Posted on 12/22/2011 7:26:45 AM PST by Kaslin
In between his purchases of gold bullion and road flares, his attempts to put one more gallon of water in his cellar, and the addition of twenty more cans of green beans for dooms day, Glenn Beck has recently taken time to criticize and perhaps even undercut the GOP.
For example, in his appearance on Freedom Watch with Andrew Napolitano last week, Beck said that President Obama and Newt Gingrich were both progressives, and that the only reason the Tea Party is supporting Newt over Obama is due to race.
Lets examine these claims one at a time.
Why is Gingrich a progressive? According to Beck its because Gingrich liked Theodore Roosevelt. And as my friend Coach Turnbow would say, The problem is, in Becks mind everythings a zero sum game. i.e., Beck seems to lack the ability to understand that Gingrich could like certain aspects of Roosevelt that werent progressive without liking those that were.
I, for one, love Teddy Roosevelts use of the Navy the Great White Fleet which he painted bright white and sent around the world so that our would-be enemies could see it and know that if they messed with America we would crush them. This was a precursor to Ronald Reagans use of nuclear weapons and Peace through Strength. Does that make me a progressive in Mr. Becks mind?
Nevertheless, just for kicks, lets pretend that Gingrich is a progressive like Obama. Even if we do that, who would assume that the only difference between them is race?
Consider this: Darius Rucker and George Strait are both country singers. If I like Straits music more than Ruckers, does that mean I dislike black people? (For the record, I like Strait and Rucker, which must really test Becks method of categorization.)
Currently, Gingrichs support has waned somewhat in Iowa. But before it did, Beck hinted that he might support Ron Paul as a third party candidate if Gingrich received the GOP nomination. Does Beck understand how the primaries work? During the primaries, the people pick the candidate they like best. So what Beck is saying is that if the people pick Gingrich instead of Mitt Romney, hes going to throw a temper tantrum and put his support behind a third party candidate to teach the GOP a lesson.
Note to Beck: As Rush Limbaugh has pointed out a million times, a third party spells a second term for Obama -- period.
Sadly, Beck knows that voting third party on our side for whomever guarantees Obama a victory, but hell do it anyway because hes shooting from the hip again. He has come completely unglued and I can only hope his followers quit drinking the kool-aid before he leads them, and perhaps even the GOP, to another Jonestown.
One thing I like about Rush Limbaugh is that he’s never let his amazing popularity lead him to delusions of political grandeur.
I generally like Beck, and he did the nation a great service during his time a Fox educating on the history of progressive politics and and cretins in this current administration. That said, these two recent comments...the race one about Gingrich and the third party threat, are really poor on his part. Really poor.
Given that he is trying to get this media company up and running, this seems like such a stupid comment to make at this time. I am fine if he doesn’t want Newt, and states why someone else is a better choice, but this recent performance has turned me off completely.
The problems with Glenn Beck are problems with Glenn Beck.
Conservatism has its problems but they are separate and different.
Glenn Beck is fast heading where he belongs: toward invisibility and irrelevance.
The problem with conservatism is infiltration by liberals who think that they are conservatives.
But he's wrong about this, and I hope he sees his mistake before too long. Is Gingrich a Progressive? Yes. Is Romney? Yes. Is Obama? Yes.
But they are not all equally wedded to Progressivism.
In my opinion, Beck's failure to differentiate between people who sometimes espouse Progressive ideas (Gingrich), those who do it frequently (Romney), and those who wish to impose it imperiously as doctrine (Obama) is causing him to ignore the reality of electoral politics.
I understand his passion, which comes largely from a sense that profound and even apocalyptic economic and social disruptions are coming to America, and soon. But the fact is that most of us are not sitting around waiting for Armageddon and we are not looking for perfection in a candidate.
We need to beat Obama because our future as a nation depends upon it.
That means supporting the best, electable candidate who is reliably conservative on as many issues as possible. It also means not attacking our own side too harshly out of emotional frustration, but in reserving our fire for Obama and his radical Democrats - they deserve it. I hope Glenn comes to this conclusion and decides to tone it down, at least by removing the emotionalism from his critiques of Republicans. To do so is not an abandonment of principle - it is only a tactic in the service of a greater cause.
The problem with conservativism is that there are not enough conservatives. Everything else flows from that.
I think that for some reason, a lot of our conservative ¨pundits¨ are revealing themselves to be flakes who have delusions of grandeur and importance. Think of Ann Coulter with her sudden Romney-worship, as well as the others who are either for Romney, for Paul, or for some completely unknown and non-existent ¨other alternative.¨ Or people like Peggy Noonan and Kathleen Parker, who seem to spend their time criticizing the candidate´s wives. Nuts.
I think some of these people did good work for many years, but perhaps the feeling that they were out there, out front for so many years, went to their heads and they began to think of themselves as both kingmakers and kings.
It´s true, btw, that Rush is about the only one who so far has seemed exempt from this.
Very good article. Beck jumped the shark for me after his big DC rally - I think his ego started to get out of control. He started to become more preachy and almost Alex Jones like - minus the hysterical anger. When he started on Gingrich it really pissed me off. Yes, Gingrich has some issues but seriously why would Beck do anything that could help bozo the ass clown get re-elected? One thing to note in spite of all his warts, Gringrich loves this country - if he becomes the nominee it will be about the guy who loves this country and the guy who hates this country. Is he the perfect candidate? No. But we are at a cross roads and if bozo gets a second term it is over. We are done. This is the time we have to pull together and support who ever is the nominee even if it is not our preferred candidate. I know that is not ideal but when the house is on fire you can’t be worried about the walls getting soot on them. You have to put out the fire!
Just for clarification (because I didn't see it)...Are you saying that he never made the statement, or that he did make it but it was obviously facetious in context? Because I'm a bit confused by the "he never said it but it was facetious" explanation.
Ah, but what he said doesn’t matter in the end. It’s what the media says he said that counts.
So what is your opinion? Is Progressivism a danger to the Republic? Does Gingrich in fact espouse any Progressive principals? Have you listened to the points Beck makes in regards to Gingrich’s statements on Progressivism? It is possible to agree with Beck, and still vote for Gingrich as the best available option, but isn’t it incumbent upon a thinking public to analyze what a candidate has actually said and done? And this is not to negate the positives, as recently pointed out by Thomas Sowell. But isn’t a critical analysis based upon fact an important aspect of these primaries? We are, of course, at that magic threshold of GDP/debt of 15 trillion (100%), and how did we get here? Has it been by following the Constitution?
I agree, I believe that’s Glen’s problem. He’s done a lot of good but since it has become about himself he will more than undo it.
There was a time when I enjoyed listening to Beck’s radio show, but now it’s become one big commercial for his TV network, his latest book, his new clothing line, and his upcoming mega rally (yes, there’s another one in the works).
“Beck never made this race claim. Did you, or the author, or any other critics listen to him when he supposedly said it on his show?”
He made the race comment on Napolitano’s show. He was quite serious and spoke plainly about it. Here is a link. Start at the 1:20 mark.
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1319042666001/
It was one of the dumbest things ever said on national TV.
Glenn Beck back at what he knows best from his shock jock radio days. His internet TV GBTV empire is probably crumbling and he’s out promoting the only way he knows how when he is desperate.
Agreed. Necons are the problem with our party.
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.