Glenn Beck's Path To Libertarianism

[Matt Collins]

Posted on the Judge's Facebook page:

http://www.thefoxnation.com/judge-andrew-napolitano/2010/06/29/glenn-beck-and-judge-napolitano-afghanistan-oil-spill-obama-and-p



.

[emazur]

kinda weird how foxnation is embedding the clip from that leftist Media Matters, which considers Beck to be their arch nemesis (they're not too kind to Judge Nap either)

[heavenlyboy34]

RPFers really need to stop pretending Beck is a libertarian. :P

[payme_rick]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

[speciallyblend]

when did beck become a libertarian?? this is news to me!!

[payme_rick]

And don't hold back guys, you know that's the baddest-assed staircase ever...

[Matt Collins]

RPFers really need to stop pretending Beck is a libertarian. :PI never said he was, I was merely quoting what was posted to the Judge's FB page :cool:

[tremendoustie]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png


Lol, love it :D

Although I don't totally discount the idea that the guy's for real on some level.

[payme_rick]

Oh, there's no doubt in my mind he is real on many levels, and truely believes most of what he says a lot of the time... But a libertarian? Not so much...

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Still waiting for the pop. Did he apologize to Ron Paul domestic terrorists yet?

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h176/rev_chager/head-up-your-ass.jpg

[JeNNiF00F00]

..

[djdellisanti4]

Hannity is nowhere near libertarianism. Whenever I think of neo-con satan, I think of Hannity (and O'Reilly and Cheney sometimes).

[JeNNiF00F00]

..

[speciallyblend]

Exactly, thats the point. Anyone can label themselves. Doesn't mean its true. Most people who say they are libertarian aren't libertarian.

dam stinkin hippies:) next time i see hannity,beck and the rest of their crew!! screw the snowballs. i am going to throw marijuana buds at him;) knock him beside the head with ganja!! tar and feather version from the hippies:) throw buds at the neo-cons!!!!!

[JeNNiF00F00]

>:)

[djdellisanti4]

dam stinkin hippies:) next time i see hannity,beck and the rest of their crew!! screw the snowballs. i am going to throw marijuana buds at him;) knock him beside the head with ganja!! tar and feather version from the hippies:) throw buds at the neo-cons!!!!!

That would be an agregious waste of money my good sir. I'll just spit on em.

[TNforPaul45]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

Epic post is Epic

[TNforPaul45]

The interesting thing is Ben Gleck's book topic, "The Overton Window." With this new found focus on his part on Liberty topics, not only is he shifting the topic acceptability window to make Liberty Topics acceptable, he is shifting the window that lies UNDERNEATH, and making the neoconservative issues now appear to be THE actual Liberty topics.

Fascinating.

I will give him credit. I have caught his show online the past few days, and cannot disagree with much that he has talked about. He gets it right on a lot of things. But though we may agree on "the problems" he and his ilk have a much different "answer" in store than we Liberty Patriots.

Until he formally apologizes to Ron Paul's supporters for the things he has said and the attacks he has made, I will never ever trust him or look upon him with non critical eyes.

[Knightskye]

Posted on the Judge's Facebook page:

http://www.thefoxnation.com/judge-andrew-napolitano/2010/06/29/glenn-beck-and-judge-napolitano-afghanistan-oil-spill-obama-and-p

Couldn't he have posted links to the clips on YouTube?

Or maybe his producer runs his Twitter and Facebook accounts. I remember on one of the earliest episodes of "Freedom Watch" -- when it was still streaming online -- he turned to someone off-set and asked, "Do I have a Facebook?"


I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

Someone's paying him to become a libertarian?

Anyway, he has more than two million people watching him a night, and he's exposing them to Austrian economics and libertarian-ish thought.

We should be non-interventionist and let that run its course.

[libertybrewcity]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

perfect!

[RokiLothbard]

I wouldn't apply the label 'libertarian' to him yet either. I just hope if we are going to bash him, we do it because of specific anti-libertarian arguments he advances .... And for no other reasons.

[tremendoustie]

I wouldn't apply the label 'libertarian' to him yet either. I just hope if we are going to bash him, we do it because of specific anti-libertarian arguments he advances .... And for no other reasons.


+1 to that

[Uriel999]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

you win!

[AGRP]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

I would have added money on the step below him as well to illustrate his waivering stances.

[Elwar]

We should be non-interventionist and let that run its course.

Non-interventionism means not initiating force.

Glenn Beck attacked us first. We are allowed to defend ourselves.

[Southron]

Republicans destroyed the "conservative" label.

Now watch as they destroy "libertarian".

I'd say by next Presidential election we will know if Beck is a "true believer" or not.

[Elwar]

I'd say by next Presidential election we will know if Beck is a "true believer" or not.

He pretty much showed us in 2007 where he stands.

YouTube - Glenn Beck - Ron Paul - Terrorism? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg8M2JBIoqo)

[Southron]

He pretty much showed us in 2007 where he stands.


Many people here are saying he has changed though. I'm just saying if he promotes Mitt Romney then that should be their answer.

[Elwar]

Many people here are saying he has changed though. I'm just saying if he promotes Mitt Romney then that should be their answer.

Has he changed since February 2010?

YouTube - Scumbag Glenn Beck demonizes Debra Medina (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8aKN_FaNsk&feature=related)

And for those that say that Medina didn't do well in the interview...just listen to how Glenn Beck treats a libertarian candidate from the beginning to minute 6. "Ok, whatever...I asked...who...ARE...you?"

[Slutter McGee]

VICTIMS. WE ARE ALL VICTIMS OF GLENN BECK.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[RonwasRight]

There's a lot about Glenn Beck I do not agree with... And a lot I don't know... Will he backstab us when elections come around? I don't know yet, and unlike some others, I will not judge him for what I don't know yet. I know he, in the very typical neocon fashion, lambasted Ron Paul in 2007. I could have never dreamed back then that a leading pundit on FOX news would be introducing people to Hayek and libertarian principles... and to Ron Paul! or Rand Paul! and Peter Schiff! and Judge Napolitano! in 2010. I am wary of Beck, but that doesn't discredit the work he has done in our favor. I can't count how many people I have run into that are now completely understanding and responsive to libertarian ideas.. that gave me the same old tired neocon lines when I tried so hard in 2007. If Beck is part of some big plan to suck libertarians and moderates back into the neocon fold in 2012, I will judge him for it then.... but right now I am not standing on a high enough horse to see that far.

I hope you all don't treat Beck's audience like you treat Beck's rhetoric. We can't afford such divisiveness.

[Elwar]

Can all of the Glenn Beck supporters at least consider a "3 strikes and you're out"? He's attacked our candidates twice so far when it's really counted. WHEN he does it again will you stop with the "At least he's bringing a lot of people to our message"?

[Elwar]

"He is, you know, on occassion a demagogue."
"He has been pretty discourteous."

--Ron Paul

YouTube - Glenn Beck Exposed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFGr-SYyrZE&NR=1)

[payme_rick]

Someone's paying him to become a libertarian?
.
No, my wonderful work of art here illustrates Glenn Beck's realization that there's a lot of money to be made by attatching himself to libertarianism.. He is currently at the top of the stairs .. But that does not mean I feel he is a libertarian, the "libertarianism" in the drawing is just a word on a sign, not actually the mindset/phylosophy of libertarianism.. The sign is also oval-like, not square, symbolizing Glenn Beck's need to separate himself from the Rush's and Sean's of the talk-right, whose arguments are the basic (square) arguments of the right...

[Slutter McGee]

Can all of the Glenn Beck supporters at least consider a "3 strikes and you're out"? He's attacked our candidates twice so far when it's really counted. WHEN he does it again will you stop with the "At least he's bringing a lot of people to our message"?

Maybe, when people here start recognizing the dramatic changes seen in his rhetoric over the last few years. I have never, not once, said we should embrace Beck as a champion of our movement. I simply think that we should not go out of our way to attack a man who is doing a hell of a lot for the message of liberty, no matter what his actual motivations are.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Romulus]

glen beck is just a blogger, who happens to have a tv show.

[Slutter McGee]

glen beck is just a blogger, who happens to have a tv show.


Who happens to reach millions of people and introduces them to the road to serfdom.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Elwar]

Maybe, when people here start recognizing the dramatic changes seen in his rhetoric over the last few years. I have never, not once, said we should embrace Beck as a champion of our movement. I simply think that we should not go out of our way to attack a man who is doing a hell of a lot for the message of liberty, no matter what his actual motivations are.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Gotcha...so the Republican that supports the Patriot Act and the Bush bailout should be supported now that he's changed his mind about the government (which coincidentally happened to change when Democrats gained control).

I do believe Hannity and Rush are now libertarians as well. I heard them talking bad about our current administration a few times.

Oh ya, and Dick Cheney has also joined libertarians in being against the government.

Looks like there are a lot of people seeing the light.

[MRoCkEd]

Gotcha...so the Republican that supports the Patriot Act and the Bush bailout should be supported now that he's changed his mind.

We should welcome people changing their mind and becoming more libertarian. How many people on this forum used to support unlibertarian things?

Unlike Beck, Hannity, Rush, Cheney have never show opposition to the PATRIOT Act, Federal War on Drugs, Federal Departments, Federal Reserve, our military empire.

[erowe1]

Oh, there's no doubt in my mind he is real on many levels, and truely believes most of what he says a lot of the time...

I don't know if that's true. But it doesn't really matter.

He could be a congentital liar who truly believes TARP was great one minute, when that's what he's saying, and then truly believes it was terrible the next minute, when that's what he's saying. But really, what difference does it make if his shiftiness is done by some kind of psyching himself out to make himself believe what he says, or if it's just acting, like his crying all the time is? It's 6 of one half-a-dozen of the other.

[payme_rick]

We should welcome people changing their mind and becoming more libertarian. How many people on this forum used to support unlibertarian things?

Unlike Beck, Hannity, Rush, Cheney have never show opposition to the PATRIOT Act, Federal War on Drugs, Federal Departments, Federal Reserve, our military empire.

I for one used to support UNlibertarian things and was neo-conservativish...

I've always admitted that listening to Glenn Beck etc... helped in my progression to being a libertarian or whatever you may call it, but I can't say GB is a libertarian (which is what the original post was about)... sure, I hear him say libertarian things, I've heard him transition from more neocon talking points to libertarian ones. But then as recently as 5 months ago he pretty much endorsed a candidate that you'd think he'd agree with 50% of the time over a candidate you'd feel he'd agree with 95% of the time...

I gave him the benefit of the doubt over his comments about Ron Paul supporters two years ago because it seemed he had made an honest change from then... 5 months ago he hit the reset button...

He can talk all he wants, but until he shows me he's actually ready to support libertarians over liberal republicans and neocons on a consistant basis, he's a silver-tongued devil...

[Slutter McGee]

Gotcha...so the Republican that supports the Patriot Act and the Bush bailout should be supported now that he's changed his mind about the government (which coincidentally happened to change when Democrats gained control).

I do believe Hannity and Rush are now libertarians as well. I heard them talking bad about our current administration a few times.

Oh ya, and Dick Cheney has also joined libertarians in being against the government.

Looks like there are a lot of people seeing the light.

Yeah, apparently you don't actually listen to the man, or you would realize there is a stark difference between what he says, and what Hannity and Rush say. I am not saying I know what is in the man's heart, or what his motivations are. But damnit, neither do you.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Nate]

I for one used to support UNlibertarian things and was neo-conservativish...

I've always admitted that listening to Glenn Beck etc... helped in my progression to being a libertarian or whatever you may call it, but I can't say GB is a libertarian (which is what the original post was about)... sure, I hear him say libertarian things, I've heard him transition from more neocon talking points to libertarian ones. But then as recently as 5 months ago he pretty much endorsed a candidate that you'd think he'd agree with 50% of the time over a candidate you'd feel he'd agree with 95% of the time...

I gave him the benefit of the doubt over his comments about Ron Paul supporters two years ago because it seemed he had made an honest change from then... 5 months ago he hit the reset button...

He can talk all he wants, but until he shows me he's actually ready to support libertarians over liberal republicans and neocons on a consistant basis, he's a silver-tongued devil...

^this

Beck has stabbed this movement in the back twice when it actually counted. Talk is cheap. His actions speak louder.

I love the fact he did a show on Hayek's Road to Serfdom but when he has had the chance to help us get off that road he sided with the aristocracy in trying to make us into serfs.

[PermanentSleep]

I would have added money on the step below him as well to illustrate his waivering stances.

lol.

[Slutter McGee]

Damnit. I am actually not a huge Beck fan. I sometimes like him, and sometimes don't. But the nonsensical arguments used against him force me into defending the man. Maybe I should give it up, and just let yall go into you circle jerk diatribe against the man every other thread.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Elwar]

Yeah, apparently you don't actually listen to the man, or you would realize there is a stark difference between what he says, and what Hannity and Rush say. I am not saying I know what is in the man's heart, or what his motivations are. But damnit, neither do you.


I listened to him right up to the Medina interview, sometimes completely through his radio show on my 3 hour commute.

And I use to listen to Hannity on my commute as well. He claims to be a libertarian, he always talks about how he's for individual liberty and personal responsibility. Why aren't people voicing their support of Hannity on here? He's had Rand Paul on, he has a huge audience, he's for individual liberty, he's been against the government a lot here recently...maybe he's changed.

[Slutter McGee]

I listened to him right up to the Medina interview, sometimes completely through his radio show on my 3 hour commute.

And I use to listen to Hannity on my commute as well. He claims to be a libertarian, he always talks about how he's for individual liberty and personal responsibility. Why aren't people voicing their support of Hannity on here? He's had Rand Paul on, he has a huge audience, he's for individual liberty, he's been against the government a lot here recently...maybe he's changed.

Beck has Thomas Woods and many other legit libertarians on his show.
Beck spends an hour on tv talking about the road to serfdom.
Beck has relaxed his past miltant foreign policy.
Beck argued for constitutional protections for accused terrorists who are citizens.
Beck said that we should rethink the federal war in drugs.
Beck has attacked the intitution and the policies that is the FED.
Beck has recently argued that we should stop funding other countries (except Israel)..I admit, not consistent but better.

Look you don't have to believe Beck. But there is no compairison between him and Hannity...who has said none of the above. The argument that if we have to accept Beck as a changed man then we must also accept Hannity is nothing more than a logical fallacy.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[constituent]

Who happens to reach millions of people and introduces them to the road to serfdom.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

I love it. he throws you a bone, you yap like a terrier. :)

[constituent]

Beck has Thomas Woods and many other legit libertarians on his show.
Beck spends an hour on tv talking about the road to serfdom.
Beck has relaxed his past miltant foreign policy.
Beck argued for constitutional protections for accused terrorists who are citizens.
Beck said that we should rethink the federal war in drugs.
Beck has attacked the intitution and the policies that is the FED.
Beck has recently argued that we should stop funding other countries (except Israel)..I admit, not consistent but better.

Does any of it really matter? He's a talking head.



Look you don't have to believe Beck. But there is no compairison between him and Hannity...who has said none of the above.

I don't believe either statement here can be made absolutely. In fact, if I cared, I could make a number of valid comparisons between what Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity say.

So what?



The argument that if we have to accept Beck as a changed man then we must also accept Hannity is nothing more than a logical fallacy.

So is the argument that "we" have to "accept Beck as a changed man."

Reminder: He's just a talking head.

Thanks. :)

[Slutter McGee]

I love it. he throws you a bone, you yap like a terrier. :)

Yeah. Thats a rather LARGE fucking bone.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Slutter McGee]

So is the argument that "we" have to "accept Beck as a changed man."

Reminder: He's just a talking head.

Thanks. :)

Umm no. I was pointing out the logical fallacy in others using that argument. Reading comprehension my friends.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[constituent]

Umm no. I was pointing out the logical fallacy in others using that argument.

Who?

[Slutter McGee]

Who?

God. You could read the thread but here you go.



He claims to be a libertarian, he always talks about how he's for individual liberty and personal responsibility. Why aren't people voicing their support of Hannity on here? He's had Rand Paul on, he has a huge audience, he's for individual liberty, he's been against the government a lot here recently...maybe he's changed.


I do believe Hannity and Rush are now libertarians as well. I heard them talking bad about our current administration a few times.

Oh ya, and Dick Cheney has also joined libertarians in being against the government.

Looks like there are a lot of people seeing the light.

There you go,

Slutter McGee

[constituent]

God. You could read the thread but here you go.






There you go,

Slutter McGee

No one said anything about accepting Hannity in either of the posts you quoted. :confused:

Can you refute any of the specific claims in those posts? I doubt it.

BTW, I read the thread. That's how I knew you were pulling the statement out of your rear. :)

[erowe1]

No one said anything about accepting Hannity in either of the posts you quoted.

What do you mean by "accepting"?

I never understand why people here (not just you, but all the time), every time Glenn Beck comes up talk about whether or not we should "support" him or "accept" him. He's not a politician. Nobody's donating money to him or voting for him.

[constituent]

What do you mean by "accepting"?

I never understand why people here (not just you, but all the time), every time Glenn Beck comes up talk about whether or not we should "support" him or "accept" him. He's not a politician. Nobody's donating money to him or voting for him.

Yea, exactly. It's not what I mean by "accepting," it's what slutter meant by "accept."

You and I agree on this point. :)

[Slutter McGee]

No one said anything about accepting Hannity in either of the posts you quoted. :confused:

Can you refute any of the specific claims in those posts? I doubt it.

BTW, I read the thread. That's how I knew you were pulling the statement out of your rear. :)


Oh give me a break. The meaning of what he said was "If we are to believe Glenn is a changed man....then why not Hannity or Rush also...since they are now anti-Government"

That is pretty obviously the meaning. And there is no CLAIM in those posts. There is fallacy. That is my point. I pulled nothing from my ass. I guess I still have the stick in it.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[erowe1]

Yea, exactly. It's not what I mean by "accepting," it's what slutter meant by "accept."

You and I agree on this point. :)

I see that now. I assume when Slutter said "accept that he's a changed man" he was still on the topic of the thread (or rather the rabit trail that came of the thread) about whether or not Beck's a "libertarian" or more libertarian than certain others or whatever (as in whether or not "accepting" the claim that he's a libertarian as a true claim must also entail "accepting" the same claim about Hannity et al).

Truth be told, this whole motif of arguing about whether or not the label "libertarian" applies to someone is another pet peeve of mine.

Libertarians really are a lot like fundamentalists in a lot of ways.

[Slutter McGee]

I see that now. I assume when Slutter said "accept that he's a changed man" he was still on the topic of the thread (or rather the rabit trail that came of the thread) about whether or not Beck's a "libertarian" or more libertarian than certain others or whatever (as in whether or not "accepting" the claim that he's a libertarian as a true claim must also entail "accepting" the same claim about Hannity et al.

Yeah thats exactly what I meant. Hannity and Rush have no bearing on Beck. It doesn't matter. That doesn't mean I must accept Beck as a libertarian. Simply that my acceptance is not contingent on also accepting Hannity and Rush.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[JK/SEA]

Still waiting for the pop. Did he apologize to Ron Paul domestic terrorists yet?

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h176/rev_chager/head-up-your-ass.jpg

I want mine in writing. Dated and signed, and notarized.

[Slutter McGee]

Everybody demands an apology. Damn you guys sound like liberals. Beck doesn't "owe" us anything. And we don't "owe" Beck anything. So he called me a terrorist. I don't care. It is called testicular fortitude.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[payme_rick]

Alrighty, Slutter and the rest, walk with me for a second... I hardly attack the more pro-Beckish crowd and I'm not going to here, but I'm going to explain some things...

We here that do attack Glenn Beck do so out of a fear he is leading people down the wrong path when it comes to the END RESULT... he absolutely HAS to be different because as the 3rd most listened to talk show in America, it has to be different from the first two (Hannity and Limbo, which Hannity echos Limbo) in order to stand out...

Now, I'm going to go ahead and give you guys the benefit of the doubt here and say you're right about Glenn, for the sake of making the following analogy...

Glenn Beck has said screw it, "I'm gunna go sky-diving!" ("I'm gunna realize I've been wrong all of these years and go ahead and go all-in with libertarianism")...

All the way up to jumping altitude, Beck is saying "Man, this is the right thing to do, this is going to be GREAT!" ("we need to get rid of these moderate republicans, get back to the constitution, restore liberty, gain our freedoms back, start being individuals)...

The pilot says "Okay guys, get ready to jump, we're almost at jumping altitude.", Beck says "Alright, let's do it" ("look at what can happen when we decide we're going to take our country back, we're so close, we need to keep pushing forward.")

Pilot says "Jump!"... Beck walks to the exit, steps to the edge and says "Wait a minute, not the right time" and sits back down ("uhmmm think Texas may need to stick with Rick Perry here")..

Now, this is fine if Glenn Beck decides this himself, but unfortunately this is a tandem jump, and even more unfortunate: Beck is the instructor...

A lot of Beck's audience are people who were once brainwashed by the likes of Hannity and Rush... some for a short period of time and a lot for way too long... they finally woke up... this voice from the #3 spot appealed to them, made sense, so they got on the plane with that guy... but just as they hung by every work Rush or Hannity said, they're now doing it with Beck... when Beck says "no, don't jump!", they don't...

I'm sure you and the folks like you on this board jump all of the time, Slutter... but it's the ones who don't that make me feel Glenn Beck is dangerous, very dangerous... (another analogy alert)... sure, his lake is big, and has clean water in it for the most part... but liberty is below his dam, and he's not letting any water out...

[JenH88]

<sigh> this is an example of what i hate about the movement.. not everyone in our ranks is going to be the same, think the same, believe all the same stuff. we're supposed to be supportive of individuals.. all i see is collectivism..

i absolutely think beck is a talking head.. most likely controlled opposition.. but he has a huge following.. that's hunting ground for us!.. we can't hunt on that ground by completely alienating the owner..

you don't need to believe everything he says, you don't need to buy his books or listen to his radio show.. but geez- i'm sick of all this party affiliation "team" thinking.. yes im a libertarian- but the team im on is for LIBERTY. if someone wants to help our team, even if it's just on certain topics or only at certain times- i welcome it with open arms! we need all the help we can get!

if our message gets hijacked (like we've seen happen to the tea party movement, and now we're seeing it with the "libertarian" label) we need to get out there in force and bring the true message back! not lay back moping about how they stole our concepts.. free market concepts baby!

[payme_rick]

and now we're seeing it with the "libertarian" label) we need to get out there in force and bring the true message back! !

That's what we're trying to do here... Beck is holding a large portion of the liberty movement hostage right now, and until he shows up in nut-cuttin' time we gotta let his followers know not to follow his lead... read my horrible anaolgies :D

[Baptist]

Glenn Beck is a libertarian?


http://urbandiner.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/judas-goat-at-work.jpg

http://www.myptsmail.com/hotdog256/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/benedict_arnold.jpg

[FreeTraveler]

I don't have the first clue if Glenn Beck is a libertarian or not. This from someone who voted for Ron Paul the FIRST time he ran for president.

What I do know, conclusively, is that a lot of friends and family members who have thought I was nuts for most of my life are now asking me questions about liberty. To a man, I have that shill Glenn Beck to thank for the interest.

If he's in place to provide disinfo, the elite screwed the pooch. He's waking a lot of intelligent people up. For the most part, they're also intelligent enough to recognize when he gets off-message and starts singing a statist tune.

[someperson]

Labels are made to be hijacked. Named groups are made to be coopted. Well... not literally, but, in the end, that's just the way the world works. A nameless organization of individuals who come together based on ideas is far more difficult to target. This type of dynamic organization was ubiquitous during the 2008 campaign.

[payme_rick]

Alrighty, Slutter and the rest, walk with me for a second... I hardly attack the more pro-Beckish crowd and I'm not going to here, but I'm going to explain some things...

We here that do attack Glenn Beck do so out of a fear he is leading people down the wrong path when it comes to the END RESULT... he absolutely HAS to be different because as the 3rd most listened to talk show in America, it has to be different from the first two (Hannity and Limbo, which Hannity echos Limbo) in order to stand out...

Now, I'm going to go ahead and give you guys the benefit of the doubt here and say you're right about Glenn, for the sake of making the following analogy...

Glenn Beck has said screw it, "I'm gunna go sky-diving!" ("I'm gunna realize I've been wrong all of these years and go ahead and go all-in with libertarianism")...

All the way up to jumping altitude, Beck is saying "Man, this is the right thing to do, this is going to be GREAT!" ("we need to get rid of these moderate republicans, get back to the constitution, restore liberty, gain our freedoms back, start being individuals)...

The pilot says "Okay guys, get ready to jump, we're almost at jumping altitude.", Beck says "Alright, let's do it" ("look at what can happen when we decide we're going to take our country back, we're so close, we need to keep pushing forward.")

Pilot says "Jump!"... Beck walks to the exit, steps to the edge and says "Wait a minute, not the right time" and sits back down ("uhmmm think Texas may need to stick with Rick Perry here")..

Now, this is fine if Glenn Beck decides this himself, but unfortunately this is a tandem jump, and even more unfortunate: Beck is the instructor...

A lot of Beck's audience are people who were once brainwashed by the likes of Hannity and Rush... some for a short period of time and a lot for way too long... they finally woke up... this voice from the #3 spot appealed to them, made sense, so they got on the plane with that guy... but just as they hung by every work Rush or Hannity said, they're now doing it with Beck... when Beck says "no, don't jump!", they don't...

I'm sure you and the folks like you on this board jump all of the time, Slutter... but it's the ones who don't that make me feel Glenn Beck is dangerous, very dangerous... (another analogy alert)... sure, his lake is big, and has clean water in it for the most part... but liberty is below his dam, and he's not letting any water out...

No? too true to dispute, or too silly to bother with?

[Knightskye]

"You don't shred the Constitution ever."

I mean, he did have the Judge sitting right next to him -- not that he would threaten anyone -- but that has to be uncomfortable.

[osan]

I shall illustrate via Microsoft Paint:

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3416/gbpath.png

That is bloody HILARIOUS. Thanks for making me laugh. I needed that.

[osan]

lol im afraid it will never happen. Next thing you know Palin is going to get in on the Libertarian action and some people in the forums will rejoice. Its the new buzzword in the studio. Even Hannity thinks hes a Libertarian.

And here we zero in on a centrally significant issue in politics: the morphing of terms. Look at what has happened to terms like "liberal" - I am a true "liberal" - a "classic" liberal, which is in modern terms what we call a "libertarian". But look at what the term has come to mean - a person suffering from deep seated psychosis believing in the impossible and willing to condone the application of deadly force against others in order to see it realized. HELLO.

"Conservative" - I would consider myself a true conservative, which is no different than libertarian from where I stand - yet consider what that has become - pretty similar to the modern liberal in its parochialism, differing in details... but who here thinks that being mastered by religious freaks is any better than materialist atheists? Hell is hell.

[osan]

I don't know if that's true. But it doesn't really matter.

He could be a congentital liar who truly believes TARP was great one minute, when that's what he's saying, and then truly believes it was terrible the next minute, when that's what he's saying. But really, what difference does it make if his shiftiness is done by some kind of psyching himself out to make himself believe what he says, or if it's just acting, like his crying all the time is? It's 6 of one half-a-dozen of the other.

More to the salient point: far too many people rely on the likes of Beck for "guidance". It is insane and it demonstrates several profound problems with people in general. First, that they need "leaders" in lieu of well-informed and intelligent self-direction. This is the error that humans repeat generation after generation and with no end in sight. They are uneducated in general, untrained in the concepts of liberty, and therefore look to others to show them where to go and how to think because they do not have the first notion what "freedom" really means.

They are fearful because true liberty is a coin of two sides. The one side is the "do what thou wilt" side and is so appealing to the mob. The other side is the compensating component - the shit-scary side wherein the risks and dangers lie - the side that most people seem to be in wholesale objection to such that they would rather the proverbial tranquility of their safe little slavery than the bracing contest of liberty.

Add to all of this the large amounts of work required to be free. People are generally lazy and want to do as little as possible for their bread. Given a choice of true liberty and slavery disguised as liberty, they choose the latter almost every time because it requires so much less of them.

Then there is the notion of personal responsibility, a concept the wad avoids with greater diligence than any plague mankind has ever known. We would rather be slaves in a gilt cage paid for by someone else than to be freemen living in a hovel to which we possess clear title. We WANT the ability to slip on that floor in WalMart so that our lives will be enriched at the expense of another. It is the childhood fantasy of discovering hidden treasure gone wholly awry and amok. Such is the nature of our collective lottery mentality.

Being free means being accountable for all one does and thinks and feels. This is out of the question for most, so they glom on to the Becks and Hannitys of the world who hold no advantage over anyone else on the planet save one: the balls to stand up and act as if they were in charge, and in so doing are given a greater or lesser degree of the consent of the mob, who fall for it every single time.

It is this all-so-easily-exploited characteristic of the human animal that dooms the majority to perpetual slavery and inevitable destruction - either because they refuse to or are incapable of breaking themselves of this most unfortunate habit or trait. This is why we are likely doomed, because this truth and the determination of those who would dominate coupled with the ever lengthening levers afforded them by technology places the mob in a state of ever growing hopelessness with each passing day.

Are the 3%ers enough to overcome this tidal surge of ever increasing centralized control? I hope so, but my faith is not that strong. The allure of the gilt cage is powerful and what can the 3% do against 97% that has been set so squarely against them?

All this seeming defeatism aside - what can one DO to help the lovers of the cage change? Is there anything? How does one divert the attention away from the Becks and onto the notion of self-direction - self-leadership? How is the mob to become trained in the basics of liberty? How are they made to want to become comfortable with the package deal that liberty represents? How are they convinced that liberty is always better than the cage of golden bars?

Or is the better answer completely foreign in tack? It may well be that the mob is irrelevant so long as they can be kept diverted or otherwise mollified. If they become non-factors in the effort to restore liberty to this land, then the 3%ers have a far smaller set of targets with which to deal, namely the active culprits. The questions then revolve around the means of neutralizing and preferably destroying the usurpers while keeping the mob out of the fight. Can it be done?

[payme_rick]

That was pretty well said, osan.. Gunna think about that for a minute..

[osan]

Until he formally apologizes to Ron Paul's supporters for the things he has said and the attacks he has made, I will never ever trust him or look upon him with non critical eyes.

Your eyes should not deviate from this practice even if Beck gets on his knees, crying out his apologies with tears flowing like the Mississippi.

I do not care who it is - even Ron Paul must be regarded with caution. People have to have sufficient sense of what proper liberty is in order to be able to know when what is being proposed has gone off the rails. This utter dependence on and trust in third parties to do all the work has been the destruction of this nation. It has to stop or we may as well throw in the towel right now. We have to be able to think for ourselves and stop relying on the messiah-du-jour to tell us what to do, where to go, and what to think and feel.

[osan]

There's a lot about Glenn Beck I do not agree with... And a lot I don't know... Will he backstab us when elections come around?

...

I hope you all don't treat Beck's audience like you treat Beck's rhetoric. We can't afford such divisiveness.

THis is what I am talking about. Forget Beck and the rest and start thinking for yourselves. This is the only way.

The libertarian movement needs a media outlet of its own - one that puts control of what it pur out there fully into the right hands. The MSM cannot be trusted to the ends of our noses. The Becks are part of that, so forget them. A briadcast medium is needed - fighting fire with water. The MSM is so effective because of what they ARE - Marshall McLuhan had it right: "the medium IS the message".

Someone else mentioned this a week or so ago - a broadcast channel/site that takes the control away from MSM and places it squarely in the hands of liberty minded people.

[TNforPaul45]

THis is what I am talking about. Forget Beck and the rest and start thinking for yourselves. This is the only way.

The libertarian movement needs a media outlet of its own - one that puts control of what it pur out there fully into the right hands. The MSM cannot be trusted to the ends of our noses. The Becks are part of that, so forget them. A briadcast medium is needed - fighting fire with water. The MSM is so effective because of what they ARE - Marshall McLuhan had it right: "the medium IS the message".

Someone else mentioned this a week or so ago - a broadcast channel/site that takes the control away from MSM and places it squarely in the hands of liberty minded people.

Osan,

I do agree with you that we must start thinking for ourselves. I sincerely believe that this board is evidence that thought is once again taking hold among our countrymen.

We really have two options in trying to continue this spread of free, unrestricted thought. You mention "thinking for ourselves." this is the first course. Change the minds of the public, and you render the tow the line rhetoric of the mass media and "messiahs" irrelevant forever.

Or we can try to beat the media at their own game and launch our own outlet. I believe that the barrier to entry to doing this is way too high, and those that hold the strings of power in the media would make sure that even If we overcame that barrier to entry to launch, we would not last long.

So it looks like option one is the best way to go, and the actions of the liberty movement have complimented this notion.

The focus on Beck is due to this: if we can't beat the media at their own game and launch our own media outlet, then we try and convert them one by one at the same time that we awaken the public to free thought. There would be little focus on Beck BUT he has drawn the focus to himself by flirting with the liberty movement. The very fact of having some of the most patriotic thinkers on the air like Thomas Woods means that his state of mind is open to discussion and focus. The desire is to have him move from being lukewarm to being hot and steaming for liberty themed causes.

My fear is that he will warm up to liberty just enough, under false pretenses, to lure enough newly awakened minds back to the faux GOP tea party and then shift both of his "overton windows" to present the problem to them as the new solution, an old trick.