Joseph A. Glean
|Joseph A. Glean|
|Virginia House District 44|
|High school||Mount Vernon High School|
|Date of birth||November 12, 1974|
|Place of birth||Alexandria, Virginia, U.S.A.|
|Religion||"Follow Christ and read the Bible."|
"What I admire most about Mason," says Glean, "is that he despised politics and that he refused to succumb to the idle demands for compromise. As I see it, he was the quintessential anti-politician. And I view his brand of statesmanship as having represented something of an antidote— he was our founding generation's antidote to political despotism and the ever-encroaching spectre of bureaucratic elitism."
A former student of Constitutional Government (1994) at Liberty University, Glean was recruited to serve as the State Campaign Coordinator for Virginia for Alan Keyes   in 2008. Working in coordination with a group of concerned citizens from across the nation (calling themselves America's Party), he led a successful, "statewide, grassroots effort" to register Dr. Alan Keyes, a former Reagan ambassador, with the Virginia State Board of Elections, as a properly declared Write-In Candidate.
During this campaign, Glean published a series of op-ed pieces for America's Party News  , in which he criticized both major political parties for abandoning America's founding principles and for the deliberate and decided manner by which both parties "have postured themselves to become and to forever remain" what he described as "decidedly pro-abortion." He wrote , "I suppose that the pro-choice folks may indeed find themselves torn between these two gentlemen – John McCain and Barack Obama – but as for those of us who are conscientious, pro-life Americans, it would seem that the Party bosses have robbed us any real choice that we might otherwise have had under a two-party system. For those of us who claim to be values-voters, we have been left with no recourse but to decisively reject both of these phony presidential contenders on Election Day, and to do so in the only language that these folks seem to understand, and that is the language of the ballot box."
Outside of politics, Glean is a keyboard player of noted proficiency  , having played live events and recorded projects with other world class musicians. He was nominated "Best Keyboard Player" of 2001 by Midnight Metal Magazine (Brazil). In December 2003, Takeshi Hirai of Young Guitar Magazine (Japan), commented that although Glean was "almost unknown," his keyboarding technique was on par with Swedish keyboard virtuoso Jens Johansson. Reality In Focus, an album he recorded with the group Magnitude Nine, debuted at No. 8 on the Japanese charts about 10 years ago. Glean has also recorded with musicians from the Maranatha! Praise Band, dcTalk, and has made live appearances with members of the multi-platinum Christian rock band Stryper. The song, Midnight Minuetto, released by Glean in 2008, and written in collaboration with WordSong musician Tim Harris, has been said to contain a strong, patriotic message advocating moral courage and political activism.
Joseph Glean speaking on campaign issues.
Personal life and family
Glean was born at Alexandria Hospital and is a lifelong resident of Mount Zephyr / Mount Vernon Manor, a small community located in Alexandria, Virginia, just north of Fort Belvoir, at the south end of Fairfax County. He describes himself  as a devoted husband and proud father of four daughters and one son (deceased). He went to school locally, attending Woodley Hills Elementary, Walt Whitman Intermediate, and Mount Vernon High School, and afterward spent some time at Liberty University, where he studied Constitutional Government under Dr. Kevin L. Clauson, head of the university's government department.
As a FCPS graduate, he earned an advanced studies diploma with the Governor's Seal of Academic Excellence (praesidis cum sigillo), and his name was published in the 1992 edition of Who's Who Among American High School Students. He was a member of Mount Vernon's District Champion Swim Team, student vice president of DECA, and active in many extracurricular activities. For ten years, from the age of eight until about the age of eighteen, Glean studied martial arts under Grandmaster Jun Saeng Yoo.
He describes himself as a genealogy enthusiast who wears the hat of "family historian." He and his family descend from the Glean family of old New York, whose life in America dates back to at least 1665. The earliest known Glean served as a military officer at Fort James (cf. Fort Amsterdam), under Gov. Richard Nicolls, and he owned property in Long Island. According to Glean, the most "famous" members of this family were Anthony Glean (the lieutenant who raised the American Flag at Battery Park on Evacuation Day 1783), Oliver Glean (the clerk who worked under George Washington's Secretary of Recording and helped to catalog Washington's Revolutionary War Papers), and John McComb (the architect of New York City Hall, the old Cape Henry Lighthouse in Virginia Beach, and the home of Alexander Hamilton). He notes that his ancestry includes "a satisfying number" of abolitionists who not only spoke out against slavery, but also fought against it. He says that his family is of mixed ancestry. The earliest Glean's in America were primarily of European descent— they were British and Dutch settlers. But this only represents one branch of his ancestry (the direct male line). Other branches include some Jewish, some Caribbean, some African, some German, some Irish, some Puerto Rican. "And on top of everything else," he notes, "my wife is Hungarian." His Jewish great-grandfather (twice removed) was from Posen (the Polish region of Prussia), spent some years in London designing cabinet furniture for the famous Rothschild family, and later came to the United States. He also points out that Governor-General Sir Carlyle Glean, Grenada's current head-of-state, "probably falls into the family equation somewhere, although I'm not yet aware of any direct connection."
He and his wife, Edina, have been deeply engaged in the task of homeschooling their children. They have long supported the efforts of Michael Farris and the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), and officially became lifetime members of the organization in 2008. Glean also speaks highly of organizations such as the Alliance for the Separation of School and State and authors such as Sheldon Richman, who understand that the fundamental principle at stake is freedom. "Regrettably, there are forces out there that wish to mandate a compulsory, state-imposed education system. And what would be the main objective behind such a mandate? To suppress the beliefs of those, like my wife and myself, who believe in preserving the right to provide our own children a decent, private education at home. Too often, homeschool advocates get caught up in subjective arguments, often pointing to examples that suggest homeschooling is 'more effective' than other forms of education. But I think its dangerous to hinge our general advocacy of homeschool education on notions relating to 'quality' or arguments over which method is 'better' than the next. As I see it, the most fundamental rationale for homeschooling is this: If we don't routinely exercise our liberties, we're doomed to lose them. And that's precisely why my wife and I homeschool our children— so that our children's right to a home education, and our freedom to provide it, won't inadvertently be lost on account of our own general apprehensiveness to exercise true independence in such matters. The only way any of us will ever perfect our independence is to develop the habit of putting it into practice."
2011 Virginia House of Delegates election
Glean is being run as an Independent candidate in the 2011 election for Virginia House of Delegates District 44, on the ballot by voter petition. He will face incumbent Scott Surovell (D) and John Barsa (R) in the November 8 general election.
He says, "Where I differ from these two candidates is that I am not a politician or even an aspiring politician, for that matter. On the contrary, I'm just an ordinary citizen whose moral character happens to represent the heart of the overwhelming majority of people in Northern Virginia. And unlike the two 'party-nominated' candidates who are gunning for this position in fulfillment of their own political ambition, I'm being run as an Independent candidate, on the ballot by voter petition. With them, the focus is primarily on the next election; with me, the next generation. Regrettably, the party elitists have nearly perfected their dominance over the moral sovereignty of the American people by allowing this country to be turned into a land of medieval despotism. The value of human life is considered, by those in power, to be relatively negligible, especially when compared against the phony merit that they place in their own corrupt political aspirations. And in this age of 'enlightenment,' the renaissance of social progressivism, our women and children are treated as mere pawns— expendable commodities being exploited by the political parties, in a consolidated effort to preserve their seats of political power."
"As many observant individuals have been pointing out lately (and as Dr. Alan Keyes has been saying for quite some time), we are no longer dealing with two parties. We are now dealing with one elite faction, with two wings. One wing is called the Republican, and one is called the Democrat. And on the national level, those two wings have it as their aim to consolidate power and control in the hands of the elite and take it away from the people at large. However, by the grace of Almighty God, I remain optimistic that the American people will soon awaken to the reality that we now face as a people. We all remember, for instance, how the 'tea party' movement broke out across our land like welcomed beams of sunlight emanating from a distant horizon. For those of us "on the watch", it was like the dawning of a brand new day from the midst of a thick, oppressive darkness. And though the political parties have done their best to seize control of this movement, in hopes of marginalizing its influence, I view this small, preliminary struggle as just the opening chapter of a larger struggle that awaits, as more and more people seek to throw off the yoke of bondage that has been placed on us by this two-party oligarchy, and as we continue to organize ourselves and look for effective opportunities to finally rid our government of these self-appointed rulers of our nation."
"If we, as a people, can somehow find a way to overcome our fear of confronting these tyrants, and a way to overcome the subtle distrust we have of one another, then perhaps ballots (not bullets) will be the prevailing factor that ultimately liberates our people, as we resolve to once again secure our freedom from this new generation of slaveholders."
Advocacy and core values
In the following excerpts, Glean speaks on the key issues of his campaign :
"As a concerned citizen, I advocate fiscal conservatism, personal responsibility, social justice, and good old-fashioned common sense; patriotism; moral courage; compassionate statesmanship; limited government; peace through strength; the due performance of any public or private duty; the habit of devoting proper attention to one’s family; the careful education of our children; and the observance of true religious freedom; each of these items representing a small, yet profoundly significant expression of self-government. On constitutional law, I favor the 'good behavior' method of jurisprudence, over judicial tyranny; state rights, over a consolidated national government; a republican administration 'of, by, and for the people,' over an aristocratic one; strict economy and the reduction of taxes to the most basic wants of the Treasury, over extravagant expenditures and high taxes."
"I support cracking down on illegal immigration; abolishing the State income tax; defending our right to bear arms; prosecuting voter fraud; exercising the right to provide our children with a decent, private education at home; encouraging Christian stewardship; and safeguarding our moral sovereignty against all forms of environmental radicalism, such as those which, today, are being used to chip away at our sovereignty under the imaginary pretext of global warming concerns, or those which I see as being more principally intended to rob us – young and old alike – of our God-given 'right to life,' under the phony premise of overpopulation. I am for restoring our freedom of choice when it comes to the purchasing of general commodities such as raw milk, light bulbs, vaccines, and health insurance; and I would rigorously oppose any Federal initiative that seeks to limit our access to nutrition information on packaged foods. Last but not least, I am devoted to the preservation of life, liberty, happiness, and safety, the blessings of liberty that were enumerated by George Mason and his colleagues in 1776, under the Virginia Declaration of Rights. I believe in affirming the fact of life in the womb; rendering equal and exact justice to all; protecting the sanctity of innocent life; respecting the established constitutional amendment process; preserving our inherent endowments under natural law; rejecting the modern day 'slaveholder' position; and cultivating a true respect for individual rights."
"The biggest problem we face in Northern Virginia and across the nation," according to Glean, "is voter apathy."  He says, "There's hardly any doubt that our 'free election' system has become something of a sham. Two parties, same result, no matter how you slice it. I advocate the restoration of America's founding principles and the belief that ordinary citizens must find the courage to declare their independence from the political parties. Free America must unite to oppose these tyrants! On Election Day 2011, I propose that we set aside whatever imaginary obligations that we feel we owe to the political parties and, for once in our lives, simply vote our conscience— for the sake of all that is good, decent, and proper; and for the enduring love of God and country. An untold measure of moral influence is there for us to express and affirm at the ballot-box. If ordinary citizens would simply take a stand and exert some of that influence abortion, same-sex marriage, neo-secularism, and other ruthless, state-imposed initiatives, might be kept in their proper dominion, and restrained from encroaching upon the free people of the Commonwealth of Virginia."
In one of his campaign essays, entitled The Biggest Problem We Face, Glean borrows the striking analogy J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis, where he reminds readers that ordinary citizens hold the power and the moral wherewithal to save America, and yet, instead of exerting their moral influence, they simply stand on the sidelines "like trees." As he points out, "We see the Amish, the Quakers, and the Mennonites, who choose to remain largely disengaged from politics, and who are happy to continue along that path. We see the Jewish, the Catholics, and the Evangelicals, who have become accustomed to setting their moral consciousness aside at the ballot-box. Or those who have fallen under the discouraging influence of men who conjure up tales of the Illuminati, the Bilderbergers, and the Masons, who claim that we're sailing on a ship that 'ain't worth savin'.' We see men of great influence, Jewish rabbis of distnguished moral character, and pastors of the Christian flock who, for whatever untold reason, refuse the speak the word that would instantly cause throngs of good men and women to spring into action and rise to the rescue of all that is good, decent, and proper."
Glean has raised a number of concerns over the existence of party elitism— an extension of the concerns that he raised during the 2008 presidential election.
"Surovell held a fundraiser at the beginning of the year where he used the mere prospect of my candidacy as the basis for his campaign to raise an additional $270,000 in his political war chest . What does this tell us about Scott Surovell? That he would rather be succeeded by a Republican than by an Independent candidate. And why should the prospect of being succeeded by an Independent candidate bother him? It's because all of his political confidence rests in the preservation of what has essentially become a closed election system. He understands the same thing that voters and other ordinary citizens in Northern Virginia are finally beginning to see for themselves— that the American people are locked in an almost hopeless situation: 'Two parties, same result,' no matter how you slice it."
As for media characterizations of Democrats and Republicans constantly being at odds, Glean calls most of it "the deliberate propagandization of empty political rhetoric," and claims that it's all aimed at legitimizing what he views as "an elaborate sham dance." To this he adds, "Even when they win at the polls, it's plain to see that the Republicans no longer present any real threat to the Democrats. While it may be true that the two parties have certain philosophical differences that have, thus far, kept them divided on a few of the final particulars, on the whole these 'parties' actually represent two separate wings of the same elite faction. And this is precisely why Surovell would rather be succeeded by a Republican, than by an Independent, such as myself. It all has to do with the preservation of polical power. It all has to do with the treasonous act of working to consolidate power and control in the hands of the elite, by taking it away – and keeping it away – from the people at large. This is the aim of the politicians, the political parties, the money people, and the pro-exploitative, pro-oppressive, neo-secular forces they all seem to happily and unashamedly represent. At this point, all that's left for them to fight over are the minor incidentals of what actually represents the wholesale abduction of our moral sovereignty, by those in power."
Glean supports Equal Protection for Posterity. He says, "We must return to an understanding of justice that recognizes the equity of all persons before the law, and that seeks to render equal and exact justice to all."
Operating on an extremely limited budget  , he has been making thorough use of Facebook, YouTube, and other cost-effective, grassroots methods to get his message out to the voters. One of the strongest messages he's delivered thus far concerns his Republican opponent, John Barsa, and what Glean describes as "Barsa's phony pro-life credentials."    He says that conservative voters have been operating under the false notion that the conservative credentials of a Republican candidate need not be tested, pointing out that "Nothing could ever be further from the truth! If Barsa were a true conservative, for example, he wouldn't be posturing himself (as he has done rather defiantly), in way that indicates an intention to neglect the God-given preeminence of our moral sovereignty."
To this Glean added, "The other day, when the Patch   asked what he thought of my pro-life, pro-family campaign, my Republican opponent claimed that voters in our district are primarily concerned with 'bread-and-butter' issues like the economy, jobs, and transportation, and that no one was talking to 'him' about abortion or same-sex marriage. So far as I'm concerned, this claim simply highlights the fact that the Republicans are running a candidate who's out of touch with the overwhelming majority of people in Northern Virginia— voters whose hearts beat with the very same pro-life, pro-family, moral conservative, strong on border security, strong on economic discipline, strong on eliminating voter fraud, strong on upholding the 2nd Amendment, strong on protecting the right to homeschool our children, strong on keeping the government out of our food supply and away from our light bulbs, core conservative attributes that my candidacy represents."
"Before it's too late," Glean encourages local voters to "awaken from the delusion" that assumes John Barsa to be pro-life, when all of the evidence "makes it clear that he is not." In relation to this "unmistakable conclusion," as he calls it, Glean says he's mystified that Barsa "has already collected well over $11,000.00  in political contributions," adding, "I can't help but wonder how many of those donations came from people who thought they were contributing their money to a pro-life candidate."
Glean has also been delivering a strong warning to voters about his Democrat opponent, Scott Surovell. "Delegate Scott Surovell is deeply devoted to the destruction of family,"  his website boldly announces. He points to Surovells "cozy relationship" with NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia and the organization's president, Tarina Keene. "They endorsed his campaign in 2009. They honored him as an abortion 'champion' in 2010. They joined Planned Parenthood in giving him a 100% pro-abortion rating in 2010 and 2011. And I have not doubt that they'll be endorsing his campaign again this year."
He also points to Surovells involvement in The Virginia Progressive Causcus , declaring, "What these legislators call 'progressive', our founding generation called 'oppressive.' The group is made up of Virginia lawmakers who favor public policy initiatives that are pro-homosexuality and pro-abortion. Our freedom of religion has been turned on its head by leaders such as these, who seek to impose their doctrines of secular humanism and moral relativism upon all of Virginia— so as to establish, by legislative enactment, a compulsory state religion."
"What does all of this really say about Scott Surovell? What it says, in essence, is that he completely underestimates the value of family and the essential role that it happens to play in human society. In neglecting the rights of our posterity, Surovell has turned a blind eye to the destruction of our traditional family, and like Areizaga (whose campaign was publicly endorsed by Surovell) , he shamelessly panders to the political persuasions of those who have sought to substitute family with artificial surrogates that are decidedly barren, sterile, and deviant, conspicuously unfulfilling, and hopelessly inadequate."
In a radio interview    conducted with Equality Fairfax on October 20, 2009, Scott Surovell openly spoke of his intention to repeal the Marshall-Newman amendment, the Virginia marriage amendment that defines marriage as solely between one man and one woman.
In light of this "alarming prospect," Glean asks, "Is this why we sent Scott Surovell to Richmond? To deliver the Commonwealth of Virginia into the inescapable clutches of these menacing political movements? To allow the politicians to help these groups phase the traditional family out of modern society in such a decided and deliberate manner? To take that which God intended to be lush and fertile, and allow the government to render it infertile by legislative enactment? To take that which is known to be fully human and created in the image of God, and allow the state to declare it something less than human? Something not quite up to snuff, because of its class or condition? Regrettably, the forces that propel these movements share a common disdain for good, responsible statesmanship, and a common affection for the type of political despotism that politicians like Scott Surovell are eager to deliver for the sake of fortifying, preserving, and expanding their own political power. It is by such criminal means that these politicians seek to oppress and subdue the entire Commonwealth of Virginia."
Right to bear arms
"We definitely need to re-assert our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, but this doesn't mean wasting our time bolstering the phony, liberalized notion that we must, simultaneously, advocate for the continuance of concealed carry permits."
Glean says, "So far as I'm concerned, the general statutory requirement of having to 'ask permission' in order to carry a concealed weapon is questionable at best. And here in America, such requirements are constitutionally unacceptable. Instead of following the Constitution, we are being forced to comply with bogus gun-control measures, despite the warnings issued by our founding generation that the party elitists would likely impose such regulations as a way to preserve their seats of power. In this way, the gun-control people seek to undermine the Constitution, depriving and divesting good, law-abiding citizens of their ability to defend or rescue themselves and their property from the clutches of those in power— from those political elitists who would leap at the opportunity to subject each and every one of us to the bondage of moral and political oppression. In principle, such measures seek to rob ordinary citizens of something that our founders viewed as an especially important right, worthy of protection under our federal bill of rights. By wasting our time trying to institute 'reciprocity' arrangements with other states, which place unnecessary (and unconstitutional) incentives on the possession of a 'concealed weapon' permit, we simply tighten the noose that separates us from restoring our true right, as law-abiding citizens, to a bona fide 'constitutional carry' policy— one that would allow every legible citizen to carry firearms at his or her own discretion, by re-affirming and re-asserting their constitutional right to 'once again' do so."
Glean says that he's also concerned about the type of information that's being collected by the Courts in fulfillment of these statutory requirements. "I'm often reminded of the account given by Tomas Schuman  (alias Yuri Bezmenov, a Soviet defector) who, back in 1983, spoke openly about his role as Deputy Chief of the Soviet Embassy Department of Research and Counter-Propaganda. Schuman explained that the agency was engaged neither in research or counter-propaganda. Its central mission was simply to compile private information on individuals. A complete understanding of what he was actually doing did not come to him until he happened to read through a press release issued by the United States Information Service, describing an incident that had occurred in the South Vietnamese city of Huế. The city was captured by the Communists for 48 hours before being recaptured by the United States and South Vietnamese armies. To their horror, they discovered that within just two nights, the Communists had managed to round up more than 15,000 people and execute them (cf. Massacre at Huế). Most of these people were either sympathetic to the United States or to the western culture, or they were directly involved in activities supporting the United States' activity in South Vietnam (including agents of the CIA and even barbers, because they knew too much). All of them were executed, and the United States Intelligence could not figure out how they could possibly have done it in such a short period of time. Later on, they found out from several defectors that long before Communists occupied that city, there was an extensive network of 'informers' who knew exactly the addresses, the names, and the whereabouts of each individual who was later executed. And when Schuman turned to his own files, he discovered that this was the very information that his agency had been collecting. Once he made the connection in his mind, that he had indirectly been involved in the mass murder of over 15,000 innocent people, he decided to defect and explain it to U.S. intelligence officials. The idea is a bit disconcerting, that our government is likewise keeping a careful record of everyone in possession of a firearm, and that this information could – at any given moment – be accessed by those with sinister intentions, in order to round up our guns or perhaps even round up those individuals who've simply been trained on how to use a gun. And so even if it were currently done under the best of intentions, the keeping of this sort of information could lead to a very troubling situation somewhere down the line. Especially if we continue to elect leaders who are hostile to America's founding principles."
Glean believes that the death penalty is an important and effective deterrent of crime, and points out that "this view happens to be consistent with the reasoning provided in Deut. 13:9-11, Deut. 17:12-13, and Deut. 21:21, so that others will hear of the punishment and be deterred from committing the same offense. Some argue that there is no solid evidence that the death penalty serves as a deterrent, but all the evidence we need is provided right there in God's moral law."
"There are some in the pro-life community who view things in terms of 'individual' lives. If one child's life is spared, they view this as a victory. Or if one person is 'rescued' from death row, they view this as a good thing. I tend to view these things on a more categorical level. This is why I would oppose any initiative intended to re-assert State jurisdiction on abortion— the view that it's okay to allow abortion in certain States, as long as its regulated in a way that's consistent with the prerogatives of the people of that State. A lot of 'pro-life' politicians advocate this view. As I see it, however, such a view is not pro-life at all. So long as our nation advocates the taking of innocent human life, even if it were just one life in exchange for the salvation of all others, the heart of our nation would continue to be in the wrong."
"Likewise, there are some who are against capital punishment, celebrating those instances when a person is 'rescued' from death row. However, when criminals are allowed to get away with murder and other such crimes, it results in negative consequences for our society on the whole. As one 'criminal' life is spared, countless 'innocent' lives are lost due to the perception that our society is soft on crime. America was founded on a Christian ethic that values the sanctity of innocent human life. And in order to properly enforce our moral duty to protect the innocent lives of our friends and neighbors, we must continue to offer a system of justice that does a sufficient and effective job of punishing crime that's committed against the innocent. When God instituted capital punishment in Gen. 9:6, it was based on the notion that innocent life was to be protected by the law at all costs. And from this it may be deduced that our love for innocent human life is really only as strong as our demand for justice when a capital offense has been committed. In the Bill of Rights (1791) [The Fifth Amendment], the mechanics of all this are stated very plainly. No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law. I fully agree with this statement."
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs named
Cite error: Invalid
State of Virginia
|State executive officers||
Governor | Lieutenant Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | Auditor of Public Accounts | Superintendent of Public Instruction | Commissioner of Insurance | Commissioner of Agriculture | Secretary of Natural Resources | Commissioner of Labor and Industry | Chairman of State Corporation Commission |