Here’s what’s so frustrating about Glenn Beck ( as your fellow AT writer puts it ):
Beck’s underlying assumption that a President Gingrich (or Romney, to a slightly lesser degree) would be a replica of President Obama is mystifying. And his further suggestion that he would consider a third-party alternative to Gingrich is beyond irresponsible, given that it all but ensures a second term of the very man Beck has rightly castigated as leading our country into the abyss.
__________________________
My current frustration is this -— MANY PEOPLE (Even here in FR ) think like Glenn Beck.
“My current frustration is this -— MANY PEOPLE (Even here in FR ) think like Glenn Beck.”
They are only doing it because they have their own candidate in the race that is polling at around irrelevant, so they are trying to take down any guy at the top as a “progressive” hoping to shift poll numbers to their “only perfect conservative” candidate.
They dont care how it’s done, they just want it done now.
Obama doesn’t see any of them as a “liberal” “progressive” or “Marxist”, because he is ACTUALLY one of them.
If Gingrich is the nominee, I’ll vote for him. But I am very uncomfortable with his own words which state that he considers himself “Wilsonian” and considers FDR the greatest president ever. Given the current size and power of government in this country, those two things could make Gingrich just as dangerous a man as Obama with regard to personal freedoms and liberty in general.
I think the average conservative voter would be more impressed by mainstream Republican candidates if the party had ever shown much inclination to deviate from Washington business-as-usual when it held power.
Lighten up, Francis. We’re still over 10 months from the actual election, and at least one believes in the ascendancy of Congress.
People seem to pick up on Beck’s one-off remarks, and ignore the thing he repeats over and over again; do your own homework.
Personally I hope for late entries or a brokered convention.
I can understand your frustration. Here is how I'm thinking:
My vote is a representation of who (and what) should be leading and representing our country. This is not a matter of "lesser evil", but a personal decision that reflects on me a a person--and as a Christian.
I believe that I will be held accountable for my decisions, and that includes my voting decisions. So I vote for the person that best represents what I believe in--as an American, and as a Christian (not necessarily in that order). The chance an individual has of actually winning the election is not really a consideration. Sure--it would be wonderful if he can win, but that is not why I vote for the candidate.
I am afraid that after being the most detested man on the political scene, Gingrich worked too hard on rehabilitating that image and trying to win over people on both sides of the aisle. I think his new wife played a part in that effort.
Gingrich is a smart man, yet he believes in anthropogenic global warming?
The problem is that almost every administration and congress we’ve had since early in the last century has been an Obama clone, differing only in how quickly they move the United States towards a totalitarian, socialist state.
That probably says less about the leaders than about the system, however, which ultimately failed to preserve freedom against the onslaught of special interests, including the special interests of the entitled majority.
It would be a fine thing if we could lay out a grid of the issues at hand on one axis and the various party/candidates on the other axis and see what the substantive differences are.
As it stands now, whether we have repub or dem, things are going along the same trajectory away from the erstwhile ideal of a Constitutional American Republic. So the question is, because there is no real difference, why not a third party?
If more people thought like Beck, we wouldn’t be getting ready to eat the cr@p sandwich that the Republican elite are fixing to serve up for you.