Glenn Beck No Friend To Conservative Cause

I’ve watched Glenn Beck and listened to his radio program.  Aside from his frequent snide attacks on Republicans, I’ve usually enjoyed the program and thought he brought out interesting facts and ideas.

But when he appeared on CBS with Katie Couric, he jumped off the cliff into crazy town located far, far below:

Fox News host Glenn Beck, whose ratings and profile have soared this year as he has pummeled the Obama administration and become a rabble-rousing protest organizer, once again demonstrated his flair for creating viral new media moments, if the widely reproduced advance video excerpt from the show is any indication.

“John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama,” Beck told Couric. He also said that he might have cast his vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton rather than McCain if he had been faced with a choice between the two.

“I can’t believe I’m saying this, I think I would have much preferred her as president and may have voted for her against John McCain,” Beck said, explaining that in his world view “McCain is this weird progressive like Theodore Roosevelt was.”

Well, Katie Couric is happy.  The left is happy with this latest fracturing within the conservative ranks.  “Conservative” independents are happy with the demonization of Republicans as a means to help their various “third party” causes.  And Republicans are trying to pull the knife out of the middle of their backs.

This morning on his radio program, a caller protested Beck’s damnation of Republicans as progressives and fakes.  Beck interrupted him repeatedly and ultimately implied that he was crazy for supporting Republicans (“What’s the definition of insanity?” he asked, with the obvious answer, “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”).

When the caller tried to point out that Republicans have been the only opposition to the massive liberal agenda (the $3.27 trillion stimulus, the 9,000 earmark-loaded Omnibus bill,  the government takeover of 1/6th of the economy otherwise known as ObamaCare, and the terrible Cap-and-trade fiasco that would cost every American family $1,761 in additional regressive taxes.

For the record, ObamaCare would cost Americans a boatload of money, too.

Beck’s ridiculous answer was that the Republicans were only voting against it because they were out of power.  As though a sane and serious person believes that the GOP would have been proposing and passing these things if they WERE in power.  Does anyone seriously think that?  Socialist health care?  Cap-and-trade energy policy?  Seriously, Glenn?  Because that is just really asinine.

As for Beck’s bringing up the definition of insanity, let me just say this for that heckled caller today: rightbackatchya, Glenn.

You tell me when hoping for a third party victory amounted to anything other than a Looney Tunes fantasy.

Glenn Beck calls himself a Libertarian.  Do you know how many Libertarians there are in national office?  Zero.  That’s how many.  And there are only two independents in national U.S. politics, Joe Lieberman and Bernie Sanders.  Sanders, by the way, refers to himself as a “democratic socialist.”

Now ask me how many Libertarians have stood up against the massive liberal onslaught that can be exemplified by the following articles:

From the New York Post:

Under President Obama, the 2009 budget deficit is set to reach a staggering $1.8 trillion. It took President George W. Bush seven years to run up $1.8 trillion in debt And these deficits aren’t merely a temporary result of the recession; the president’s budget would run deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion a year for the next decade.The national debt would double. In other words, Obama would run up as much government debt as every president in US history from George Washington to George W. Bush — combined. Put simply, he’d dump $84,352 per household of new debt into the laps of our children and grandchildren over the next decade.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget blueprint, by his own admission, redefines the role of government in our economy and society. The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public, adding more to the debt than all previous presidents — from George Washington to George W. Bush — combined. It reduces defense spending to a level not sustained since the dangerous days before World War II, while increasing nondefense spending (relative to GDP) to the highest level in U.S. history. And it would raise taxes to historically high levels (again, relative to GDP). And all of this before addressing the impending explosion in Social Security and Medicare costs.

From Heritage:

The Office of Management and Budget has released its annual mid-session review that updates the budget projections from this past May.[1] They show that this year, Washington will spend $30,958 per household, tax $17,576 per household, and borrow $13,392 per household. The federal government will increase spending 22 percent this year to a peacetime-record 26 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). This spending is not just temporary: President Obama would permanently keep annual spending between $5,000 and $8,000 per household higher than it had been under President George W. Bush.[2]Driven by this spending, America will run its first ever trillion-dollar budget deficit this year. Even worse, the President’s budget would borrow an additional $9 trillion over the next decade, more than doubling the national debt. By 2019, America will be spending nearly $800 billion on net interest to service this large debt.[3]

That’s right.  Zero.  Not one.

In fact, out of the 537 elected national politicians (President, VP, US Senators, US Representatives), the only two who are “independents” vote with the Democrats.

The conservative “Pipe Dream Party” that Glenn Beck thinks will one day sweep into power aint going to happen.  Except in the minds of the brain damaged.

And he’s mocking this caller as insane?

One of the things I concluded long ago was that, if we ever by some miracle got a third party off the ground with enough power to change things, it would become every bit as corrupt as the other two.  Or does Glenn Beck think his politicians would be sinless, morally perfect saints?

If you think a third party would do everything right, you seriously need to wake up and quit being so foolishly naive.

Another thing: Glenn Beck admires Sarah Palin, as I do.  But Sarah Palin RAN with John McCain.  She’s continued to praise him.  If McCain is that terrible, than Palin is terrible too.  She’s tainted by McCain.  We can do one of Glenn Beck’s chalkboard exercises and draw double arrows connecting Palin to McCain.

If McCain is worse than Obama, then Sarah Palin deserves to be thrown into the junk pile of history.

I’m perfectly consistent in continuing to support Sarah Palin; Glenn Beck is not.

Mark Levin, a man whose books I’ve read, and a man I respect, said this about Glenn Beck’s remarks:

“I think there’s enormous confusion and positioning and pandering. It may be entertaining, but from my perspective, it’s not. It’s pathetic.”

Beck is great at criticizing Republicans’ motivations.  Let’s see him justify his own damned motivations.  He is pandering to divisiveness and anger.  He is appealing to the type of people who would rather take their ball and go home than grow up and try to build the Republican Party into what real conservatives should want it to become.

Conservatives easily outnumber liberals, and have for some time.  And that conservative majority is growing:

( – Self-identified conservatives outnumber self-identified liberals in all 50 states of the union, according to the Gallup Poll.

At the same time, more Americans nationwide are saying this year that they are conservative than have made that claim in any of the last four years.

In 2009, 40% percent of respondents in Gallup surveys that have interviewed more than 160,000 Americans have said that they are either “conservative” (31%) or “very conservative” (9%). That is the highest percentage in any year since 2004.

Only 21% have told Gallup they are liberal, including 16% who say they are “liberal” and 5% who say they are “very liberal.”

Conservatives overwhelmingly outnumbered liberals while Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took over the House and Senate, and conservatives overwhelmingly outnumbered liberals while Barack Obama became president and liberals increased their stranglehold over our government.

And the simple fact of the matter is that they’re going to keep doing that unless “conservatives” decide they don’t want to keep eating liberal crap and start making their votes count.

As a practical matter, what Glenn Beck said on Katie Couric’s show was that he supports the hard-core liberal agenda more than he supports the conservative agenda.

Being able to work off the anger at the worst president in American history sure has done his pocketbook an awful lot of good.  Methinks Beck doesn’t want his gravy train to end with a conservative takeover.

This isn’t the first time talk of conservatives forming a new party has happened.  It happened in 1977, too.  Ronald Reagan responded:

I have to say I cannot agree with some of my friends—perhaps including some of you here tonight—who have answered that question by saying this nation needs a new political party.

I respect that view and I know that those who have reached it have done so after long hours of study. But I believe that political success of the principles we believe in can best be achieved in the Republican Party. I believe the Republican Party can hold and should provide the political mechanism through which the goals of the majority of Americans can be achieved. For one thing, the biggest single grouping of conservatives is to be found in that party. It makes more sense to build on that grouping than to break it up and start over.

What Reagan said is every bit as true today as it was in 1977.

It was Ronald Reagan’s philosophy – NOT Glenn Beck’s – which led conservatives out of the wasteland and into the promised land.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

8 Responses to “Glenn Beck No Friend To Conservative Cause”

  1. Michelle Says:

    You’re wrong on this one. The Republican Party is not conservative anymore. Reagan started as a Democrat and claimed his views had never changed, but the Democrat party left him. The same has happened with the Republicans.

    G.W. Bush is an excellent example. Sure he was more conservative than Clinton, but Patriot Act? No Child Left Behind? Both are intrusions into freedom and totally inexcusable by someone who understands core principles of freedom. Bush apparently does not and neither does the Republican party as a whole. Beck is absolutely correct on this one. Obama is only good for the country because he is so radical that he woke us up to our plight of slipping into socialism. McCain would have helped us slide further down the slope as well, he would have just done it slower and we would have remained asleep.

    Not that I would have voted for Hilary, but I sure didn’t vote for McCain either, and I will probably not vote for any Repub or Dem again.

    No third party has ever emerged? How about the Republican Party itself? Read up on your history, they took the conservative position when the Democrat Party left it and the Federalist and Whig parties went away because they strayed too far from their principles.

    I’m not saying any of the current third parties will become mainstream, but they do have a big effect on politics. I hope very much that the Republicans, who have an opportunity, will choose to use it by getting back to core principles and changing some of their weak practices. But I do not believe they will. They lure of power, money, and prestige are too great.

  2. hl Says:

    Thanks Michael for addressing this critical issue. I think there is so much frustration and Glenn has been dissing the R party without making the critical distinctions you make in this post.. People are not thinking critically to realize what a third party would do.
    Reagan was and you are so right that if Conservatives do not stick together and lead the R party we don’t have a chance to take the power out of the hands of the insane bunch running things now.

    As always keep sounding the trumpet of truth, hopefully enough voters will ‘get it’ before the 2010 and 2012 election……..if we’re still here.

  3. Michael Eden Says:

    Michelle, I will try to be as civil to you as you to me, and as Reagan was with those whom he disagreed.

    In the passage I cite, Reagan quoted some facts of the time. He said we should support the Republican Party because that was where most of those who called themselves “conservative” resided. He said that we should go where the conservatives are, and make that party better. What Reagan said in 1977 is true today. In other words, saying that Reagan left the Democrat Party in no way justifies YOU leaving the Republican Party, given that Reagan explained WHY YOU SHOULD REMAIN WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

    This link proves that what Reagan said in 1977 is equally true today. According to Gallup, conservatives are in the Republican Party FAR more than any independent party or all of them combined. So you would be turning your back on Reagan’s advice if you leave the Republican Party now. There’s no ifs ands or buts about it.

    It is also a fact that the Reagan Revolution would have been utterly crushed in 1977 had people thought like Glenn Beck – and disagreed with Reagan’s call to stay with the Republican Party.

    What political party does Beck say we should vote for? Name it. And then explain to me in detail, Michelle, why it is you believe ANY independent or 3rd party would attain ANY kind of victory at all.

    Believe me, I HAVE read up on my history, Michelle. You are describing an event that occurred an event that occurred more than 160 years ago – and which has never occurred since. And the Republican Party was hardly a “third” party; the Whigs were done for. They rose to become a SECOND party, not a third one. If you think that the Republican Party is where the Whigs were in the 1840s, you’re just wrong.

    In fact, Michelle, the Republican Party is actually as strong or stronger today than it was in 1977, when Reagan told us to remain Republicans.

    If you think this country is eternal, and can never collapse under the weight of debt, or mismanagement, or Marxism, then the strategy of demanding that we don’t vote Republican until the Republican Party attains some idealized level of perfection is one thing. But we are on the verge of a disaster unlike even the Great Depression. We’re in a war for our very existence as a nation and as a free people. And we just don’t have long to go before we run right off the cliff.

    I was always delighted that liberals fractured into 3rd parties. The fact is, the Green Party and Ralph Nader cost the Democrats the 2000 election by taking enough votes in Florida and one or two other states to change the balance. We could have had AL GORE as president – and he is a raving loon.

    If conservatives do not unite, we will be defeated again. And this country will collapse.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    Thanks for that support, HL.

    The only way conservatives will lose in 2010 and 2012 is if we don’t stick together, and fracture into “independent parties.”

    When conservatives overwhelmingly remain in the Republican Party, how is it that splintering off into whatever third party can do anything other than help liberals continue to maintain their domination?

  5. Kitten Mitten Says:

    Glen Beck is out to support one thing: GLEN BECK. If he thought he could make more money supporting liberal causes, guess what he would do?

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    When did you get such complete access to Glenn Beck’s inner thought life, Kitten?

    Hey, what am I thinking now???

  7. robert haynes Says:

    the big problem i see with it all is the absolute disrespect to the conservative wing of the party by the progressive wing. the truth of the matter is that the gop since 1932 has only had 2 true conservatives nominated- goldwater and reagan (twice). look at how robert taft was crapped on. here’s our great list of “conservatives “-ya ready: hoover (twice)-landon -wilkie-dewey (twice)-eisenhower (twice)-nixon (THREE TIMES!) -ford- bush sr. (twice) dole- bush jr. (twice) mccain. so there you have it 18 to 3 moderates over conservatives . do you think conservatives are going to remain loyal settling for these kinds of scraps ? all along the way have been many similar RINOs ( rockefeller, scranton, gouliani, specter, romney and romney etc.) not to mention the neoCONS ( cheney, rumsfeld, haig, fred thompson etc.) how long are we going to have two parties BOTH subverting our constitution without demanding a return to the TRUE tenants of conservative government which are less intervention both home and abroad.

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    I’m learning more and more about the problem with Republicans and conservatives all the time.

    Of course, there ARE no conservative Democrats, no matter what they say. It’s just posturing; when they need Democrats to vote for a bill, they vote for it. Maybe they get a Louisiana Purchase or a Cornhusker Kickback, but they fall into line with the liberal base.

    On the Republican side, we’re hearing about “the appropriators.” These are a class of politician that is all about doling out government money for the sake of political patronage. And there are too many Republicans in this class.

    Neo-cons were defined as “liberals who got mugged.” They are conservatives re: foreign policy, but not true conservatives. They do not have a consistent conservative worldview, but rather a hodgepodge. “Convenient conservatism” is not conservatism.

    What do Republicans need to do? Keep involved in Republican politics year-round, not just at election time. Try to shape the agenda and the people who run.

    Nixon ran as a true conservative, but it was all a ruse: he ran as the “conservative” who nailed Alger Hiss. But he wasn’t conservative at all. He would have sold out his own mother if it was politically expedient. And as president he did some of the most blatantly progressive crap (e.g., price controls, race quotas and his China policy) of ANYONE.

    What we need is someone who can articulate a true conservative message, rather than just running on a few cherry-picked talking points.

    Conservatism stands as a worldview. What it really is is the Judeo-Christian worldview, properly understood.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: