Having been privileged to share the stage with radio host and Fox News phenomenon Glenn Beck at a recent event, I had the opportunity to form personal impressions about a man that I had only previously observed from a distance.

I came away from the encounter convinced that Beck is real, that he has an unshakable love for our country, and that he is committed to using his platform to promote the values necessary for it to endure.

But those impressions only complicate what I perceive as a glaring inconsistency in Beck's thinking, exposed in a late summer exchange with Bill O'Reilly.  O'Reilly asked "Do you believe gay marriage is a threat to the country in any way?" Laughing, Beck mocked, "A threat to the country? No, I don't...will the gays come and get us?"

As one who frequently faces inane and myopic criticism from those on the left who don't care to actually confront his positions, it was disappointing that Beck would employ the same rhetorical condescension towards so many of his political allies whose opposition to homosexuality is far more nuanced than that.

Opposition to same sex marriage is not born out of a fear of some imminent onslaught of homosexual warlords, but out of a keen understanding that the voices advocating it are part of a larger movement seeking a cultural transformation - a larger movement that, ironically, Beck consistently exhorts his faithful to confront.

Paula Ettlebrick, once the policy director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, put it this way: "Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so...Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family; and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society."

Surely someone as well researched as Glenn Beck is aware of this.  As an enthusiastic proponent of the values of Western civilization, he undoubtedly recognizes the three "f's" that form its backbone: family, faith and freedom.  And as a watchdog and vocal antagonist of the progressive humanist movement seeking to undermine each of those foundational cornerstones, his apparent failure to identify their most insidious strategy is tragic.

For while Beck courageously blows the whistle on their bludgeoning of constitutional freedoms and their rabid assault on faith in the public square, he leaves the most vital of all institutions - the family - open to attack.

As Selwyn Duke previously articulated, what the homosexual activists seek is not the much ballyhooed "redefinition of marriage."  It can't be, since the activists have offered up no replacement definition for the institution's traditional understanding.  Indeed, they can't offer one.  The moment homosexual activists define marriage (in other words, place parameters defining what constitutes marriage and what does not), they would be guilty of the very act of moral exclusion they condemn in others.

For instance, if they seek to redefine marriage to mean the union of two human beings (regardless of gender), they have excluded from their definition those whose preferred sexual expression is polyamory or polygamy.  At that point, the very arguments they have leveled against proponents of "traditional marriage" get turned around on them.  They become the bigots, the haters, the narrow-minded.  Therefore, they will offer no new definition for marriage...thus "un-defining" it.

But un-defining the nucleus of the family is tantamount to saying the family is insignificant and unimportant in the preservation of society.  Reason and experience both tell us otherwise.

In other words, outside of physical intimidation and plunder, live and let live.  Fair enough.  But that Beck or anyone could fail to see how the "gay rights" movement violates both of those principles is astonishing.  Though they may prefer to "break legs" through legal force rather than physical, the results remain the same: charities ended, adoption agencies closed, churches bullied into compliance, and free speech stifled.  Beck should ask his own Church of Latter Day Saints how their legs are feeling after the vicious threats they received for daring to cross this supposedly passive movement.

And when it comes to pocket-picking, the sexual depravity crowd takes a back seat to no one.  Besides their demands for government funding for sex change operations, the rewriting of publicly funded school curriculum to embrace sexual anarchy, and affirmative action for those practicing homosexuality, consider the consequences that come from their cultural ascendancy.  The abandonment of sexual morality in a society breeds illegitimacy, disease, and the breakdown of the family.

Even libertarian economist Ludwig von Mises (Beck considers himself libertarian) recognized that for a free market system to thrive, people had to be willing at times to sacrifice for the future (deferred consumption).  Ask any parent who wants something better for their children...family breeds such sacrifice.  That isn't something to laugh off.

This is one of the only issues where I believe Beck is misguided.  And it's a real shame, because we desperately need his voice.  I am comforted, however, by this one other thing I have come to believe about him: he is a diligent student.  He will eventually get it right.  Given his platform and widespread influence, the sooner the better for the country he unquestionably loves.

Thanks to their elected representative Joe Donnelly, residents of Indiana's 2nd Congressional District are getting front row seats to an embarrassing spectacle: the timeless art of political deception.

Over the course of the last few months, Donnelly has been working overtime to make himself into a joke throughout much of the nation with his bizarre behavior.

For instance, though he attempts to market himself as an affable, mild-mannered Hoosier, Donnelly became the first national candidate in the country to go dirty.  He began slinging mud against his capable challenger, state lawmaker Jackie Walorski, in late July - over 3 months before the election. 

While avoiding his own voting record entirely, Donnlley alleged Walorski's "goofy ideas" have shipped jobs overseas and threaten to raise taxes.  That's pretty influential stuff for a woman who has been just one of a hundred votes in a small Midwestern state legislature.

Donnelly also made his contribution to the biennial Democrat Party strategy of scaring seniors into the voting booth by accusing Walorski of a diabolical scheme to allow Wall Street to gamble away all of Social Security's funds on the stock market.  In contrast, Donnelly informs his constituents that he is responsible for helping keep their Social Security "rock solid."  Yes, he is speaking of the same government-run Ponzi scheme that has a $7 trillion structural shortfall and begins running permanently in the red this year.  Evidently that's how Joe defines "rock solid."

Moreover, despite the fact that recent polling shows only 1% of voters in IN-2 regard immigration as the major factor in their voting decision, Congressman Donnelly spent precious campaign money on an ad bragging how he opposed his party on the issue.  In it, he displays an image of Obama and Pelosi while declaring, "That may not be what the Washington crowd wants, but I don't work for them...I work for you!"

One can almost envision Joe standing behind the controls of the wizard head feverishly shouting, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain," as Toto pulls back the drapes to reveal his voting record.  That record includes a vote for the Wall Street bailout, the failed $800 billion Obama stimulus bill, and two votes in favor of ObamaCare.  In fact, Donnelly has voted with the Pelosi/Obama agenda 88% of the time.  And though that isn't overly surprising given the fact that since 2007 Donnelly has accepted $84,000 worth of donations from liberal politicians including Pelosi, you would never know it by watching his "Mr. Independent" ads.

As if that weren't enough, Donnelly recently released an equally deceptive commercial, accusing Walorski of wanting to enact a national sales tax of 23%.  Donnelly's ad ominously recites how much money that would cost his constituents.  What Donnelly purposefully omits, however, is that the Fair Tax plan Walorski supports would also eliminate all federal income tax, estate (death) tax, gift tax, payroll tax, and would totally obliterate the IRS.  If enacted, that plan would not cost his constituents, but rather save them thousands of dollars.  It would also mean less control for Washington politicians over the people's money, which explains Donnelly's opposition.

Perhaps all this was to be expected from a politician like Donnelly who, in just four years, has morphed into the very Congressman he once campaigned against.  Back in 2006, Joe Donnelly told the voters of IN-2 that his opponent, then-Congressman Chris Chocola, was aloof and unaccountable, representing only those who agreed with him politically.  Fast-forward to current day and such complaints are embarrassingly laughable.  Consider this is the same man who is so interested in political dialogue that he has ignored almost 200 voicemail messages I have left with his press secretary on live radio requesting an interview.

But Donnelly's behavior has been getting attention far outside my radio audience.  After seeing the Congressman's ad on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Democratic National Committee Chair Tim Kaine called Donnelly crazy for running away from who he is.  Time Magazine noted Donnelly's propensity for using "unflattering photo(s)" of Obama while arguing he is, "not one of them."  Even David Gregory on NBC's Meet the Press noted the bizarre Donnelly sideshow, forcing liberal columnist E.J. Dionne into some mental gymnastics as he attempted to explain it away.

As Donnelly's propensity for half-truths and deceptive ads earns uncomfortable snickers from national audiences, his constituents should recognize what this says about his character.

Bristling at this possibility, Donnelly's campaign manager Mike Schmuhl pouted, "Joe Donnelly's independence is reflected by his pro-life, pro-gun, anti-amnesty positions."  This, of course, begs the question: what kind of a pro-life, pro-gun, anti-amnesty conservative crusader would ever vote to put the gavel in the hands of someone like Nancy Pelosi?  Yet, Joe Donnelly has done so every chance he's gotten.

One month ago, the prideful Donnelly campaign was mocking Walorski, challenging, "What evidence can her campaign produce that shows she is even competitive in this race today?"  Besides the subsequent Sarah Palin endorsement and recent polling that shows the race a dead heat, it remains Congressman Donnelly's shameless resort to deception and deceit that offers the best evidence of all.

When the mainstream media dedicated themselves to providing equal coverage between the massive "Restoring Honor" rally orchestrated by radio and TV personality Glenn Beck, and the much more, shall we say...intimate "Reclaim the Dream" rally orchestrated by radio host Al Sharpton, they undoubtedly thought they were doing their liberal brethren a huge favor.  As it turns out, they accomplished the exact opposite.

The images and sounds that emerged from the two competing events did more to damage the credibility and cause of left-wing activists from Sharpton to Obama than anything Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh or other conservative spokesmen could have done in 20 years.  Why?  Because for any American citizen willing to pay attention (and many of them did), it was a real-time depiction - no filter, no interpretation, no cosmetics - of the stark contrasts between two totally different views on this country, its heritage and its destiny.

Sure, there were the anecdotal comparisons like noting how the media incessantly referred to Beck as a "controversial conservative," while the uber-controversial and race-baiting Al Sharpton received the undeserved title of "civil rights leader."

There was the humorous exercise of comparing the cleanliness of the National Mall after Beck's rally (supposedly full of environment-hating corporate polluters) to the trashed Mall after Obama's inauguration (attended by the environmentally conscious left). 

Or the irony of liberal columnists like Alexander Zaitchik writing at the New Republic about how the Beck rally was all about Beck, when it was Al Sharpton who chose to grandstand, speaking beneath a large vinyl banner with his name tattooed across the front. 

And then there was the classic moment when ABC reporter Tahman Bradley commented on how the "almost all white" crowd at Beck's rally gave "critics an open door."  Besides the obvious self-indictment such a statement brings of Mr. Bradley's obsession with the color of people's skin, notice that there was no similar acknowledgement of Sharpton's "almost all black" crowd and what that might indicate.

But the meaningful contrasts - the ones that spoke volumes to a watching nation - were far more profound.  While the Beck rally featured speakers honoring God and country, the left's rally was laced with anger, bitterness and profanity. 

Jaime Contreras, a local SEIU president, took Sharpton's stage to proclaim, "We are here to let those folks on the Mall know that they don't represent the dream.  They sure as (expletive) don't represent me.  They represent hate-mongering and angry white people."  Meanwhile, at the Beck rally, the participants were singing "Amazing Grace."

Then came the image of a Sharpton enthusiast marching down Constitution Avenue cautioning, "We need to be shouting ?we are America.'"  This call for unity came just moments before she directed attention towards the Beck supporters and bellowed, "See all those tea baggers?!"  A unifying message indeed.

And there was Sharpton himself who, after admonishing his faithful to not be deterred by the hateful conservative hecklers they were sure to encounter, watched his own followers become the hateful hecklers.  As the Washington Post reported, "One group of black women chanted, ?Yes we did and get over it,' [while] those part of the Glenn Beck rally clapped and passed out Restore the Honor bottles of water." 

Moreover, to thinking Americans, the label of hate-filled white racism doesn't fit a crowd eagerly applauding Dr. Alveda King (MLK's niece) as she calls for restoring the "foundation of the family."

Indeed, the greatest irony of all came in the title of Sharpton's liberal lollapalooza: "Reclaiming the Dream."  As Jerome Hudson, a black man who participated in the Beck event explained, "Al Sharpton is a pretender.  He is going to tell you to pretend that the color of your skin matters.  He is going to ask you to ignore the overwhelming proof that 50 years after the Civil Rights movement, blacks are now destroying each other faster than the KKK could have ever dreamed."

That truth didn't phase Marc Morial, however, as the president of the National Urban League thundered to his fellow left-wingers, "We will not stand silent as some seek to bamboozle Dr. King's dream.  We reclaim the dream of Dr. King for the 21^st century." 

But anyone who has ever read Dr. King's "Letter From a Birmingham Jail" knows he was a man inspired by a faith and a purpose higher than himself - a belief that America's wrongs and injustices would be corrected not by the arbitrary actions of the state, but through an obedience and submission of the people to their Creator. 

On August 28, 2010, there was only one rally in Washington, D.C. preaching that message...and as Americans witnessed, it clearly wasn't the left's. 

NOTE: This column was first published at The American Thinker.