Just a note to confirm my receipt of your Freep-mail rebuttal to my comment. If you want to debate our mutually exclusive takes on the OP's take of Beck's comment, bring your points into the public forum.
Separately, on review of my post, I'd like to add a point that I started to make, then dropped in order to simplify the post.
When Beck talks about "good enough" and "success," it is likely (and I think it would be clear if his comment had been presented with the surrounding context of his other comments) that he is referring to success of the country, reducing the size and influence of government, increasing personal freedom, improving our economic lot, and so forth. In other words, "big ball," not "small ball" (winning seats in the next election).
In other words, it's not good enough to just win seats. What follows winning the seat is vitally important, or else the government is going to continue to take its people down an unsustainable path.
If that is the gist of his "it's not good enough to suck less than the other guy," it is obviously true. And again, that contention does not impugn Cheney. The only aspect of Cheney that Beck appears to use is Cheney's forward-looking contention that conservatives are going to have a successful year. Beck's response is "Yes, but the success depends on ..."
Sorry. It was a mistake. I clicked in the wrong place...you got me so intent on replying, I didn't notice what I was doing until I sent it and my Freep-mail box popped up. I always debate in public, never in email or Freep-mail.
OK. I wouldn't have played off Cheney's encouraging comment but its a matter of style I guess. Beck has done great on some things. I never thought I would see anything like the Revolutionary Holocaust on TV. Conservatives have been pushing that message since Walter Duranty--before him even.
But the negativity and lumping all republicans into one group does grate.
All he has to do is tell the truth.
Republicans are not the same as Democrats. Some are but not all are.
There are some Republicans we need to get out of Congress. There are some we need to keep in Congress (DeMint, Bachmann for instance) and others (Rubio for instance) we need to support in the primary in order to defeat an establishment RINO.
Its a simple, obvious and truthful position to take. But Beck refuses to take it. Everyday its usually the same thing. Republicans are to blame too. Yeah well, some are. But not all. And certainly not the ones the TPs are trying to get elected.