Quote of the day
posted at 10:30 pm on September 21, 2009 by Allahpundit
Click the image to listen.
Join Ed and Allahpundit on Facebook!
GreenRoom
- Confessions of a Conservative Woman
- Russia, Iran standing off from Obama’s showcase events
- How To Make Obama’s Spending Look Small (MarketWatch Rebuttal Infographic)
- ‘Hustler’ publisher Larry Flynt answers criticism over obscene Cupp photo
- Thank God for the Atom Bomb
- NYC public school to require students grades 2 through 5 to learn Arabic
- Necessary skyrocketing
- Breaking: Man who claims he lured and killed Etan Patz in NYPD custody
- WH to press corps: ‘Don’t buy into the BS’ GOP is slinging
- Changing the definition of middle-class AKA Republicans are winning the tax debate
Hot Links
|
|
Feeds
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 6 7 8 9 Next »
Like I said, Spathi and his libertarian friends don’t care about America or its survival; all they care about is small government.
2Brave2Bscared on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 AM
Except for killing babies. Who cares about them right? They’re just a hindrance on our “right” to choose…
2Brave2Bscared on September 22, 2009 at 5:54 AM
Spathi, I just want to thank you for being so frank about the true anti-American goals of libertarianism. Keep talking.
2Brave2Bscared on September 22, 2009 at 5:58 AM
2Brave2Bscared,
Right on Right on as El Rusbo would say. Say it with me SMASH THE GOVERNMENT. SMASH THE GOVERNMENT.
In all seriousness why does it matter anyway? The government is just synonymous with the politicians. Do you support the scamsters in D.C.?
Worshipping the politicians is not a religion so this shouldn’t be in your eyes. Maybe they made you say the pledge too many times primary school?
The people themselves would probably be better off anyway without a large central government. Worshipping the central government isn’t a religion you know.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 5:58 AM
Actually all property would be private including the roads. That means you couldn’t just show up uninvited.
I’m not sure I support that extreme end of libertarianism…then again maybe i do.
Immigration is a tough problem to solve for Libertarians. I don’t support McCain’s amnesty plan for your information though.
The Democrats just want new voters so I don’t like the way they frame the debate.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:00 AM
I cede your point about homogeneity vs. plurality. However, did not our founders understand those needs and write them into our constitution and bill of rights whilst checking those liberties in the creation of a representative democracy? Populism was checked (i.e. might = right) while government was checked (i.e. bill of rights/const.)
True balkinization seems a liberal fantasy…in fact, it appears they instigate balkinization of the people to manage via grievance and promise of legislative goodies. While I understand your fear of hegemonic government, balkinization is the antithesis of American ideology. We are both united and diverse.
What do you believe our common creed should be?
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:01 AM
Unless wanting to see America return to the Constitutional Republic it was meant to be is “worshiping” the government, you’re erecting a strawman.
Keep tilting at windmills, buddy.
2Brave2Bscared on September 22, 2009 at 6:02 AM
Ron Paul talks immigration….keep the Yankees from trying to cross the red river!
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:04 AM
Diane,
We’re already balkanized though.
I was more just clarifying that I kind of like it like this. He was talking about some Christian war on Islam, which seemed crazy to me.
if we actually had that, that means something is seriously wrong.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:06 AM
It’s a very tricky line to walk. There is a battle of ideas, certainly. we would be wise to do the research to know our enemies well, which we do have in spades. However, the hyper-political Christianity some espouse is also troubling…escatological in emphasis and light on historical (or scriptural, for that matter) fact or precedent, is difficult to divide. It takes education, discernment and a delicate hand, I believe.
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:16 AM
How about the right to be left along?
You don’t need government enforcing common beliefs (I’m not saying that that’s what you think just saying.) Just let the people do what they may. If they all like watching Monday Night Football, then so be it.
If most of them celebrate Christmas, then that’ fine too.
Whatever, but I don’t like the government getting involved in any of that.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:16 AM
alone=along
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:17 AM
Well actually the government is kind of like a religion for some especially on the left but I would say on the right too.
The politicians have made statues of themselves based on Roman temples in D.C. People go there to worship (I’m not joking.)
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:22 AM
God Lied?
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:23 AM
What about, “Do all that you’ve promised to do,” and, “Do not encroach on other people’s property”? In other words, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
Granted, this would require some extrapolation. What promises mean, define property, etc. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (though not the governmental guarantee of.)
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 AM
giggles.
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:27 AM
Diane,
I support decentralized government to the extreme. Individual over local. Local government is better than state. State is better than national.
As a defining characteristic of government, I would say decentralized power. No standing army, etc.
I like the idea of not having a government at all so I don’t like the idea of ceding a rational for it to exist.
If it exists, well then fine, but let’s at least not trust it very much.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:32 AM
Spathi: I didn’t realize you’d answered some questions I posed already. I’m bouncing from tab to tab.
For the record, I have some libertarian leanings but still, at least philosophically, remain strongly republican.
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:32 AM
Diane,
Ah Ok. Well I for one want to destroy the United States.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:34 AM
Not in a violent way of course.
I just vote for whoever wants to end the empire…namely Ron Paul.
ha
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:36 AM
Ok, yeah…you lost me with the anarchist/neo Noble Savage ideology (haha, see what I did there? Anyway…) Alas, my day is beginning and I will hopefully live to debate another time.
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:39 AM
It’s all very clear to me now…I’ve been duped! DUPED, I tell you!
You…are…a PAULIAC. oh, dear God…
Diane on September 22, 2009 at 6:41 AM
Well we can have guns…just so long as the president doesn’t get any.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:42 AM
There is no empire and Ron Paul is a loon, as is Lew Rockwell.
Mark Levin is completely correct about Paul and his views on U.S. foreign policy.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 6:42 AM
The country will never be ready for Ron Paul–thank God!
(Nor do I think he’ll run: he’ll be quite old and he only got 3% of the vote last time, plus he’s a lunatic jerk!)
Anyone who votes 3rd party throws their vote away.
I know this well after voting for Perot in 1992.
Never again.
I’m happy with the GOP anyway and pray every day that Sarah Palin will be our candidate.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 6:47 AM
Jenfidel,
He got 5%.
That’s 1 million out of the 20 million who voted in the primary.
However, he seems to have had about 6 million supporters. Some of them were not fixed and inflexible. Only 1/3 of the R’s that voted in the general actually bothered to vote in the primary. Only about 1/2 of the R’s even voted in the general election. So that’s how you get about 6 million Ron Paul supporters.
We need to double or triple that number at least by the next election cycle.
The Afghanistan and Iraq occupations will linger on for another 4 years.
We’ll see if the republicans want to keep dying or being maimed for the State over there or perhaps they’ll come to their senses and start supporting Paul.
The passage of time is the best way to win people over sometimes.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 6:52 AM
Levin has been harping on Beck for awhile and it makes him look small and petty. Now Joe Scarborough is doing it too. Book envy? A liberal twitterer told me the right always eats its own. Surely the right is big enough for Beck and Levin to live in it peaceably. My 14 yr. old can’t stand Levin’s whiney voice and thinks Rush is a know-it-all. He enjoys Glen Beck’s goofiness immensely, we dvr him everyday. Different strokes.
btw, I wouldn’t watch Katie Couric to save my life no matter who was on.
ctmom on September 22, 2009 at 6:55 AM
Spathi:
No, the roads would not be private. In the Constitution, it states plainly that the state will build roads.
I am all for smaller government, but sometimes Libertarians with a big L go too far. I have actually heard these guys praise the Confederacy. They were oblivious that not only were the Confederates traitors to the Union…they lost the war in large part because of their disunity. The trains often stopped at state lines, one Governor was not willing to give troops over to the defense of another state…all sorts of silly self defeating fanatical nonsense.
Terrye on September 22, 2009 at 6:57 AM
And to say that McCain would have been worse the country than Obama, when you are claiming Obama wants to ruin the country is stupid .
A lot of these people out there running their mouths with this right on right stuff have their own agenda.
I knew that when I heard Beck say that people should not vote for Republicans. or Democrats. I think some of these people are using the worry and distrust of people to build their own following for their own purposes.
Terrye on September 22, 2009 at 7:03 AM
Yeah, saying McCain would have been worse makes no sense.
rollthedice on September 22, 2009 at 7:04 AM
Illinois has private roads.
Works fine.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 7:10 AM
Roads isn’t the main issue here though.
That’s a sideshow issue. The main issue is destroying the U.S. Empire.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 7:11 AM
McCain would not pander to the Russians, kiss up to the Communists, abandon the war on terror. McCain would not nationalize health care. McCain did not vote for that big fat stimulus package. McCain would not bankrupt the country. McCain would not do half the stupid stuff Obama does all day every day.
Terrye on September 22, 2009 at 7:12 AM
Spathi:
The issue of roads is just another example of big L libertarians being off their rocker.
Terrye on September 22, 2009 at 7:13 AM
And not only that spathi, the vast majority of the people of this country will always think that approach is ridiculous, a big joke and they will never support it. So go ahead, render yourself irrelevant.
Terrye on September 22, 2009 at 7:14 AM
Geez. If my eyes rolled any harder at the mention of American “Empire” they would fly right out of my head.
Lehosh on September 22, 2009 at 7:15 AM
John McCain was a great war hero for this country and I will always respect that. But he is a total jerk politically and the only folks who liked him when he ran against Team Obama were from the NYT. I stand with Glenn Beck who has done yeoman work against the Marxist Messiah – if Beck think that McCain would have actually been worse than Obama – he may very well been right. Look at McCain’s history with the Republican party and it is sick. Sure Obama sucks big time and is dangerous – but McCain is just as stupid and just as dangerous. Beck is not running for office – he leads in a different way – and he has done more for America in the last year than 300 McCains will ever be able to do. McCain doesn’t have the intellectual ability to even understand what Beck talks about! So I stand with Sarah and I stand with Beck. And I trust both. I love Mark Levin – but for him to criticize Beck at this point is like shooting your own officers as you wage war against the enemy – as for Ron Paul. He’s got many good ideas – but he is not a leader here because of his complete failure to see America threatened by the Marxists Obama surrounds himself with. Beck loves America and sees the dangers……….Paul does not and McCain does not. Again, I stand with Beck and I stand with Sarah and Rick Perry. I used to adore Romney but that health mess in Mass. turned me off. Pawlenty creeps me out too.
Cinday Blackburn on September 22, 2009 at 7:26 AM
Yes those crazy libertarians not supporting Bush’s shock and awe terror campaign in Iraq and not supporting his torture camps.
So crazy…
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 7:27 AM
Beck has a point. It took a Carter to get a Reagan. It takes an Obama to get a … PALIN ?
I wish these boys would stop the fighting.
I hope Beck isn’t heading up a 3rd party… I don’t think it will turn out well.
stenwin77 on September 22, 2009 at 7:29 AM
I can understand and appreciate valid points on each side. What I cannot understand is Mark Levin’s petty obsession with making a spectacle of eating our own. Sure, disagree all you want, but making a spectacle of it? No way. I’m sick of it, it angers me, and don’t listen to him much any more because of it.
Maybe Mark needs to spend more time with the Foundation, and drop radio for a while.
petefrt on September 22, 2009 at 7:33 AM
If McCain had won:
1) Would he be for more “campaign reform”?
2) Where would he stand on illegal immunity and citizenship?
3) With a Demo House and Senate, where would he be on Healthcare?
4) Would we have had the porkulus?
Imagine if much of the crap that Obama has given us, McCain had given us. Where would the Town Hall movement have been?
My fear is taking back the White House, the House and great strides in the Senate in 2012, with McCain and other Liberal Republicans as the Leadership. GWB’s terms had some great qualities, being a strict constructionist was not one them.
barnone on September 22, 2009 at 7:34 AM
I think Beck is GREAT! But he is not one of our own. He is not a D or an R. Levin is correct for distancing R’s from Beck. Beck has his place, but it is not in Governing the Republic.
Beck is correct. Levin is correct.
We need Beck to be independent and find fault with both sides.
We need Levin to show R’s how to lead.
barnone on September 22, 2009 at 7:39 AM
Rots of ruck!
The Paul wave has come and gone.
And there are lots of us who won’t forget what a crank and a loon he is, supported by Neo-Nazi StormFront and David Duke.
I despise the use of the “o” word in regard to our troops.
In actual fact, we aren’t “occupying” Iraq: we’re there at the behest of the Iraqis.
The U.S. has had troops in Europe and Japan for 65 years and Korea for 50, to name just 2 former war theaters.
Our troops–some of whom are Democrats–aren’t there to die or be maimed for the State; they’re there to meet and kill jihadi bad guys over there so they don’t come to kill us over here.
God bless our troops!
And d*mn you for speaking so disrespectfully of our soldiers!
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 7:43 AM
yeah you so-called ‘libertarians’ sound just like liberal wackos…
right4life on September 22, 2009 at 7:46 AM
I had noticed Levin never mentioned Beck favorably before (ignored him) and I noticed Beck didn’t mention Levin’s book as he mentioned all kinds of books for his audience to read. Recently someone called into Beck’s radio show and mentioned Levin’s book and Beck said he heard it was good in a way that made me think that Beck knows Levin doesn’t like him. Levin’s yelling late at night when the show runs hear is not a good sleep inducer so I mostly skip it. I like his calm self when he deigns to appear on Hannity who he tolerates but is Beck-like.
deedledee on September 22, 2009 at 7:46 AM
“Shock and awe” was a bombing campaign conceived by the Pentagon, which isn’t supposed to be political.
Operation Iraqi Freedom was voted on by everyone in Congress and was approved by same, including a few Libertarians.
As for Bush’s “torture camps,” I really have no idea what you’re talking about.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 7:46 AM
Exactly! Why can’t Beck help us to fight the marxist creep in this country? Beck is certainly not going to run for office or start a third party in my opinion. For comparison, look at how vicious and off the charts nutty Franken was before the Minnesota race. Beck is certainly not on Franken’s level of vitriol. Yet, Franken is now a sitting senator – WTH?
KickandSwimMom on September 22, 2009 at 7:47 AM
It’s unfortunate that Levin has decided to split the conservative movement. I wonder if Levin has joined the Frumians?
True_King on September 22, 2009 at 7:51 AM
Point well taken. But Levin needs to learn how to assert his positions without bashing, tearing down others on our side. (And as libertarian-conservative myself, I consider Beck to be on our side.) When he indulges himself in his cannibalism, he discredits himself and weakens us all.
Rush doesn’t do it. Hannity doesn’t do it. And Levin shouldn’t do it either.
petefrt on September 22, 2009 at 7:51 AM
Ha-ha.
Levin has done anything but “split” the Conservative movement, Mr. Paultard.
As to how he feels about Frum, you’ve obviously never listened to Levin’s show on a regular basis: he thinks Frum is a baffoon, which he, indeed, is.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 7:54 AM
Actually, he didn’t do such a bad job outing Van Jones and getting him to resign from his WH appointment.
Marxist Creep was set back quite a bit with that!
Given that, however, it’s clear that Beck has only a surface understanding of the issues at stake (I don’t think he’s all that bright and he’s rather incurious…) which makes him completely unlike either Rush or Mark Levin who are extremely familiar with Conservative ideology and its underpinnings.
Beck seems to care more about histrionics and popularity, but every voice fighting against NObama’s attempted destruction of this country helps.
He’s just one voice.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:00 AM
Levin is a tool sometimes. If he doesn’t think that US military deployments in Saudi Arabia from 1990-2001-present did not provide some instigation for the attacks, he clearly never read OBL’s fatwas. Granted we were in SA at the request of the House of Saud, but if we are acting as their security don’t be suprised when we have to fight their enemies.
snoopicus on September 22, 2009 at 8:03 AM
What the hell!? I wake up and find myself agreeing with spathi just a teensy bit?
Not so much in ideology but in where this country is headed.
Maybe I should go back to bed.
Lanceman on September 22, 2009 at 8:03 AM
And where have you been, Jenfidel?
AnninCa has been roaming around here freely, as nature didn’t intend.
Lanceman on September 22, 2009 at 8:05 AM
LOL!
Oh no! Has she been telling her little personal stories, too?
This cannot be allowed to stand!
I love kicking her Lib b*tt.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:10 AM
Levin is just being a good puppet for his buddy, Sean Hannity, who’s jealous as hell of Glenn Beck but can’t attack him directly for fear of arousing the wrath of his bosses at Fox. That’s the real story behind the so-called Beck/Levin feud. At the bottom of the pile is Sean Hannity who’s jealous that he’s being left behind on both television and radio.
Percy_Peabody on September 22, 2009 at 8:13 AM
No, U.S. troops in SA did not provide OBL with instigation for his fatwas!
(I see you bought the Muslim talking points, at least in part.)
All jihadis say that they’re waging war because X power has troops in X country which is “holy Muslim land.”
They consider not just SA, but *the entire world*, as “holy Muslim land, especially for purposes of waging jihad.
The only reason US troops in SA provoked Bin Laden is because he offered the services of AQ to SA and they him down and said they’d rather have the U.S. military.
His ego and vanity were wounded and therein lies the origin of the 9/11 attacks.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:14 AM
I’m gonna catch some flack for this, but I agree with Beck on some things. I think it’s a waste to have troops in Germany. Japan. Heck, most places. And I’m not so sure we need to waste American blood in Afghanistan either. I’d much rather see us infiltrate their networks, use drones, and blow them the hell away. Without mercy of any sort. Human shields? Heh. Block a 500 lb bomb. Go ahead. I don’t think their culture or civilization is worthy of our young men and women’s lives. They’re brainwashed by their backwards religion, and trying to install some sort of democracy there will always be met with enough resistance to throw their society into chaos, as we’ve seen. I’m by no means advocating a hands-off or pacifist approach, just a different approach.
I understand that we had to finish what we started in Iraq, and thankfully, I think things will turn out for the better. But going forward, I’m more inclined to want to use napalm, bunker busters and cruise missles than ground troops.
I have no respect for the islamic world. Not one bit.
moonbat monitor on September 22, 2009 at 8:14 AM
C’mon Mark, you need to drop the ego and realize the truth. glenn Beck and the AMERICAN PEOPLE have done more to stop this totalitarianism in 8 months than the ENTIRE GOP has in the past 20 years.
McCain is a fraud.
Obama has united people against him like no other could.
nelsonknows on September 22, 2009 at 8:16 AM
What are you talking about?!?
Levin doesn’t have any “bosses at Fox!”
And why should Levin, who has a #1 bestselling book that has sold over a million copies, be jealous of Beck?
He’s just worried that Beck is spreading wrong ideas and disinformation like having on Ron Paul as a respected commentator.
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:17 AM
I think of it this way.Obama and the Democrats, with their media power, and their corrupt labor buddies, are the tyrant King of England.
Those in the war against the tyrant king are like the Scottish clans. The clans have feuds with each other that have been around for centuries, but while they usually fight each other, they band together to defeat a common foe.
Jeff from WI on September 22, 2009 at 8:18 AM
Looks like the Paultard, anti-war, Lew Rockwell, V/Dare isolationist trolls are out in force today!
Super. *clunk*
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:18 AM
Oh, btw. John McCain sucked too. Don’t think that he would be worse than Obama, but still.
moonbat monitor on September 22, 2009 at 8:18 AM
BINGO!!!
cubachi on September 22, 2009 at 8:20 AM
For the record: I did *NOT* vote for Ron Paul. Don’t lump me in with them.
moonbat monitor on September 22, 2009 at 8:22 AM
Read the post a little closer. I was talking about Hannity’s bosses at Fox. And Levin didn’t write a #1 best seller either. He had a bunch of flunkies at his Landmark Legal Foundation ghostwrite it for him. Whatever one thinks of Glenn Beck, Mark Levin is a thousand times worse both as a talk show host and a human being.
Percy_Peabody on September 22, 2009 at 8:22 AM
Regardless of what he may have said, George W. Bush, and even his father, probably would have liked to wipe the Middle East off the map. Kind of like what they’d like to do to us.
What was it that Sgt. Jablonski always said on Hill Street Blues?
“Let’s do it to them before they do it to us.”
As President, you walk a fine line between fighting a war versus being a war criminal.
Lanceman on September 22, 2009 at 8:23 AM
Good Lt on September 21, 2009 at 10:49 PM
+ 1 bazillion
ginaswo on September 22, 2009 at 8:25 AM
I have to jump in here on the subject of libertarianism.
First of all, the Constitution is a document that embodies what we today call libertarian principles, and it’s high time America began debating policy on these terms. Nothing could be healthier for us right now. It’s an antidote to creeping socialism and the federalist paternalism that has so bloated our federal government, and it’s an ideal that obviously energizes people — dismissing it as populist (as some are trying to do) denigrates it and misses the point.
Second, Ron Paul is unelectable, and I sincerely hope that those who support him will realize that associating their cause with him personally is a liability. The man is an unappealing speaker, he’s proven himself tone-deaf on key hot-button issues, and he’s unable to come across as genial when he needs to. If he cared about America, he would step down & re-style himself as the libertarian Karl Rove — get a gig as a columnist somewhere and let a new generation take the spotlight. He had his time; he blew it; time to go backstage.
Third, the interstate highway system is not necessarily incompatible with libertarianism: it was built to strengthen our national defense. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System. OTOH, using federal money for non-essentials like adding pretty curbs to side roads, something I see happening all around my county, is an infuriating waste of taxpayer money.
Fourth, the immigration issue can also be neatly resolved in a fashion compatible with libertarianism, IMO. Controlling our borders is arguably a defense issue, and we can’t control our borders in an orderly and humane way unless we permit people to enter the country peaceably in order to engage in commerce. Therefore, we should invest in “legal immigration” reform; do that, and in a generation or two the only “illegal immigrants” would be bona fide criminals — and we’d be able to focus our enforcement resources on those individuals — a more effective way to spend our policing $. This is a MUCH higher priority than so-called health care reform or any other social services program.
Finally, to the “American Empire” point: I would like to see us return, to some degree, to our isolationist roots, but that needs to be directed by a focus on national defense. In that respect, invading Afghanistan was more defensible than Clinton’s foray into the Balkans. That said, if our immigration system wasn’t broken, 9/11 may never have happened — and for libertarians to gnash their teeth about Bush’s foreign policy afterward is a waste of political energy. What’s done is done.
It’s also insane to formulate policy on the basis of trying to get non-Americans to like us, as both liberals and many libertarians seem to want to do.
We can’t just walk away from the consequences of decisions made by past administrations. What we need to do is clear our heads about who we are and where we want our foreign policy to be in the future. If we focus our attention on defense, many of the more controversial aspects of our foreign policy solve themselves. Our prosperity and political ideals will also serve more effectively as a beacon for other countries — which IMO will do more toward promoting freedom than we could ever expect to accomplish via military intervention.
bluestatered on September 22, 2009 at 8:25 AM
Bush tortured over 100 detainees to death. That was official policy to interrogate them to the extreme not just rogue acts like abu ghraib supposedly was.
That’s why we need official war crimes trials for Bush-Cheney and the Gonzo 6.
Holder seems to weak to move forward though.
Spathi on September 22, 2009 at 8:27 AM
Bullsh*t.
Didn’t happen.
We need exactly zero “war crimes trials.”
Who or what are the “Gonzo 6?”
Guess you have no problem with Holder being the defense lawyer for the Marc Rich pardon, huh?
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:32 AM
I like Levin a lot. He’s brilliant, accomplished, and instructive in a professorial way. But his short fuse is the stuff of legend, and he’s radioactive when he thinks someone is appropriating his material.
I can understand getting ticked when someone is using chunks of his research in his blockbuster Liberty and Tyranny and acting as if s/he thought of it all him/herself, but he loses me when he goes off on other hosts for using his show’s theme song (the superb “Somewhere I Belong” by Linkin Park) as bumper music on their own shows. Chill out, Mark! Guys with a heart condition who eat at McDonald’s shouldn’t be giving themselves more reasons to blow a gasket.
Levin often reminds us that he was a Reaganite before Reagan was cool. But there is one Reaganism he’s seemingly forgotten lately: “There is no limit to what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.”
Beware of destroying Glenn Beck before he flames out on his own, Mark — you may wish you had him on your side come 2010.
L.N. Smithee on September 22, 2009 at 8:35 AM
I couldn’t care less about Hannity.
Nice guy, right on most of the issues, but he doesn’t flip my switch.
Got proof?
I’ve listened to both on the radio for years.
Actually, they run about even in my book, although I find Levin just as funny and certainly more ideologically sound than Beck.
When Beck starts on one of his “both parties are equally corrupt” rants, it makes my eyes bleed (as he would say).
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:37 AM
Beck was way off base on thinking Obama is better the McCain for America.
Sometimes there is a bellwether moment, when you stop and realize that someone is not who you think they are.
This should be such a moment of Beck cultists…Levin is correct, to think that McCain is worse then a Marxist loving bureaucrat is ridiculous…border line idiot. It shows that Beck runs with a “program” not an ideology.
If it looks like it gets ratings, let’s do it…but little thought beyond that.
right2bright on September 22, 2009 at 8:39 AM
Right.
Hopefully Rush will put a bug in Mark’s ear about Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment.
petefrt on September 22, 2009 at 8:40 AM
It’s not the Gonzo 6, doofus. It’s the Gonzo 9.
L.N. Smithee on September 22, 2009 at 8:41 AM
Okay wise guy…link please…since you think honesty in reporting is so important and you think Levin is not so honest…let’s have your link to his book being ghostwritten.
right2bright on September 22, 2009 at 8:43 AM
The few genuine, self proclaimed Libertarians that I know would carelessly walk over and ignore all my rights and choices and anybody elses if it suited their own personal goals and purposes. These seem to be interested in little but what works for them personally. Even the mildest of governments would be interpreted as standing in their way.
jeanie on September 22, 2009 at 8:44 AM
2Brave2Bscared on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 AM
You don’t care about Americans. All you want is for America to have sufficient power to bully everyone in the neighborhood.
MarkTheGreat on September 22, 2009 at 8:45 AM
What “neighborhood?”
What are you talking about?
Jenfidel on September 22, 2009 at 8:46 AM
I agree with Beck.
McCain would have been better as president as far as a lesser or two evils, but America would still be asleep while we took the slow road to big-RINO government.
It took a socialist to get in the white house for America to wake up.
Taken out of context, Beck is a nut. Taking him in context, makes sense to me. McCain would have been bad for America too.
robman27 on September 22, 2009 at 8:46 AM
If Mark Levin screams in a forest and no one hears him, does Beck’s new book still hit #1?
Pablo on September 22, 2009 at 8:46 AM
Everyone is turning this into something that it is not.
This is not a split in ideology.
It was “mindless” to suggest that McCain is worse than Obama. Beck displayed his tendency to be undisciplined.
Personally, I can’t stand McCain, and neither can Levin. Anyone that has listened to Levin knows this.
We now have momentum. The People are awakening to Obama’s Marxist agenda. We have to stay on a multiple front attack on the Obama brand.
Stupid. Undisciplined. Mindless.
As Conservatives, both Levin and Beck have been relentless in going after the leadership in the GOP…
…but third party is a bad play. Absolute idiocy. Sucker’s bet.
What Conservatives need to do is take over the apparatus of the GOP and offer the country the best alternative to Leftist ideology.
We need to unite under the promotion of Liberty and the eradication of Tyranny.
Ignore McCain most of the time. Use him when necessary.
Discipline is critical.
Saltysam on September 22, 2009 at 8:47 AM
Hence the freakout over 38 seconds of CBS edited video. Dog whistle? You betcha. And the dogs came running.
Pablo on September 22, 2009 at 8:48 AM
Allahpundit, you diabolical….
Lanceman on September 22, 2009 at 8:59 AM
That should have come when Beck said Obama hates White people considering that Obama’s family is White.
Decider on September 22, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Granny was a typical racist white person. His favorite crazy uncle isn’t.
Who said it, Decider?
Pablo on September 22, 2009 at 9:07 AM
Beck wasn’t the only person to state that…but many things Obama has said should change people’s mind…but apparently what McCain has said is worse? That is Beck’s view, McCain is a worse leader potentially then Obama…I am not buying it.
right2bright on September 22, 2009 at 9:08 AM
I don’t know whom you claim as sources, but I doubt they’re reliable. I’ve seen no friction between Hannity and Beck on the air at all.
OTOH, O’Reilly has Beck on his program on a weekly basis, and often giggles and denigrates his stances on Obama’s radicalism without any alternative explanation. Last week Bill quizzed Karl Rove whether he agreed with Beck about BHO’s handpicked advis-czars being an indication of his far-leftiness. Rove refused to say Beck was overreacting, despite O’Reilly’s attempts to lead him in that direction.
It’s very important to O’Reilly not to appear too conservative, and in his battle to maintain middle ground, he’s slandered some in the conservative blogosphere, primarily Jim Robinson of Free Republic. O’Reilly, after lashing out at Daily Kos, ThinkProgress and the like famously claimed that JimRob was negligent in removing “hateful” posts on the FR threads, adding that moderators on BillOReilly.com were on the ball 24/7.
When other “right-wing” bloggers browsed O’Reilly’s site and found old posts that fit his own description of “hateful,” he banned their registrations in violation of his own terms of service.
Bottom line: Both O’Reilly & Hannity still have more viewers than Beck. Glenn is rising the tide, and the O’Reilly and Hannity boats are lifted. If they’re really jealous, that’s their problem.
L.N. Smithee on September 22, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Looks like no link…this shows how much credibility this poster has…
right2bright on September 22, 2009 at 9:11 AM
I think McCain would have been a better choice too, though not much better. McCain and Olympia Snowe seem to have one grating characteristic in common. They define themselves as ‘open to reason’, ‘fair minded’ and/or logical. What they fail to see is that their assessments of themselves are just as rigid and binding as any ideology. The difference is that they apply it just to themselves and pride themselves on being ‘open-minded’. This makes them, especially Olympia, incapable of having definte principles of any kind–acting on any rigid principle would destroy their self-imposed image of themselves as flexible, able to see the larger picture people…can’t have that.
jeanie on September 22, 2009 at 9:12 AM
Paul has a cap on % of vote he can get, the more popular he gets, he’ll eventually get exposed for the whackjob that he is.
He called Reagan a traitor, lies about the history of the GOP/Conservatism and the founding fathers. and there isn’t a wild conspiracy theory he doesn’t like.
in 2005 I think, he was telling people the Afghan War(he voted for) was only being faught for “Oil Pipelines”, i.e. his buddy Michael Moore has great influence on him.
jp on September 22, 2009 at 9:16 AM
yeah if you read lewrockwell.com they sound like liberal wackos…BOOSH LIED…LINCOLN WAS A TYRANT…yadayadayad
right4life on September 22, 2009 at 9:26 AM
correction 2007 interview:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-paul-on-afghanistan-oil-pipelines.html
he voted for the AUMF(war against Afghanistan), which he claims the AUMF for Iraq is “unconstitutional”, and the one he voted for he says is all a conspiracy and there is no effort to get Bin Laden.
the fact anyone gives this clown the time of day on the right worries me as much as Obama does.
jp on September 22, 2009 at 9:32 AM
If you had read the vast majority of my comments at HotAir, you wouldn’t be using sarcasm. Yes, I am educated and on the rare occasions that I comment, I strive for maturity in my words and civility in these forums. When I’m not being mature, like the comment about Savage’s program that got your knickers all twisted, there’s a good chance it’s for comedic or satirical effect.
(a) I’m not a petty shmuck, so no, the “Mr Weiner” thing would not have come up. Nor, for that matter, am I a fan of Levin. I have listened to both regularly in the past (btwn 6 months and a year), so I do know a little about their shows.
(b) Did I claim Savage was wrong to meander down memory lane? No. Did I evaluate his accuracy at all? No. So Savage’s rightness or wrongness on how he chooses to run his show and the assertions he makes is immaterial to my criticism of his style.
(c) Hyperbole (which is what the HE HATES EVERYONE was) aside, yes, Savage makes it a point to target and deride other talk radio hosts, he is exceptionally rude to his callers, and apparently prefers to engage in name-calling rather than discuss issues.
Savage may be your cup of tea; he’s not mine, and to each their own. My criticism of his show, however accurate, need have no impact on whether you listen and enjoy it.
Lastly — unless you’re blatentblue’s super-secret alter-ego, I wasn’t even addressing you in the first place (way back on page 4), kiddo.
Harpazo on September 22, 2009 at 9:37 AM
Actually, I think Allahpundit being Pavlov would be more apt.
MadisonConservative on September 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM
I find myself very irritated this morning, pulling up the boards at HotAir to find YET ANOTHER slam on Glenn Beck.
He’s not every one’s cup of tea. I get that. But honest to God… it’s not his JOB to carry water for Republicans. If Levin wants to do it… great. That’s his choice. It’s still a semi-free country after all. But if conservatives and libertarians can’t find a way to get along… we’ll be living under Barack Obama’s fascist thumb for a long time yet to come.
I love John McCain for his service to our country, and I believe he’s an honest and decent man. But still… he IS a big, fat RINO. We’re lying to ourselves if we say otherwise. The “compassionate conservatism” of Bush and McCain isn’t any different essentially than the nanny-statism of Socialist Democrats. The only difference is that “Moderate” Republicans have the grace to blush while they’re spending us to the poor house.
Beck’s point was easy enough to understand. Obama’s redistributive policies are a raw, slap in the face, one that awakens us from complacence. This is a GOOD thing. Because it gives us an opportunity to rub the sleep from our eyes and NOTICE that we’re sliding off the cliff into Socialism, and hopefully in time to yet do something about it.
A RINO at the helm creates a more cooperative atmosphere, whereby the descent is slower and almost imperceptible to the slumbering public. And those who ARE already awake and politically aware of where we’re heading are gagged, lest we arm our enemy.
Yeah… it sucks that we’re having to fight tooth and nail for our liberties under Barack Obama’s regime. But by God… at least we can SEE the enemy for what he is.
Libertarians and Republicans agree upon more issues than they disagree. We should be natural friends. And it’s pointless to create enmity where none should exist right now when we most need each other. I’m a Republican and I like both Mark Levin and Glenn Beck.. but if you’re gonna force me to choose between the two over petty nuance, I’ll stand with Glenn. Because…
He’s not the one starting the in-fighting. All he expects from me is decency and common sense. I don’t have to kowtow to his nuanced definition of conservatism. I’m free to develop my own thoughts. And yeah, he’s a little crazy… passionate in his views to the point of near hysteria sometimes. But he doesn’t expect me to embrace his every word to prove my conservative bonafides.
Glenn has tapped into something that alot of conservatives with megaphones don’t seem to understand. And that is the fact that we are still, in many ways, the same stubborn Americans we were two centuries ago. We don’t appreciate other people trying to live our lives for us. And we sure as Hell don’t appreciate them trying to do our thinking for us.
It’s the weak-minded liberal who craves uniformity and can’t deal with the chaotic nature of life the way he finds it. Why would we try to adopt his failings? Isn’t it better to embrace the handful of conservative principles that we all agree upon rather than try to stuff a gag in the mouth of anyone who might differ, even marginally, on the issues?
You give the statists what they want when you create division in the ranks of opposition over small differences.
Murf76 on September 22, 2009 at 9:44 AM
BS!
Mark spent 18 months on his own time after a day of work at Landmark then his radio show. He would go home and write “liberty and Tyranny”. He did all the research himself, looked up and read the sources himself…so give up on hte disinformation.
BTW, Mark has won 8 cases in front of the SCOTUS. with a record like that I don’t think he would hire flunkies.
b1jetmech on September 22, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 6 7 8 9 Next »