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.
“So somebody explain to me about the John Birch Society. I hit their website, they look like anti-communists from the McCarthy era.....I have no problem with that.”
I think it’s all about anti-semitism or at least the look of it. I’m guessing it’s about endorsements, the anti-Nixon bent of Welch, conspiracism, etc...
The Birchers tended to go a little overboard. Everybody was a communist. They declared Ike to be a dedicated member of the communist conspiracy. That well qualifies as nutty.
Good answer!!
Good post. I suspect that you are pretty much on the money.
Hannity clearly feels very threatened by Beck and Levin and Hannity are pretty tight.
Levin is in no danger of being upstaged by anyone not named Rush Limbaugh.
Personality preferences aside, you put Beck and Levin at the same show: Beck sucks up all of the oxygen. Beck attracts the crowds. Beck gets all of the soundbites. Beck grabs 90% of the headlines.
Levin knows that and it rankles him every waking moment of his life right now.
Levin, Hannity, Rush, they’re all part of the GOP good ‘ol boy network, outsiders like Beck and Savage don’t belong. The GOP can certainly win elections without their help or audience. (sarc)
Who is advocating that we do that? People are getting off the sofa and working hard to primary the bums out. Beck tells the folks both parties are the same and we are doomed. I agree about the RINOs, but at a time when so many are getting involved being told day after day after day no difference is not productive. Beck has said throw out both parties and vote third party. NO. We have to change the Republican Party.
So far, republicans have been a disaster for Conservatives.
True.
"I feel it is this issue that Beck is addressing"
Beck isn't addressing any issue. He doesn't see the issues that we see. He wants to be a voice, but has no idea what that voice should say, and is envious and distrustful of those that are conversant on all the issues, like Rush, Sarah, and Mark. He is particularly envious of Sarah Palin's ability to draw crowds on a moments notice.
Didn't watch the speech, eh?
Yeah, that was me mocking my teenage daughters, LOL. But seriously, he is amazing.
I agree with those asking what is wrong with the “Birchers”. All I’ve seen so far is “they are BAD”, and “they USED TO BE BAD”. “they used to be communists” while they appear not to be. How about some specifics? How about some evidence?
“It doesn’t work that way. We (the Republicans) have to own up to our historical role in this process of SPENDING America into bankruptcy.”
Absolutely. Luckily all of the spending since then has been Democrat owned and has shown anyone who is intellectually honest that it can’t continue no matter what party affiliation. But... to say that Republicans & Democrats are pretty much the same is also intellectually dishonest.
Well, with all respect to you and to Coulter, I'm going to have to disagree. The election of Barack Obama proved, if nothing else, the incredible power that the "media" still wields. Here was the least qualified and experienced man to stand for the Presidency - and I've seen 10 or more of these elections - and yet because the "media" all vouched for his qualifications, the sheeple in America gladly followed along.
FNC is great, but they're are one, lone conservative voice is a cacophony of liberal media voices. The media is still relevant, no matter how much we wish it wasn't so.
The girly stuff bugged me no end too at first. Then he seemed to veer off from it into some good comedy. But now he's back to the feminine histrionics. Creeps me out. I want a Patton, not Oprah or Barbara Walters to lead the charge.
Admit what every Republican I know has known for decades if he must. There are RINOS around. Then get off it, get off there is no difference between secular socialists and Republicans and start attacking the enemy.
I don’t believe Levin and Hannity are jealous. Its apparent to me that they know something they aren’t sharing with the rest of us about Beck. I do know, for instance, that Beck steals passages from Mark’s book and show, then passes it off as his own. This is plagarism. This is one reason I suspect Mark doesn’t like him. But jealous? Naw, I seriously doubt it. Beck is ok on some things, but, I truly think he is a flash in the pan and his ego is starting to get the better of him, just as it did BOR.
I'm of an age where I can reinforce that assessment.
In addition, there was a strong streak of anti-Semitism, as well.
no, i watch his tv show - and he does say both parties are the same - not once - many, many times
Yep, and that was his problem.
Phoenix at the time was full of Birchers. They supported him and he couldn't disavow them completely but they were loons. Goldwater had originally run for City Council on a clean government (not expressly conservative) platform. It was to stop the corruption and get the hookers off of Van Buren.
As Senator he had to step in and save the Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act (The Siberia Act) from the screwball right and he wanted no truck with the "Eisenhower is a Communist Agent" crowd. He needed to separate himself from the leadership of the JBS and their wacky notions without alienating the rank and file.
The Catholic Church in Arizona and also the LDS had strong JBS ties. Frank Brophy (Valley National Bank and Brophy Prep) was a Catholic Leader and a major Bircher. He was influential enough that Goldwater thought that he could derail Goldwater's presidential run. Goldwater did not want to be associated with his views. The extremism statement was an attempt to keep the membership after repudiating Welch and his nuttery. It also served to diffuse the attacks that Goldwater knew were coming on his starkly conservative views.
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.