Quotes of the day

posted at 10:20 pm on February 22, 2010 by Allahpundit

“I have no idea what philosophy Glenn Beck is promoting. And neither does he. It’s incoherent. One day it’s populist, the next it’s libertarian bordering on anarchy, next it’s conservative but not really, etc. And to what end? I believe he has announced that he is no longer going to endorse candidates because our problems are bigger than politics. Well, of course, our problems are not easily dissected into categories, but to reject politics is to reject the manner in which we try to organize ourselves. This is as old as Plato and Aristotle. Why would conservatives choose to surrender the political battlefield to our adversaries — who are trashing this society –when we must retake it in order to preserve our society? Philosophy, politics, culture, family, etc., are all of one. Edmund Burke, among others, wrote about it extensively, and far better that I possibly can. But all elements of the civil society require our defense. Besides, why preach such a strategy when conservatism is on the rise and the GOP is acting more responsibly?

“Moreover, when he does discuss politics, which, ironically, is often, how can he claim today that there is no difference between the two parties when, but for the Republicans in Congress, government-run health care, cap-and-trade, card check, and a long list of other disastrous policies would already be law? The GOP is becoming more conservative thanks to the grass-roots movement and a political uprising across the country, which has even reached into New Jersey and Massachusetts. Why keep pretending otherwise? My only conclusion is that he is promoting a third party or some third way, which is counter-productive to defeating Obama and the Democrat Congress. These are perilous times and this kind of an approach will keep the statists in power for decades.

“And what of his flirtations with Ron Paul’s lunacy respecting America’s supposed provocations with her enemies, including al-Qaeda? Why should such a fatal defect in thinking be ignored? Do we conservatives agree with this?”

***
Via the Right Scoop.

***
Via the Radio Equalizer.


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 5 6

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 12:47 AM

I’m a believer in “God created evolution, because he’s smart and knows what he’s doing”. Is that allowed?

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

Some would say the same about Christianity. You really want to get into a religious mud-slinging fight?

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 12:44 AM

Yeah.

Name the mudpit, and I’ll make sure my 2.1 billion Christians show up.

You bring your 13.5 million Mormons.

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:23 AM
well said

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM
they don’t necessarily have to say intelligence design, but what is the harm in exposing the holes with Darwinism? What is the harm to point out that there are patterns that show up throughout nature that science doesn’t have an explanation as to why…just report the observation. That is the problem I have with people against Intelligent Design, they are all about silencing questions and observations.

Conservative Voice on February 23, 2010 at 12:49 AM

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

I’ll be snarky and say…sure, we have God on our side.

Conservative Voice on February 23, 2010 at 12:49 AM

Pretty simple for me: I’ve listened to Rush, Levin, and Beck for about as long as all three have been on, and I agree with them in that order. Therefore, while I like Beck well enough, I’ll defer to Rush’s and Mark’s judgement first, because it tends to hit the mark more often, be firmly grounded in verifiable fact and common sense, and is slightly less egotistical and hysterically theatrical.

Beck makes me uncomfortable about 50% of the time. It bugs me that people take his word as gospel, but I appreciate the work he does anyway.

Still, I’m a Dittohead forever.

Animator Girl on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

I’m a believer in “God created evolution, because he’s smart and knows what he’s doing”. Is that allowed?

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

NO, but it should be!

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

Why don’t we get more anti-McCain posts here?

Mitchelle Malkin can’t stand McCain, but this seems to be a pro-McCain website.

Spathi on February 23, 2010 at 12:43 AM

Because we LOVE Ron Paul…

We want to have Ron Paul’s baby. We wish we were Ron Paul’s baby so he could breast feed us.

We have lotion, and when we are done sniffing our fingers like you, we are going to shave Ron Paul’s back.

That’s why…

Seven Percent Solution on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:23 AM
Big fan of your comments.

And that one just proves it.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM

As long as you don’t tell me to shut up like Katy, things are copacetic!

;^)

Let him have it. he can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster for all i care.

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM

Clam sauce or alfredo?

I hear that’s where the Schism in FSM is starting.

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

Yeah.

Name the mudpit, and I’ll make sure my 2.1 billion Christians show up.

You bring your 13.5 million Mormons.

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

You really want to play the numbers game?

There’s a lot more Muslims than Jews. I guess that Quran is just better than the Old Testament, huh?

A majority of the country’s registered voters picked Obama, also. The numbers game isn’t a logical way to debate.

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 12:53 AM

As long as you don’t tell me to shut up like Katy, things are copacetic!

;^)

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

If he did, it means he likes you extra special

katy on February 23, 2010 at 12:54 AM

That is the problem I have with people against Intelligent Design, they are all about silencing questions and observations.

Conservative Voice on February 23, 2010 at 12:49 AM

A LOT of scientists actually have many of the same concerns regarding origins and evolution, but the scientific community is a far cry from being open to reasonable discussions on the subject.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 12:54 AM

Yeah.

Name the mudpit, and I’ll make sure my 2.1 billion Christians show up.

You bring your 13.5 million Mormons.

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

Latter-Day Saints are Christians.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 12:54 AM

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 12:47 AM

Whew! Glad YOU understand him/her/it.

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Clam sauce or alfredo?

I hear that’s where the Schism in FSM is starting.

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

Blasphemy, the real FSM is bathed in marinara sauce.

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Mitchelle Malkin can’t stand McCain, but this seems to be a pro-McCain website.

Spathi on February 23, 2010 at 12:43 AM

Meh.

Pro-Michelle maybe.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

Marinara sect, obviously.

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Whew! Glad YOU understand him/her/it.

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Rosetta Stone – Paulbot Edition was worth the money. : )

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 12:56 AM

Back on topic:
Someone was asking about Beck’s and Levin’s ratings.
Here they are.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 AM

What other falsehoods would you guys not mind being taught to our children?

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:32 AM

Reading, writing and arithmetic.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 AM

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

We are so on the same wavelength. LOL.

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 AM

The constant reference to BOTH parties being the problem is causing a problem. The Republicans in office now are far from perfect. However, to say they are as bad as the Democrats is ridiculous. The Republicans, when in power, did not try to turn this country into a Socialist dictatorship. We may have had some bad policies and some needless spending, but nothing compares to what Obama and his fellow Democrats have done in just one year. Remember, before Obama was President, he was in the Senate. The Congress from 2006, which Obama was part of, was controlled by the Democrats. The massive spending started during that period and has accelerated nonstop during the Obama regime. To not put FULL blame on the Democrats is a major mistake.

If Glen Beck is not pushing for a third party then what is he doing? His grouping of the Republicans with the Democrats makes no sense unless he’s promoting a third party. If he doesn’t acknowledge that’s what he’s doing then he’s either delusional or lying. Maybe, working for the other side is what he’s doing after seeing a USA Weekend article where he said he believes in global warming and that part of it has been caused by mankind, one has to wonder what he’s up to.

http://www.usaweekend.com/article/20100219/ENTERTAINMENT01/100218001/Don-t-judge-Beck-by-his-cover

Hobbes on February 23, 2010 at 12:58 AM

What other falsehoods would you guys not mind being taught to our children?

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:32 AM

Critical thinking skills

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 12:58 AM

Glen Beck has become something akin to a circus sideshow. His television program is easily 90 percent him – alone – with his chalkboard and pictures of Stalin and Valerie Jarrett. The man needs new material, and his emotional outbursts (the crying) make me think he’d be better suited for a seat on Dr. Phil.

He’s making the same point over and over and over — and spends a good amount of time talking about himself and what others say about his positions. It’s borderline creepy, trainwreck-ish…

I don’t dislike him at all — I genuinely like the guy, but he becomes less and less appealing to watch and less coherent every day. I get that his show draws huge ratings and that he’s popular… I just don’t get it.

D2Boston on February 23, 2010 at 1:00 AM

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 AM

That explains a lot.

katy on February 23, 2010 at 1:00 AM

Just a few things to consider. On the Limbaugh, Levin, Beck and other talkers issue; are they like the different authors of the gospels in The Bible telling the same story only from different points of view or are they like the framers arguing over the details of the constitution?

Secondly, there was some complaints regarding Scott Brown siding with the ‘Donks’ on the jobs bill; To get anyone with an “R” next to their name in the seat formally occupied by Kennedy is a win. Even former Gov. Mitt Romney, whom everyone is touting as the second coming, is hardly a Conservative.

Think of Beck as a teacher for the TEAparty people, who will then lead the GOP to their “come to Jesus” moment. I see the GOP’s current problem the same as I see the Dem’s, neither has had to deal with an educated, angry electorate for a long time.

The_Basseteer on February 23, 2010 at 1:00 AM

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:32 AM

wnirtitg guud.

Rightwingguy on February 23, 2010 at 1:00 AM

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 AM

Alan Colmes is #16? Man, this nation is in really sad shape. I can’t believe even 16 people listen to that blithering idiot.

neurosculptor on February 23, 2010 at 1:01 AM

Back on topic:
Someone was asking about Beck’s and Levin’s ratings.
Here they are.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 AM

Ugh, how is Triv still Top 100? I can’t stand that guy.

Good Solid B-Plus on February 23, 2010 at 1:01 AM

This whole debate is healthy…

Get everything out in the open and let’s air it out. We have some time before the primaries and each of us is free to choose who to support financially and who to vote for.

… Now if we were Democrats, our union dues would be taken by goons and given to people we might not support, all negotiations would be done behind closed doors, and we would be told who to vote for. Debate would not be tolerated.

“Nice family you’ve got there…

… It would be a shame if anything happened to them.”

Seven Percent Solution on February 23, 2010 at 1:02 AM

I can feel it.

katy on February 23, 2010 at 12:44 AM

That was my radio, I had the volume maxed for Levin’s show.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:02 AM

Ed Schultz is #11. That’s mind boggling.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 1:02 AM

If Glen Beck is not pushing for a third party then what is he doing? His grouping of the Republicans with the Democrats makes no sense unless he’s promoting a third party.

Telling the truth! It matters to some people!

The GOP has expanded government and made what is currently happening possible. They did their part in preparing the way to total dependence. Most of the blame belongs to the Democrats, but most is not all.

If he doesn’t acknowledge that’s what he’s doing then he’s either delusional or lying. Maybe, working for the other side

Hobbes on February 23, 2010 at 12:58 AM

Or perhaps he just disagrees with you!

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:03 AM

What other falsehoods would you guys not mind being taught to our children?

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:32 AM

US History. Not that sissy social studies crap.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM

If Glen Beck is not pushing for a third party then what is he doing? His grouping of the Republicans with the Democrats makes no sense unless he’s promoting a third party. If he doesn’t acknowledge that’s what he’s doing then he’s either delusional or lying. Maybe, working for the other side is what he’s doing after seeing a USA Weekend article where he said he believes in global warming and that part of it has been caused by mankind, one has to wonder what he’s up to.

http://www.usaweekend.com/article/20100219/ENTERTAINMENT01/100218001/Don-t-judge-Beck-by-his-cover

Hobbes on February 23, 2010 at 12:58 AM

This and the WND derivitive have been linked here a couple of times already. Beck talked about what a massive fraud this article was on his radio show. He said 4 of the 10 things he didn’t know about himself either. Beck regularly talks about what a massive fraud AGW is. This is nothing more than a hit piece to diminish his conservative cred. It was reprinted by WND because WND’s president, Joseph Farah, is a major Birther and is pissed at Beck for saying Birthers are retarded. Farah is also good friends with Savage who has the same type of envy/hate thing against Beck that Levin does. FYI

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM

Which ever you like, it all boils down to entertainment.

With a big difference.

Kini on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM

As long as you don’t tell me to shut up like Katy, things are copacetic!

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

But I never said…

…oh never mind.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

US History. Not that sissy social studies crap.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM

Preach it brother. God I hated social studies. I love history, it being a favorite subject of mine, but SS was deathly dull.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

If he did, it means he likes you extra special…

katy on February 23, 2010 at 12:54 AM

Shaddup already.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

BTW, sorry for using “massive fraud” twice in the same paragraph. It’s late and I’m going to bed.

Also, anyone who thinks Evolution and nothing else should be taught in schools needs to dust off Ann Coulter’s “Godless” and give it a fresh read.

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

Beck understands that conservatism vs liberalism will get the “liberals” reelected. Conservatism is stuck at 40%. Beck focuses on progressivism or socialism as the target and otherwise tries to be as inclusive as possible. His ideological core is the Constitution. He does not aim to be the Voice of Conservatism like Rush Limbaugh.

The Founding Fathers were (classical) liberals, not conservatives.

modifiedcontent on February 23, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM

BTW, sorry for using “massive fraud” twice in the same paragraph. It’s late and I’m going to bed.

Also, anyone who thinks evolution and nothing else should be taught in public school needs to dust off Ann Coulter’s “Godless” and give it a fresh read.

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

Stop playing tough guy and just give in baby…

katy on February 23, 2010 at 1:13 AM

US History. Not that sissy social studies crap.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM

Preach it brother. God I hated social studies. I love history, it being a favorite subject of mine, but SS was deathly dull.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

Social studies was great! I learned about the Tasaday and how awesome soviet bloc housing was, and I am not kidding!

Big surprise I was indoctrinated to love collectivism.

daesleeper on February 23, 2010 at 1:14 AM

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

You can say that again…

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Seven Percent Solution on February 23, 2010 at 1:14 AM

Preach it brother sistah. God I hated social studies. I love history, it being a favorite subject of mine, but SS was deathly dull.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

FIFY

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 1:15 AM

Seven Percent Solution on February 23, 2010 at 1:14 AM

Sorry. Either the site is lagging tonight or my computer is. I saw that and was like “ugh. so much for not looking stupid.”

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:15 AM

I’m heading to bed folks. I’m whooped!! I’m looking forward to the Texas snow storm we’re suppose to get tomorrow.

mizflame98 on February 23, 2010 at 1:18 AM

I’d love to see Ron Paul debate Ben Stein, Mark Levin, or the rest of the loons.

The Dean on February 22, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Settle down…the adults are talking now.

gary4205 on February 23, 2010 at 1:20 AM

Well, of course, our problems are not easily dissected into categories, but to reject politics is to reject the manner in which we try to organize ourselves. This is as old as Plato and Aristotle. Why would conservatives choose to surrender the political battlefield to our adversaries — who are trashing this society –when we must retake it in order to preserve our society? Philosophy, politics, culture, family, etc., are all of one. Edmund Burke, among others, wrote about it extensively, and far better that I possibly can. But all elements of the civil society require our defense.

And this is why I love Levin. The man brings philosophical principles and knowledge to the table. Foundation understanding of the purpose of politics. Government isn’t a necessary evil. It’s a fundamental aspect of human nature. Man is a political animal.

darii on February 23, 2010 at 1:20 AM

night flame

katy on February 23, 2010 at 1:20 AM

daesleeper on February 23, 2010 at 1:14 AM

That Tasaday nonsense is some really messed up crap.

Truly sad that Russia is moving towards free markets and the US is moving away.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:21 AM

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:15 AM

Just having fun…

:O)

Have a good night!

Seven Percent Solution on February 23, 2010 at 1:21 AM

I’d love to see Ron Paul debate Ben Stein, Mark Levin, or the rest of the loons.

The Dean on February 22, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Settle down…the adults are talking now.

gary4205 on February 23, 2010 at 1:20 AM

+1

darii on February 23, 2010 at 1:22 AM

Stop playing tough guy and just give in baby…

katy on February 23, 2010 at 1:13 AM

*tips hat, rides horse off into the distant setting sun*

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:23 AM

Anyone who is claiming Beck is advocating a third party clearly doesn’t listen to Beck.

Beck’s philosophy is to make them EARN your vote… If they know they have you just because of an “R” after their name, they will continue with their crap.

I’m sick of those who think we should be like the Dems and mindlessly follow the R brand. I’m sick of Progressives period. Beck is spot on and Rush and Levin would do well to do a little listening themselves…

The one’s doing the dividing are those who think they can ORDER people do as they wish… I don’t want to take orders from Levin or Limbaugh any more than Obama.

I’m a free person who will decide for myself who to vote for.

That Republicans actually have a problem with that is STUNNING and very revealing… Tyrants are tyrants no matter what letter follows their names.

Joy on February 23, 2010 at 1:24 AM

Also, anyone who thinks Evolution and nothing else should be taught in schools needs to dust off Ann Coulter’s “Godless” and give it a fresh read.

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

I’m not against teaching creationism in a religion class, but only science belongs in a science classroom. If the teacher wants to point out that some people don’t believe in evolution and refer them to their parents, church or a religion class or something for alternate views, (as mine did), and then get back to teaching science, I don’t think many people would have a problem with that.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:30 AM

Joy on February 23, 2010 at 1:24 AM

Emotional hyperbole.

Try screen writing.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:32 AM

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:32 AM

No actually it isn’t. It is an opinion shared by many. The GOP acts all too often as if they own a conservative vote farm.

Conservatives can just walk away and that is something the GOP needs to realize.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Also, anyone who thinks Evolution and nothing else should be taught in schools needs to dust off Ann Coulter’s “Godless” and give it a fresh read.

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

Science class deals only with observed fact. Creationism is not observed and there is zero evidence for it other than religious claim which is not evidence merely claim.

Questions such as that should be handled in a Philosophy class that is a required course in all public high schools and a comparative religion class which is an elective in all public high schools.

Holger on February 23, 2010 at 1:35 AM

I’m not against teaching creationism in a religion class, but only science belongs in a science classroom. If the teacher wants to point out that some people don’t believe in evolution and refer them to their parents, church or a religion class or something for alternate views, (as mine did), and then get back to teaching science, I don’t think many people would have a problem with that.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:30 AM

Darwinian evolution isn’t science anymore than AGW is. Intelligent Design is closer to science than they are.

I think evolution of some sort is likely true, but we truly do not know how it came about.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:37 AM

Joy on February 23, 2010 at 1:24 AM

Emotional hyperbole.

Try screen writing.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:32 AM

Actually, Joy understands Becks message.

You’re just being silly, yes?

Kini on February 23, 2010 at 1:38 AM

Science class deals only with observed fact. Creationism is not observed and there is zero evidence for it other than religious claim which is not evidence merely claim.

Holger on February 23, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Fine, leave common descent out of the classroom as well. It is absurd.

I’m perfectly fine teaching change in allele frequencies across generations. Just don’t tell me heckle and jeckel were once flipper and gilly.

daesleeper on February 23, 2010 at 1:39 AM

Emotional hyperbole.

Try screen writing.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:32 AM

The ending was but there were some good points in there as well.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:41 AM

Actually, Joy understands Becks message.

You’re just being silly, yes?

Kini on February 23, 2010 at 1:38 AM

Yes, it’s late.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:42 AM

Emotional hyperbole.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:32 AM

If you want to hear emotional hyperbole check out the first hour of Levin’s program today.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:43 AM

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Well, I agree with you. It’s the non-sense that Rush and Levin are party bosses ordering us around.

Rubbish.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:43 AM

If you want to hear emotional hyperbole check out the first hour of Levin’s program today.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:43 AM

LOL.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:43 AM

Intelligent Design is closer to science than they are.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:37 AM

No it’s not, but let’s agree to disagree.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:45 AM

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:45 AM

I mean ID and NOT creationism.

Yeah, we can disagree politely!

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:47 AM

The GOP abandoned fiscal conservatism. Take McCain towards the end of the campaign proposing a massive new federal program to bail out individual mortgages. That was further to the left than what Obama was saying at the time.

The GOP deserves everything Beck throws at it right now. They’ve been on good behavior for the last year. But I think Beck’s comparison to an alchoholic is apt. As soon as we take the fire from their feet they are going to abandon fiscal conservatism again.

Sure the two parties aren’t the same, but that’s not good enough.

jhffmn on February 23, 2010 at 1:48 AM

Oops. I must have stumbled onto the wrong thread.

Is this the Christopher Hitchens QOTD?

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:49 AM

Is this the Christopher Hitchens QOTD?

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:49 AM

Startin to look that way!

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:53 AM

The fact that these guys carried the water for Bush and co for all those years contributed heavily to the GOP’s wayward descent. If you listened to these guys circa 02-07 Bush and the GOP could do no wrong, because everything was (and still is with them) in the prism of Democrat vs. Republican.

Beck isn’t advocating a third party, just principles over party. I still like Rush, but let’s be honest folks, does he ever go after Repubs that aren’t full-blown RINOs? I get it, I get that he’s fighting the good fight, but kudos to Beck for moving beyond this blind partisanship and be willing to stand on principle, regardless of party.

Clearly, these other guys still don’t get it. And that’s because they’re partisan hacks (that I still appreciate).

jjraines on February 23, 2010 at 1:53 AM

I like all three. . .Rush, Then Mark then Glenn.

Only one is touring with O’Reilly the Obama
suck-up.

Texyank on February 23, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Take McCain towards the end of the campaign proposing a massive new federal program to bail out individual mortgages. T

jhffmn on February 23, 2010 at 1:48 AM

That is the root of the problem. Honesty.

McCain didn’t mean that. He was desperate for votes. He knew he didn’t have the emotional charisma Obama had during the campaign. Another reason why Palin drew crowds because she was on message, with her own conservative values. Which members of McCain’s campaign management tried desperately to contain. Going Rogue.

McCain would have said anything. He knew he was losing and he refused to give up his RINO principals.

Obama said the same thing also. And he didn’t mean it also.

He Lied and continues to lie.

Kini on February 23, 2010 at 1:56 AM

Oh, and another thing to remember: Of these three, Beck is the only one that has had anything to do with the Tea Party movement. I know Rush loves to take credit for everything, but it’s hard to argue against Beck being the most effective conservative last year — from exposing liberal fascism to a greater audience, czars, ACORN, Tea Party movement, etc.

Rush, Levin, Hannity, et al are still living in the 90′s when radio was relevant, and blind partisanship was effective. Instead of just bashing the other side, Beck has gone on the OFFENSIVE and has been a leader in this conservative resurgence.

jjraines on February 23, 2010 at 1:58 AM

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:45 AM

I mean ID and NOT creationism.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 1:47 AM

That’s what I meant as well.

Yeah, we can disagree politely!

+1. I think creationism/ID is preposterous but many of my favorite commentators here believe otherwise. I even like Right4Life, (on other topics), even though he lumps me in with Hitler and Stalin and the dreaded Darwin.

(I might be confusing Right4Life with one of the other similar monikers here.)

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:07 AM

Oops. I must have stumbled onto the wrong thread.

Is this the Christopher Hitchens QOTD?

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:49 AM

Hey, I’ve been good. With only a few exceptions I’ve ardently tried to refrain from engaging on that topic. :)

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:09 AM

Seven Percent Solution on February 23, 2010 at 12:50 AM

Great, now I’m going to stay up another hour to watch Red Eye.

jhffmn on February 23, 2010 at 2:10 AM

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:09 AM

….In Doctor Zero’s thread, too.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:10 AM

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:07 AM

At least he spares you Wallace, Malthus, Gould, and Lyell.

daesleeper on February 23, 2010 at 2:11 AM

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:07 AM

ID is not creationism, though I do know that Christians are behind ID.

sharrukin on February 23, 2010 at 2:13 AM

Rush, Levin, Hannity, et al are still living in the 90’s when radio was relevant, and blind partisanship was effective. Instead of just bashing the other side, Beck has gone on the OFFENSIVE and has been a leader in this conservative resurgence.

jjraines on February 23, 2010 at 1:58 AM

Blind Partisanship? Bashing the other side?

Actually, what Beck has done is use History to funnel the direction of Progressivism and how it relates to Obama’s policies. The Socialism intent with a dash of Progressivism just to nudge you on your way.

Beck’s presentations are thought provoking as well as entertaining. He captures his audience with silliness and serious content that keeps this short-attention-span fan tuning in.

However, the others have opinions also and their content should be examined with equal value. I would also include NPR (Non Productive Radio). Because it gives me reason to validate all the opinions and my own.

Sun Tzu’s Art of War also speaks of this.

Kini on February 23, 2010 at 2:15 AM

If he did, it means he likes you extra special…

katy on February 23, 2010 at 12:54 AM
Shaddup already.

Saltysam on February 23, 2010 at 1:07 AM

!

profitsbeard on February 23, 2010 at 2:15 AM

jjraines on February 23, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Well said. While they may have criticized Bush from time to time on a few specific issues, overall I think “carrying the water” is apt.

While I’m a Rush fan, (and to a lessening extent, Mark), I’m very glad we have Beck’s independent voice cutting through the R and D fog.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 2:18 AM

I don’t understand how anyone can listen to Levin and his whiny voice.

2Brave2Bscared on February 23, 2010 at 2:30 AM

i think beck scared the old-school talkers a little bit.

eh on February 23, 2010 at 2:30 AM

I’m not against teaching creationism in a religion class, but only science belongs in a science classroom. If the teacher wants to point out that some people don’t believe in evolution and refer them to their parents, church or a religion class or something for alternate views, (as mine did), and then get back to teaching science, I don’t think many people would have a problem with that.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 1:30 AM

I’d be fine with this approach as well, provided that Darwinism is taught with the caveat that it, too, is mere theory. I suppose what all of this comes down to me is more fundamental than mere creationism vs. evolution. It’s the fact that schools are supposed to be places where varied ideas are welcome and debate is encouraged. How are we supposed to produce critical thinkers if we don’t allow students and teachers alike to question things? Once we start outlawing certain ideas, I think we place ourselves on a pretty slippery slope. Merely discussing the concept of religion in schools does not rise to the level of establishment of religion.

NoLeftTurn on February 23, 2010 at 3:08 AM

Beck scared me enough to unsubscribe from his radio show and magazine.

I’ve had enough of his demagoguery.
I find his use of the expression “Come to Jesus” offensive and I also was repulsed by his portrayal of “Morning in America” as the Morning After a Big Drunk.

I’m proud to be a Republican.
We’re the party of better ideas, the right values like the Right to Life and the most foundational American values that our Founders would laud, also.

Jenfidel on February 23, 2010 at 3:09 AM

1)On the Limbaugh, Levin, Beck and other talkers issue; are they like the different authors of the gospels…

2)Secondly…Even former Gov. Mitt Romney, whom everyone is touting as the second coming…

3)Think of Beck as a teacher for the TEAparty people, who will then lead the GOP to their “come to Jesus” moment.

The_Basseteer on February 23, 2010 at 1:00 AM

Dear long-eared, shortlegged canine lover,

1) More like the “3 blind men” bravely trying to describe the elephant’s nomenclature. Happily, for Rush and Levin, they got to survey the front end — poor Beck, perhaps because of his sins of indulgence, has mostly had to explain the hind end — not so surprisingly he keeps getting pelted by pachyderm packets — as he tries to make heads or tails out of the beast.

2) Don’t believe “everyone” is touting Mitty — maybe 10% of likely voters, including Frum, Brooks, Buckley and the rest of the GOP RINO contingent.

3) Your Beck as “teacher for the TEAparty people” model has a feeling of truth to it! Lord knows he sure has done a lot to educate voters to its US political history, as well as the bloodsucking “progressives” who’ve populated it over the last 100 years or so.

Whether Beck’s students/disciples/supporters are successful in leading the GOP into the promised land remains a statistical long-shot — especially considering how far the family Elephantidae has devolved toward Rhinocerotidae and its probable (predictable?) extinction.

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on February 23, 2010 at 3:17 AM

I think Beck is like the kooky, eccentric uncle in our little circle. Yes, I think sometimes he has a tendency to wallow in conspiracy theories and has a penchant for being overly dramatic. OTOH, there is little denying that he has done a lot of yeoman’s work for the conservative movement over the last year, and much of the history he has been teaching is spot on. He has certainly missed his calling as a teacher as he would be great in a classroom.

With all due respect to Rush and Levin, both of whom I respect and enjoy listening to, I feel like they’re both stuck on just one discrete part of Beck’s speech, when really it should be considered in its entirety. In terms of spending, which at this stage in the crisis is pretty much all that matters, the GOP has been virtually indistinguishable from the Dems. This is true. They just spend money at a slower rate than the Democrats do, but they are just as guilty of it. Even defense spending, which we can all agree is necessary, could probably be made more efficient; the DOD is still a federal government bureaucracy, after all.

I think it’s fine for Beck to sound a warning shot to the Republicans to straighten up and fly right. Unlike many, I don’t sense from him that he’s really pushing for a third party. I think he, like the rest, would prefer to see the Tea Party coalition taking back the GOP and restoring it to its roots. This is going to require a serious purge of RINOs unwilling to toe the fiscal conservative line. It will be painful for some, but it is necessary and those folks would probably be more at home somewhere else instead. The funny thing is, I have heard Rush more than once say pretty much the same things as Beck about the party having lost its way and not differing much from the Democrats anymore. I’m not sure what it was about the way Beck put it that struck such a nerve with him and with Levin. I don’t see Beck as trying to divide us; quite the opposite in fact.

NoLeftTurn on February 23, 2010 at 3:20 AM

provided that Darwinism is taught with the caveat that it, too, is mere theory.

NoLeftTurn on February 23, 2010 at 3:08 AM

I’m all for teaching students the technical definition of “scientific theory” before/during and after the teaching of evolution. It’s a necessarily part of science education. But I suspect that we differ in that your intent is probably to teach science students the standard non-scientific definition of “theory” in place of the scientific definition.

It’s the fact that schools are supposed to be places where varied ideas are welcome and debate is encouraged.

Absolutely, however, science classes are a place to learn and discuss science, not politics and religion. There are other classes where that is appropriate. Just like you wouldn’t discuss Mark Twain in a math class.

FloatingRock on February 23, 2010 at 3:35 AM

O/T
Watch Breitbart’s site tomorrow, for Hanna’s video
at CPAC
Just announced on Red Eye

macncheez on February 23, 2010 at 3:49 AM

Wow, this is bizarre. You have CPAC with booths for both Birchers and GOProud; speakers getting booed; Levin admitting he declined to speak at the event because the tent was too big for him; Rush saying basically the same thing; Huckabee saying it was too Libertarian for him; straw poll picking Ron Paul for President; then the keynote speaker says you’re going after the Big Tent and this isn’t a circus….

Yet…

the story is Levin, Glenn, and Rush. I submit the story is CPAC and what CPAC is trying to represent as the GOP to the voting public. When you’re touting Levin whose slamming your keynote speaker and refuses to attend your function because of your sponsors I think you’re the one with the problem. It’s not the other way around.

Smoke and mirrors my friends. Smoke and mirrors. Just sad.

Sultry Beauty on February 23, 2010 at 4:43 AM

I also can’t figure out why my liberal friends on FB posted Rubio’s speech but HA didn’t. Why post Crist and not Rubio?

Sultry Beauty on February 23, 2010 at 5:21 AM

Beck -looney or not -has done a remarkable service for America. He has helped do the most impportant job of all -arouse the populace to the evils of mega-government and teach the vaccuous about what constitutional government is supposed to be. He has riled them up -stirring the pot with information that is never told by those that seek unity abouve truth, and is being excoriated for that service. If there is to be a republic, this internal detox cleansing is absolutly essential. Both parties are remiss and are like two comfortable trains on the wrong track heading in the wrong direction. That one is going slightly slower won’t avoid the crash.

Don L on February 23, 2010 at 5:23 AM

Sultry Beauty on February 23, 2010 at 4:43 AM

Both Levin and Sarah Palin (and I assume Rush) refused to appear at CPAC because of its sponsorship by the John Birch Society, an ultra Right Wing group.

If Beck and Ron Paul are the face of Conservatism, we’re in real trouble, but thankfully, they’re not.

Sadness is in the eye of the Libertarian beholder.

Jenfidel on February 23, 2010 at 5:25 AM

I don’t understand how anyone can listen to Levin and his whiny voice.

2Brave2Bscared on February 23, 2010 at 2:30 AM

I find it interesting that you mention Mark Levin’s voice. While I was stationed in Nothern Italy, a close friend of mine spoke with the same inflection, tone and grammar. I wouldn’t be surprized if Mark and my old friend were from the same part of Pennsylvania. It was an acquired taste but once you get familiar with it you realize that there is a unique humor that goes hand in hand with it. Listening to Mark reminds me of my tour in Italy. My friend was a genuine personality with a good heart. Mark has been pretty consistant for as long as I’ve had the chance to listen to him. I consider him to be a straight shooter and the true definition of the Pennsylvanian genuine article.

Americannodash on February 23, 2010 at 5:44 AM

Yeah.

Name the mudpit, and I’ll make sure my 2.1 billion Christians show up.

You bring your 13.5 million Mormons.

David2.0 on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 AM

You think shear numbers means a group holds to the truth? In that case, I’m sure the worlds 6.8 billion Muslims will want to get involved.

If you were to study the scriptures, specifically Matt 22:14, you’d be holding your tongue and wondering if you really have the standing to judge others.

csdeven on February 23, 2010 at 6:00 AM

The division among conservatives is already there. You can’t compel people to remain silent about them. And telling us that these divisions don’t help the Republican party is not that much of a selling point either, since many of us aren’t even Republicans.

Any support I may have for the GOP is conditional. The Republicans need to understand that they are not entitled to anything.

NorthernCross on February 23, 2010 at 6:03 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6