And so he was, but you also must remember that we have to get back to THAT rule of law, clear out the excesses and idiots in government and then...maybe, if it grows...we can then decide how were going to trim it, improve it and make it last.

The proper mind set does not exist in today's culture, the states nor the whole of the country...what you speak of, take a consensus within a convention of the states and that might very well take another generation.
That's my take...we let the rabbit go way to deep into the hole.

Do you think it's wrong to say a) our society is a great example of a free society compared to most of history, and b) it would be an even better example if it followed the Constitution better. I assert A and B. I think Beck is asserting B, without denying or commenting on A. I don't remember whether he asserted the Constitution could never be improved upon.

No, after thinking about this, and sleeping on it, I have to caution you. He only tells them what they want to hear, and with a child's story as his paradigm. I liked "Willie Wonka" also. (I saw the Gene Wilder version, not the modern Johnnie Depp version.) But, think about this.

The Constitution was not handed down like Tablets from God. It was an artifact of the Enlightenment. It was our third compact, following the Articles of Confederation and the Albany Plan of Union. Even before Albany, the colonies of New England and New Jersey formed an alliance to defend against Indians. Our Constitution exists within an important and salient context. It is not a unique artifact.

And, it has flaws.

I have tried to discuss some of them here. No one else seems up to it. At the end of Atlas Shrugged Judge Narrangansett is amending the document. So, I have asked here the Gulch, what are the contradictions in the Constitution. (See here: https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post... but we have had other discussions.)

I have seen this in Catholic shurches and in synagogues: the holy man holds aloft the Holy Book for all to see.

Glenn Beck's was not offering a reasoned and empirical examination of the Constitution in order to identify the best within it, and to suggest improvements. He was only offering the audience a golden ticket to a chocolate bar. .. and they ate it up.

I do not like this speaker, but I like and agree with what he's saying here. It's mostly just facts, facts about what the Constitution says and means that we often ignore. It's important we say it aloud as he does here.