Skip to comments.Saturday Night Beck (Bennett's Beefs with Beck's Bloviations)
Posted on 02/21/2010 2:10:47 PM PST by TruthHound
To say the GOP and the Democrats are no different, to say the GOP needs to hit a recovery-program-type bottom and hang its head in remorse, is to delay our own countrys recovery from the problems the Democratic left is inflicting. The stakes are too important to go through that kind of exercise, which will ultimately go nowhere anyway because its already happened.
The first task of a serious political analyst is to see things as they are. There is a difference between morning and night. There is a difference between drunk and sober. And there is a difference between the Republican and Democratic parties. To ignore these differences, or propagate the myth that they dont exist, is not only discouraging, it is dangerous.
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
My only complaint was that Glenn didn't mention the most important public policy issue of our day: abortion. It's hard to imagine that God will bless our country as long as we slaughter future generations.
Who are you going to purge and where are you going to purge them to? You CANNOT win the presidency without the votes from a majority of moderates and Independents. That’s a fact. Purge the GOP of everyone you happen to disagree with on one issue or another and you will hand over the executive branch of government, and the senate, to the Democrats permanently. That’ll show those RINOs, won’t it?
Bush is not in office any longer. He didn’t walk on water either.
I think Beck is all talk and somethimes a broken watch is correct, but Boehner thinks he can still pay off congress and be a good leader. His ideas are a real as his tanning bed tan. EGO not leadership.
Ron Paul may be for small government but he trows in plenty fo pork for his district. He would not need to if we did a little mroe drilling.
Perhaps in his next column he'll explain just what differences there are between the Republican and Democratic parties and not its members.
Oh, you prefer a "Constitutional scholar" who teaches it? Like Barack Obama?
"...a low rated CNN show"
Got some numbers you can cite, or is your low opinion of Beck just making you talk out of your butt? BTW -- he was on CNN Headline News, which isn't carried in all the same places that CNN is. It's a miracle that he was even able to work there, considering the content of some of the shows.
I completely agree with electing conservatives. But if they're in a third party, the Dems win. That's just the way it is.
We need to reform and revitalize the Republicans in Congress. We need to have them stand on conservative principles and elect new conservative Republicans to office.
A third party will KILL the Conservative ascendency that's taking place. I don't think that's what Beck wants, but that's what he's advocating ALL THE TIME.
Too bad Glenn has forgotten what he did to save this country from destruction during those days.
...and so sanctimonious. He's a broken record - founding fathers ... constitution ... But when he says there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats he exposes how much of an real idiot he is.
I think some of you are misunderstanding what Beck is trying to do. The fact is, the Pubbies did such an awful job w/ their stewardship when the had control, that they ended up losing control of Congress, & ultimately the White House as well.
The mood of Congress has certainly changed since Beck started his “crusade”. I think the Pubbies are doing better, not great, but better since then. I think Beck simply wants to keep the heat on lest they fall back into the error of their ways. Let’s face it, it’s not hard to imagine them doing so given their recent history.
Many of the guys that handed the power back to the Dem.’s are still there. I’m glad Beck is keeping their feet to the fire. Do you think the MSM will?
There is a wave of change sweeping the nation & we can’t afford to have that wave snuffed out by complacency. Beck, & Rush to some extent, are some of the only ones willing to put it all on the line to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Bottom line, whether you like Beck or not, people are talking & listening, & that’s a very, very good thing. It’s been a long time since we’ve seen that. If nothing else comes of Beck’s crusade, the fact that he’s got people talking & listening, is quite remarkable & worth celebrating, whether one likes him or not.
So who are the chosen ones deemed worthy to speak about the Constitution? And who sets themselves up as the high-and-mighties (empowered by what authority) to appoint whoever they deem worthy to speak? Lord Bennett appears somewhat jealous of the attention he craves.
Isnt it usually the opposite track?
Why, yes, it is. Isn't that curious in and of itself!
Pundits do not get elected...
They have to enter the arena to get elected and I don't see any of them stepping up to the plate!
...they cant shake the talking head image.
And this is supposed to be a bad thing? Most talking heads have higher name recognition than most politicians.
Is that what you intended? To make no sense whatsoever?
btw, if you're saying "Bush is not in office any longer," why are so many BDS'ers still running around screaming about him requiring factual clarification of wrongheaded posts?
Also.......I hope you appreciate the ongoing legacy of President Bush in selecting Roberts and Alito, two strong conservative SCJ's.
Doesn't require walking on water, but it's a good thing to most conservatives. Not to you, preach?
Sorry for missing that, but I see what you mean. :)
“Then pray tell, what did the Republitards do to reign in the profligate spending when they controlled both houses?”
Did you not read what Bennett wrote?
He specifically addressed this and remakred that many GOP have ADMITTED they blew it. I’ve heard over and over myself. Why is there this resistance to give the devil his due?
Now, do we just want bloody red meat or a real solution?
The point is, real work HAS been done by solid conservative republicans to refocus GOP efforts along conservative principles—they should be given credit, not devoured in some ‘yesterday’s news” mindless rage/temper tantrum.
I’m beginning Beck is chasing his tail in some overwrought zeal of to much celebrity, too bad— as his instincts and common sense, when not given over to maniacal self indulgence are dead on.
We do not cannibalize ourselves. It is STUPID.
Bennett is right.
Re: Justice Samuel Alito
You seem to have forgotten that Bush's first choice was his center-left White House Counsel, Harriet Miers.
It took an outside-the-beltway grassroots Conservative rebellion, led by Rush Limbaugh and Michele Malkin, to put Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.
Do you have the article where that is stated or perhaps the exact quote?
This is what I originally said that drew a reaction from you:
We need a purging of the soul in the Republican ranks.
That is not the same thing as "purging the Republican Party of people like George W. Bush". Those are YOUR words, not mine.
I purposely used the words I used to highlight a TENDENCY, in many Republicans... most certainly in George W Bush... to make BIPARTISANSHIP a goal in and of itself.
It's that TENDENCY that MUST be purged... otherwise we're all no better than John McCain.
Do you not agree that the nomination of John McCain was a travesty? Do you not see the role George W Bush played in that nomination?
And when I say role, I mean so in a broad sense, not saying George W Bush actively campaigned for McCain in 2008.
But he may as well have. After years of wishy-washy policy... he set the stage for McCain.
And it was McCain who gave us Obama.
I think Beck wants to be a 3rd party troll. Beck just cares about Beck. I’ll bet Beck would not be adverse to accepting some dough from Soros under the table. Soros knows how to divide and conquer.
I’m glad Levin is naming names. Bennett too. We don’t want a stupid third party because, we don’t want to live (or die!) under the one party Democrat tyranny.
When Levin starts naming names, others will follow.
A lot of people took credit for that, but she just didn't do well.
And Alito was nominated by President Bush very quickly afterward, and, in case you've forgotten, is now on the Supreme Court.
I haven't forgotten anything. Roberts and Alito are on the SC because of President Bush.
I agree with you about Roberts and Alito. Thank God that we got better than we deserved didn’t we?
But there’s no doubt that Bush’s fiscal policies helped to get us to where we are today. That’s where my main gripe with him is/was (along with the border and amnesty).
In terms of social policy and the courts though, we probably couldn’t have done better... and we dodged a bullet. We could have nominated Johnny Mac in 2000, a year he could have won... shudder...
I’m just ready to move forward with TRUE conservative change and not a default return to the government-lite status quo. Obama has provided us a wonderful opportunity that we shouldn’t squander.
Bennett is Newt with a better marriage vow.
There were also many Dem crossovers in the primaries that helped McCain along.
And when he was nominated, he campaigned harder against Bush than he did against Obama. He countered Bush at every turn when he was in the Senate. He took credit for Bush's successful surge.
He was as much anti-Bush as Obama was, so blaming Bush for his loss, frankly, makes no sense.
btw, saying we need a "purging of the soul in the Republican ranks," followed by George W. Bush, is even worse than the way I worded it.
It was both a misleading and confusing statement, with no implication of bi-partisanship whatsoever. The implication was that George W. Bush damaged the soul of the Republican party. And he didn't.
I just watched a video of him yesterday; that’s why it was fresh in my mind. I will try to scan my history later to find it.
Actually, if you google, it’s the video where he tells the NY Times reporter that she is a despicable human being.
FrdmLvr, If the day comes that Beck openly calls for people to vote 3rd party, then I will openly criticize him.
Until that day comes I say this: he’s doing a good job introducing conservatism to many who would otherwise just not get it at all.
And Bennett and Levin should cut him some slack. Especially Bennett, who’s pretty much an intellectual lightweight.
That’s right. McCain was a travesty. And what was his greatest single travesty? Well, to each his own, I guess, but in my mind it was McCain-Feingold.
And what did Bush do? Signed it. And why? Because he thought the Supremes would gut it, which they did, almost a decade later. But what does that say about Bush? What would YOU have done if you had been president. I know what I would have done, or any decent conservative.
But Bush, for all his fine points — and he had many — was not deep down a conservative. He really wasn’t.
Your conspiracy theory is as laughable as the Paulites. Soros money under the table? Seriously?
And it doesn’t matter that McCain spent the 2008 campaign campaigning against Bush. That only shows how stupid McCain was.
What matters is that Bush’s inherent RINOism set the stage for McCain.
And that’s what you can’t see.
And that’s what Beck can see.
I too am ready for an across the board conservative, but I think you'll agree that the person needs to be able to be elected, don't you? There needs to be a strong leadership potential (as Reagan and Bush both clearly had), and not just an ideological perfection.
We never get 100% of what we want, but when we get across the board conservative federal judges and SC justices, a powerful pro-life stance, an unwavering tax cutting policy, and a courageous (and lonely) stand in the war against terrorists, I'd say we came out extremely well under George W. Bush.
And I believe history will prove me right on that.
I agree with you, mulligan, and I’m going to get that article you mention.
That’s not the same video. He was giving a press conference and I thought he was talking to a female reporter (you can’t see the reporter).
I hear ya!
Time to cast aside all the past “R”s who were part of this growing mess we have now.
I want a real revolution in the conservative movement, and don’t want anyone influencing of having any “leadership” position that was part of the ‘ruling establishment’ in Washington these past 20 years. Especially the last administration.
I want NEW FACES with NEW and BOLD IDEAS, who have been out front TELLING IT LIKE IT IS and that have ACTUALLY DONE SOMETHING - they have WALKED THE WALK!
PALIN, RUBIO, DEMINT. - There’s three right there.
RINO's don't pick judges like Roberts and Alito. RINO's aren't unwaveringly pro-life. RINO's aren't absolute tax cutters. RINO's don't stand against Kyoto, the World Court and the UN. RINO's don't stand alone (even against their own party) to fight and win the war against terrorists.
There's a big difference between Bush and McCain, IMO. Bush cared what was best for the country. McCain cares what's best for McCain. Bush wanted to work with Democrats. McCain wants to BE a Democrat.
I know others will disagree, but doing some things I don't agree with doesn't make a regular, sometimes conservative Republican a RINO.
And as long as Beck keeps putting his little magnet picture of Bush on the same side as traitors and Marxists, he can't 'see' anything.
I have to admit, ohioWfan, you make good points. Darn good points. The next time I watch Beck I’ll keep your points in mind.
Yes, too many in the GOP, including at least some of the leadership, were THEN part of the problem and deserve blame. However there were some people in Congress, outnumbered, trying to hold down spending. I don't recall many of them being on the Rat side of the aisle. For example remember the legislative history of TARP, McCain's Hari-Kari moment. The House, behind vocal efforts by GOP conservatives, initially blocked it. Most of the RAT nays wanted something even worse. McCain and Obama next pushed it through the Senate. Then 26 more GOP arms were twisted in pushing it through the House, with still the majority of the GOP opposed
Blaming all of the THEN GOP for the actions of many of the GOP is wrong and dangerous to our cause. The GOP lost a lot of seats in '06 and '08. Many of the biggest GOP spenders were removed, so their share of the blame shouldn't still fall on those who remain. Alas their RAT replacements have been as bad or worse. Concentrate your efforts where blame remains rather than being proudly "mad as h*ll" while throwing in a bunch of new bums. We don't need screaming fools metaphorically shooting randomly on full auto; we have a target rich environment for snipers who can tell a donkey or a RINO from an elephant.
We must also consider that some of the spending binge was extortion money passed to keep the Democrats from further screwing with the war effort. That certainly doesn't excuse every budget busting GOP vote, but had the opposition party been loyal to the country some in the GOP wouldn't have sacrificed the budget for permission to defend the country. Blame the Rats for forcing those hands and blame Bush for not providing any support to fight it.
The RINOs. Starting with McLame.
Now YOU listen up.
That is only true for the last year at best. What were the Republicans doing the previous 8 years?
Why, contributing to the enormous problem directly or by acquiesence. Most of it was deemed "bipartisanship." Being girly-men and not wanting to be labeled the party of "no."
Often, "Hell NO!" is the proper answer. Better late than never.
I’ll agree with you on the Bennett comment.
I agree. To paint Bush with the RINO label is absurd. But I am somewhat sympathetic with Beck’s characterization of his economic policies as “progressive” (although Beck probably doesn’t make the distinction I do). I have heard him praise Bush regarding the War on Terror and particulary the surge.
He was very hard on Bush’s Iraq policies prior to the surge, particularly regarding Fallujah.
Damn straight, Bill.
Who gave us expanded coverage for prescription medicines? Who gave us 3 trillion dollar budgets? Who gave us expanded government involvement in education? Who gave us trillion dollar bank bailouts?
Hint: It would be the Party that is "different" from the DemocRAT Party.
Oh Beck is so smart. Yes. The parties are both bad, the Democrats are just a little worse. Let’s join the 9/12 project and buy a Beck book. Then we will support Mr. Smith. He’s the third party candidate we need to show those mean folks in Washington! The third party will be up and running in a couple of months, just in time for a landslide against both of those evil Democrats AND Republicans. They are all bad and part of the problem don’t you know.
If that’s our plan, I’m moving to Singapore.
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.