Video: Glenn Beck goes all in for Doug Hoffman — and third parties

posted at 7:55 pm on October 26, 2009 by Allahpundit

“I am no longer going to throw my vote away by giving it to the party,” he vows, confirming Gingrich’s fears of independent challengers splitting Republicans in purple districts into conservative and moderate camps next year and handing the district to the Democrat. In fact, I thought of Beck and his “In or Out” litmus test (which he touched on briefly tonight) while writing this post last week. Given his activist ambitions, it’s easy to imagine him using his show to encourage and promote a variety of third-party congressional candidates, and while they’re unlikely to win, they could bleed enough votes from Republican nominees to make life easier for The One. Beck would shrug that off by claiming that there’s zero difference between the major parties anyway and, a la his assertion that McCain would have been worse for America than Obama, that another GOP loss next year might actually be good for the country in preparing the ground for his brand of libertarian Republicanism. Which makes this a perfect place to quote Doctor Zero’s rejoinder to him last month:

During the campaign, disgruntled Republicans often said it would be better to have Obama in office, showing everyone just how horrible Democrat policies are, than tolerate a RINO like McCain pushing the same policies in low gear, with bipartisan fingerprints. Glenn Beck’s slap at McCain is a retroactive expression of the idea that conservatism is just one crushing defeat away from total victory. Anyone who thought it was worth putting Obama in office, as some kind of object lesson for the American voter, gravely underestimated the amount of damage he could do. Look at how far we’ve sailed past the edge of fiscal sanity, in only nine months. It would take decades of careful, moderate reform just to get us back to where George Bush left us… and that wasn’t exactly an enviable position. Freedom is an endless voyage, while tyranny has far too many points of no return. The course we steered away from President McCain has taken us perilously close to those terminal waters.

One crushing defeat away from total victory, in perpetuity. A question for Beck fans, borrowing a line uttered here by the man himself: What is the endgame? There’s a sense I get from watching Beck that he thinks there’s a supermajority out there willing to return to Founders-style libertarianism if only he and other conservatives hammer the message hard and long enough. I don’t think there is. And if I’m right that there’ll always be at least 40 votes or so in the Senate and 45 percent among the population for progressivism, how does he presume to enact the libertarian agenda while confronting the realities of congressional compromise? In a perfect world, Doug Hoffman wins and all the purple districts break for “true conservatives” and all federal entitlements are repealed and the income tax is abolished etc etc etc. Assume hypothetically now that the world isn’t perfect. What is the endgame?

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: 1 2 3 4

All the Republicans have to do to prevent a Third Party is stop being Democrat-Lite.

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM

Precisely. But sometimes the simple truths are the hardest to understand.

rrpjr on October 26, 2009 at 8:41 PM

There’s a sense I get from watching Beck that he thinks there’s a supermajority out there willing to return to Founders-style libertarianism if only he and other conservatives hammer the message hard and long enough. I don’t think there is

Mr. Pundit, you will never persuade me to vote for a liberal. You will never persuade me to not vote for a conservative.

Skandia Recluse on October 26, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Well then you’re going bust. Precisely my point.

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:11 PM

I think it’s way to soon to make that assertion. The RINO may not be as bad as the new Democrat, but it isn’t capable of solving the problems we’re facing. We need a new sort of beast. I don’t much care what it calls itself, as long as it does what’s needed.

ElectricPhase on October 26, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Well then you’re going bust. Precisely my point.

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:11 PM

We all are. When there’s no choice, there’s no freaking choice. Democrats are looking to decapitate America, Republicans are bleeding her slowly. The result is the same. She dies. I’m voting for the men and women who will attempt to save her, not those who seem hell bent on resigning her to the death panel.

jimmy2shoes on October 26, 2009 at 8:42 PM

I doubt Beck would be supporting Hoffman if Scozzafava was halfway convincing as a conservative. You don’t see him calling Christie a RINO, do you?

Speedwagon82 on October 26, 2009 at 8:11 PM

There is no viable 3rd party conservative running in NJ, perhaps if there was he would.

NY Conservative on October 26, 2009 at 8:42 PM

Some little dweeb from the RNC called up today. Told me how great my conservative views were and asked me if I’d like to donate $100. I told him as long as the party was going to support candidates like Scozza-whatever they weren’t going to be seeing any money from me.

I hung up before I got his response.

trigon on October 26, 2009 at 8:43 PM

Again, what is the endgame? How far are the Beck/1791 purists ready to compromise or not compromise?

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

Personally, I’m waiting on your wing of the party to answer that question before I commit to riding the trail with you any more. Where do the Snoop Sisters from Maine draw that line? How about Frum or C. Buckley, Noonan or Parker? For that matter, where do you draw that line, AP? You’re mighty bold in calling out conservatives to answer that question, but I don’t see you jumping into the briar patch.

You’re the pundit — tell us peasants what we should think. Or are you all rabble-rouser and no substance?

trfogey on October 26, 2009 at 8:43 PM

*facepalm*

ThePrez on October 26, 2009 at 8:43 PM

Allah you assume all Democrats will vote for the “D” – but the Democrat party on the national level is gone – it is the Progressive party. Democrat voters are just as disenchanted with their party, they are looking for an alternative and don’t see it in the the RINO’s who are just Republican Progressives.

Obama has a majority and cannot get anything done – that’s not the minority R’s stopping him – it’s because he & his Progressive ilk did not completely take over the Democrat party on the local levels before the Progressive rise to the executive.

People are begging for fiscal responsibility and smaller government – neither party is answering. One party is purposefully slamming us headlong into government servitude and the other is drunkenly stumbling toward it… who would you have us follow?

batterup on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

Scozzafava brought this to a head. If the RNC is going to support the likes of her, then they should be put on notice that they can’t expect conservatives to sit back and take it. I think the NY-23 race should make this clear to them, however they seem like such slow learners who knows when they will take heed.

On the other hand, I don’t beleve (and I don’t believe that I heard Glenn Beck say tonight)that a third party candidate should always be encouraged just for its own sake. The Repubs should make SOME effort to field clearly conservative candidates. Hoffman just makes sense in the case of NY-23.

DrStock on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

When your party picks a freakin liberal you have to make a decision about how you vote for. In this case I completely advocate hoffman, but hopefully the republican party learns its lesson and doesn’t continue to put conservatives between a rock and a hard place.

Beck is right if this is what the Republican party continues to do.

therightscoop on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

Time for Allah to take another vacation or something.

mobydutch on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

what an idiot

jp on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2009 at 8:13 PM

Think Hegel as in the philosopher. Until conservatives stop trying to maintain the thesis and start challenging the orthodoxy of the left we will continue to lose ground to the rising tide.

chemman on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

One crushing defeat away from total victory, in perpetuity. A question for Beck fans, borrowing a line uttered here by the man himself: What is the endgame? There’s a sense I get from watching Beck that he thinks there’s a supermajority out there willing to return to Founders-style libertarianism if only he and other conservatives hammer the message hard and long enough. I don’t think there is.

If Founders conservatism had the big money (corporate, GOP establishment) and the big megaphone (talk radio, Fox News) instead of neoconservatism, traditionalism would indeed be much more popular than it is now.

Right now the GOP platform boils down to draining the treasury for 50 different wars, ignore the Constitution, and print tons of money to fund corporate plus redistributive socialism. None of that helps the white working or middle class. If they had policies to actually help the working class, it would be more popular and lead to more successful governance than trying to trick people into voting for a disastrous agenda (as is the case now).

The Dean on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

The end game is throwing these criminals out of public life once and for all.

AP is just another RINO.

notagool on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

What is gained by putting a liberal, in a conservative sweater, in power?

Tell me if your hungry and you don’t have no option of having a FULL meal….would you rather get snack (a moderate) or having nothing to eat (a liberal)?

If seems like you prefer to starve.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

Political suicide. Are you really that naive to think that “true conservatives” can win in the Northeast or Northwest. Get real.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:39 PM

Yes I do, in a landslide. A person who speaks of fiscal responsibility, more liberty ( ie less limited government ) and is strong with the border and with keeping America safe…a person who is a true capitalist, will win in a landslide. Why do democrats run as conservatives, but as soon as elected govern as liberals? Because they know the people are conservative, but don’t pay attention to them once they are in.

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

Right. There was no reason to nominate a liberal Republican in a red district. That’s why Gingrich is wrong. But there’s very good reason to nominate centrist Republicans in purple districts. Paul Ryan, for instance, is a fiscal conservative but he supported TARP. Does Ryan get a third-party challenger?

Again, what is the endgame? How far are the Beck/1791 purists ready to compromise or not compromise?

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

Say this is 1970, and it’s Republican incumbent Charles Goodell vs. Democrat Thomas Ottinger and Conservative Party candidate James Buckley. Party loyalty, or support the candidate who best represents your ideology.

NY-23 is interesting because the New York State Republican Party hasn’t changed much if at all from the top-down selection of candidates 39 years ago and their total lack of faith that a conservative candidate can win there. The difference here is that was a statewide Senate race where New York City had a major vote; this is a race in the north central/northeastern part of the state that’s far more Republican than the state as a whole, and the GOP hierarchy picked a candidate thinking it was the summer of 2008 and Obamamania was still in full bloom, not the summer of 2009, when the bloom is definitely off the rose.

Mindlessly supporting all third party conservative candidates is self-defeating. But in an election for an unexpired one-year term and going into a 2010 election where the trend figures to be even more against the Democrats, backing Hoffman here, even if he loses, is likely to be a correctable setback 12 months from now, unless Owens votes as the bluest of Blue Dog Democrats if he gets elected (on the other hand, if Scozzafava wins instead of Owens, you’re not getting her out of their in 2010).

jon1979 on October 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

Give me Liberty or Give me Death

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM

What is the endgame with letting more and more liberals into the GOP ranks? Just cast your gaze to Europe and it’s “conservative” parties. Slowly but surely the entire political scale has shifted leftward. The same is happening with the republican party. Can Beck reverse that? Only time will tell, but at least he is trying. If this line of thinking leads to a quick decline in GOP influence and the weakening of conservative ideals irreversibly, then it does. But it isn’t certain. What is certain is that the current path of the GOP, exemplified in Scozzafava and McCain and Graham, will lead there.

Smiles on October 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM

That’s it though-it’s not right.

There is a way.

Hold the line.

Horatius on October 26, 2009 at 8:20 PM

Horatius: Hold the line,Toto!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfzUv09nIH4&feature=related

canopfor on October 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM

Hold the line.

Horatius on October 26, 2009 at 8:20 PM
It may that there is not enough Line to hold.

half the population lives off of Government Money and some of them–and others–have been Mentally Polluted enough to actually believe in Hope & Change.

If conservatives are a third–with libs a third and ‘moderates who call themselves conservatives’ the final third, any party which only caters to a third is Electorally Doomed

AthiestPundit is essentially correct

Janos Hunyadi on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

In that case, Dems have 2/3 (since they own the Dems AND most of the GOP) and anyone who is not a Dem or a RINO has already lost, and we might as well close down Hot Air and go to an Obama rally.

I’m voting principle, whether they are (R) or (I) or (C) – or in a very rare case, (D). The Repubs have shifted from a generally conservative party to a (mostly) flat-out moderate party because they thought that’s what would get them the votes.

Financially supporting and voting for very conservative candidates of ANY party is the only way to get the attention of the GOP so they can see where they went off track – and how to get back on.

SouperConservative on October 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM

Remember when Joe Lieberman ran as a third party candidate? That was just crazy.

Pablo on October 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM

Well then you’re going bust. Precisely my point.

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:11 PM

Is that really your point? I read Hotair (pardon me) religiously and you seem to not have a point, merely criticism.

One crushing defeat away from total victory, in perpetuity.

Really? did you forget that McCain was the nominee last time around? He lost you remember that? Captain Amnesty, olive branch, reach across the aisle, the moderates wettest of wet dreams… He lost. Should we just run on the Democrat platform next time? Make the capitulation complete?

Why you can’t admit that bipartisan fingerprints on things like cap-and trade, “immigration reform,” stimulus and the like would be used to legitimize them and make these things the base line for governing not the fringe, is beyond me. The media is using Graham and baby McCain for just that purpose. “See these are what Republicans should be!”

Allahpundit have you noticed that the only thing Obama was able to get through congress and to his desk were the things that Republicans gave credibility to, namely the stimulus which he had cover on because hey “Bush did it first.” What else has he been able to accomplish by himself? Nothing! Get it? Democrats don’t have the guts to pass anything. But McCain would right now be passing a grand compromise that at best only doubles the cost of private insurance and comes in just shy of 1 trillion with creative acocunting of course sheesh. Can’t you see it cap and trade light (as if any part of cap and trade would be a good thing.) Do you think McCain would be pushing for the drilling of oil and expanding our refinery capacity? Me neither he let the Democrats have an arm and a leg for the good press in exchange we might get a few new reactors maybe, in a few years, we hope…

Real politik, the Democrats need the Republicans to take some of the responsibility. This you know. Whats it matter if a few Republicans lose a few seats because of copnservative opposition who cares? Jesus, can you imagine what would happen if the GOP had 10 Olympia Snowes? Obama or McCain the thought is frightening. That is your your end game whether you realize it or not.

Theworldisnotenough on October 26, 2009 at 8:47 PM

At one point in June of 1992, Perot with his third party led the polls with 39%.

The GOP got 31% and the Democrats got 25%.

That was when people were not nearly as pissed off as they are now with the RINOs and democrats. The spread would be even bigger today. So for those who say a third party candidate could never with the White House, and therefore, conservatives should support RINOS as the lesser of the two evils, are simply ignorant, not just of political theory, but of recent history.

keep the change on October 26, 2009 at 8:47 PM

Tell me if your hungry and you don’t have no option of having a FULL meal….would you rather get snack (a moderate) or having nothing to eat (a liberal)?

If seems like you prefer to starve.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

I’d go to a drive thru & get a happy meal.

batterup on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

Time for Allah to take another vacation or something.

mobydutch on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

mobydutch: DOH!!

canopfor on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

and is strong with the border and with keeping America safe

Yeah I’m sure the number one issue on the minds of people who live thousands of miles away from the Mexican border is immigration.

ARE U THAT FREAKING DELUSION!!!

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

The end game is to live free and die hard. Conservatism or bust!

Well then you’re going bust. Precisely my point.

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:11 PM

And where exactly has your plan taken us? To big government.

True_King on October 26, 2009 at 8:49 PM

therightscoop on October 26, 2009 at 8:44 PM

I’ve been hearing the stick with us we’ll do better next time tune since 1972. The party, GOP, finally left me in 2002. I will vote and fund conservatives until I breathe my last but don’t expect me to support liberals regardless of the letter after their name.

chemman on October 26, 2009 at 8:49 PM

Yes, immigration is only about people who live on the Mexican border. You wake up.

bazil9 on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM

If seems like you prefer to starve.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

The choice is not between eating and starving, but between having others starve us, and starving ourselves.

keep the change on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM

ARE U THAT FREAKING DELUSION!!!
terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

It’s delusionary, sweetie. Take your meds.

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM

District One:
Typical liberal Dem versus ‘moderate’ Republican, ala SzaraFazza (sp?) Vote for the Independent Conservative, since a vote for either the D or R gets you the same basic results.

District Two:
Typical liberal Dem versus conservative Republican who supports core republican principles Vote for the conservative Republican

and for the poster that wondered if an Independent would cause a ‘Naderization’ of an election: if the election is very tight, they might, but look at NY-23; you aren’t comparing Hoffman to Nader are you? He has much more than a sliver of support.

Red State State of Mind on October 26, 2009 at 8:51 PM

just shoveling sand against the tide.

cozmo on October 26, 2009 at 8:02 PM

Similarly, when the Republicans swept Congress in 1994 and took the WH in 2000, that was the end of the Democratic party. I wonder what they are up to these days?

Kafir on October 26, 2009 at 8:51 PM

The choice is not between eating and starving, but between having others starve us, and starving ourselves.

keep the change on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM

I have no clue what the hell your talking about.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:52 PM

This post doesn’t take into analysis any econmic factors at all. The pension defecit in this country is somewhere slighty north of 409 billion. Social Security is going negative and we arae likely to have a dollar crisis during Obama presidency.

The future is gauranteed to have higher taxes and lower benefits. Period. I’m guessing that the young, when they see their job opportunities diminshed and their taxes sky high aren’t going to jump in the GOP boat. Libertarianism is going to look alot more attractive. The more libertarian the GOP seems the better.

Theworldisnotenough on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

If seems like you prefer to starve.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM
The choice is not between eating and starving, but between having others starve us, and starving ourselves.

keep the change on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM

+1

SouperConservative on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

You are delusional if you think that people aren’t bothered with an open border, aren’t bothered with the drug lords having so much power on the border…and the federal government doing nothing. Even people in NY, Wisconsin, etc have a strong opinion about security matters and illegal immigration.

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

You guys haven’t been paying attention…

‘Free and Fair’ elections….. HA!

Obama has already made it a Federal Hate Crime to oppose his ideology…

… While you were sleeping, you were not only raped in the a%s, but you were also tattooed, sold, and now have a dog collar around your neck.

But by all means, keep talking about this “United States of America” thingy… It’s very amusing.

Seven Percent Solution on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

We can’t even agree on a definition of conservatism.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:37 PM

It’s like pornography, you know it when you see it.

jimmy2shoes on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

So tell me Allah, what do I have left to lose by going rogue?

Bruno Strozek on October 26, 2009 at 8:33 PM

Exactly.

davidk on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

Preach the damn values. If you make the message clear, everyone with a brain will embrace some aspects of conservatism. Especially the fiscal part.

uknowmorethanme on October 26, 2009 at 8:55 PM

Hey AP.
Third parties in US are failures. Not 100% but close enough. The present R leaders seem to conflate that “those not in the party” must vote R for the party to win with “Rs must act against basic principles to win.”
That’s an argument the D’rats make to distract us.

In every instance the Rs win, they do so by espousing conservative principles. TNITP then recognize that it is in their interest to vote R and follow. It does not matter if the present R leadership is dumb, halt, and blind. Talk conservative, elect conservative and even the blind Rs will get the point.

America needs no RINOS or DIABLOS. Hoot them down. Make ‘em do a Specter. Only conservatives will do. If a label is needed, the candidate is phonus.

Support the Constitution as written. Have a verifiable record of it. There’s not a lot more needed. Yeah, a lot can be added but what for? KISS! And win!

Flying 1st Confederate

Caststeel on October 26, 2009 at 8:55 PM

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

The endgame for me is that the GOP pulls back on it’s nomination of far too “moderate” candidates, especially when it makes no sense like in NY23. They lock themselves in to these types far too often and early, like is currently going on with Crist. Until they get the idea conservatives won’t be taken for granted anymore, there is nothing to be lost by bucking the party when advantageous, and a lot to gain.

Now for all the hoopla in NY23, it could very well still be a bust – but it will have sent a message to the national GOP organizations, and by extension the local orgs across the country.

The NJ governors race is another problem, there is a third party rightist candidate siphoning votes from Christie, and that will probably mean Corzine stays governor. That is bad for our cause overall, letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. But I don’t see to many here on the conservative right getting exercised about it – I see far more support for Christie. So you see, we can pick our battles.

JeffWeimer on October 26, 2009 at 8:55 PM

A question for Beck fans, borrowing a line uttered here by the man himself: What is the endgame?

Wrong question, allah. We are in the endgame. That’s the point.

If you don’t know what I mean …

progressoverpeace on October 26, 2009 at 8:56 PM

It’s delusionary, sweetie. Take your meds.

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM

kj, it’s delusional. Pill call!

thomasaur on October 26, 2009 at 8:57 PM

And you’re never going to have enough enough conservatives to enact the Glenn Beck agenda in its pristine form. Never. Ever. Ever.

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:24 PM

By this “Glenn Beck agenda”, I’m assuming you mean conservatism. But it’s not just about a head count in congress in winning or advancing an agenda. It’s about articulating as well. One person can sway many people with argument, it’s not like people arrive in congress with an “R” or a “D” on their forehead and they vote that way every single time, so we should just take a head count of the “R”s and the “D”s. A minority can win, if a winning message gets through.

The compromise comes when people give in and vote in support of something that they know they disagree with. The whole point of congress is to debate and win votes. It’s to get the other guy to die for his party, to paraphrase ol’ Patton. It’s to get them to agree with you. It’s to get THEM to compromise.

When you say ‘decide on which Founding principles to compromise’ you’re already compromising. You’re already giving ground to the Left. Conservatives don’t compromise any of their principles.

To answer your question, what’s the endgame? The details are a little fuzzy, but whoever’s the most principled wins.

trace_9r on October 26, 2009 at 8:57 PM

Yeah I’m sure the number one issue on the minds of people who live thousands of miles away from the Mexican border is immigration.

ARE U THAT FREAKING DELUSION!!!

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

I live in the Washington, Dc area, thousands of miles from the Mexican border. Many people here are deeply concerned about illegals because:
They dilute the wages that law abiding citizens and legal immigrants would otherwise earn.
They take jobs away from law abiding citizens and legal immigrants.
They are a significant portion of the criminal population.
They tax our education resources, and we aren’t allowed to count them and get funds for the education of the children of citizens and legal immigrants.
They tax our emergency response and treatment resources, and we aren’t allowed to enforce our Nation’s laws when we discover and identify these criminals.

Red State State of Mind on October 26, 2009 at 8:57 PM

uknowmorethanme on October 26, 2009 at 8:55 PM

Great minds …
Inspiration.

Flying First Confederate

Caststeel on October 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM

I have no clue.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:52 PM

keep the change on October 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM

I have no clue what the hell your talking about.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:52 PM

Which is frequently the case.

thomasaur on October 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM

Again, what is the endgame? How far are the Beck/1791 purists ready to compromise or not compromise?

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

Lol, the mantra of the political machine to smear the base. Nice.

I think you underestimate the movement and lack an understanding of whats happening at ground level. This is not a war against the GOP, its a war against corruption and socialism. The small battle in NYC is just a microcosm of whats happening on the ground.

As the movement grows I think you will be pleasantly surprised. There is most definitely a paradigm shift happening.

True_King on October 26, 2009 at 8:59 PM

Again, what is the endgame? How far are the Beck/1791 purists ready to compromise or not compromise?

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

We have seen what compromise and “moderate” RINO’s have gotten us thus far, losing both the House and Senate and nominating Liberals! If a stand is not taken then change will never happen. Mobs are the only things that politicians understand and it’s the same for the GOP leadership. When enough people turn on them and demand that they change, change will happen. Stand around and eeoring about how we are going to lose it all won’t bring about change. It will just allow more of the same. There has to be a penalty for ignoring the base!

flytier on October 26, 2009 at 8:59 PM

thomasaur on October 26, 2009 at 8:57 PM

It’s both according to merriam-webster.com, but I could still use the medication.

Main Entry: de·lu·sion
Pronunciation: \di-ˈlü-zhən, dē-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin delusion-, delusio, from deludere
Date: 15th century
1 : the act of deluding : the state of being deluded
2 a : something that is falsely or delusively believed or propagated b : a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also : the abnormal state marked by such beliefs
— de·lu·sion·al \-ˈlüzh-nəl, -ˈlü-zhə-nəl\ adjective
— de·lu·sion·ary \-zhə-ˌner-ē\ adjective

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 9:01 PM

Yeah I’m sure the number one issue on the minds of people who live thousands of miles away from the Mexican border is immigration.

ARE U THAT FREAKING DELUSION!!!

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM

Terry Ann, immigration is not a priority, what it is, is a subtext to the number one issue, the economy. Any moves forward on immgration come with the obvious sentiment, illegal aliens are taking jobs from Americans.

Aren’t you freaking out just a little? “strong with the border” does not equal delusional.

Theworldisnotenough on October 26, 2009 at 9:01 PM

have no clue what the hell your talking about.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:52 PM

Yes, we know that. We also know you hate Beck. See!Look at all the typing I saved you.

katy the mean old lady on October 26, 2009 at 9:02 PM

We can’t even agree on a definition of conservatism.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:37 PM

It’s like pornography, you know it when you see it.

jimmy2shoes on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

If that’s the electoral strategy, then kiss 2010 and 2012 goodbye, because you’ll always be defining people out of the category. I don’t think anyone here is saying that the NY-23 situation isn’t a screw-up, but this nebulous “true believer” standard for ideological acceptability should scare the bejezus out of everyone that seriously wants to retake Congress and back-off this plunge into hyper-pervasive statism.

Patrick Ishmael on October 26, 2009 at 9:03 PM

If you build it (a home that welcomes conservatism), the like-minded (fiscally conservate) will come. I predict that many disaffected Independents and Democrats will support candidates of conviction like Hoffman.

Like Lieberman, who had to run as an Independent, Hoffman will be able to caucus for Republicans that share his conservatism.

The movement toward fiscal sanity has to start somewhere. Now voters in NY’s 23 have a place to offer their support with a candidate who represents their interests more than the other two.

onlineanalyst on October 26, 2009 at 9:03 PM

Even people in NY, Wisconsin, etc have a strong opinion about security matters and illegal immigration.

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM

Immigration didn’t even crack the top 5 issues in last year’s campaign. Only in HotAir world does anyone obsess over immigration.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:03 PM

Tell me if your hungry and you don’t have no option of having a FULL meal….would you rather get snack (a moderate) or having nothing to eat (a liberal)?

If seems like you prefer to starve.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:45 PM

There aren’t any snacks left after “moderates” have been raiding the pantry the past few years. Can’t I even get a sandwich, figuratively speaking?

The Dean on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

We can’t even agree on a definition of conservatism.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 8:37 PM

That’s a typical symptom that moderates suffer.

trace_9r on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

katy the mean old lady on October 26, 2009 at 9:02 PM

*chuckling*

Florida babes in the house! :)

bazil9 on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 9:01 PM

My paperback M/W only had the one, I humbly defer to the e-dictionary.

thomasaur on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

Paul Ryan, for instance, is a fiscal conservative but he supported TARP.
Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

What is wrong with the picture here?

Voting for a bill that essentially helped quadruple the deficit in fiscal year 2009 is not the hallmark of a fiscal conservative. This is why those of us who are fiscal conservatives are p….d with the GOP and many, many politicians.

I have been against deficit spending since I was old enough to understand the concept. That means I didn’t like Nixon’s over spending, Reagan’s over spending, Bush I’s over spending or Bush II’s overspending. I left out the dems because I am focusing on the GOP and their idiocy.

chemman on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

That’s a typical symptom that moderates suffer.

trace_9r on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

Define it then.

Patrick Ishmael on October 26, 2009 at 9:05 PM

How ignorant. Go ask Envar Hoxha, Ceaucescu, Brezhnev and Jimmy Carter how their career curves went. Read some history

TexasJew on October 26, 2009 at 8:20 PM

I lived a lot of that history.

The career paths of those you mentioned mean nothing in the greater scheme of things. Even with Reagan, the policies didn’t move to the right.

There has yet to be a government downsizing of any meaningful size anywhere on this planet. My favorite government program to cite is the Rural Electrification Act, still going strong decades after its usefulness came to an end.

cozmo on October 26, 2009 at 9:07 PM

Immigration didn’t even crack the top 5 issues in last year’s campaign.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:03 PM

Bullsh!t. Illegal aliens (not “immigration”) was a totally toxic issue that everyone was scared to even touch, after it caused Shrillary’s primary campaign to go off the rails due to nothing more than her support of Spitzer’s moronic licenses for illegals (and also crashed his numbers). After that, everyone was so petrified at the thought of saying even one word about it that no one mentioned it, at all.

Illegal aliens is still a HUGE issue and you will see it when Shamnesty comes back to Congress.

Non-issues are talked about and debated. Illegal aliens scares the cr@p out of all the traitors who are dying to print up US citizenships by the millions and hand them out to people who already have citizenships in other countries and have no business being in this nation.

progressoverpeace on October 26, 2009 at 9:07 PM

It seems that terryannonline and Miss Meghan McCain have studied writing, spelling, and grammar at the same institution.And Allah should let his cats write a post once in a while, they might make more sense.

rinohumper on October 26, 2009 at 9:08 PM

Endgame? We don’t need no stinking endgame!

Freedom is not free. How’s that for a start?
The tree of liberty must occasionally be watered …. Another good Revolutionary comment.

Those seeking to suckle at the public teat are always with us so we conservatives must always be vigilant.

BTW The country is far from finished. Proof: Enlistments are at an alltime high with recruiting exceeding requirements. These are the conservatives of tomorrow. As always, we who fought in our time continue to fight in our way. That those who follow can return our “Thank you” with “It is our pleasure.”

Flying First Confederate

Caststeel on October 26, 2009 at 9:09 PM

Sorry, I didn’t get from this that Beck is going “all in” for third parties. I take his exhortations as pro-traditional and republican, but that he laments the dissolution of the republican party. In that instance, what else can one can one do, as a conscientious citizen, but vote for someone like Doug Hoffman. He mocks the claim that he, Beck, is the problem when, as many here agree, it is the party which has repeatedly and determinedly betrayed its core prinsiples with clowns and faux conservatives like Dede what’shername, usually under the specious pretext of either “electability” or from the false fear of radioactive conservatism. That is what offends Beck, as it offends a growing base of conservatives.

rrpjr on October 26, 2009 at 9:09 PM

I don’t think anyone here is saying that the NY-23 situation isn’t a screw-up, but this nebulous “true believer” standard for ideological acceptability should scare the bejezus out of everyone that seriously wants to retake Congress and back-off this plunge into hyper-pervasive statism.

Well, everyone committed to the Republican party, that is.

Once you take a plunge, there’s no backing off. There is only the impact and the aftermath. I’m really not going to be happy if I find myself telling Congresswoman McCain “I told you so.”

Pablo on October 26, 2009 at 9:10 PM

progressoverpeace on October 26, 2009 at 9:07 PM

Poll

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

“When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it.

“Compromise” was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything.

“I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’

“If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.

- Ronald Reagan

————–

Beck is sticking his head in the sand unless he’s advocating a Conservative Dictator taking over then what he’s advocating in the real world is Complete and Total Socialist Domination of this country in the USSR type of manner.

Idiot

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

I won’t let progressive pansies in either party intimidate me into accepting RINOism. We’ll never win by presuming defeat.

flyfisher on October 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

Immigration didn’t even crack the top 5 issues in last year’s campaign. Only in HotAir world does anyone obsess over immigration.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:03 PM

And Health care is where on the priority list? Fact is if you run your party based on polls versus principles then you will make that conclusion. And yet, people are pro-military, pro-police protecting our streets, anti-gangs, etc. I don’t care if you are a so call progressive…you are for peace of mind that you can walk the streets at night without getting molested. Note that I said security AND illegal immigration.
Fact is you can’t rely on polls. You have to run on principles…and conservative principles win…That is why Obama ran as a Conservative, and McCain lost as the bone a fide moderate that you love and think is the winning ticket.

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

This seat is being filled only temporarily, right? Should Hoffman win, I expect that he would run as a Republican in the next campaign. Maybe the GOP party leaders should let the best candidate win and stop salting the contest with acrimony,

onlineanalyst on October 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

What is so difficult about imagining that the collective disgust of Obama could manifest itself into a firm third party?

anniekc on October 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Right. There was no reason to nominate a liberal Republican in a red district. That’s why Gingrich is wrong. But there’s very good reason to nominate centrist Republicans in purple districts. Paul Ryan, for instance, is a fiscal conservative but he supported TARP. Does Ryan get a third-party challenger?

Again, what is the endgame? How far are the Beck/1791 purists ready to compromise or not compromise?

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:28 PM

exactly

We should be targeting Democrat Senators in Red States and bite out toungue and tolerate the Liberal Republican Senators from Blue States, also

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

The course we steered away from President McCain has taken us perilously close to those terminal waters.

Um, here’s the problem with that statement: It assumes McCain wanted to win. He proved very loud and clear, in the end, that he did not. McCain lost.

Editor on October 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

Beck is going for the real Republican…he is going for the guy who has 75-80%.

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 9:16 PM

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

Just tell me the point you were trying to make. If it has anything to do with illegal aliens, then it’s worthless, since both McShame and The Precedent are chomping at the bit to destroy US sovereignty and give AMerican citizenship to everyone they can. There is no daylight between their positions. And whenever either of them expresses their America-kiling ideas about illegals, people hate it. Most people.

progressoverpeace on October 26, 2009 at 9:16 PM

A final nail in the progressive coffin.

Yes, that’s Fantasyland material. As surely as leftist dreams of a final nail in the conservative coffin are Fantasyland material. It’s frankly juvenile to even entertain it.

Allahpundit on October 26, 2009 at 8:25 PM

What is juvenile is the same tired notion that you vote for the letter at the end of a politician’s name and not what they truly stand for. You’d think that this past election was proof of that. Two men with the same progressive rhetoric running for POTUS, who are you going to vote for? Marx or Marx lite? We’ve been playing that game for over 80 years and it has resulted in our rights slowly disintegrating. If you can tell me how continuing to vote for the lesser of two evils will result in a different outcome, I’m all ears. In the meantime, I think we are due for another change to the two-party system.

mizflame98 on October 26, 2009 at 9:16 PM

We have an incremental system, period

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:16 PM

What is the endgame?

Progressivism is contained to it’s respective states and our children’s children will one day go on field trips to throw bread crumbs at starving Californians.

jhffmn on October 26, 2009 at 9:16 PM

Beck = William Wallace

AP= Robert The Bruce

Kataklysmic on October 26, 2009 at 9:17 PM

The End Game?

SECESSION

WichoFawkes on October 26, 2009 at 9:17 PM

The only thing that matters to both major parties is getting re-elected. They will sell out every time to maintain their place in D.C. They have no hard and fast principles that are not up for negotiation that benefit anyone but themselves. People finally realize what’s going on, thanks to the out-and-out thuggery of the Messiah & Co.
Next, we’ll see if the people are willing to stand up to this incredible arrogance and elitism and vote the scum out.

n0doz on October 26, 2009 at 9:18 PM

Just tell me the point you were trying to make. If it has anything to do with illegal aliens, then it’s worthless, since both McShame and The Precedent are chomping at the bit to destroy US sovereignty and give AMerican citizenship to everyone they can. There is no daylight between their positions. And whenever either of them expresses their America-kiling ideas about illegals, people hate it. Most people.

progressoverpeace on October 26, 2009 at 9:16 PM

My point is that “true conservatives” want to make a big deal about immigration while it’s not even a priority to the American people.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:18 PM

Beck is sticking his head in the sand unless he’s advocating a Conservative Dictator taking over then what he’s advocating in the real world is Complete and Total Socialist Domination of this country in the USSR type of manner.

Idiot

If you’d ever listened to him speak for 60 seconds or so, you wouldn’t make an asinine statement like that. Beck is a Constitutionalist. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pablo on October 26, 2009 at 9:19 PM

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

You do realize that though NY is a blue state, its because of NYC. The rest of the state, especially the district that Hoffman is running in, is very conservative. And given that, why did the Republicans field a liberal Democrat and dressed the wolf in Republican clothing?

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 9:20 PM

In the confusion, the deck guns on the Bonhomme Richard went unmanned. John Paul Jones took charge of a 9-pounder himself, calling the firing commands for the gun crew. The crew loaded and fired in time with the armed men in the rigging. But the damage below decks was so severe that some of the junior officers panicked.

Warrant Officer Henry Gardiner realized the Richard was sinking and tried to find a senior officer. Someone mistakenly told him that both the Lieutenant and Captain had been killed. Gardiner thought he must be the senior surviving officer. Crying “Quarters, Quarters, our ship is sinking!” he ran to strike the colors and surrender.

John, still commanding the 9-pounder, heard the cry. In fury he ordered Gardiner shot and pulled out his own pistols to carry out the command. Finding them empty, John threw the pistols at Gardiner, knocking him unconscious. But Captain Pearson of the British Serapis had also heard. He demanded to know if the Richard was striking her colors and asking for quarter.

Standing on the deck of a sinking flagship, betrayed by his allies, John shouted his refusal. The earliest record reports that he replied, “I have not yet thought of that, but I am determined to make you ask for quarter!” Lieutenant Richard Dale, serving with John on the Richard, recalls his Captain answering, “I have not yet begun to fight!”

Heartened by their Captain’s determination, the men in the rigging increased their musket fire and the rain of grenades. They destroyed the deck guns on the Serapis. Then a well-aimed grenade hit the powder bags that had been carried up to reload the guns. Fire erupted on deck, racing to the gundeck below, where smoke and flames forced the men out.

(excerpt from “I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight” by Elaine Marie Alphin)

Instructive.

ElectricPhase on October 26, 2009 at 9:20 PM

Newsflash, most people that vote are not wingnuts that worship the ideology.

That is why there will ALWAYS be a split with Libs and Conservatives fighting for the Moderates who sway with the wind.

and Most Moderates, and certainly not 50% plus 1 of the country are ready to suddenly become wingnuts like Beck and follow his lead.

Beck would be more credible if he was Organizing a Militia to install a Conservative Dictator in a Coup.

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:21 PM

Yeah, I remember the “True Conservative or Bust!” and “Teach America a Lesson” rhetoric from last year.

I’m just wondering, looking back over 10 months of Obama, as American troops languish and die in Afghanistan with no clear mission, as businesses and wealth are destroyed by bad tax policy, Cap’n Trade, massive government debt and out of control spending, as the administration emboldens our enemies and signs away our freedoms to international groups while alienating old allies, and as our tax dollars pay for abortions oversees.

Is the Republican Party an purer? Has America learned its “lesson” yet? Is there “another Reagan” on the horizon? If one appears will he be shouted down as just another “RHINO” (as the original would have been)?

How much more damage to our freedoms and our country are people willing to put up with on this road to their Conservative Utopia? Why aren’t the people who were so concerned about our “rights being eroded by RHINOS” equally concerned about the Constitution being flushed down the toilet by Liberal majorities?

Is it really about what’s best for America or is it just about being proven right and forcing everyone else to admit it?

29Victor on October 26, 2009 at 9:22 PM

Generally, I hate third party candidates. Reagan rejected a third-party candidacy, or he would have fractured the Republican Party beyond repair. It was Perot’s third party candidacy that gave us 8 years of Clinton, when either Bush or Dole would have beaten him easily. It is Daggett’s third party candidacy that is going to give me another 4 years of Corzine. Even in NY-23, as much as I dislike Scozzafava, I’d be loathe to endorse Hoffman, as it ensures victory for the Democrat. I’d much prefer to work to make candidates like Hoffman the party nominee.

DarkKnight3565 on October 26, 2009 at 9:22 PM

My point is that “true conservatives” want to make a big deal about immigration while it’s not even a priority to the American people.

Hey, what happened to Kennedy-McCain, anyway? I remember something about a problem with the Capitol switchboards, but the details are sort of fuzzy.

Pablo on October 26, 2009 at 9:22 PM

Ideological purity will lead to a political minority.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:23 PM

My point is that “true conservatives” want to make a big deal about immigration while it’s not even a priority to the American people.

terryannonline on October 26, 2009 at 9:18 PM

You’re making a huge mistake. People don’t mind that nothing is being done about illegals, because they saw what awful plans Washington has for that situation. So, like me, most would rather have nothing done than the stupidly irreversible and nation-killing move of legalizing them and even worse, giving them citizenship. But let someone start talking about amnesty again, or giving them licenses, or having them leech off of our health care, and you will see the numbers of what people think.

We are in the eye of the storm with illegals and the feral government’s refusal to throw them out, but as soon as something starts moving, there is going to be a reaction and it is going to be hot.

The traitorous dems jumped hard to try and squelch the idea that illegals were going to be part of their commie health takeover (which was a lie, anyway). Why do you think that is?

progressoverpeace on October 26, 2009 at 9:23 PM

You do realize that though NY is a blue state, its because of NYC. The rest of the state, especially the district that Hoffman is running in, is very conservative. And given that, why did the Republicans field a liberal Democrat and dressed the wolf in Republican clothing?

Conservative Voice on October 26, 2009 at 9:20 PM

Yes I do, and this is about the entire country not just Hoffman situation though.

Newt was RIGHT in the Big Picture(his point), because exactly this type of GOP/Conservative split that will certainly give the Democrats MORE POWER.

Its’ insane, politics is a game learn how to play it.

jp on October 26, 2009 at 9:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4