Interesting analysis. I am not in complete agreement with Beck’s speech either, but for Bennett to imply that because a fine man like Paul Ryan says the Republicans have spent freely is enough to fully address the issue is simply false.
Conservatives aren’t upset at Paul Ryan or Jim DeMint. They are upset at Michael Steele and the machinery of the party, which keeps giving us the Charlie Crists of the world over the Marco Rubios and the Dede Scozzafavas of the world over the Doug Hoffmans.
It is the machinery of the party who gives us John McCain and Mitt Romney. It is not the conservative base. I feel it is this issue that Beck is addressing — and the Republican Party has not yet addressed this issue to my satisfaction or the satisfaction of many others.
The Republican Party has a significant problem in that not enough of the candidates we field believe in what the party of Ronald Reagan believed. I believe those candidates are coming, borne by the Tea Party movement, but the machinery of the party — that part of the party which helps select those who govern — is sadly lacking. In that manner, Beck is 100 percent correct.
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.