Accompanied with him was former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin. She strongly supported Mr Beck’s intentions. When she spoke, she compared him to some of America’s great men, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King. She supported his patriotism and courage, as did the tens of thousands in attendance at the “Restoring Honour”rally.

All in attendance desired to show their patriotism and stand together in hopes of a brighter future for America. Each shared the same conviction, believing America had lost her way. While the crowd behaved properly, they believed the constitutional freedoms have started to slip from them by the power of the government.

Mr Beck proclaimed that the rally was not a political rally. He believes unity in the country will not come, because party’s have become incredibly divided. However, he believes if the nation, as a whole, turned back to God, change could happen. During the rally, Mr Beck said, “The country is in trouble and I don’t see a political solution, because I think we’re too divided. I think both parties have sold their souls.”

Meanwhile, at a site not far from the Lincoln Memorial, Reverend Al Sharpton organised a counter-rally, taking place at the same time of Mr Beck’s “Restoring Honour"rally. Rev Sharpton did not appreciate Mr Beck choosing the anniversary day of Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream"speech.

Mr Beck claims to not have know that Saturday 28 August was the day of Mr King’s speech 47 years ago. He also proclaimed that while the scheduling was merely coincidence, the result was divine providence.

Congressman John Lewis from Georgia does not agree with Mr Beck’s rally stating, “It’s an affront to what the civil rights movement stood for. We didn’t do anything in anger and never tried to divide people. Glenn Beck is a very divisive force.”

Mr Beck replied to all arguments with the statement on his television show on Thursday, “It’s not the date, it’s the message.”

It seems that in America there is a powerful protection of personal freedom with regards comes to religion and traditional values. More so than in Britain, or indeed any other western country. It is rooted in the US constitution, which protects freedom of religion as well as a host of other freedoms such as the right to bear arms and the right to a speedy trial in court. However, these liberties often contradict each other, causing notable frictions among different groups in society.

An excellent example of this societal friction in America is the longstanding battle for equal rights for same sex couples. Religious advocates have often been hostile towards expanding gay rights, as they see it as a threat to America’s strongly Christian tradition. This is despite the fact that there is actually no official religion in the country, which means that Christianity in America is merely symbolic; a powerful representation of the nation’s culture but separated from its law entirely.

Therefore the idea of imposing one’s religious beliefs in order to prevent a same-sex marriage law from taking force, for example, quashes one of the most defining foundations that led to the birth of democracy in the western world - the separation of the state from the church. Religious advocates, however, believe that expanding same-sex rights prevent them from exercising their own beliefs, even though no one is actually challenging their legal rights. They see it as an infringement on their personal freedom, even if their ability to practise their religion and express their opinion is not impaired at all.

However, the personal freedoms of same-sex couples to be granted the same legal rights as all other Americans is always going to cause friction with others, and in Britain they can seek hr advice to protect their rights in the workplace. They are groups who essentially hold the view that no one should be granted equal rights under a secular law system if they do not accrue to the values of their own religion. The fact is that in a democracy everyone disagrees with one another. Freedom of speech is one of the most important liberties in America, as it gives people a voice and a platform to initiate change in the legal system.

Here in Britain, freedom of speech is accompanied with reasonable limits, however. Hate speech is banned, in America it has traditionally been protected by the constitution, a two-hundred plus year old document that is perceived as a relevant reference for 21st century law. The vocal expression of hatred towards specific groups can lead to dangerous consequences, such as serious psychological harm for the targeted groups and the spreading of false rumours and lies. Every country should have freedom of speech, but governments have a responsibility to maintain law and order unconditionally.

The United States, from this Englishman’s perspective, is a country with much to admire yet also much to be perplexed by. It is a country which, by its geographical size alone, was always going to be diverse in its nature and customs. Its history only further adds into the sense of it being a country of many levels, many views and many angles. Many of these seem inherently opposed to each other yet all seem to fit together into a whole.
You can split the country easily along the lines of north and south based on the historical states. Southern states are hot and the locals speak with a relaxed drawl. Ask for directions in Macon, Georgia and expect a slow and friendly response which welcomes you in. Try it in New York and be prepared to be looked at as if you just fell off a space ship.

East and West is no less puzzling yet obviously have of each is south and the other half north.

The United States has for a long time stood as a beacon in the free world. It considers itself the most free nation on Earth. Yet this is a country that spawned the Patriot Act giving Government almost endless powers to spy o and detain its own people. In England the powers afforded the US Government would quite frankly never make it pasta first reading. Yet not only it is enshrined within US law it is welcomed by likely half the population.

Have you been to Las Vegas? This is the country that has a bill making it illegal to gamble on online poker sites yet has no issues with Las Vegas, the gambling capital of the world. Doesn’t that strike anyone as odd?
If you ask an American how the world was created and how humans evolved you have pretty much a fifty chance of them describing creationism and God’s will as you have mentioning Darwin and the big bang.

And don’t even get me onto the second amendment and the right to bear arms in a country with how many gun murders a year?

The United States is a country which answers most questions yet throws up twice as many as it answers.

And you know what… I love it!

Although as an aside, before I go back, I am going to have to have a quick look for some botox chelmsford. Why you wonder? Well amungst other things. the talent over there isn’t bad at all, and to be honest a little extra help with the looks and I could land me some action. Hey, you never know, I might even get me a green card eventually!

The United States trains many of the world’s best doctors, surgeons and nurses, offers some of the highest paid locum doctors jobs, and sustains a quality of healthcare very few countries can match. Why is it then that the life expectancy of this country ranks so much lower than other western nations?

The answer most likely stems from America’s health care system. Even after Obama’s sweeping health care reforms there are still tens of millions of Americans without medical insurance. Those who can benefit from Obamacare will only do so from 2014 onwards, assuming that the Republican Party is unable to repeal the healthcare bill in the next few years. Meanwhile, in America there are countless numbers of cancer and leukaemia suffers who have been denied treatment by insurance companies because of a number of technicalities.

Medical insurance companies sometimes ’opt out'of paying for a person’s treatment because the patient did not state their history of pre-existing conditions. For example, a cancer sufferer who has suffered the disease in the past is considered by the insurance companies as ’high-risk’, meaning that their chances of survival are regarded as being lower. Ultimately, this process involves making a choice between lives that are deemed ’worthy ’of insurance and those that are deemed ’unworthy’.

Here in Britain, any doctor of a private medical facility (outside of the NHS) who worked by this same principle would be tried in court and possibly sentenced to imprisonment. Meanwhile, in the US this sort of regime is occurring day after day, often unbeknownst to most Americans. Unlike in Britain, where health care is a universal human right, in America the fate of one’s life is determined by a ’price’. The price that medical insurance companies are willing to pay to cover the medical fees of a patient, before that patient is considered ’unworthy'of any further treatment.

It is clear that putting the lives of vulnerable Americans in the hands of insurance companies is a failed system. It devalues humanity and distorts the true purpose that a health care system should live up to. As many uninsured Americans continue to look to Canada - or even Cuba, to find medical care, the British NHS continued to adopt the principle of providing health care for all, from the cradle to the grave. It may have its weaknesses and its challenges, but the principle of the NHS is something that every country should aspire to.

The ’Don’t Ask Don’t Tell'policy in the US bans openly gay and bisexual men and women from serving their country, an honour that many heterosexual men and women in the military take for granted. It was introduced by President Bill Clinton in 1994 as a compromise, due to increasing pressure from Republicans to ban gay Americans from serving in the armed forces altogether. Since its introduction, thousands of gay and lesbian military personnel have been unjustly kicked out of the army simply for their sexuality. It doesn’t matter whether you are the most talented person in your division, or if you have saved the lives of other military workers from imminent explosions, or if you have even risked your own life for the safety of others – if you are gay then you are considered a threat to conduct and you are thrown out like the garbage. What next, is the US government going to think it is okay to ban homosexuals from working locum doctors jobs because they are a ’threat’?

Now hear it from a British point of view – gays in the army are no threat to military conduct. Take it from a country that is now celebrating its 10^th anniversary of permitting all men and women to serve in Her Majesty’s Forces, regardless of their sexual orientation. The truth is that heterosexual men working alongside homosexual and bisexuals have never had any problems with regards to sexuality of their crew members. Neither have any heterosexual women had a problem working alongside homosexuals or bisexuals serving in their units. America is backwards and desolate when it comes to equal rights in the military. Every European country except Greece currently permits all gay and lesbian persons for serving in their armed forces.

The truth is that the social conservatives in America have been unable to find any evidence to challenge the fact that gays and lesbian do not degrade military standards, because such evidence simply does not exist. Segregating heterosexuals from homosexual and bisexual members in the army will only cause friction and bitterness and merely brings America back to the times of ‘separate but not equal’, when blacks and whites were regularly segregated at public venues. It is time for America to move forward and become a global model for equal rights – otherwise it will continue to remain isolated from the core values and objectives that the United States was founded on.

Mass immigration is one of the major problems faced by the US. It has been found that close to 10 million illegal immigrants reside in the US at present and their population is growing at the rate of 700,000 every year. America that was known as a ‘nation of immigrants’ is now facing a threat due to excessive illegal immigration.

The actual problems posed by immigration include the pressure on the social infrastructure, the weakening of the legal system, and the threat to national security. For long the approach was to ignore the whole situation but now this approach is no longer feasible and various efforts are being made to bring about changes in the current policy including tightening the security, verifying citizenship status, verifying employment details, etc. However the US has also benefited immensely from its immigrant population and this is exactly the reason why they are complacent about dealing with this problem very strictly. Let us have a look at 3 reasons why the US won’t solve their immigration problem.

Immigrants regardless of whether they are low skilled or highly skilled increase the national output tremendously. Immigrants have to live and thus they have to purchase goods and services. As immigrants increase the consumer demand they propel the economy towards growth which definitely benefits the middle class. Besides they also stimulate the economy by attracting investments from their native countries. And the highly educated immegrants come and fill nessecary positions like locum doctors jobs, bringing not only money into the economy, but also in most cases intelligence and another point of view or set of talents to a profession.

Labour. Because there is an increasing worry about outsourcing jobs to other countries, an attractive alternative in the form of in-sourcing labor is considered feasible. That is, if workers are allowed to work in the US itself they will add to the economy by paying taxes which would not happen if the jobs are outsourced. Also many illegal immigrants are paid well below what the minimum wage is for any state.

Studies indicate that immigrant families have positive net fiscal impact on the US economy and they contribute more in terms of tax payment than what they consume in terms of goods and services.

There are some states that are benefiting from having illegal immigrants since they are will to work in certain jobs that Americans are unwilling to work. The US must sort out this situation because if they do not the country will be overrun by illegals.