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.
See Glenn Beck Archives: Rallies for America
Remember, this was 2003. The 25,000 people in Atlanta still probably remains as the biggest rally in the city in the last 20 years. The Atlanta Tea Party was in the 15,000 to 20,000 range.
"beck jumped out in front of the tea parties - he did not start them"
I never said Beck started the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party idea was started by CNBC's Rick Santelli on February 19th 2009. It was Dick Armey's FreedomWorks which was the driving force behind the rallies. Beck may have jumped on the bandwagon, but he was on it early. Beck's proposed the 9-12 Project on March 13th.
I do not know of any other talk radio hosts who sponsored, and were involved in, specific grass-roots projects during this time.
As I recall, many such as Rush and Hannity, were reluctant to get behind the Tea Party movement. I would note once the Tea Parties started happening, Hannity was happy to have his camera and face in front of them. So there are opportunists everywhere.
It is very odd for any other radio host to criticize Beck, who has a history of direct grass-roots involvement, for not being involved. It would be perfectly fair for a host who chooses not to be involved, such as Rush, who specifically chooses not to, to criticize another host for being an active participant rather than a detached commentator. But to claim Beck sits behind his microphone rather than being involved, is really dishonest.
Let me turn this to Levin, who started this discussion. Levin brings up his work 30 and 34 years ago with Reagan's campaigns. My question to Levin would be: "What have you done for me lately?" No offense to Levin, who has written some outstanding books, and contributed mightily to the cause, but my point is fair.
As for Bill Bennett, his criticism of Beck's speech is an very fair criticism of the first 15 minutes of Beck's 55 minute speech. But I can only conclude from Bennett's comments, that Bennett changed the channel and did not see the final 40 minutes of the speech.
Beck has a common man's humanity which connects with many people. A stoic academic like Bennett, and a cold lawyer like Levin, don't connect on the same level. Beck's comments on the role of failure as a sometimes necessary building block to later success, and how preventing someone from failing only delays ultimate failure were powerful. It was something I had not thought of, but I realized I have seen this in family members and friends.
It is very fair to criticize some of Beck's CPAC speech, as it is some of his other actions. But it is also very fair to praise other parts of both Beck's CPAC speech and his other activities.
They didn’t say he was a communist. They detailed the effort he made (that was a continuation of Truman’s effort) to keep the Soviets up to par technologically, and how he bungled foreign policy in favor of the Soviets constantly.
The opening of the archives showed the links between the Kremlin and the Eisenhower State Department.
Get my viewers on my side - since I’m on their side - and since I’ve been right all along then....Mitt! Wouldn’t surprise me at all - if his (subtle) propaganda works on his viewers - that includes 3rd party.
- - - - - - - -
Yep. And I guarantee NO MATTER WHAT Beck will NOT speak out against Mitt. They are both LDS and that is a very strong bond, esp since Mitt is LDS aristocracy and Beck is a ‘lowly convert’.
I couldn’t believe it also! She’s a Republican - he wanted her support for 3rd party and he didn’t get it. Then came his ‘take on her’. What an obvious putz!
He truly has put himself over her - w/listen to me, folks, I’m your voice of reason.
Looking back at Beck’s interview with Palin, I see what you mean. I thought he was trying to be a tough interviewer at the time but looking back, he was thinking third party. It fits.
Who’s Beck?
;P
You are the Messiah, not Obama. All the others suck, Glenn. You’re the best. Rush is and has been, Levin is jealous, Hannity is a RINO, Bennett is old school, but
you, Glenn, you are the man! Let’s all drink to that!
- - - - - - -
LOL. And not to far off for a guy who thinks he will become a god of his own planet someday.
Thanks for the edification. I went to their website a few years ago and found nothing awful. But I trust you and other freepers...
Once again he is not a 100% broadcaster. He will constantly do stuff that pisses you and others off.
But on the other hand this guy has opened up minds, brought out facts, exposed the socialists like no on else has and done so many great things if he screws some stuff up is it fair to throw out all the good stuff he does as well?
Probably not. He's not at the broadcast level of Rush yet and few are.
.
See post 562: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2456317/posts?page=562#562
.
Mark, I love you, but Glenn’s voice is needed. If we left the GOP to their own devices Mitt Romney will be the nominee is 2012.
- - - - - -
I will bet money that Beck comes out in favor of Mitt at some point before the convention.
Thanks for your input...I trust freepers...
I am fine .. how R U ..??
I’m trying to be more active locally, but my job keeps me so busy - I don’t have the time I’d like to have.
I’ve been watching Beck for quite some time, and realizing more and more that when I was in school they were still teaching about the founding fathers .. but they stopped teaching it a long time ago and I think Beck does a great job teaching the truth to America.
I do agree that he seems to be all over the place sometimes .. but I chalk it up to the anxiety of trying to convey too much too soon. It must be difficult to keep some of this stuff quiet for a little while longer, when what he really wants to do is just teach it non-stop for weeks on end; there is just so much to tell.
My sister and I went to see him in person in San Diego. He was just great. I’m a fan .. so I hope he isn’t getting in over his head.
I didn’t mean Beck.
There are no “new” philosophies. That’s a myth born of modernism. And “modernism” is liberalism’s inner sanctum.
Mike Church
http://www.mikechurch.com/
You are right on the money with that.
And we know why!
Post-modernism is worse.
But it helps to remember the lesson contained in this dumb little joke:
"All the popular songs have already been written."
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.