself expresses this view in its many injunctions to provide for the widow, the orphan, and the poor - those who are vulnerable. Centuries of Jews have understood these injunctions as mitzvot, commandments, part of God's requirements for building a just society and living a holy life.

The rabbis reinforced this notion of social justice as a religious imperative in the way in which they structured the daily prayer service. In my prayer book, Siddur Sim Shalom, every morning begins with a reflection on this rabbinic text: "Whoever does deeds of social justice is considered as having filled the world with lovingkindness, as it is written: 'God loves social justice: the earth is filled with the lovingkindness of the Lord'" (Talmud Bavli, Sukkah 49b). It is a reminder as I begin each day that God requires me to be engaged in bringing God's will into the world through acts of kindness toward all who are vulnerable. Social justice is a requirement if you are to live a holy life.

By Steven Wernick | April 13, 2010; 11:30 AM ET

Can I get an "Amen!"

edbyronadams asked: Since a childless atheist has zero stake in the long term future, why should we listen to her?
___________________________________________

1)... because when you categorically dismiss the thoughts of a person because of who she/he is you engage in ad hominem. One could just as easily ask why should anyone listen to you- a practicer of logical fallacy? Neither question carried meaning.
2) Re: Glenn Beck...
Beck is the current Moses to the Lost Children of Panic. His astounding foolery gives us a glimpse of wingnut madness and its momentary direction. He provides amusement and early warning.

I'm amazed that Americans worry about the term social justice. We should worry more about social injustice.

The Glenn Beck's of the world do one helpful thing -- they intentionally or not help to illuminate the greedy and self-centered.

The only other helpful thing Glenn Beck does is demonstrate that the best comedy is not found on the comedy channel, but on fox news.

YEAL9 I'm afraid you don't understand how non-profits and endowments work. All of them invest the money they don't use during the year as seed money for future years. Many charities function the same way. It allows them plan for the future and not be dependent year in and year out on donations. The Gov't and IRS are of course aware of this and allow it under the idea that they perform a 'social good'.
As a rule of thumb before I donate to any charity or non-profit I inspect their balance sheets and income stmts and if they aren't using at least 2/3 of the money for the cause in question I consider them top heavy in admin and won't contribute.
P.S. Look hard at the non admin stmts as many organizations try to lump fees paid to consultants into the charity works sections. I always subtract those out.

Posted by: haveaheart |
Clearly, Beck has been bankrolled by the LDS church

Haveaheart - you need to go to OZ and get a brain. You are a nut case unconstrained by facts.

Since a childless atheist has zero stake in the long term future, why should we listen to her?

Exactly!, Susan. You put it best in the fewest words. I care more about my dog's opinion than anything spewing from Glen Beck's mouth.

I don't care what talking heads like Glenn Beck or Susan Jacoby say. The term "social justice" sounds a bit too much like "entitlement." We as a nation should be working to maintain a country that provides opportunity and upward mobility for all. What people do with their opportunities is up to them. I think "social injustice" is when you work your life away only to find that government forces you to pay for the prodigal son who spent his life on Caribbean cruises, homes he couldn't afford, and accumulating one VD after another. Paying for the prodigal son should be a personal choice.

This is the most rational response to the question. Who cares what a highly paid, offensive crank wants religions to be? The best response to him is to ignore him.

Thank you Susan...my sentiments exactly.

Thanks Susan !

I found myself on this page - seeing all these stories about Beck - thinking the VERY same thing as you posted- WHY are we even...

Kind of like my joke I never fully succeed in telling to people about "Today is international silence day" and then I comment that I really can't announce that - regarding the Why are we even ...

My minute is up - WELL said Susan - indeed. It's nice to be reminded that reason DOES exist.

I hear Barney the Dinosaur has 17 actual real suits ! JK - trying to change the subject from B... what's his name ? heh

"My question for the week is why any sane person would waste five minutes responding to anything Glenn Beck has said. You might as well debate Porky Pig or Donald Duck."

Actually, Porky and Donald at least have the gift of comic relief: there is nothing funny about Beck, and nothing humorous about his minions.

To address Susan's question about why we listen and respond to Glenn Beck, it's because his outlook is common among Americans, and debating him is a kind of proxy for debating the views of many who vote and their representatives who do make our laws.

The relationship between Christian values and politics is complex (thank goodness; politics doesn't get much worse than when it's a straightforward application of religion, like in Islam) because Jesus was an apocalyptic who told his listeners to give up what they had and be moral because God was about to overthrow the existing political order (and put Jesus in charge, although he didn't say that publicly.) He didn't address how moral views were supposed to be inculcated into our politics.

The question is what makes a better society, social justice or tough love? There's no worse economic situation than single parenthood, but how do you dissuade people from doing it without creating penalties under which the children themselves suffer? That will always be an unresolved issue as long as our country is made up of people with different values.

On Faith: A reason for social justice
Who would have thought that the concept of social justice would be at the heart of religious controversy? Oddly enough, it is this very concept which has polarized modern Christianity.

Both Beck and Wallis are wrong!

Glenn Beck has become a household name preaching religious extremism and the evils of social justice. Those that take him seriously are quite frankly insane. Jim Wallis on the other hand is a much less known religious extremist. Unlike Beck, Wallis identifies himself more on the other side of the political divide, but has maintained like Beck that he doesn’t support any political party (wink wink).

You can read the rest of my response to this topic:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-8928-Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner~y2010m4d13-On-Faith-A-reason-for-social-justice

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

Your question "Why are we even talking about Glenn Beck?" begs a larger question: What was Glenn Beck talking about? What was Christ talking about?

I think that the two questions can easily be reconciled IF one has any desire to do other than throw bricks at one of the Left's favorite whipping boys.

True, Christ did speak of caring for the poor and needy, but he spoke of caring for them yourself, of going into your own pocket, and helping one who needed help. He NEVER spoke of forcing someone else to do so. He always spoke about our own personal responsibility, NOT of any formalized program of taxing, or other means of putting things into the hands of the needy. He always spoke of your own responsibility to reach out and care for those who needed help.

What I heard Glenn Beck say was to watch out for those who used the pulpit or any other means to push for things that FORCE transfers of means from the hands of one person to another. That is the one characteristic of all of the calls for "Social Justice" in the past. Whenever you heard it, the next thing that you heard was to institute a "tax" or to take an industry into communal hands, or some other means of taking from the rich to help the poor, always with an un-spoken inclusion that the "rich" is someone other than "me" who obviously has more that they can be just in keeping.

These plans ALWAYS include government programs to FORCE one to share, through some means of intimidation or law, and NEVER base themselves in digging into the pockets of the ones that are calling for these "social justice" programs.

I think that, if given the chance, most would agree that anyone calling for these forced programs are doing exactly what Beck said. They are using "code words" which have come to mean what he said they do mean: Programs of force, of Socialization (with a capital S) and Communism (with a capital C) any of which I think have been discredited of themselves as being unworkable and dangerous.

This drivel about Christ teaching Communism etc miss that point. He NEVER talked of forcing another to do what he said should be done. He always left things to the free will of the hearer. The programs and people Glenn Beck warned of are those that want to force YOU to do things, not of your love for your brother or sister, but out of fear of what will happen to you at the hands of some government agency if you don't.

To that extent, I have no problem understanding what he said and meant. and I have to agree with him.

I've always believed Porky's tragic speech impediment kept great secrets of wisdom and knowledge forever locked inside of him.

Hi Arminius,

Since you're having difficulty reporting CCNL/YEAL9, have you considered emailing David Waters directly about the bothersome blogger?

According to Wikipedia,

"Beck was raised as a Roman Catholic and attended private Immaculate Conception Catholic School in Mount Vernon, WA."

Another disgruntled x-Catholic, I guess.

"New Testament Supports Socialism

Not only are communial communities mentioned in the Epistles, but there is also passages in Acts.

There is a parable wherein it states that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven."

And all the major religions have their version:

Judaism

The Babylonian Talmud applies the aphorism to unthinkable thoughts. To explain that dreams reveal the thoughts of a man's heart, the product of reason rather than the absence of it, the rabbis say:

They do not show a man a palm tree of gold, nor an elephant going through the eye of a needle. [1]

A Midrash on the Song of Songs uses the phrase to speak of God's willingness and ability beyond comparison, to accomplish the salvation of a sinner:

The Holy One said, open for me a door as big as a needle's eye and I will open for you a door through which may enter tents and [camels?][2]

Christianity

"The eye of a needle" is part of a phrase attributed to Jesus by the synoptic gospels:

...I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.
The parallel versions appear in Matthew 19:23-24, Mark 10:24-25 and Luke 18:24-25.

The saying was a response to a young rich man who had asked Jesus what he needed to do in order to inherit eternal life. Jesus replied that he should keep the commandments, to which the man stated he had done. Jesus responded, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." The young man became sad and was unwilling to do this. Jesus then spoke this response, leaving his disciples astonished.

Islam

The Quran uses this phrase to express the idea of something that is unlikely to happen:

To those who reject Our signs and treat them with arrogance, no opening will there be of the gates of heaven, nor will they enter the garden, until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle: Such is Our reward for those in sin. Al-Araf (The Heights) 7:40

Simply more borrowing on the part of the NT and the Muslim scribes??? Of course!!!

And no doubt the Jewish scribes got their version from the Babylonians.

Well, I learned one thing from this week's exchange of opinion: Glenn Beck is a Mormon.

So, a lot of disjointed pieces have fallen into place. Clearly, Beck has been bankrolled by the LDS church and positioned to do maximum damage to legitimate presidential candidates in 2012 so that Mitt Romney can roll into Washington as our next president.

Ok, I'll concede that that sounds awfully like conspiracy theory -- a mode of thinking that I don't generally indulge in.

However, since we know that the Mormon hierarchy happily pours unlimited millions into any cause they want to dominate, perhaps it's not so far-fetched to consider that they may have tapped Convert Beck to start laying groundwork for the "new and improved" Romney campaign.

After all, Mormons do a great deal of advance planning and have excellent organizing skills. You don't defeat ballot initiatives like gay marriage in California without media-savvy operatives, and the Mormons seem to have those in quantity.

It appears that Glenn Beck is the Mormons' latest -- and most divisive -- mouthpiece for the bigotry and intolerance that characterize so much of their culture and theology.

"You might as well debate Porky Pig or Donald Duck."

Or Yeal9/CCNL.

I think that the wheels began to come off of Christianity as the (unspecified by name) Church rose to the heights of political power and wealth, while the basics of Christianity is intensely personal, having little to do with power and wealth. And Christianity has never really recovered.

I think that this whole issue is being over-thought. If Jesus lived today, I do not suppose that he would be a Marxist or a Communist, or any kind of socialist at all; but I am sure he would not be a Republican wearing an expensive suit and tie; in fact, the very image is laughable.

But aside from all of that, Glenn Beck IS a boring babbling boob.

the fact that jesus as described in the bible would be a socialist, if not a communist, is kind of a touchy subject for most of the "religious right".

If you have not already done so, please report Yeal9, aka CCNL, to the Moderator for constant spamming of the same few cut-and-paste posts over the entirety of On Faith. None of the posts are pertinent to the subject, and are often bigoted.

Social justice? (as in universal health care, food stamps and Social Security) Yes, as long as it is monitored with controls, audits and inspections.

An added note: CEOs, CFOs and directors of "non-profits" who pay themselves salaries of $100,000 + every year from the donations to their groups are not practicing social justice. And it is obvious from the IRS Form 990s, that many "non-profits" are simply investment vehicles for dodging taxes on dividends, interest and capital gains.

To wit: guidestar.org

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs

Investment holdings in publicly-traded securities, 2007-2008 tax period, $6, 145,612. Dividends and interest from these investment for the same period, $705,970.

Director Josephine Heindel’s salary is $184,000 including savings plans. VP of Finance, Robert Cordes’ salary $159,000 to include savings plans. Three other directors make in the range of $140,000/year.

Michelle Obama was previously a director of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. One assumes she was making $140,000/yr.

The Institute of Global Engagement’s Mission Statement:

Chris Seiple is the president of this non-profit organization. His salary in 2008 was $162,261. Approximately 30% of this group funding is from government grants.

One of the largest expenditures for this group is the money paid to an independent contractor in China, Beijing Pu Shi Zhi Quan Cultural Co Mei Lin Hua Yaun, Beijing, China for cultural consultancy. Strange that government grant money is being used in China for cultural consultancy???

The ACLU

This "non-profit" has over $225 million invested in mutual funds, notes and bonds.