Levin is quite clearly the more intelligent, learned, experienced and principled conservative. Though his personality can be a turn-off for the squeamish.
Beck can stir emotions and rally folks, especially those who may be middle-of-the-roaders or perhaps new to the political scene. He has a bit of the populist in him. He has good intentions. But, as he admits himself, he is only now barely beginning to learn the American history that Levin has in his DNA.
Beck: the sometimes entertaining but increasingly serious and effective reporter.
Levin: the often gruff but unquestionably wise professor of American history and conservatism.
"Can't we all just get along?"
These guys will be well served to take on the “real enemies” of this country expecially those who will undermine freedom from within. Savage blasts Rush & Hannity, Levin slams Beck.....this is what the RATS & MSM feed on.
The fact of the matter is that there are, as time goes on, fewer and fewer differences between the Democratic and Republican platforms. They’ll never be the same, but they are so similar on so many levels that it begs the question: “What’s the difference?”
I used to laugh at Pravda’s assertion that Dems & ‘Pubs were two sides of the same coin...but now I don’t. Its like the old saw, “I used to laugh at mother-in-law jokes, until I got married.”
The Founders were largely libertarian (small “L”) in their view of the role of the federal government. It was viewed as a necessary evil. They didn’t much like powerful central governments, having just fought a bloody and costly war against one. They feared its potential, so they only gave it certain enumerated powers, powers divided between competing branches with checks and balances. Here’s what Washington himself said:
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
For about 150 years the federal government only spent about 3% of GNP, except during wars, and we always repaid war debts as fast as possible. Does that bear any resemblence to the government of today? Nope, and it hasn’t since the time of the Depression, at least. Government is pervasive in the effect of its laws and regulations, and takes upwards of 20% of the GNP in each year (more, when you consider the debts it is obligating us taxpayers to repay at some point in the future).
Beck is pissed at this, echoing what many people around the country think and believe. He understands, as did the Founders, that when government becomes too large, corruption sets in. Frankly, IMHO, it matters not whether a “-D” or an “-R” follows someone’s name, they are either corrupted by the prospect of power before coming into office, or they become corrupted by it sometime not too long after attaining office. There are, of course, exceptions...but not too many. That’s just a natural result of the combination of human nature and the system of government we have - it should be no surprise to anyone with any knowledge or experience.
On the issue of Levin v. Beck, I take the side of Beck. I have, over time, changed from a much more conservative point of view to a more libertarian one. That’s not to say that there aren’t certain big problems with libertarian philosophy and political positions - there most definitely are - but I firmly believe that “that government governs best which governs least.” We take power from DC, and the corruption will lessen, the influence of special interests will lessen. I am still very much a hawk on foreign and defense policy - but I have always been and will remain a proponent of the POV that IF we’re going to fight a war, we go in big, hit very, very hard, and leave. It cuts the losses of blood and treasure, and leaves someone else - the one who is to blame - with the expense and effort of cleaning up the mess. It also serves as an object lesson to any future aggressors - you F with the USA, and it will utterly destroy you and your nation. Bush campaigned in 2000 against “nation-building” as was done by Clinton in old Yugoslavia and elsewhere, and then turned around and did the same thing on a much grander scale in Iraq - aided and abetted by John McCain.
I know that McCain, despite this, would have been much better on foreign policy and defense, and somewhat better on the appointing of judges, but little else domestically would have been different. McCain was also for Cap & Trade and amnesty for illegals, unforgivable positions IMHO. McCain simply bends over too far to get along with the Dems - who rarely compromise on their positions for the sake of getting along or bipartisanship. IOW, McCain is a sucker when it comes to domestic politics (like virtually all RINOs). Beck is correct that the Republicans would NEVER have been united against Cap & Trade or the Healthcare proposals if McCain would have been President, and the fact that we’d have perhaps gotten watered-down versions of both bills would be little consolation for taxpayers and those receiving medical care in this country - they (i.e. WE) would have been screwed. Plus, and this is something I have learned from history, when the Dems would have gotten power later on they WOULD have tacked much more spending and much more onerous regulations onto the framework that McCain would have worked so hard on and been so proud of. Now, at least, the Republicans are in strong oppostion and many Dems are running from Obama because of that opposition.
By the way, I voted for McCain. Really, it was a vote against Obama, as was my primary vote for Hillary (since McCain had already defeated the entire field, including my favorite, Fred Thompson). I knew that Obama would be a disaster, and tried my best to stop him. It is just that in retrospect, I now know that McCain would have left me about as ticked off - without the large and determined opposition to socialism and appeasement that has developed and which will, I sincerely hope and pray, result in a similar remaking of the American political scene as we experienced in 1980 as our revulsion for Carter set the stage for Reagan. Gerry Ford as President fro 1977-1981 would NEVER have allowed for Reagan to be elected, just as the election of McCain last year would never have allowed for the rise of a future Reagan-like President.
Mark, as much as I love your show and respect your intellect, I believe your attacks on Glenn Beck are totally unnecessary and counter-productive. Like you, I disagree with Beck's claim that McCain would have been worse than Obama, but can I see where he was coming from: Zero has galvanized the conservative movement. And Glenn played a huge role in organizing the 9/12 rallies in DC.
Please, Mark, STAND DOWN THE CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD, knock off the Howard Stern crap of accusing other hosts of ripping you off, and set your sights on the real enemy: the Left.
what I thinkwe are seeing is the competition for the New Media voices, I think the rules of engagment are still being determined and fluid...abit like the Law of the Old West...situational rules have to be somewhat fractitious.
I see it with Schlussel, Savage, Levin, Hannity, Beck, O’Reilly...all all competitors to a certain extent and that’s not necessarily bad. May the best do well!
Well Glenn is jealous of the SUCESS of Mark’s newest book, “Liberty And Tyranny”. It has gone past 1 million sold.
I don’t think Mark Levin “hates” Glenn Beck; he just doesn’t agree with him sometimes.
I think Mark Levin would like that Glenn Beck said today that he (Beck) is only like RC cola, but Rush is like Cola. (I’m paraphrasing.) Beck is humble.
There are lots of good Conservative talkers, Rush, Hannity, Levin, Savage, Hewitt and dozens of others... In their own style they have all furthered the cause... and we need them.
But American Citizens are alarmed right now and want to have ‘DOERS’ not just talkers.
Beck along with Breitbart are big time ‘DOERS’-— results... ACORN blown out the water, NEA’s Yosi Sergant exposed and resigns, Van Jones forced to resign, the SEIU’s influence and ties with ACORN exposed in detail, Beck’s 9/12 Project involving real people in organizing for a solution - not just talking about it, heavy promotion of the Tea Parties, heavy promotion of the 9/12 March on DC, Heavy coverage and discussion of the Town Hall meetings...
Other ‘talkers’ have had a hand in this too - but none to the extent and/or direct involvement...
‘DOERS’ get the attention in these perilous times... and Beck is a big time DOER.
Good stuff.
No one is a REAL conservative
You’re a grab-bag of worthless trolling. PFFFFFT.
Hmm Hmmm Hmm...B,H,O...
he’s on my TV everyday ,I wish that he would go away...
Hmmm Hmmm Hmm B,H,O,
He lies and lies ,there is no end,and now he is pre-emting Glenn...
Hmm Hmm Hmmm B,H,O,...
He pals around with terrorists, I wish he would give it a rest..
Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm B,H,O,...
Beck’s nothing special about this: Levin hates everybody. He’s a jerk.
I like Levin. I like Beck.
Give it rest Mark. Our side has been too nice. We need a fire brand who will tell it like it is. Glen is filling that role, and you need to recognize the value of it.
Bump for later...
Right now we need to prevent a 1 party system. The BHO party has the White House, the House and Philabuster proof senate, SCOTUS depending on Anthony Kennedy’s desire for awards and good publicity.
Mark Levin is great, he correctly proclaimed Benjamin Netanyahu the leader of the Free World. But I disagree with his take on Ron Paul and Beck. They are standing up for the Constitution which is what all elected offials in the country.
Beck explained the comment on on O’Reilly the other day. The reason McCain would have been such a poor choice is that he would have dropped us further into the whole we found ourselves in after the Bush era. If you look at McCain’s policies, (i.e. his utmost respect for Ted Kennedy) you will discover that the man is the incarnate compromise of conservatism. I tend to agree with Beck.