Looking into Glenn Beck


Recommended Posts

And, in a nutshell, you have shown why I think Glenn Beck is a hack.

Whoever wrote that pamphlet that made up a significant portion of his keynote speech is hardly a 'Key political figure'. He is an obscure political figure that isn't indicative of the movement as a whole.

However: I'd like to ask you and Rameumptom a question since you seem to believe his tactics are fine. I stated it in my original post, but I'll reiterate it. Please address it.

If a left-leaning journalist spoke about the Conservative agenda of legalized violence and used Ted Kaczynski's manifesto(He was the Unabomber, by the way) as a means of proof that Conservatives want that, would you accept what he said and move away from conservativism?

If not, why not?

He fits the following:

1) Staunchly conservative.

2) Published.

3) Far more famous than even the creator of the pamphlet that his keynote address was on.

4) Passionate about his ideals.

I don't think Satan cares about lefty's and righty's, or conservatives or whatever they are.......he's using just about everybody in government to wreck peoples freedom and well being! All this sounds like a text book analogy from high school or law if you ask me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, you've got nothing then? The question was asked for specific things he has been wrong about.

The poster wanted specific things. My bad. I don't have anything specific except my very low opinion of Beck and my opinion, which I know is correct. I'll refrain from posting further on this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, of course. There has been a plethora of bad decisions in government interventionism. I've cut out a lot of what you said and addressed the more salient point. As for whether Ted Kaczynski received public funds, you're right. I could instead take a tack that showed several prominent Conservative leaders who used public funds to get prostitutes or gay liaisons. While I could, it would serve no purpose other than being funny and you are just as capable of coming up with your own strawman argument for what all 'Conservatives' have as their agenda. ;)

Then you are neither saying that the Progressive movement, currently active within both political parties has no intention now nor have they ever had intention to define law and institute public policy in the manner Beck has represented. For example to increase federalism both with control of funds (increasing taxes and use of federal monies to enact policies beyond the reach of the Constitution) and instituting policy that was denied to the federal government by law of the constitution.

By your definition, it was denied to the federal government by law of the constitution.

The problem, though, is that the Constitution is interpreted differently by different people.

There people who state you have to interpret the Constitution strictly according to what it says(And this is further split according to those who want it interpreted according to what the language meant in the time that it was created and what it's come to mean now).

There are those who feel that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the will of the people at the time(And that is further split along those who say this, then quote only Thomas Jefferson's works all along the way to those who say the only way to understand the Constitution is to read not just all the Federalist papers, but the personal papers of all representatives who debated and argued for it and their reasons for doing so).

There are those who state that the Constitution was designed as a living document, capable of adapting to the times, hence its very simple wording. This is why 'amendments' have come in to being.

If you're arguing that 'Progressives' wish to change the Constitution, then would you argue that the Amendments are uninspired? Would you argue a repeal of the first, second, third or fourth Amendment? Those were changes to the Constitution - And changes to the Constitution, as you've stated, are the purview of the 'Progressive'.

Mistakes have been made. You're right. In the interests of re-election and self interest and back room dealings, Tyranny has crept in to the American system.

But that is not the fault of 'Progressivism' or 'Liberalism' or 'Democrats' any more than it's the fault of the Northerners, the Southerners, Easterners, Hicks or any other label that has been used to dismiss anyone who disagrees with them. And Glenn Beck's use of the word 'Progressivist', 'Liberal' or such is where he becomes misleading and where he misrepresents people.

Edited by FunkyTown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.