On tonight’s show, caller Jerome from Mt. Vernon had a lot of good points about why Glenn Beck should not get his own day in that city, and should not get the ‘key to the city’ (whatever actual significance that has, I don’t know).

Listen to the show here:

http://www.kgmi.com/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=4041918

My point was that if a city has a hometown boy that is as successful as Beck, they should be allowed to honor him, even if some people don’t like him. And a lot of people don’t like Glenn Beck. They hate Glenn Beck (which poses a question about hatred, but I won’t address that here).

But Jerome said he didn’t care whether Beck’s haters were on the left or the right, he said anyone that controversial shouldn’t be given the key to the city.

I brought up Howard Stern (and later, I also mentioned sports figures like Roger Clemens and Pete Rose). Many people are offended by Stern, just like many are offended by Beck. Should Stern’s hometown declare a ‘Howard Stern Day’ to honor his success? Should he be given the key to his city?

Jerome said no, and I appreciate his consistency. For him to say yes would be hypocritical.

But what about all this alleged damage to the city of Mt. Vernon. Jerome said people around the country plan to boycott the city’s businesses, even the famous tulip festival, over this apparent endorsement of Beck’s so-called hateful views. He said the city didn’t want or need this kind of attention.

Do you really believe the city of Mt. Vernon will suffer over declaring a ‘Glenn Beck Day’? Personally, I doubt it. Like they say, ‘No press is bad press’ (think about it).

Furthermore, who is responsible for any negative press for the city over this event? Certainly not Glenn Beck or those who organized the event. The negativity arose from people who decided to make a big issue out of something that’s really not a big deal.

If it weren’t for people freaking out about it, hardly anyone would know.  It was a little local story that hardly anyone beyond Whatcom and Skagit counties would really care about until people began to protest it.

A website is vowing to post  the names of people signing petitions for the state referendum to overturn the ‘everything but marriage’ bill ONLINE.

Read the story here: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009286787_webpartnership01.html

I admit, it’s legal, but it shouldn’t be happening. People signing petitions shouldn’t fear intimidation for putting their name down on a petition — it goes against our American sensibility of fairness and privacy in democracy.

This group (who you can check out online at http://whosigned.org/) should be ashamed of what they’re doing.

A couple of callers on PM Bellingham tonight wanted more info on how to sign a petition for Referendum 71. Here’s a website with more info on that:

http://protectmarriagewa.com/index.php/component/content/article/2-press-releases/130-protect-marriage-wa-organizes

I noticed that locally, Cindy Honcoop with the Washington Eagle Forum is involved with the effort, so I’m guessing you could contact her.