Skip to comments.Glenn Beck is no Ronald Reagan (but Rand Paul is a lot like his father)
Posted on 02/23/2010 10:12:38 AM PST by Sergeant Tim
"Ronald Reagan would never have loosely generalized about conservatives and the Republican Party because like a surgeon, like a real thinker, and like an activist, he wanted the distinctions to be known, he wanted the distinctions to be clear, he wanted to promote our principles, and he wanted to contrast them with those who either had no principles or were promoting something else. Carpet-bombing the Republican Party takes out an awful lot of good people, too many good people." -- Mark Levin, February 22, 2010
Mark Levin took great issue last night with "carpet-bombing" the Republican Party:
Mark had some advice for the bomber:
"It is the spending, stupid." Yes, we get it; this grass roots movement of ours gets it and seems determined to vote out of office the offenders. Yet just reading one label, i.e. Republican or Tea Party, and applying a value to candidates is very risky.
In Nevada, a man who few ever heard of and who has not been endorse by two substantial tea party groups there, is polling at 11%; his candidacy might return Harry Reid to the Senate.
Rand Paul in Kentucky is polling far ahead of his nearest opponent to become the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate. He sounds remarkably like his father, Congressman Ron Paul, on national defense. Rand Paul speaks about the "military-industrial complex." He derides McCain-Feingold yet proposes he own set of restrictions on campaign contributions.
Rand Paul is also factually incorrect about both our invasion of Afghanistan and what constitutes a formal declaration of war. He quotes Michael Scheuer saying, "One of the mistakes we made in Afghanistan was not that we invaded but that we waited a month and a half to go in." Paul expands from that by saying, "So there might have been a reason the President could have sent Special Forces in secretly within a few days and I think that could have been something that would have been justified. However, the truth is it took us a month and a half to get into Afghanistan and there is no reason why there should not have been a declaration of war vote in Congress." Here are the facts: our Special Forces began crossing the border into Afghanistan before dawn there on September 12, 2001; we began invading Afghanistan in force on October 7, 2001; and Congress has 'declared war' more times without using those words that it has used them during our history. In addition, Congress voted in favor (including Ron Paul) of an 'Authorization to Use Military Force' on September 18, 2001 and it did not limit the President to merely invading Afghanistan:
That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
If that was not a declaration of war, then two Presidents have violated Congress's intent in Afghanistan. Yet Congress has since authorized more than 800 billion dollars and nearly 1,000 U.S. troops have died fighting there. It is clear to me that Congress declared war and Rand Paul would be a 'chip off the old block' as a U.S. Senator.
It’s a nice thing he never attacks fellow Republicans huh? lol
It’s a nice thing he never attacks fellow Republicans huh? lol
Who in heck ever said Beck was like Reagan?
I’m seeing a pattern with these posts.
Yes, Glenn Beck should quit it.
I would settle for a just a real free market advocate and fiscal conservative.Reagan united the outliers in the party by being all about that.
I don’t believe you can be a “social liberal/moderate” AND also be a fiscal conservative.Somebody has to pay for all the gubmint programs and “compassion”.
The GOP needs to focus on reintroducing America to the free market and focus on the economy.
I don’t know how I got on your anti Beck ping list but I want off it.
levin is just jealous of beck’s success.
Glenn Beck is a celebrity. He’s not a serious thinker. A nice chap, but no intellectual.
Long as everyone knows that, we’re fine. And I think he’d be the first guy to admit it.
Beck gave a heckuva speech at CPAC and days later the caterwauling hasn’t stopped.
Beck’s rather simple message: conservatives, you need to take back your party. Its the same thing you hear here on FR 365 days a year.
Levin’s got his role to play, and so does Beck. Sarah’s got her role to play and so does Hannity. If we’re in the process of turning around a rout, we’ve got a lot of people to thank, and if we aren’t going to bankrupt this country, we’ve got to be very clear about our principles. Electing more Dem-lite politicians will only break this country five minutes slower than electing Obamists who give us the full dose. We need to insist that supposed conservatives act like it. And the “bipartisan” Repub hacks need to be retired from office once and for all.
One would have to be brain dead not to know that both parties are to blame for excessive spending, but only one of the two parties plans on stopping.
That’s a straw man title if ever there was. NO ONE would remotely compare Beck with Reagan. Or any radio yakker with him for that matter.
I thought only Dems and RINO’s answered questions that weren’t asked.
Levin should stop this pissing contest because at the end of the day, he won't win it. I've seen several articles now from him slamming Beck and not one peep from Beck about Levin...at least that I know of. It sincerely does smack of jealousy now.
Beck, the college dropout (oh wait, he didn’t bother taking that first class) couldn’t hold Mark Levin’s jock strap, sparky.
Levin had already been an elected official and a law school graduate by 22 years old.
That would be right around the time Beck was getting loaded so he could get sober some years later.
While GB was sobering up and learning his name, Mark Levin was making a difference.
Unless you heard Mark last night, you have not had time now to click on the icons and to have heard him now. So, as usual, the Beckers (like Beck) here are talking and not listening.
Beck cited the very reasons I didn’t vote GOP in 2006. The Hasterts and Delays of that era screwed all of us. President Bush’s lack of fiscal restraint also led to the debacle of 06.
If you refuse to fire those that are spending us into bankruptcy due to party allegiance...I don’t understand you.
Fiscal conservatism and social conservatism go hand in hand.
The GOP lapdogs don’t want you looking at the problems within the GOP. Its that “We suck less” thing that Beck was talking about.
Meanwhile Michael Steele is on a spending spree and the lapdogs can only complain about Beck.
Levin built his career on it, its a little hypocritical.
He built his career on what? Be specific.
My hubby and I both went to Rand Paul for eye exams ONE TIME. I also took my newborn (2.5 pounds, 3 mos. premature) to him for an eye check as advised by Vanderbilt UMC. He was extremely rude to all of us, and not gentle with my son. We have since found an equally qualified doc who actually treats people well. Have been with her for 4 years now.
No votes for him.
Attacking RINO’s as well as liberals.
This is what a Congressional Declaration of War sounds like:
The advantage of securing a Congressional Declaration of War, is that if a liberal votes for a Declaration of War as per the Constitution, he can't very well go back after the fact and wail, "IT'S BUSH'S FAULT!!" Hey, buddy -- you said "WAR" and you voted for it, capische?
The whole idea is to get Congress to make an up-or-down commitment on War, and not allow a bunchy of weaselly wiggle-room. Rand Paul (who, as a simple matter of fact, is more hawkish on Afghanistan and on military tribunals for Terror suspects than is dear old dad Ron Paul) is not advocating an outlandish position here, IMHO.
Jeez, pathetic pot shots. I guess no one in our country can become successful after making mistakes int heir life. This Levin hatred is making me dislike him and his show. It is close to invalidating the other great work he does.
At least Rush criticized in a professional and non-personal manner. People on the same side can respectfully disagree, but Levin is showing his ass here.
I didn’t have to read any further than the contrary to fact “carpetbomb” statement to know Levin is making it up so he can find a problem to have.
It’s not like Reagan’s most famous quote regarding liberals was a generalization or anything....
Glen Beck is not a Republican. More hot air than anything, just a talented entertainer. Please don’t put any faith in his rants.
I am sure you know more than me when it comes to Beck through your contacts with Mark but I too have been concerned about his convoluted message for a very long time.
Both parties are the same comments are nonsense and like Mark says destructive to this Conservative ascendency.
Going on tour with Oreilly who is in the tank for this administration and using his show to help rebrand him to conservatives as a good and funny guy?
I have listened to Beck respond to this criticism and back off some of this both parties rant in the last couple days.
In your opinion do you think he can change and be trusted ?
Or will he continue to disrupt our attempt to elect as many of Conservatives within the party come this November?
Beck put on a good show!
Not a bit. I’m a high school graduate with only some college myself, although I’m a tortured member of the lame Mensa bunch.
That said, when was the last time you saw Rush, Hannity putting themselves in front of a chalkboard, as some sort of educator?
I’d pay a thousand dollars a minute to see GB go at it with Mark Levin.
Of course, GB would have no career afterwards. LOL He’d be doing Sham-Wow commercials.
Thank you for subscribing to the Mark Levin Radio Show daily thread!
How dare he make millions of dollars without subjecting himself to four years of Marxist indoctrination and tens of thousands of debt! No fair!
Barack Obama, Ward Churchill, William Ayers, Amy Bishop... all the sharpest minds are the product of our fine institutions. Praise them.
“Ronald Reagan would never have loosely generalized about conservatives and the Republican Party because like a surgeon, like a real thinker, and like an activist”
More importantly, he was a politician, who wanted to use the party to get elected.
Oh, and he had no problem loosely generalizing about A LOT of other things. That was his appeal: the Plain-Talkin’ Guy.
Is Beck a Republican?
If he is, he is a Repubic.
Those who attack Beck from “the right” seem to be defending the RINO establishment.
I don’t care. I’m not.
I think he calls himself a ‘centrist libertarian’ (whatever the heck that means).
Read the same article- lives in a "Green" house? So what-I'm considering solar panels for my house for various reasons.
Man may have contributed slighty to GW? It's possible anyway, can't tell for sure until we get the politics out of science. I haven't seen him rant or rave about it, so what?
So he matches the charitable contributions of his employees and his employees choose the charities they want. MY GOD - THE HUMANITY!
Just saying, so what?
Beck is only defending his bank account.
He will continue to be the class clown, always craving attention. So, yes he will continue to disrupt.
Yeah, I heard Levin’s resume on his show-
A little self-interested. Needing to promote himself in an effort to show he’s been down for the struggle...
Levins sounds a little more like Sharpton and Jackson then Mark Levin himself last couple days..
“he wanted the distinctions to be clear, he wanted to promote our principles, and he wanted to contrast them with those who either had no principles or were promoting something else”
What if we lived in a world where there wasn’t a clear distinction between the major parties? Or at least not to people who had principles other than growing the government slower than the other guy and policing the world. Hard to promote your principles via a mechanism controlled by people with whom you disagree.
What Levin ought to be doing here is telling us how Republicans are still—or still could be—Reagan Republicans. Instead, it’s all about Beck’s manners and unity and blah, blah, blah. Which is all well and good if Levin’s right. But I don’t have much reason to think he is. And certainly, he doesn’t explain why he thinks Republicans have any principles.
My guess is we’ll end up with nothing better than another Nixon or Bush, which is not good enough. Unless this Bush can do what the other Bush couldn’t. Namely, “privatize” entitlement programs. But Bush didn’t, so why should we expect another Bush to?
Giving progressive and liberal groups is charity? That’s what they also called giving to groups that were financing terrorism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.