Over at Pajamas Media, Dan Riehl weighs in on Glenn Beck:
“…Beck is a distraction, if nothing else. But he is also something far worse. He’s a genuine danger to us and we need to sort that out. Without taking credit away from Beck for talking it up as he did, along with many, many others, the notion that 9/12 was much about Beck is a joke. The many pushing it were simply more generous in crediting the people actually involved — the little people, patriotic Americans across the country like you and me who are driving it. They stand in stark contrast to Beck, who seems to ultimately and always be about himself. As for the real meat behind the various other scandals mentioned, it was either Breitbart or blogger Gateway Pundit who did the real work on those. Beck’s great contribution was again, like others, to broadcast them. That’s a good thing. He deserves credit for that, though also unfortunately he seems so willing to make them his own. I guess that’s what so-called stars, or wannabe famous people, do.
But what else has he done? This represents my only serious concerns involving Beck. Otherwise, I doubt I’d be much interested in him at all. He’s called Barack Obama a racist, for one. I’m appalled by my friends on the right who seem so willing to pass that remark off as insignificant — almost pretending it was never said. It was outrageous, undeserved, and represents nothing but the very kind of racist cudgel the left has been falsely charging the right with being for years. Maybe Beck is one, otherwise he could never conceive of making such a remark — and so publicly at that.
Hannity looks nicer in person
.jpg)
Hey Tim! Stop stealing my material!
In the words of the Brits, here here.
From my perspective Mt. Riehl really knows how to rile things up. Most people on this site understand conservatism and have no difficulty in recognizing that Beck’s problem is that he doesn’t speak for conservatives, the way the media wants the public to believe he does so that they can then define the debate by creating a perception of conservatism which can be vilified, marginalized or classified as irrelevant and conspiratorial. Beck’s problem is really a problem for all conservatives because the media is on a constant hunt to find conservatives to fault. Better that they be popular and unlikable, as Rush became the de facto leader of the Republican Party when that concept advanced a liberal agenda.
One thing on I can say for certain is that Beck is not going to be buried by anyone anytime soon and especially by the left leaning media which really wants to prop him up as long as they can, simply so that they have something to talk about, which is why real conservatives are fearful they will be deliberately caught up in the spin. Beck is a lighting rod the media does not wish to lose; they hope he gives more.
Who among us cannot tell that most of Beck’s work is not original. Some of it actually is but the strongest criticism comes from conservatives who recognize his failure to credit the original sources of the many who did the hard work that provide him with much of his popularity. Conservatives often know the sources but the public frequently doesn’t and the reason that he is successful is because most listeners and viewers don’t seem to care as long as what they hear is perceived as accurate.
I am not a Beck defender but I have to cross the line and state that Beck’s bold move in calling Obama a racist is a lot easier to defend than stating that McCain would have made a worse President and that he would have voted for Clinton over McCain had she been the Democrat candidate.
Maybe Mr. Riehl doesn’t live on the ground to interact with a cross section of voters, the majority of which never got over Obama’s reaction to the arrest of Louis Gates by James Crowley. From that point forward the unrehearsed spontaneous prejudgment by Obama, against Crowley, without knowing the facts, immediately stigmatized him as having racial preconceptions. So what, some will say. Well now we read, in an otherwise rather favorable biography, that he was a lot closer to the racist Reverend Wright than his campaign denial ever conceded to. Twenty years listening to a radical, racist pastor somehow never stimulated him to leave that Church? Are we all confused about Black Liberation Theology that Reverend Wright used to inspire his congregation as they sat in the pews? Maybe Barack disagrees with his wife who couldn’t help but remark that she has only recently become proud of America. Was it just part of America she was not proud of for all those years, or all of America, and if it was part of America was that part a different color? I suspect Barack and Michele have their disagreements but this is not one of them. What about those bible thumping, gun loving Pennsylvanians. Seems to me there are plenty of non-whites, with the same lifestyles, throughout the south that were never similarly vilified. Obama does not like America. He was taught by Frank Marshal Davis, a black, anti-white communist, identified with his core beliefs and pursued them his entire adult life. Does he feel the exact same way about all of America, all races and nationalities or just white America (the way Davis does)? The fact that he mostly hangs around with whites is the same argument that I heard from a Jewish friend who stated that because he has lots of Jewish associates he must support Israel even though he seems to take much of his mid-east policy from his friend, pro-Palestinian, anti-Semite Rashid Khalidi (also Reverend Wright) and not Benjamin Netanyahu.
The left-wing media will always use the race card as they did even against Bill Clinton. But they would be foolish to do so this time and they understand why and so does Barack Obama. It is irrelevant if Beck thinks Obama has racist proclivities, or is indeed a racist, even though that is something the media would love to pin on Beck and, by association, all conservatives. Obama, has most Americans focused upon ideology and it is only the media that would like to shift the focus to race. To the extent that they try will likely reactivate something currently dormant and would, at best, document that Obama is an arrogant elitist and at worst exactly what Beck and a lot of other Americans already have concluded, even if they originally believed otherwise, before Obama was elected President.
Mr. Beck knows what is good and bad, he understands and believes in liberty and freedom and sees the virtue of capitalism. He can’t yet separate the players and thinks America’s problems can be essentially explained by a lack of religion and pervasive corruption. Barack Obama sorted out his identity problems a long time ago and never blamed his father, his stepfather, his mother and grandfather for his early life. He blames America and most of all he blames capitalism. He sees the world as divided between those that exploit and those that have been exploited. To him the genesis of the rift between those that have and those that do not have has its roots in capitalism, John Locke, Edmund Burke, the great European colonial powers and most of all America. To him the despots of the World understood the evils of capitalism and believe, as he does, that massive and great reparations are a corrective remedy. He sees Africa as a continent of victims and America as a nation of users and, as a result, on balance, the World is a poorer place than it need be. To Barack Obama people who stood behind our founding documents and the Constitution that created a Republic based upon the individual have deprived much of the World of development and improvement. These were self-serving old and rich white men who got it all wrong and they set into place a system that consumes so much by so few. Yes, Barack Obama may see the World as shades of ideology but the ideology he blames for inequality has its historical roots in shades of color and ultimately he can’t hide who he feels deserves the blame without noticing the color of their skin at the same time. For a better understanding of who Barack Obama is Mr. Riehl would be better served by reading Thomas Sowell’s book, “Black Rednecks and White Liberals†and not adopt the talking points provided by his liberal friends.
If Glenn Beck is stealing people’s material and failing to give credit where credit is due, that’s where the focus of all this needs to lie. Furthermore that’s an issue between Mark and Glenn that should be dealt with between the two of them. It’s really up to Mark as to whether he wants to file suit against him or just continue down the path of trying to convince him one on one. There’s no doubt it’s a serious thing when somebody does not give due credit to a source they’re quoting. I understand all that. But as I see it, the way for us as fans of both men to handle this is to keep the focus of the discussion on that and not the next reason why we should all be shunning Glenn Beck. And furthermore, this is something we ought to be keeping in house instead of making it a wide open issue for all the public to be a part of. Glenn has been saying a lot of things we want to hear lately, and he has done a lot of good things for our cause. Give him credit! Rush has; that is if you need more validation than I could give you. You don’t hear Rush focusing on it or for that matter Sean, or Andrew, or whoever. Don’t you think those guys would have more to say about it if it was something due such attention? But you guys who feel the need to draw a line in the sand and make the whole thing a full-scale war between Mark and Glenn could far better use your efforts to fight that real demon from hell out there called liberalism. Let Mark and Glenn work out their own differences. We ought to be doing what we can to help the sides reconcile instead of exacerbating the problem. I don’t know how that’s supposed to be helping us.
Just a reminder that Mark’s work isn’t the only that Beck has “borrowed”…..
http://marklevinfan.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16649
Also, you will recall that Michelle Malkin’s book, “Culture of Corruption” came out on 7-27-09, BEFORE Beck started “exposing” these people. If you haven’t read it, she exposes ALL of Obama’s cronies, the same ones that Beck now takes credit for exposing. He even has Michelle on his show, touting her book, and then when he speaks of Valerie Jarrett or the others, no mention for anyone.
Yes dear, but that’s what I said in my comment, right? If there’s an issue, it’s between Glenn and Mark or Glenn and whoever else. Litigation remains a viable option for anyone victimized by copyright infringement. My point is, why are we spending so much time on this issue? It’s become an obsession, beginning with Mark by the way. And I say that as one who still believes Mark is the best, period. The man has inspired me and fired me up like no other since I first started listening to Rush seventeen years ago. But put your full efforts into litigating against him, and we’ll be behind you 100%. We know what’s going on. But I’d just like to see on-air references to it minimized.
Your patronizing use of the term “dear” is not necessary or appreciated.
Great objective article from Dan Riehl.
SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT……
If you were a Libertarian and wanted to grow your party, what would you do/say?
If you were a Libertarian with a bully pulpit that wanted to grow your party, what would you do/say?
If you were a Libertarian with a bully pulpit and now a large following and you wanted to grow your party, what would you do/say?
And would you do/say the more controversial things before or AFTER you gained that following.
The only question that remains in my mind, is whether or not Beck is trying to deliver his followers to the Libertarian party’s candidate for 2012….or if he thinks HE IS the Libertarian party’s candidate for 2012.
Just my two pennies in the pond….simple-minded thoughts from a simple-minded person.
Until recently no one spoke negatively of Chicago’s politics. However Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin are not the only ones who know how corrupt the City by the Lake has been for the last five decades and it is not too difficult to research who the players are. You can’t easily strive for political success in any large city unless you are part of the political process and a lot of Americans know that Chicago is a City of order with the law determined by the insider’s club.
Many of us were dismayed by the “Silence of the Lambs (Media)†that completely overlooked and/or deliberately hid some of the most easily identifiable corruptions (Tony Resko); if America was looking for a candidate for hope and change Chicago should be the last place to prospect. Obama is a media production, an imitation that used style, youth, color and sophistry to camouflage ideology; he was fashioned to take out anything that resembled an alternative media creation… the dreaded Bush, his Iraq war and an economy blamed on the Wall Street wealth moguls. Now, when we look into the rear view mirror, we see what should have been as obvious as a hitchhiking whale that we somehow missed while hurriedly driving by.
I see little reason to attack those on the right who help to fight the cancer that is the Left. I have little use for those that annoint themselves the “guardians” of conservativism. These I lump with the Frums, McCanns, Buckleys, Wills and the like who’d rather be invited to a Beltway cocktail than stick to principle or the many bloggers who seem to have abandoned their principles in the hopes of a gig at the Atlantic or other MSM journal like LGF or other squids of which there seem to be more and more. Let them join the Lindsey Grahams and Snowes.
Better to focus on the real issues and enemies than occupy yourselfs with diversions.
The patients seem to have Left flew [sic] and we need to inoculate against it from spreading using ‘conservatism’ as the vaccine. (Yes, that was an original thought and you can quote me
)
Why worry about swine flu when we have a more serious pig virus called liberalism. You generally don’t die with with the liberal strain; in fact your ego increases to God-like dimensions, you display delusions of grandeur, become enamored over the exceptionalism of dictators, wish you could be one yourself while losing empathy with your fellow man; you become increasingly dysfunctional at your job, wishing to continually party and generally find a life of debauchery and self-indulgence, supported by other people, more worthwhile than a life of productivity. The disease is spread through the educational system and is rapidly disseminated by the media. Your only hope of cure is when someone is more infected than yourself and you have to support them while your own support diminishes. If you are not too advanced you might survive, otherwise you won’t be missed. Ideally the disease should be prevented by multiple doses of conservatism, given at an early age, with lifelong boosters provided at periodic intervals.
What the HELL are you talking about? Or should I say WHO-Buckley? Meaning the late William F. Buckley? And who the hell is ‘McCann’?
Alright, Beck, time to start using your real name here, twinky, and get a better spell-check program. I’m getting tired of you, and I don’t think I’m alone in that.
The trouble with calling Leftists ‘swine’ is it so unfair to actual pigs.
I actually thought of that and went ahead and wrote it anyway but have to stand corrected… you are right.
There actually is a one vaccination protocol and it may even work as a cure for the disease of moderation. Read “Liberty and Tyranny”.