Glenn Beck's 'restore honor' rally...

[SteamWake]

Slated for this weekend.

Should be interisting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...507063_pf.html

[AVGWarhawk]

I find this will be a serious waste of time and energy to be honest. Not to mention the resources the city will have to come up with. I think Beck is off his rocker as well.

[Konovalov]

Glenn who? And what is he going to restore honor to?

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I find this will be a serious waste of time and energy to be honest. Not to mention the resources the city will have to come up with. I think Beck is off his rocker as well.

I would be less generous; Glenn Beck is an unhinged loon who helps give conservatism a bad name.

[AVGWarhawk]

Usually as I'm breezing my way up to the History Channel or HD Channel I will stop and listen to this guy. Really, he nuts. I just shake my head and then go watch American Pickers or Pawn Stars.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Usually as I'm breezing my way up to the History Channel or HD Channel I will stop and listen to this guy. Really, he nuts. I just shake my head and then go watch American Pickers or Pawn Stars.

Pawn Stars is awesome.

[Konovalov]

Ok, I think I get the picture now as to this guy. But if tens of thousands of people turn up to this rally what does that say?

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by Konovalov

Ok, I think I get the picture now as to this guy. But if tens of thousands of people turn up to this rally what does that say?

That no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people?

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I would be less generous; Glenn Beck is an unhinged loon who helps give conservatism a bad name.

Which is unfortunate because, if I recall correctly, he's more of a libertarian than a conservative.

I could be wrong on that number, though.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Which is unfortunate because, if I recall correctly, he's more of a libertarian than a conservative.

I could be wrong on that number, though.

He's more of a social engineer than an economist, which is really the point of his whole rally. So, he's Neo-Con through and through. It cannot be overstated how much harm the talk radio crowd has done to American Conservatism.

[Zachstar]

I hope the cameras are rolling to expose the amount of racists the various claimed "moderate" rallies swarm with.

Keep the rallies coming! Every rally is a chance to expose the racists within it to the world.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

He's more of a social engineer than an economist, which is really the point of his whole rally. So, he's Neo-Con through and through. It cannot be overstated how much harm the talk radio crowd has done to American Conservatism.

Judging by the polls, I'm not sure he's done any harm at all.

Hey, I agree that the guy's a bit of a loon. But he certainly is striking a chord with people.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Which is unfortunate because, if I recall correctly, he's more of a libertarian than a conservative.

I could be wrong on that number, though.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

He's more of a social engineer than an economist, which is really the point of his whole rally. So, he's Neo-Con through and through. It cannot be overstated how much harm the talk radio crowd has done to American Conservatism.

I think he is an entertainer that will do anything for ratings. When he was on CNN he "acted" libertarian, when that fell through all of a sudden he turned conservative and went to fox. When fox dumps him he will change into anything the next station will pay him for.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Which is unfortunate because, if I recall correctly, he's more of a libertarian than a conservative.

I could be wrong on that number, though.

I suppose he could be qualified as a libertarian in some respects, but he's more of a Bob Barr than a Ron Paul. Tak is right about his social engineering. Whatever his economic beliefs, Beck has a very conservative moral message, which places him squarely in the ranks of traditional Republicans on most societal issues. Just look at the article. Not that I think there is anything wrong with that, so long as moral messages are not confused with policy.

I'm actually happy that Beck and the Tea Partiers are providing an impetus for a classic platform shift for Republicans, as they have a poor history of fulfilling the promises of smaller government and greater economic freedoms. It may not pay off in the elections this year or even in 2012(partially because the tea party is producing a bull-moose party effect), but it will pay off as this recession continues to drag on and the independents grow increasingly disillusioned with Democratic attempts at recovery. A free economy, I believe, is the most important element in liberty. Though I try to live by conservative moral codes it is anathema to me to try to impose them upon anyone else without their consent. With economic freedom comes societal freedom as people are freed from the shackles of subsistence. Socialism, and whatever so-called "third-way" euphemism is substituted for it, on the other hand, breeds dependence, poverty, and a reduction of liberties. Better to live in Singapore than India.

The silver lining to the two-party cloud is that the Dems will be forced to take the opposite tack from the Republicans' new platform/initiative and strain their vernacular and rhetoric to the maximum in an attempt to re-word Keynesianism, entitlement theory, and another kind of social engineering to remain viable by capturing extremist votes and swaying independents. Anything that forestalls their current agenda and expands free trade gets a plus in my book. On the flipside, the cloud itself is that it won't take long for voters, and therefore the Republicans and Democrats to readjust themselves and become Republicrats once again and we'll be stuck with this same crap thirty years from the end of the recession, just in a different toilet.

edit-

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

And one should not take dissatisfaction with the current party in power as tacit approval of the opposing party. That would be foolish. Personally, I am not happy with the current state of the Democratic Party governement, but at the same time cannot think of a single Republican candidate of whom I would be more confident. It is a sad state of affairs, and likely contributes to my disgust with the political.

Indeed they shouldn't, but they do, at least in sufficient numbers to be categorized as the "swing" vote. It's the natural result of a winner-takes-all system and a powerful government. Limited choice and concentrated power will always breed inefficiency, insufficiency, inequality, and dissatisfaction.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

Indeed they shouldn't, but they do, at least in sufficient numbers to be categorized as the "swing" vote. It's the natural result of a winner-takes-all system and a powerful government. Limited choice and concentrated power will always breed inefficiency, insufficiency, inequality, and dissatisfaction.

That's been my take on politics for about the last 15 years. I still belong to the Republican Party, but it is becoming a party that is increasingly distant from what it's stated ideals are, and overtly hostile to anyone who attempts to point that out.