Posted on 02/21/2010 1:14:06 PM PST by Sergeant Tim
I was invited to be the opening speaker at Saturday's CPAC session. I had accepted but then, to my amazement, I learned that the John Birch Society would be one of many co-sponsors. This takes the big-tent idea many steps too far for me. So, I withdrew. Apparently, others were not so moved. That's fine. But it wasn't for me. Bill Buckley and Barry Goldwater, among others, chased the Birchers from the movement decades ago. And they're not a part of the movement. So, to give them a booth at CPAC was boneheaded.
I want to commend Bill Bennett for his wise piece this morning on the Corner. I agree with him.
I have no idea what philosophy Glenn Beck is promoting. And neither does he. It's incoherent. One day it's populist, the next it's libertarian bordering on anarchy, next it's conservative but not really, etc. And to what end? I believe he has announced that he is no longer going to endorse candidates because our problems are bigger than politics. Well, of course, our problems are not easily dissected into categories, but to reject politics is to reject the manner in which we try to organize ourselves. This is as old as Plato and Aristotle. Why would conservatives choose to surrender the political battlefield to our adversaries -- who are trashing this society -- when we must retake it in order to preserve our society? Philosophy, politics, culture, family, etc., are all of one. Edmund Burke, among others, wrote about it extensively, and far better that I possibly can. But all elements of the civil society require our defense. Besides, why preach such a strategy when conservatism is on the rise and the GOP is acting more responsibly?
Moreover, when he does discuss politics, which, ironically, is often, how can he claim today that there is no difference between the two parties when, but for the Republicans in Congress, government-run health care, cap-and-trade, card check, and a long list of other disastrous policies would already be law? The GOP is becoming more conservative thanks to the grass-roots movement and a political uprising across the country, which has even reached into New Jersey and Massachusetts. Why keep pretending otherwise? My only conclusion is that he is promoting a third party or some third way, which is counter-productive to defeating Obama and the Democrat Congress. These are perilous times and this kind of an approach will keep the statists in power for decades.
And what of his flirtations with Ron Paul's lunacy respecting America's supposed provocations with her enemies, including al-Qaeda? Why should such a fatal defect in thinking be ignored? Do we conservatives agree with this?
Finally, Beck is fond of congratulating himself for being the only or the first host to criticize George Bush's spending. This is demonstrably false. I not only attacked his spending, but the creation of the Homeland Security Department, the prescription drug add-on for Medicare, his "moderate" tax cuts, as well as his nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, "comprehensive immigration reform," and so forth. And I was not alone -- Rush and Sean did the same, for example. And as someone who fought liberal Republicans in the trenches when campaigning for Reagan in 1976 and 1980, I don't need lectures from Beck, who was nowhere to be found, about big-spending Republicans. But this is not about me, or Beck, or Beck's past drunkenness (which he endlessly wears as some kind of badge of honor). It is about preserving our society for our children and grandchildren. Beck spent precious little time aiming fire at Obama-Pelosi-Reid in his speech, and it is they who are destroying our country.
On as a positive note, I am personally happy to see that Beck has cleaned up his public act -- as best I can tell, no more boiling fake frogs on TV or pretending to pour gasoline on someone -- and the rest of it. But I do think his speech, which contained nuggets of truth heard before and read elsewhere, including on Rush's show and in my book and many other books, may have distracted from some of the more compelling and coherent speeches at the event, including Marco Rubio's superb speech. I fear the media will see to this. I hope not.
Or
Levin:Beck::Get off the phone you big dope:dope
Gee, I must have missed it all.
http://barelyablog.com/ Guess Beck isn’t everybody’s cup of tea
Do you even have any idea how much Beck discusses the constitution? Otherwise I can’t quite decide why you thought it necessary to give me a lesson on the constitution.
I don’t think so, since it was out Lincoln Day Dinner I didn’t even see anything in our paper today, but the turnout from Mohave County was excellent, the event was sold out.
I have long told dear wife cyborg of my classifications:
Hannity : AP High School
Limbaugh : Undergraduate
Ingraham : Post Graduate
Levin : Doctoral
I’ve not before now tried to fit Beck into that continuum, but here goes:
Beck : Pre-law
Has Beck claimed to be part of the movement?
I don’t know how you got that since he clearly says “and then after Obama is elected and starts spending this is the line”... and he shows it going skyward.. no indication Bush is in any way responsible.
Gees I did not look at the site I was looking for the video
get real!
holier than thou? No, Beck is not steeped, hasn’t had enough experience, doesn’t know enough, and is not that smart. It is unseemly that you don’t give enough respect to Levin and Bennett.
Boy if I had to make a choice on these two I’d go for Levin by several car lengths.
Beck is useful but kind of unbalanced..Levin is a scholar and unabashed culture warrior which is conservatism for me.
No, but Beck is not interested in anything but Beck so..
Sorry for the site I was looking for the interview when Beck said he voted for McCain because of Palin...
making mountains out of mole hills!
Well, since you think it bears repeating, I must correct myself. “Former” should be “latter” in the original post. Here is the corrected version:
This IS THE NUTSHELL of Levin’s political issue with Beck. He doesnt believe that the latter should be promoting himself as the leader or instigator of the Tea Party Movement, nor should he take any credit for its successes.
Levin has here expressed concern that this potential self-ordained “leader” may not have a cohesive political/philosophical policy with which to lead the Tea Party. And that is a valid concern.
I think both Levin and Beck are needed voices Mark educate on our Founding Fathers
Beck Educates on what the progressives are doing to the documents of our Founding Fathers!
I’d love to be able to know people’s intentions, even if I have never met them. How did you get so lucky? And if that was true, what does it have to do with Beck being part of a movement?
I could go on and on about what it is to be a broadcaster,the overall insecurity etc. etc. but I’m too tired.
Hey, your friend isn’t the first one to make a judgment call just by hearing one side of the conversation. Not too sure why you think your friends reaction ‘showed something’.
IMO, what it showed is - your friend gossips and judgment is flawed- has no knowledge of what the other party did/said/is up to nor the one she’s listening to - what it really is all about.
Have been real right along, it just makes some uneasy.
Very sensible post, you sure you’re on the right forum?
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.