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?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Ahh yes, those unteachable ignorant masses for whom we must give up principle and moral ground because they will never unlearn their progressive ways and will always require government to take care of them.
Just curious, but since they weren’t exactly present for the first 100 or so years of this country in numbers great enough to rob the government treasury as they do now, why is that?
Could it be that when you always EXPECT them to be present you will always find that someone is there to manipulate them into following such immoral ideas?
I will never understand moderates, especially moderate Republicans, who seem to want to “understand” and “accept” that because the situation exists as it does now it will always exist. Here is a concept, educate and put forward those conservative ideas which you seem to think are a lost cause. It may take some loses, it may take years to change the culture as it did for progressives, but it can be fixed. And just giving up and accepting that these kind of people will always be present and must be catered to does one and only one thing.
It ensures that progressivism will always be a useful tool to those seeking power at the expense of the masses. Is that really what moderates want for this country?
woodythesingingcowboy on February 20, 2010 at 10:46 PM
Proud rino is a first year law student. If that helps you understand her AWESOMELY awesome wisdom.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 10:46 PM
No, but it was such an easy give-me question that anything but a “No, the government was not involved with bringing down the World Trade Centers on 9/11.” would have been the damn wrong answer.
SERIOUSLY. Common Sense man!
Trov on February 20, 2010 at 10:47 PM
Still 1st year? He/she/it was in law school at this time last year.
thomasaur on February 20, 2010 at 10:48 PM
Good. We’ll need more idiot lawyers since we’ll be voting out a bunch of them in Plan A.
jamie gumm on February 20, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Let’s see now:
Beck is a fraud
Medina’s a non-committal idiot
Paulsur and Proud Rino thinks Beck is a threat
That just about
coverswaste two pages of a whole thread arguing with two people you will never convince they are in error.The title of the post was Beck: The problem is progressivism
Rovin on February 20, 2010 at 10:50 PM
I think they held her/it back. They do that at community college nowadays don’t they?
katy on February 20, 2010 at 10:51 PM
Gee, I thought I lived in a country where we have freedom of speech…
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 10:51 PM
That explains quite a bit. Have known a few law students who went from ‘normal’ persons to egotistical maniacs that were certain they knew everything immediately upon entering law school.
Takes awhile before they realize they’re embarrassing themselves with how much they really don’t know.
Midas on February 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM
We live in a country where you are able to be as snarky as you wish, but we don’t live a country that insulates you from being corrected.
I’d get used to it if I were you.
chimney sweep on February 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM
I just call them tyrants. :)
Tuning Spork on February 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM
You don’t even know what Freedom of Speech is? Get the f*ck off this thread, tool.
jamie gumm on February 20, 2010 at 10:53 PM
Gee, I thought I lived in a country where we have freedom of speech…
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 10:51 PM
———————————————
You do….and we have the right to not agree with you.
shomegirl on February 20, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Glen Beck a.k.a. Elmer Gantry was in fine form tonight. He is an original, and a great spokesman/preacher for conservativism. No, I don’t always agree with him, or his style, but I admire the heck out of him. Besides, he has the funniest of the conservative talk shows: political satire and just plain zaniness.
Randy
williars on February 20, 2010 at 10:54 PM
When someone asks you if you’re a god, you say “YES”!
When someone asks if the government was behind 911 you say “NO”!
Medina is a Truther, or a moron
sharrukin on February 20, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Only three things will make me stop:
1. At least 2nd place finish by medina on mar 2nd.
or
2. Beck eats crow publicly
or
2. I get banned. Not likely as long as I engage in respectful debate.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 10:54 PM
I was going to thank Rovin for pushing the discussion back on track, but I see the Ronulan is still wearing out the chicken…
As for cableguy612… Beck DOES touch on the Progressivism vs. Liberalism topics… Watch the entire clip, you’ll like it…
phreshone on February 20, 2010 at 10:55 PM
Absolutely – Beck’s free to ask, she’s free to answer stupidly, and the public is free to realize that she either is a truther, is linked to truthers, or really isn’t ready for ‘prime time’ and can’t think on her feet.
Midas on February 20, 2010 at 10:55 PM
We agree
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 10:56 PM
Wonder why he uses the chalkboard rather than a whiteboard. You have so many brilliant color options with the whiteboard.
crosspatch on February 20, 2010 at 10:56 PM
You do. Which is why she wasn’t censored by our government nor even by Beck.
All Glenn Beck did was ask a question with a real easy answer and watched as she FAILED.
Trov on February 20, 2010 at 10:56 PM
You know what I love about Beck…
He just brought progressivism out of the closet and into the BRIGHT SUNLIGHT OF DISINFECTANT!!!
HA HA HA!
NOW IT BEGINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
katy on February 20, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Honestly; folks that rabidly defend Medina have taken on an air akin to rabid Obamaphiles. Question: have you for one honest moment seriously considered that her answer might mean that she is, in fact, a ‘truther’?
Rhetorical question, no need to answer – your comments thus far have pretty well answered it already.
Midas on February 20, 2010 at 10:57 PM
She gave the same answer he did a year prior.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 10:58 PM
All I can say is bless your heart.
It must be tough living with you.
thomasaur on February 20, 2010 at 10:58 PM
We do.
Unfortunately that means the morons who yell “TROOFUR!” are as free to
speakyell as anyone else.Our system is inherently vulnerable to whoever speaks the loudest and the most often…and it’s making for a wicked soup in the age of mass communication.
Dark-Star on February 20, 2010 at 10:58 PM
yEP, i’D SAY THAT JUST ABOUT COVERS IT…
lovingmyUSA on February 20, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Preview, preview, preview…sigh…
Off to get ready for work, have a good night all…
lovingmyUSA on February 20, 2010 at 11:01 PM
Pulsar you forgot to quote this part:
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
Midas on February 20, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Thank you!
What’s with all the “agitators” this evening. When was the most recent open registration?
Yellowdog12 on February 20, 2010 at 11:04 PM
I have the right to answer your question although it is clear you do not want me too.
As a texas resident, when I heard the interview I felt I had the responsibility to first ask myself how important I thought it was to the debate in Texas.
To me it is not part of the Texas debate, but if you are going to hold public office, i want you to have responsible and sensible ideas. I dont care what memeber of your capaign may beleive.
Secondly, was there anything in Debra’s past to support the allegation. So, I did review my already in depth look into Debra’s background. I did not find anything published or in the media record that indicated she had ever held a view that the U.S, government may have been involved in the planning or the execution of the 911 attacks.
That is enough for me.
I will tell you, I did not like her evasiveness. But again I asked myself if that would disqualify her from getting my vote, and when I look at the other candidates in the race, and their lack of integrity, it makes me laugh.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:04 PM
*hits forehead with palm of hand*
Saltysam on February 20, 2010 at 11:06 PM
Later. paulsur will miss you.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:06 PM
Then vote for her!
Don’t say that Beck is being unfair when SHE screwed up! It was a gimme question for 90% of the population and she can’t get it right?
sharrukin on February 20, 2010 at 11:07 PM
Special thanks to Jonah Goldberg.
Saltysam on February 20, 2010 at 11:08 PM
I did vote for her this morning.
The issue I have with Glenn is that everyday on his radio show or TV or both since the interview, he has continued to keep hs slander going. He is trying to get you all the non-texans to stop sending money to her campiagn.
he is trying to influence our state election.
That is my issue with Glenn Beck the liar.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:10 PM
He got the ball rolling for sure!!!
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:11 PM
To the contrary, I believe that mass communication has diluted this particular vulnerability, since even those who are generally disinclined to speak can at minimal cost express their ideas and beliefs.
And much as it does in the market of goods and services, branding allows consumers to distinguish between sources of speech more easily.
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:12 PM
Not true, and a clear indication of the deepest flaw in your entire approach to political issues.First, individuals have free will, so nothing is inevitable. Second, Progressivism hasn’t always existed in the world, nor in America.
One might as well say that believing in eugenics or racism or advocating prohibition will always exist and be a force to be reckoned with.Since individuals do have free will, it’s always possible there may a few here or there. But as a political or cultural phenomena with significant influence in America, the view is historically false and inherently illogical.
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
Is this:
your answer to this:
Hmmm? What is your answer to this?
Hmmmm?
IowaWoman on February 20, 2010 at 11:13 PM
Thought this was a Texan affair?
As opposed to those non-texans?
What did he lie about?
sharrukin on February 20, 2010 at 11:13 PM
The fact that Glenn Beck is a liar is central to the whol conservative grass roots movement.
You see there are the career corruptocrats Like Rick Perry and Kay Bailiey Hutchison in the republican party. they represent their own interests. Recently there have begun to emerge citizen candidates that are more represenetative of the people. Glenn decided to insert his self into a state (local) race, something he says he does not do. He has repeatedly made untru claims about that surging citizen candidate. I an not going to allow that to go unanswered in the public forum. the is a thread on beck and conservatism. I have a right to address my issue on this thread. it directly relates to it.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:15 PM
What did he lie about?
sharrukin on February 20, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Get real. Nobody claimed otherwise. It’s not our fault she’s a Truther, and it’s not Beck’s fault merely for giving her the opportunity to reveal herself as one.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:17 PM
He has repeadly made the claim that Debra Medina is a truther. Debra for her part has officially denied the allegation, and there is nothing in the public record that inidcates that she is.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:17 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
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.
At some point, then, we should begin devoting less effort to eliminating terrorism and more effort to eliminating some other, greater threat to our nation.
It’s about allocating scarce resources (like time and capital). Completely eliminating terrorism should not be our goal; reducing the gravest threats to our nation is.
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:18 PM
Found this major palate cleanser…wish this guy had a speeching spot at CPAC.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1015885/divine_mercy_tv_intro_part_1_of_2/
ProudPalinFan on February 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM
I agree we should seek to make it extinct, and should have faith and hope as we engage that battle, and avoid fatalism and compromise, but the will to power is a human trait that we will never fully escape. No matter the name or the philosophy, Statism will always circle humanity like the vulture it is.
Maquis on February 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM
Gosh… are you still trying to convince people you’re bright?
Sheesh…you had me at “fraud”.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:20 PM
Would us non-Texans sending money to Medina influence your state elections? If so then Beck helped keep outside influences out of your elections. You can not have it both ways. By wanting non-Texans to send money to Medina You are saying you want outside influence on your state elections, are you not? Again, Glenn Beck did not lie about Medina. Again you lower yourself to slander. This is what you claim you hate about Beck. Can you not see past your hate?
IowaWoman on February 20, 2010 at 11:22 PM
What you have here is the Palin effect. there are a number of people here who are upset because am calling it like it is. They don’t want me calloing beck a liar, and so they have a choice to tell me to shut up, or to agree with him.
Look I liked Beck to, the whole interview and the daily comments sice have taken me completly by suprise. they are totally out of character for Glenn Beck. The are indicative of something far darker. I dont know what. By for my own part, I have surmised that since Beck has fervetly supported Palin who also happens to be a strong perry supporter, that is where the tie in is. Some says the Beck’s boss is a big time Perry supporte, and beck used his influence with Palin to get her to stump for perry. I dont know if there is any truth to this, and it wouldnt be illegal if it were. but is would certainly call into question everyone’s true ideaology and their conservative credentials now wouldnt it?
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:22 PM
Correct. I don’t believe Medina is a 911 Truther.
She showed lack of character in not being honest.
She betrayed that she is PART of the problem because she already is a ‘politician’.
She now has to scramble to rebuild her dwindling credibility.
If you don’t believe it, don’t say you do or avoid the question because you don’t want to lose a vote. STAND on principle.
She didn’t, although I still think she has a future in politics if she just takes a page from the Cuda and just be yourself.
Sapwolf on February 20, 2010 at 11:22 PM
My vote is for #3.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:23 PM
You do what you want to do. All I can ask is you do it with integrity and honesty.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:24 PM
Yup… that would have brought down the house!
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:24 PM
You sir are on the far edge of the ‘bell-curve’.
Beck was right on earlier today at CPAC.
The Progressives are the enemy. We need to annihilate them and drive them from our education systems across the country.
Sapwolf on February 20, 2010 at 11:24 PM
Not true. Stupid can get you banned too.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM
…Except her own words.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM
The Beck interview appears to have had an oppositie effect. There has been a ground swell uprising of support for debra Medina. Of course there have been no polls to support or disprove this, and we really won;t know until March 2nd.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:26 PM
Pretty much. Everything they touch turns to sh_t.
capitalist piglet on February 20, 2010 at 11:26 PM
She has never made the claim that the government was involved in the planning or support or the carrying out of the attacks that occurred on 911. He only statement has been questions the goverments role in the intelligence failure.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:27 PM
Yah. This thread is a good example.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:28 PM
As well as being an incessant nuisance, as evidenced by:
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:28 PM
She said all that needs be said. These nuts have been around for years, we all know how they operate.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM
Beck is effective and must be destroyed.
daesleeper on February 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM
heh
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:29 PM
I am an original poster on this blog I have been here since the first week Michelle premiered it. This does not give me any special ability here, but I can tell you that the managers of the site are extremely tolerant of diverse views, whatever you may wish to call them.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:30 PM
Did the government allow the panty bomber to try to blow up the plane on xmas day?
Jeff2161 on February 20, 2010 at 11:30 PM
…And my pseudonym here at HotAir is not, I repeat, not FloatingRock.
See how easy that is? Meaningless—but easy.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:31 PM
FYI: If you say yes, your a truther… Incompetence by our government is a given. Saying you don’t know if our government acted stupidly, is denial.
Jeff2161 on February 20, 2010 at 11:32 PM
I won’t get banned. To bad for you I guess. I participate on the comments on these blogs. Some call me a troll, but I have always held a consistent point of view. I have also always engaged in repectfult debate. not once tonight or ever before have I called any of you stupid, or dumb, or some of the other insightful labels you have placed on me tonight.
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:33 PM
I love him for that too. Except we need a mighty big can of disinfectant. That flesh-devouring insect has got mighty fat over the century and it has disarmed a lot of its prey.
AshleyTKing on February 20, 2010 at 11:34 PM
I dont think I will answer that, it doesnt have anything to do with this debate. :)
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:35 PM
So, who will be the first to say our incompetent gov’t. employees let a pantybomber in the country but, held the line defensively on 9/11 ?
Jeff2161 on February 20, 2010 at 11:35 PM
Of course you have the right to question your goverment.
I know I have questions about how the administration habdled the whole affair :)
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:35 PM
Admit is pauly, you’ve been hiding out waiting for MediaMutters to give you the OK to come out and tweak the blogs.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:37 PM
Thanks Jeff you made my night. I off to bed all, you can name call me some more later!
paulsur on February 20, 2010 at 11:37 PM
If gov’t allows something to happen through carelessness, does asking questions about the lapse equal insanity?
Jeff2161 on February 20, 2010 at 11:37 PM
To me, it isn’t that Beck is slandering her. It’s that he’s defending himself from all the attacks on him because of the interview. For example: He was talking with Pat and Stu earlier in the week about Medina finally saying she did not believe in gov’t involvement in 9/11 on another station. The problem? She was saying she denied such on Glenn’s show, when she clearly, didn’t. I don’t have the transcript right now, but you don’t lie about you response to Glenn. And that ticked off Glenn even more, Hell, ticked me off.
He asked her a question, expecting to hear a no, but didn’t receive the answer.
There are questions out there that people ask that are easy gimme questions. They are so easy, if you answer wrong, people start to question you.
1+1=? Is such a question.
As is the question Glenn asked Medina.
When you don’t answer correctly, you either didn’t know the answer, or did know the answer but didn’t want to say it.
And when it’s a politician. It’s usually, 9/10, the latter.
A lie is an false statement known to be untrue. Glenn Beck honestly believes that she is a truther. So he hasn’t lied.
And after that Interview, most people would logically believe she is a truther. Why? Because if she did not believe such, she would have said such.
Trov on February 20, 2010 at 11:37 PM
Question: Why is everyone continuing to feed the Paulbot?
I thought we talking about stamping out scumbag progressives . . .
Or at least we were.
CPT. Charles on February 20, 2010 at 11:38 PM
Pulsar you have yet to really quote me:
You leave out parts of my post every time.
IowaWoman on February 20, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Great video, but the audio only comes out of one side and boy does that make my ears water.
Sharke on February 20, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Who put LSD in the punch at CPAC? Ron Paul wins straw poll? Please!
AshleyTKing on February 20, 2010 at 11:41 PM
Oh, of course.
In other words, you just made it up. LOL!
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:42 PM
liberals, progressives, leftists, statists..who cares..different names, same aholes.
therightwinger on February 20, 2010 at 11:42 PM
So true. Sigh
IowaWoman on February 20, 2010 at 11:44 PM
Why don’t any of the GOP losers ever come out and saywhat they believe like Glen Beck? Why are most of them so mealy mouthed?
People respect someone who stands true to what they believe in, even if they disagree with him.
sharrukin on February 20, 2010 at 11:45 PM
You just gave me an idea for the next tea party protest in DC. IF anyone sees a giant can of RAID… it’s me.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:45 PM
If you keep this up until one of your three option are fulfilled, as you stated, I can guarantee you’ll be banned. No question about it.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:47 PM
Ron Paul supporters are very good at skewing Polls. They just don’t have ACORN when the real voting starts. The futility of skewing polls have not occurred to them yet.
IowaWoman on February 20, 2010 at 11:48 PM
Don’t be too hard on them, its really the only victory they are ever going to see!
sharrukin on February 20, 2010 at 11:51 PM
I don’t care if people call me names but I do care if truther trolls vow to take over and pollute every thread with their nonsense until they’re banned.
Let’s get on with option #3. If you stick to your earlier promise then I’m sending an email to HotAir, even starting a petition.
FloatingRock on February 20, 2010 at 11:54 PM
Isn’t there a clause in the HA rules about hijacking a thread?
I seem to remember that one.
katy on February 20, 2010 at 11:57 PM
John Yoo?
CliveStaples on February 20, 2010 at 11:59 PM
Does Ron Paul advocate canning the US-Australian alliance? What exactly do the Paulians think about foreign relations?
Crux Australis on February 21, 2010 at 12:01 AM
Well then let’s call them what they really are: Socialists.
NoLeftTurn on February 21, 2010 at 12:06 AM
Ron Paul…
I believe our founding fathers had it right when they argued for peace and commerce between nations, and against entangling political and military alliances. In other words, noninterventionism.
sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 12:07 AM
Well, he’s not really a politician. Where are the leaders?
sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 12:08 AM
I don’t recall, but ultimately they have the right to ban anybody for any reason, and truthers promising to hijack threads until they’re banned are likely to have their wishes fulfilled, IMO.
FloatingRock on February 21, 2010 at 12:10 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »