Beck at CPAC: The problem is progressivism

posted at 8:46 pm on February 20, 2010 by Allahpundit

I can’t find a good representative clip so I’m giving you the full 60-minute extravaganza. The crowd expected him to take it to the GOP and he did not disappoint:

“It’s not enough to not suck as much as the other side,” said Beck, on how Republicans can regain their ideals. “The first step to redemption is admitting you have a problem. … When they do say they have a problem, I don’t know if I believe them. … They’ve got to recognize they have a problem. … ‘I’m addicted to spending and big government.’”…

Beck went on to compare GOPers to Tiger Woods, who recently gave his first public apology for his cheating candal. Beck said some people believed he was only sorry because he got caught. Beck, to GOPers in Congress: “You got caught. Are you sorry?”…

More Beck: “One party will tax and spend. The other party won’t tax, but spend. It’s both of them together. I’m tired of feeling like a freak in America.”

There’s something in there too about a coming “economic holocaust.” The money passage was his description of progressivism as a cancer on America that must be eradicated, but we’ve been over that before. You’re never going to eradicate it. You may be able to roll back parts of it if the Dems screw up beyond belief and a red wave carries Republicans to a heavy majority in Congress (see, e.g., Clinton and welfare reform), but you’ll always have to grapple with a significant progressive minority and centrist Democrats who are sympathetic to parts of its program. In which case, what’s Plan B?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Yah. This thread is a good example.

katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:28 PM

I think cancer is a pretty good description of it. I think its ultimate aim is destruction. They won’t be happy until everyone is equally miserable and completely dependent on the government for all of life’s essentials.

And we all know how that usually works out.

And now, like clockwork, there are lefties elsewhere freaking out and claiming that the language you all are using is “extermination rhetoric” [insert eye-roll here].

Maybe I need to read the whole thread, but that seems like a ginormous freaking leap to me.

capitalist piglet on February 21, 2010 at 12:20 AM

Beck said that it is not the government’s role to offer healthcare, housing, or handouts. Amen.

He is championing the ideas of RW Emerson in “Self Reliance.” We have the freedom to make choices, live with the consequences (whether success or failure), and answer to no collective. We have a guiding pilot, and when we are true to that self, we have integrity.

Charity comes from the self; it is not imposed by some self-annointed elites in power.

Individuals examine their own skills and abilities, nurture them, and share their bounty with family and neighbors as they choose.

Contrast the communities that pitched in to save themselves from the Red River’s rising in the spring floods with the helpless and government-dependent in New Orleans, who are still looking for someone else to provide for them.

Self-reliance (not to be confused with selfishness) is an exhilarating liberator.

onlineanalyst on February 21, 2010 at 12:21 AM

Urmmm George Washington said that I think “argued for peace and commerce between nations, and against entangling political and military alliances.”

And he meant for a period of time to allow our nation to grow and get stable not for all time since the nations very existence was due to those outside nations being entangled in our political and military alliances.

You cant change the grown man back into a baby no matter how much you might wish it to be so. And you cant just roll back all the crap put in place over a hundreds years in just one or two years even if you get people willing and able to do it ..

alloyiv on February 21, 2010 at 12:27 AM

capitalist piglet on February 21, 2010 at 12:20 AM

It’s the small, thin mind of the liberal that can take a reference like “progressivism is a cancer and must be eliminated” and make it into a declaration of human extermination.

They curiously miss the distinction between ridding a society of an ideaology and killing off huge swaths of people.

They get it. But they love fear more than anything else.

katy on February 21, 2010 at 12:31 AM

alloyiv on February 21, 2010 at 12:27 AM

Try telling that to a libertarian!

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 12:36 AM

They curiously miss the distinction between ridding a society of an ideaology and killing off huge swaths of people.

They get it. But they love fear more than anything else.

katy on February 21, 2010 at 12:31 AM

Well, considering what National Socialism did, and what Communism did, it may not be so surprising that the first thing leftists think about is murdering those who are ideological enemies!

Conservatives don’t think that way and that is hard for them to understand.

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 12:40 AM

I also liked what Beck said about the importance of competition and the foolishness of giving a trophy to all just for participating. Even though he admitted that the throwaway line was “even low for himself,” when he used the Nobel Prize as an example, the point resonates with people. Nothing demoralizes achievers more than to see their outstanding work or contributions belittled in the name of phony “fairness.”

onlineanalyst on February 21, 2010 at 12:41 AM

It’s the small, thin mind of the liberal that can take a reference like “progressivism is a cancer and must be eliminated” and make it into a declaration of human extermination.

Everything is a swim in Lake Hyperbole with these people.

capitalist piglet on February 21, 2010 at 12:47 AM

I think you’re overstating your case. The threat that terrorism poses to our nation is proportional to the size and power of terrorist networks; the more we eliminate terrorism, the less threat it poses.
… [snip]
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:18 PM

Sir, I think you quoted the wrong person. What did anything I wrote have to do with fighting terrorism?

the will to power is a human trait that we will never fully escape. Maquis on February 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM

Maquis, I can only agree with you partially, but not fundamentally. Since individuals have free will and the capacity to reason there can be no such thing as an inherent “will to power.” Certainly, it’s common, but it’s still a choice.

In any case, it isn’t necessary to eliminate it entirely (and I’m not arguing for that), only contain it. The Constitution and the original understanding of it did that quite well for some time – because it was supported (for about 100 years) by a culture that understood and accepted a certain philosophy. Not with 100% consistency, to be sure, but very substantially.

Then along came Progressivism.

Jeff

P.S. Thank you for the thoughtful response.

JDPerren on February 21, 2010 at 12:48 AM

I didn’t watch all of the talk but I loved the part where he read the poem correctly.

Beck’s interpretation of that poem is correct.

Europeans are descendants of those too afraid to come. They wanted to be taken care of… not to risk it.

But we… we are they who descend from those who struck out, those who lived the less safe but more rewarding life. Those for whom the ability to choose thier life was more important than life itself.

How many died trying to get what we have? And now we throw it away and sell our freedom for the safe and controlled life.

We must rid this country of the forces that are taking our freedoms. And it’s not going to be fun or easy to do that.

petunia on February 21, 2010 at 12:52 AM

Dasher on February 20, 2010 at 9:08 PM

Did you know that JD Hayworth is one of those Rino’s?

He voted for the $400 billion Medicare drug fiasco.

He’s a spendthrift. McCain didn’t vote for it. McCain is more conservative than Hayworth on fiscon issues.

Imagine that.

Sapwolf on February 20, 2010 at 11:18 PM

Oh man, I was afraid of this. Palin has her supporters now supporting progressive Republicans.

True_King on February 21, 2010 at 1:01 AM

It’s the small, thin mind of the liberal that can take a reference like “progressivism is a cancer and must be eliminated” and make it into a declaration of human extermination.

Everything is a swim in Lake Hyperbole with these people.

capitalist piglet on February 21, 2010 at 12:47 AM

It’s part of the liberal handbook to invoke Hitler symbolism whenever it’s politically expedient to do so. Just don’t try to educate them on the true, leftist nature of Nazism. They will squeal like stuck pigs, either because denial is also part of their game plan, or because they are utterly ignorant of history. Probably a little of both, esp. considering the subpar quality of troll we have here these days; they used to be a lot better. Have you noticed they’re all in law school? A strange coincidence, I guess.

NoLeftTurn on February 21, 2010 at 1:09 AM

Urmmm George Washington said that I think “argued for peace and commerce between nations, and against entangling political and military alliances.”

It was Jefferson, I believe, but your point is well-taken. I scarcely think that either Jefferson or Washington would have argued for the United States to sit by passively after being attacked on our own soil. In fact, Paul might want to study more the distinction between non-interventionism and isolationism. He’d be more intellectually honest if he described himself as the latter. Non-interventionism at least makes provision for self-defense.

NoLeftTurn on February 21, 2010 at 1:28 AM

We need blood oaths and gang initiations.

abobo on February 21, 2010 at 1:30 AM

sorry-drunk!

abobo on February 21, 2010 at 1:30 AM

sorry-drunk!

abobo on February 21, 2010 at 1:30 AM

Made 10x more sense than anything the paultard drones have vommited into the comment box.

Now drink a glass of water and get some rest! :)

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 1:35 AM

I think Allahpundit’s problem is one shared by far too many so-called “moderates” – those without passion. You, Allah, have no passion. You’re standing on the sidelines winking and groaning, poking your stick at anyone else who does have passion. You seem to think this is some kind of silly game.

You and people like you have allowed our country to end up on the brink of total destruction of the very ideals we were founded upon. It’s more important for you to consider yourself “reasonable” than risk being mocked by RINOs and lefties.

I have a question for you: where were you planning to go if America goes belly up? The world is becoming more dangerous each month that Barry Noballs leads the last bastion of freedom.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 1:43 AM

I am thankful for Beck in many ways, but of late I have been seeing too much of a one-man show monologue and not enough of a methodical expose of berri’s posse of czars and appointments. Why did he stop with Dunne and Jones? Why would he stop when he had won such victories? What are these unvetted and unconstitutional madmen and women paid? What and why do they have budgets to spend? On what?
What is their authority and from where in our Constitution do they derive it?

Also, I am proud to say that I strongly question berri’s credentials and why he has sealed all of his life’s vital records. The fact that a sitting President of the United States, in charge of the nuclear football, refuses to and spends a million dollars hiding simple documents that are required in countless lesser situations is beyond belief.

I am highly angered that Beck uses the enemy’s Alinsky ridicule tactic and calls me a “birther” and goes out of his way to insult me, and millions like me. He does much damage and aids and abets the enemy every time he has the nerve to drag me through the mud. He does just what a Maddow, Olbermann or Matthews would do, and he is quickly losing me as someone I will listen to. There are those on this site who do the same, but that is for another day.

If berri’s records showed any type of lie that could show fraud on his part, not only could we get rid of him before 2012, but every law and executive order he signed could be voided AND he possibly could be jailed as the criminal that he is. This is a far better payoff than just “beating him on the issues” in 2012. We don’t have that long; repealing the damage he could do until then will be very difficult AND we won’t get the satisfaction of seeing berri stylin in his orange jumpsuit.

Any time I hear someone who is supposed to be a free speech conservative who loves the Constitution, start calling names and insulting and ridiculing in ways IDENTICAL to the Leftits, even going so far as using their denigrating “birther” label, then I question their intellect and loyalty.

tigerlily on February 21, 2010 at 1:46 AM

I think Allahpundit’s problem is one shared by far too many so-called “moderates” – those without passion.
disa on February 21, 2010 at 1:43 AM

I also see cynicism and complacency.

VinceP1974 on February 21, 2010 at 2:27 AM

You and people like you have allowed our country to end up on the brink of total destruction of the very ideals we were founded upon. It’s more important for you to consider yourself “reasonable” than risk being mocked by RINOs and lefties.

Passion doesn’t require that we make bad arguments; it is possible to be both reasonable and passionate (see Christopher Hitchens’ critique of Islam).

CliveStaples on February 21, 2010 at 2:31 AM

Note to whoever made that video:

when encoding mono audio, make sure it encodes as mono, not one channel stereo. 1 channel stereo is a pain to listen to through headphones.

Fizzmaister on February 21, 2010 at 3:06 AM

That was the best speech I’ve ever seen Glenn Beck give.

I DIDN’T KNOW we had a Depression in 1920 definentally didn’t learn that in history.

But most importantly that it was SOLVED BY CALVIN COOLAGE! No wonder we didn’t learn much about the Roaring 20′s. Except for the Mafia.

History only talkes about Crime, the Mafia, sex with the Roaring 20′s NOT that it was a supurb economic time!

rednebulastudios on February 21, 2010 at 3:59 AM

This nation now has a political conscience. His name is Glenn Beck. May he successfully fulfill the role for a long time to come.

{^_^}

herself on February 21, 2010 at 4:13 AM

Progressivism… You’re never going to eradicate it. -Ap

Don’t have to,
It’s self-eradicating.
The only question is, how many
American’s will be ruined,
before in consumes itself?

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on February 21, 2010 at 5:43 AM

…you’ll always have to grapple with a significant progressive minority and centrist Democrats who are sympathetic to parts of its program. In which case, what’s Plan B?

Deprogramming the youth of today and tomorrow, raising them the be absolutely loyal to the Constitution as written, and then enacting legislation that deconstructs the progressive elements of our laws and governmental institutions. It’ll take time, and since Medicare and Social Security are going under anyway, their failure will illustrate why progressivism does not ever work.

And if that doesn’t do it, G-d help us if we have to go to Plan C.

J.J. Sefton on February 21, 2010 at 6:23 AM

This nation now has a political conscience. His name is Glenn Beck. May he successfully fulfill the role for a long time to come.

{^_^}

herself on February 21, 2010 at 4:13 AM

I am certain Rush would love to hear your thoughts on this.

kcarpenter on February 21, 2010 at 6:54 AM

I am certain Rush would love to hear your thoughts on this.

kcarpenter on February 21, 2010 at 6:54 AM

Might not be necessary. I assume Rush watches/listens to Beck from time to time. In any case, Rush should join those on Mt. Rushmore. Nearly single-handedly, he kept a spark alive, and watched as his life goal of unmasking the MSM and destroying their monopoly on information became a reality. Those who follow him, like Beck, owe him. If Rush died tomorrow, his life would be a triumph, and his mission fulfilled. He led us to the Promised Land, but he himself might not see it. It may be that none of us alive now may.

JiangxiDad on February 21, 2010 at 7:11 AM

That sort of passive acceptance of evil is one of the root causes of the problem, and a major contributor to how we arrived at our present situation. But even you have free will and you could change your view, if you cared to rethink your position.Jeff Perren

JDPerren on February 20, 2010 at 11:12 PM

Not sure he wants to.

We’ve been wandering in the wilderness for 40 years. It’s prob. future generations who may benefit from that. For us, it may be punishment for letting our guard down and allowing to happen what has.

JiangxiDad on February 21, 2010 at 7:39 AM

Urmmm George Washington said that I think “argued for peace and commerce between nations, and against entangling political and military alliances.”

It was Jefferson, I believe, but your point is well-taken. I scarcely think that either Jefferson or Washington would have argued for the United States to sit by passively after being attacked on our own soil. In fact, Paul might want to study more the distinction between non-interventionism and isolationism. He’d be more intellectually honest if he described himself as the latter. Non-interventionism at least makes provision for self-defense.

NoLeftTurn on February 21, 2010 at 1:28 AM

It was Washington, in his Farewell Address.

http://www.csamerican.com/Doc.asp?doc=washfarewell

It would do well for everyone to read it, study it and think long and hard about what President Washington had to say.
There is much wisdom in it and we’re seeing his warnings come to pass in our present day. His warnings about political parties are particularly applicable to our current political climate.

single stack on February 21, 2010 at 7:39 AM

When it comes to progressivism in america GB knows what he is talking about. I have watched his show over the past month and he has laid out a very compelling argument. He has been studying books about early 20th century politics, economics and the progressive movement. I am starting to read them too. History IS repeating itself. The progressives (Democrats and Republicans) have just rebranded and repackaged the exact same ideals and are selling it to the american people as hope and change. Thanks to GB I can now spot progressives in either party very easily. That is his true gift to us all. The time to expose them and vote them all out is upon us.

dddave on February 21, 2010 at 7:40 AM

Might not be necessary. I assume Rush watches/listens to Beck from time to time. In any case, Rush should join those on Mt. Rushmore. Nearly single-handedly, he kept a spark alive, and watched as his life goal of unmasking the MSM and destroying their monopoly on information became a reality. Those who follow him, like Beck, owe him. If Rush died tomorrow, his life would be a triumph, and his mission fulfilled. He led us to the Promised Land, but he himself might not see it. It may be that none of us alive now may.

JiangxiDad on February 21, 2010 at 7:11 AM

Now, that was good. :o)

IowaWoman on February 21, 2010 at 7:42 AM

You’re never going to eradicate it.

“I have a dream!”

davidk on February 21, 2010 at 8:07 AM

They curiously miss the distinction between ridding a society of an ideaology and killing off huge swaths of people.

katy on February 21, 2010 at 12:31 AM

They don’t miss it, because that is part of their game. Look at Marist overthroughs in other countries. They killed the opposition by the millions. They will not hesitate to do that here.

And since they think that way, they think we think that way. After all we are the oppressors, the are the freers.

davidk on February 21, 2010 at 8:13 AM

I am thankful for Beck in many ways, but of late I have been seeing too much of a one-man show monologue and not enough of a methodical expose of berri’s posse of czars and appointments. Why did he stop with Dunne and Jones? Why would he stop when he had won such victories? What are these unvetted and unconstitutional madmen and women paid? What and why do they have budgets to spend?
tigerlily on February 21, 2010 at 1:46 AM

He stated at the beginning of the year that the show was starting a new phase.
A couple of days were spent going over the things you mentioned, and he stated that they were proven to be facts and there was little more to be gained by rehashing or adding a lesser character here and there because it was time to move forward towards the goal of stopping the takeover of the government structure and the educational system.
The process is evolving as it should.

Itchee Dryback on February 21, 2010 at 8:31 AM

Glenn Beck is a political John the Baptist.

WordsMatter on February 21, 2010 at 8:39 AM

Beck lost me a long time ago. I don’t like his emotional manipulation, his use of patriotic images like the Statue of Liberty for his own political use. As if people like Theodore Roosevelt, George W. Bush, John McCain, Scott Brown, and Dick Cheney…all of whom he has made a point of attacking do not revere the Statue of Liberty just as much as Beck.

The other day I saw a post at Gateway with a video of Beck comparing Cheney to Reid. I mean, come on, that is just ridiculous.

I think we need to cut government spending too, but I don’t think we should repeal the Patriot Act. And when it comes to spending I think the Democrats have demonstrated that they are in a league of their own, the Republicans are downright stingy in comparison.

And if the government spending he is talking about, is all entitlements, then should conservatives be attacking Democrats for wanting to cut Medicare, or should they be giving them kudos and saying we want to cut it even more?

Is that what Beck wants? Does he want Republicans to repeal the Medicare Part D plan? Should they run on that? I don’t think people want that, nor do I think they would vote for Republicans if they pushed for it. In fact when Bush tried to reform social security he got precious little support from people like Beck. At least I do not remember it. It was not popular at the time.

I think that people need to remember that a progressive in Roosevelt’s time was different from a progressive today. Those were the days of the robber barons, child labor, no votes for women, etc. In fact Abraham Lincoln was considered a radical reformer by a lot of people. I hope he is not next on Beck’s list of people who have betrayed the constitution.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Glenn Beck is right the problem is Progressivism. The other problem many of the politicians that practice Progressivism, don’t even now what it is. They don’t get that the roots are foreign NOT from American soil so when it’s rejected they may be at a loss as to why they were not elected or re elected.

I am not interested in A One Global Government, how is that EU thing working out for all the European Countries, that formed the Union? Anyone seen the trouble the Euro is in currently? So no, I don’t care for any European Styled Socialism – I will take a pass.

Who is pushing the one world order, our old buddies at the UN, we know how uncorruptable they are/SARC.

Dr Evil on February 21, 2010 at 9:32 AM

In fact Abraham Lincoln was considered a radical reformer by a lot of people. I hope he is not next on Beck’s list of people who have betrayed the constitution.

I’ve never heard of anyone calling Lincoln a radical reformer. He was a tyrant. And he did betray the Constitution.

single stack on February 21, 2010 at 9:33 AM

I’ve never heard of anyone calling Lincoln a radical reformer. He was a tyrant. And he did betray the Constitution.

single stack on February 21, 2010 at 9:33 AM

And there we have it!

Oh yes, Lincoln the abolitionist, who was willing to suspend habeas corpus in order to save the Union. Well, Lincoln was a president not a media personality so he had to make some really tough choices.

But my guess is you won’t actually see Beck go after that particular man on Mount Rushmore. And he won’t go after Ronald Reagan either. Even though Reagan ran deficits and expanded government. It might hurt his ratings.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Good gravy. I can’t stand Beck, but I agree with him on this one.

Romney being the top “regular” GOP is definitely a signal that nothing has really changed.

AnninCA on February 21, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Oh yes, Lincoln the abolitionist, who was willing to suspend habeas corpus in order to save the Union.

LIncoln wasn’t an abolitionist. He was a virulent racist. You should read what he said about slavery-and about black people.
The President doesn’t have the authority to suspend habeas corpus. The authority to suspend habeas corpus is found in Article I, Section 9. Article I lays out the power and authority of the legislative branch. The power and authority of the executive branch is spelled out in Article II.

Well, Lincoln was a president not a media personality so he had to make some really tough choices.

All presidents have to make tough choices. That’s no excuse for raping the Constitution.

single stack on February 21, 2010 at 9:57 AM

single stack on February 21, 2010 at 7:39 AM

Point taken, tho I was thinking of Jefferson’s first inaugural address:

About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people—a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected.

Not that it matters of course, as we should all read all the founders. I was a history major in college, but I mostly focused on social and political history in Europe and Asia. I took American History as an AP course and placed out of it in college. Listening to Beck and reading here at HA has inspired me to start studying American history again. It’s amazing how much I was never taught.

Or not. I did go to public school after all.

NoLeftTurn on February 21, 2010 at 10:23 AM

But my guess is you won’t actually see Beck go after that particular man on Mount Rushmore. And he won’t go after Ronald Reagan either. Even though Reagan ran deficits and expanded government. It might hurt his ratings.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 9:38 AM

‘Might hurt his ratings’ is a gigantic understatement, Terrye. Criticizing Reagan would earn him the wrath of every True Believer from coast to coast…and if there’s one thing Beck does know, it’s who butters his bread.

Dark-Star on February 21, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Beck is not a real conservative. He is a fraud.

paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 9:28 PM

Beck is a fraud.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 9:27 PM

“He is a fraud you know
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 9:41 PM

Sadly, Beck is a fraud.

paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 9:45 PM
Fraud…Fraud…Fraud…Fraud…Fraud…Fraud…

The needle is skipping. Somebody bump Paulsur”

Memo to Paulsur and all other trolls and trollettes:

Hitler On The Big Lie

——————————————————————————–

All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious community, where as in reality they are a race? And what a race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. Schopenhauer called the Jew “The Great Master of Lies”. Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail.

——————————————————————————–
Source: Mein Kampf, p. 134 as cited in Wikipedia.

margretto on February 21, 2010 at 10:42 AM

‘Might hurt his ratings’ is a gigantic understatement, Terrye. Criticizing Reagan would earn him the wrath of every True Believer from coast to coast…and if there’s one thing Beck does know, it’s who butters his bread.

Dark-Star on February 21, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Yes, Beck is a real pro at this stuff. He knows exactly what he is doing.

But as for CPAC in general, I am not sure what to think. I read over at Powerline, a conservative blog, that the John Birch Society was one of the sponsors this year. That is something people like Buckley worked hard to prevent. And then Ron Paul wins the straw poll. Maybe Sarah Palin was smart to stay away.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 10:52 AM

“When listening to politicians, It is more of what they DON’T say that matters. Are you new at this Pulsar? By not saying nothing she is saying yes. It is the politicians dance-side step. Medina was afraid to answer. Afraid to alienate truthers or afraid to reveal herself to be one. Who wants their Governor to be Afraid? To side-step questions?

IowaWoman on February 20, 2010 at 11:02 PM”

Spot on! ;) It’s called omission.

margretto on February 21, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Beck lost me a long time ago. I don’t like his emotional manipulation, his use of patriotic images like the Statue of Liberty for his own political use.

I’m sorry that you find his emotionalism off-putting. It says more about you than it says about him. All of America and its symbols are fair game for anyone’s use, as far as I can tell. Pay attention to the points he is making instead of looking to find things you don’t like about him. If you are a conservative, he’s educating people to your way of thinking. That, more than anything, is why the Progressives have made such strides in this country – people don’t realize who they are, nor do they realize the rot that progressivism brings.

As if people like Theodore Roosevelt, George W. Bush, John McCain, Scott Brown, and Dick Cheney…all of whom he has made a point of attacking do not revere the Statue of Liberty just as much as Beck.

You’re off on a stupid tangent. STAY FOCUSSED.

The other day I saw a post at Gateway with a video of Beck comparing Cheney to Reid. I mean, come on, that is just ridiculous.

I could judge the validity of that comparison if you can tell me in what way he said they were similar. One of the services he is providing is pointing out progressivism in Repubs. It’s just as dangerous there, you know.

I think we need to cut government spending too, but I don’t think we should repeal the Patriot Act. And when it comes to spending I think the Democrats have demonstrated that they are in a league of their own, the Republicans are downright stingy in comparison.

This sounds like my stepdaughter: “At least I’m not a pregnant junkie.” To her I say, “It’s depressing that you have such low standards for yourself.”

And if the government spending he is talking about, is all entitlements, then should conservatives be attacking Democrats for wanting to cut Medicare, or should they be giving them kudos and saying we want to cut it even more?

Ignore the fargin Democrats and FOCUS ON THE PROBLEM. We can’t afford this crap – do you understand?? It’s not about politics here, it’s about grownup responsibility.

Is that what Beck wants? Does he want Republicans to repeal the Medicare Part D plan? Should they run on that? I don’t think people want that, nor do I think they would vote for Republicans if they pushed for it. In fact when Bush tried to reform social security he got precious little support from people like Beck. At least I do not remember it. It was not popular at the time.

No, what’s popular, clearly, are the fairy tales as told by Obama during his campaign (and even now). How’s that hope ‘n’ change working for you, sucker?

I think that people need to remember that a progressive in Roosevelt’s time was different from a progressive today.

Are you trying to tell me that today’s progressives are not in the process of destroying America? If so, you are a fool and there’s no point in talking to you.

Those were the days of the robber barons, child labor, no votes for women, etc. In fact Abraham Lincoln was considered a radical reformer by a lot of people. I hope he is not next on Beck’s list of people who have betrayed the constitution.

Do you watch his show daily? If not, you should. It sounds to me like you haven’t the intellectual stamina to listen and digest the points he is making.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 11:08 AM

That’s no excuse for raping the Constitution.

single stack on February 21, 2010 at 9:57 AM

You offend rape victims when you use that word in such inappropriate manner. Choose your vocabulary more carefully.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 11:15 AM

“I think that people need to remember that a progressive in Roosevelt’s time was different from a progressive today. Those were the days of the robber barons, child labor, no votes for women, etc. In fact Abraham Lincoln was considered a radical reformer by a lot of people. I hope he is not next on Beck’s list of people who have betrayed the constitution.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 9:12 AM”

Note to Terrye:
Read up on your history sweetie, you are very MISINFORMED!

margretto on February 21, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Even though Reagan ran deficits and expanded government. It might hurt his ratings.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 9:38 AM

Uh, no. Reagan did not expand government, and he ran deficits as a means of starving the beast, cutting government by making spending more unpalatable.

And on the subject of “progressive” vs “liberal,” Jonah Goldberg makes a very detailed argument in his book, “Liberal Fascists,” that liberal=progressive=fascist. Same goals as Mussolini, different approach to getting there. Beck is right.

iurockhead on February 21, 2010 at 11:25 AM

Too bad Beck himself is a sort of liberal/progressivist.

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:30 AM

Plan B?

Maybe start to establish a form of public governance that would be free of the kind of big egos politics automatically produces.

Create gatherings of people debating and voting on political matters in conditions that would prevent, at the structural level, the predominance that charismatic people always enjoy in politics.

Develop set-ups that would so strongly privilege matter-of-fact decision-making (against partisanship, private interests, ideological callings …) that only good decisions can make it into law.

Create systems of debating matter of public interest that would be attracting only to people who care for good governance and nothing else.

ajm on February 21, 2010 at 11:31 AM

You offend rape victims when you use that word in such inappropriate manner. Choose your vocabulary more carefully.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 11:15 AM

I’m sure the sentence could be rewritten to include the word “retarded” instead…

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:32 AM

It’s part of the liberal handbook to invoke Hitler symbolism whenever it’s politically expedient to do so. Just don’t try to educate them on the true, leftist nature of Nazism. They will squeal like stuck pigs, either because denial is also part of their game plan, or because they are utterly ignorant of history. Probably a little of both, esp. considering the subpar quality of troll we have here these days; they used to be a lot better. Have you noticed they’re all in law school? A strange coincidence, I guess.
NoLeftTurn on February 21, 2010 at 1:09 AM

This is why it’s extremely important to properly frame the debate and define who the Statists really are.

If you study Statism or Collectivism in any detail you will find that it’s pretty much the same tactics and ideology through the totalitarian Statism spectrum – they just change the names to protect the guilty.

One of the best ways to do this is to emphasize that Socialist was a part of

“Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei “

Translated:
National Socialist German Workers Party
just as Socialist was a part of USSR – as in Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.

Rest assured that just as god made little green onions, the Statist Left will always try to tar the Right with the ‘NAZI’ moniker – emphasizing that they should be called ‘Far-Left National Socialists’ is a great way of preempting those attacks and correcting historical record.

If they squeal like stuck pigs on the comparison, the response should be that it’s not a problem on the right – we stand for Freedom and Individual Liberty – It is the leftists that should question their own ideology if it makes them “Uncomfortable” with whom it’s associated.

Chip on February 21, 2010 at 11:34 AM

Too bad Beck himself is a sort of liberal/progressivist.
I have never watched Beck’s show on Fox nor listened to his nationally syndicated radio broadcast.
2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:30 AM

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 11:45 AM

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 11:45 AM

I used to watch his television show on CNN and then Fox News on an almost daily basis. Boy, don’t you sound stupid.

Guess again, idiot.

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:47 AM

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Here’s some advice for you. In the future, instead of making yourself look like a complete fool by trying to pigeonhole me, ask for clarification. If you’re lucky, I’ll indulge your request. You might learn something.

Or you can continue to live in ignorant assumption-ville. Your choice.

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Any time I hear someone who is supposed to be a free speech conservative who loves the Constitution, start calling names and insulting and ridiculing in ways IDENTICAL to the Leftits, even going so far as using their denigrating “birther” label, then I question their intellect and loyalty.

tigerlily on February 21, 2010 at 1:46 AM

I feel the same way. I hate that people who question where Obama came from and why he is hiding all information about himself, known as “birthers”, are equated with “truthers”. Glenn also gets me angry equating Republicans with Democrats as being just alike. Just this past week he had George Bush and Van Jones being on opposite ends of whatever point he was trying to make, Bush the bad one on the right and Jones the left. This is just not right. Bush on the right is not the same as Jones on the left. He may lose me over this.

silvernana on February 21, 2010 at 12:01 PM

Maybe Sarah Palin was smart to stay away.

Terrye on February 21, 2010 at 10:52 AM

I’m starting to think so. Although if she’d won, we certainly would be hearing all this sour-grapes nonsense.

But when it comes to political tactics…Palin’s crazy like a fox.

Dark-Star on February 21, 2010 at 12:04 PM

In which case, what’s Plan B?

Plan A always has to be pro-individual. You are in charge of your own life. It should be a liberating message.

rbj on February 21, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Thanks for the lesson teach. I fell into your trap of making an unsubstantiated claim that is not reflected in reality.

Ya got me, and boy do I feel shamed.

But now I got it. The guy that lambasted progressivism last night at CPAC and during the hours he is broadcast on tv and radio is himself a progressive. Forgive me for not parsing your eloquent nuance when you said:

Too bad Beck himself is a sort of liberal/progressivist.

I wish assumption-ville was hiring!

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 12:08 PM

I’d offer some advice to you but I am not one of those internet prigs. :)

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 12:15 PM

I’d offer some advice to you but I am not one of those internet prigs. :)

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 12:15 PM

Run along now, little one.

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 12:21 PM

Again…thanks for the flesh out on your unsubstantiated claim and the continued ad hominem.

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Too bad Beck himself is a sort of liberal/progressivist.

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:30 AM

Substantiate that, please.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 12:56 PM

I’m sure the sentence could be rewritten to include the word “retarded” instead…

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:32 AM

“Retarding” the Constitution? Makes no sense.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 12:57 PM

I used to watch his television show on CNN and then Fox News on an almost daily basis. Boy, don’t you sound stupid.

Guess again, idiot.

2Brave2Bscared on February 21, 2010 at 11:47 AM

IF this statement is true – and there are reasons to doubt that – why did you stop? Do you think you know it all now?

disa on February 21, 2010 at 12:59 PM

I like Glenn but his insinuations and statements that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the parties is reckless at best and dangerous at worst. For now the democraps have the ideal commercial against any republican, with Glenn’s voiceover saying that the republicans are the same as democraps and that they’re hypocrites and progressives. Thus, candidate X the republican is lying and a hypocrite and a stealthy big spender. Whereas the democrat is honest and will tell you why he’s/she’s spending and for what noble purpose, the republican is a liar and a cheat and won’t stand on his/her true beliefs.
Also to state that republican spending during the Bush years was equivalent (‘not a dime’s worth of difference’) to spending under the Obama years is again not correct and damaging to proper accountability. The republicans had terrorist attacks on US soil, two wars, and Hurricane Katrina, and still reduced the deficit from 440 billion to 162 billion dollars in FY 2007. When the republicans were voted out of power in 2006, the deficits rose to 440 billion and then to 1.4 trillion and then to 1.6 trillion dollars under complete democrap control. Thus the republicans spent from one third to ninety percent less than the democraps. That’s like comparing someone who splurged buying a new tv (republicans) to someone splurging by buying all cable tv stations (democraps).

It is also less than honest for Beck to claim that no republican has repented for spending excesses, when in fact there have been many who have so stated. Again, how shooting republicans in the head is going to stop wasteful government spending is a mystery best known to Glenn.

eaglewingz08 on February 21, 2010 at 1:06 PM

I feel the same way. I hate that people who question where Obama came from and why he is hiding all information about himself, known as “birthers”, are equated with “truthers”.

And I mistrust people who seal all of their records. Do you think Obama is pulling a Saddam Hussein? You know, making a big show of having something to hide, but there’s really nothing to hide? Is he a Flying Imam, deliberately behaving in a manner guaranteed to make people uneasy?

I follow Occam’s Razor on things like this. Act guilty and I’ll treat you as if you are.

Glenn also gets me angry equating Republicans with Democrats as being just alike. Just this past week he had George Bush and Van Jones being on opposite ends of whatever point he was trying to make, Bush the bad one on the right and Jones the left. This is just not right. Bush on the right is not the same as Jones on the left. He may lose me over this.

silvernana on February 21, 2010 at 12:01 PM

Then he never “had” you. And he didn’t say they were exactly alike, that would make no sense. Bush wasn’t a proper conservative, he was a progressive as well. Or at least, didn’t have any problem with allowing progressives to make strides under his Presidency.

Look, you don’t pick out individual arguments with which to invalidate the entirety of what someone says. You don’t have to agree with every comparision Beck makes. Do you agree with most of what he says? If not, you have a lot to learn.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 1:07 PM

It is also less than honest for Beck to claim that no republican has repented for spending excesses, when in fact there have been many who have so stated. Again, how shooting republicans in the head is going to stop wasteful government spending is a mystery best known to Glenn.

eaglewingz08 on February 21, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Letting the GOP play the ‘less bad’ card will change nothing. When does it ever end? The US cannot go on spending like a drunken sailor and the Republicans have their share of the blame in that.

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 1:26 PM

Shrink government and the “progressivist” impulse co-dependently shrinks with it.

Cut the number of troughs for public servant hogs to slop at and the problem of Nanny Statist intrusion dwindles according.

The smaller the State the larger the Citizen.

profitsbeard on February 21, 2010 at 1:28 PM

It’s nice to see someone who believes in the idea of America.
It doesn’t bother me that Beck is emotional. He can use his emotions to include his audience. When I see the flag of the United States flying somewhere, I get emotional. Guess you’ll just have to peg me as some kind of knuckle-dragging nationalist. Won’t change how I feel about this country and those who are out to ruin it.

gordo on February 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM

I think Allahpundit’s problem is one shared by far too many so-called “moderates” – those without passion. You, Allah, have no passion. You’re standing on the sidelines winking and groaning, poking your stick at anyone else who does have passion. You seem to think this is some kind of silly game.

You and people like you have allowed our country to end up on the brink of total destruction of the very ideals we were founded upon. It’s more important for you to consider yourself “reasonable” than risk being mocked by RINOs and lefties.

I have a question for you: where were you planning to go if America goes belly up? The world is becoming more dangerous each month that Barry Noballs leads the last bastion of freedom.

disa on February 21, 2010 at 1:43 AM

What other rubbish! It’s not been the sheep walking a party line that have fought the hardest. It’s been independent thinkers like Winston Churchill. You can’t do any better than Winston Churchill in terms of someone who passionately defended the Western values that matter. In fact, I don’t think we can save ourselves from the Muslim aggressors without invoking him. Yet he was so moderate that he joined the Liberal Party for a while.

thuja on February 21, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Yet he was so moderate that he joined the Liberal Party for a while.

thuja on February 21, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Liberal doesn’t mean in Europe what it means in the US. It means classic liberalism (free enterprise) and the Liberal Party in the UK only started to drift towards the welfare state in the early 20th century. Churchill left the Conservatives over his support for free trade.

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Also to state that republican spending during the Bush years was equivalent (’not a dime’s worth of difference’) to spending under the Obama years is again not correct and damaging to proper accountability. The republicans had terrorist attacks on US soil, two wars, and Hurricane Katrina, and still reduced the deficit from 440 billion to 162 billion dollars in FY 2007. When the republicans were voted out of power in 2006, the deficits rose to 440 billion and then to 1.4 trillion and then to 1.6 trillion dollars under complete democrap control. Thus the republicans spent from one third to ninety percent less than the democraps. That’s like comparing someone who splurged buying a new tv (republicans) to someone splurging by buying all cable tv stations (democraps).

It is also less than honest for Beck to claim that no republican has repented for spending excesses, when in fact there have been many who have so stated. Again, how shooting republicans in the head is going to stop wasteful government spending is a mystery best known to Glenn.

eaglewingz08 on February 21, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Thank you, eagle. I didn’t know the exact numbers and timeline and it is astounding that the deficit was reduced to only 162 billion during two wars and following Katrina. It is a study in how obama has mastered the Big Lie of Hitler’s that he to this day complains about Bush’s deficits and unsustainable spending, all the while personally driving the country over a cliff!
And people still can’t get their minds around tha fact that a mold-breaking liar like obama is so evil, that faking his origin and backround is like a cakewalk for him.

Glenn needs to slow down and speak with greater precision. imo, his show is becoming more and more all-glenn all-the-time. He interviews others only sporadically nowadays. I think he is starting to love the sound of his own voice a little too much. He needs to learn that there can be too much of a good thing.

Also, I saw the show (last week or so) where he had decided that all the miscreants who had brought the country to where it is now could be found somewhere on a big circle that he drew on his chalkboard. As silvernana said above, he equated Van Jones with George Bush, and equated “truthers” with “birthers”. As I said above, I proudly question and demand answers from a sitting President who has spent over one million dollars to hide everything about his past. Beck needs to realize that he has a responsibilty with his newfound megaphone. And when he will not demand documentation, (that is his judgement call) but then goes over the line and uses the Left’s own Alinsky-insults and goes out of his way on several occasions to attack and denigrate those who do, then he is crossing a line that he has no business even being near.
I really liked him in the beginning, but I see him changing fairly rapdidly, and not for the better. He may have stopped drinking, but he is acting more and more like he is getting a little drunk with his newfound power.

P.S. to itchee dryback (whose posts are usually spot-on):
Glenn said that last year he was going to lay out the problems and this year he was going to implement an action plan. So far, he has not done that, it is more of laying out the problem that we are going bankrupt as a nation.
While I appreciate and have learned much from his economic treatises, if I hear or see one more my head will explode.
I get it! Time to move on to your action plan, Glenn.
I say all of these things in the hopes that Glenn will straighten up and fly right, because he can be and has been an incredible force for good, but I see him tilting and getting a bit wobbly. He has taken on a huge burden; I wonder if he has a mature, spiritually sound mentor/advisor.
He is swimming with the sharks, and I would hate to see him implode, and all of the collateral damage he would cause.
Already, he is causing division among conservatives who agree on almost all points, except whether and how to question obama’s secret documents. Leave it alone, Glenn, stop acting like a tool of the Left. Take a lesson from you pal O’Reilly. Years ago he was much more conservative, now he has become almost useless and is becoming a liability.
Not to mention the constant salacious and gratutious half naked women spots, such as the olympic women athletes in skimpy bikinis, with Bill practically drooling at the end of the segment. He’s a bit of a perv, in my book.

Sorry of the long post, but it’s Sunday afternoon, afterall ;)

tigerlily on February 21, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Yeah Teddy Roosevelt was an evil progressive! Give me a break!

MCGIRV on February 21, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Yeah Teddy Roosevelt was an evil progressive! Give me a break!

MCGIRV on February 21, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Read a book on T. Roosevelt. A little information might prevent you from reveling your ignorance with such gusto.

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Yeah Teddy Roosevelt was an evil progressive! Give me a break!

MCGIRV on February 21, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Ok, take a break and go read some history of what TR really said and did.

Nathan_OH on February 22, 2010 at 8:58 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4