Article Image
News Link • NeoCons

Glenn Beck is a Neocon (Not a Libertarian)

• YouTube
Glenn Beck is a Neocon (Not a Libertarian)

- Libertarianism?
For a New Liberty by Murray N. Rothbard
http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertyw...

18 Comments in Response to

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

 I'm in the Republican party and I can see Beck for what he is: a false-"opposition" cointelpro operative.  He's 0% libertarian.

Comment by Dixie Destroyer
Entered on:

Beck is puppet of the Globalist Elite...just like other Neocon mouthpieces "Pawn Vanity", "Bull O'Lielly" & Rush "Limblaah"!

 http://www.anu.org

 

Comment by Michael Shoen
Entered on:

Beck is a neo-con, sure as shooting. If he could wipe-out the lefties, he would march in lock step with the Bushies, the lying, anti-democratic, money-grubbing aristocrats who can't get enough war(s) in enough places fought by and against other peoples' children. A lot of what Beck has to say is correct. The only problem is that he is full-bore military-industrial-governmental complex oppressor statist. Beck would trash the "liberal" statists and replace them with the neo-con statists. Which is worse? They both are. Beck is playing to the grandstands. He is not playing for freedom.

Comment by Nick Barnett
Entered on:

Don, you completely missed the point. With Beck's "liberty" rhetoric, he entices people to join his "movement" of 9-12ers... which is a direct coop of the true liberty movement. He wants people to "remember how you felt on 9/12"... whats that? You want America to band together to kill terrorists? You want us to jump to conclusisons and demand retribution against a country? I was all for getting Bin Laden, but what does that have to do with invading Iraq?

 I'm getting off topic.

 Glenn Beck is a fake crying bafoon posing as a patriot to make the liberty movement look like a bunch of idiots. 95% of what he says is correct, its the 5% BS that he injects that make him more of a threat than help.

I don't expect everyone to be a passionate truther. I know how misinformed our public is. But, when someone can look at building 7... or even the towers falling at free fall speed and then tell me that there wasn't something else happening, you are not being honest with yourself. Its how Beck mentions "troofers", terrorists and communists in the same sentence that makes his motives so easy to understand.

When you say that Beck says the same thing as Ron Paul about 911, you are WAY off. Show me Ron Paul mentioning anything about truth seekers being terrorists... or Beck agreeing that it was caused by blowback.

Comment by Steve Freedom
Entered on:

It has been said before that trying to get a group of libertarians to agree is like trying to herd cats, can't be done.

I think that might be a good thing.

 You suggest that Beck is the puppet of Rupert Murdock and then ask how his loss of advertisers would adversely affect him. Well if you were Murdock you wouldn't want to be spending 50 million on a talking head that is so controversial that you can't get advertisers on his show and ever recoup your initial investment. So based on your assumption Murdock would simply order Beck to apologize to the groups he has offended and get the advertising dollars back.

So far, that isn’t happening.


Comment by Don Wills
Entered on:

Glenn Beck is not a truther. On that subject, Beck exhibits suspicion using language similar to Ron Paul's. Beck's exposé of Van Jones was primarily about Jones being a self-avowed communist, not about being a truther. So LoTek, are you saying anyone who's not a truther is a neocon (or worse)? I'm not sure what point you are trying to make about Beck other than you believe he's a deep agent for the Bilderbergs or the Trilateralists or some other evil cartel. LoTek, such an argument is ridiculous, and those who make it will be completely ignored by 99% of America.

LoTek, you are also misinformed about Beck's contracts and advertising. The advertising boycott by the left is causing sponsors to leave his TV show on Fox, which is of course governed by his contract with Murdoch's Fox. His syndicated radio program (the $50m 5 year contract you refer to) is with a subsidiary of Clear Channel. Advertising for and syndication of his radio program are doing just fine.

I am really sick of folks like LoTek and Ernie, who ostensibly love liberty, castigating those who may not be pure anarchists or truthers, but generally believe in liberty. STOP IT NOW!

Comment by Nick Barnett
Entered on:

While I agree with you about the insignificance of him losing sponsors, his $50mil contract is partially salaried and partially profit sharing through syndication... so unless his sponsors are causing a drop in syndicated stations, he ain't feelin it at all.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/05/glenn-beck-resigns-radio-_n_71123.html

Comment by Found Zero
Entered on:

The point doesn't necessary rely on Beck at all. I think most would admit that Glenn is impressionable and clearly emotionally unpredictable. So. Do you really think he's operating independently of Ruppert Murdock's handlers?

And the point of his altruism having anything to do with advertisers eludes me. Wouldn't we imagine his compensation to be sallaried and defined in contract?

Comment by Nick Barnett
Entered on:

While Beck might be a gateway drug to liberty, he is most certainly working in a COINTELPRO fashion. He went NUTS over Van Jones signing a 911 truth petition and then lumped the 911 truth movement in with the far left saying that people who want an investigation are communist, racist and a danger to our society.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqhGuCLqgF4&feature=player_embedded

He doesn't stop there... he's lumped the r3voLution into a category of terrorists as well, saying that those that believe in Ron Paul are violent and uncontrollable. Because of the "money bomb" on Nov 5th a few years ago, he is convinced that Ron Paul activists want to blow up the government, like Guy Fauks. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg8M2JBIoqo&feature=player_embedded

Beck does more harm than good.  Kurt Nimmo & Paul Joseph Watson @ infowars did an article on this very thing earlier this week.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/beck-parrots-white-house-information-czar-talking-point.html

Comment by Steve Freedom
Entered on:

Glenn Beck certainly was a neo-con and political views can change, that is the goal of most liberty activists isn't it? To bring attention to our ideas and to get others to wake up, correct? Or do we just hold signs by the freeway, distribute DVD’s, attend political functions etc for entertainment?  

Prior to seeing Ron Paul on a presidential debate in 2007 you could have fairly called me a neo-con, my political views did an about face after learning more about Paul and branching off from there in discovering the true intent of our founding fathers. You could say I had an awakening.

That is what seems to have taken place with Glenn Beck. He clearly isn't doing the libertarian stance for financial gain, do some research and you will see the vast majority of Beck’s advertisers have abandoned him because of a successful campaign by the extreme left to pressure companies not to advertise on his program. Watch one of his shows and you won’t find many commercials.

Had I received a hostile reception from the Ron Paul/Libertarians then I wouldn’t have became active in the movement. A litmus test should not be required, the basic principles are a good start, and then through others in the movement, they can learn of new ideas and expand their restricted views.  Is Beck the perfect libertarian? No.

However his message gets top millions everyday and he is passionate about liberty. He is waking up a lot of Neo-cons who would have been closed minded to hear such thought from nearly any other talking head on tv.

Beck has the Judge on the show either as a guest or to fill in for Beck very often and lets look at his recent statements against Bush, the Fed, expanded government, cap and trade, real id act, patriot act and a host of other stances that most here would agree with.

If liberty were a drug, think of Beck as the "gateway" drug.

 

 

Comment by Nick Barnett
Entered on:

Glenn Beck is beyond Neocon, he's a talking head for the CIA and puppet masters behind the scenes.

 His constant strawman arguments about "911 Troofers" wanting to get in bed with white supremacist and other hate groups is proof int he pudding.

 NO LIBERTARIAN or lIBERTARIAN would ever call for a value added tax for Americans to pay down our "debt" to the banksters.

Comment by Don Wills
Entered on:

Good discussion.

Brock - "libertarian" does not equate to "Libertarian". I try to be clear when I write about Libertarians (and the LP) and when I write about libertarians. They are not the same. Ron Paul is libertarian, not Libertarian. Glenn Beck is also not Libertarian, and is mostly libertarian. (Oh and by the way, Ron Paul isn't 100% libertarian.) Unfortunately, Bob Barr is Libertarian but is only somewhat libertarian.

My earlier comments about how anarchists are hurting the Libertarian Party still stand. I am happy for anarchists to be members of the LP and help elect liberty-loving candidates. I just don't understand why anarchists want to control the party. Anarchists demand purity for membership ("the pledge") and purity to become a candidate. They are much of the reason why the LP has been an abject failure in its first 39 years of existence. But that's not germane to this thread. The discussion about anarchists and the LP is only tangentially related to the discussion about how "libertarian"ish or "neocon"ish Glenn Beck is.

Comment by Don Wills
Entered on:

Oyate writes "Ultimately, I only see us winning with hardcore libertarians". Bzzt. Wrong. If the choir is only hardcore libertarians (ie. purists), then there will never be a "winning" libertarian. Our only hope is to destroy the GOP as it exists today, replacing it with a party (LP, CP or rebuilt GOP) based on the Jeffersonian principles of sovereignty of the states with a limited central government. History shows that government is inevitable in any society of more than a few families. We must strive to control it. Belief that we can somehow get to a paradise with only voluntary association and no taxes is fantasy, pure and simple.

Yes, Scott Brown is a RINO. He and McCain are two of a kind. And Bob Barr is no Libertarian. He may be 60% libertarian, but he is a pro-war conservative at heart who is a supporter of the first 5 amendments to the Constitution, and that's about it.

Unlike Barr, Glenn Beck is not an opportunist. IMO, he really believes what he's saying. He had no epiphany in his move toward libertarianism, it's been a gradual process. The point is that Glenn Beck has never proclaimed he is a Libertarian. Rather, he call's himself libertarian. It may only be 80% true, but he's more libertarian than any other talking head who has a one hour TV show today. I'm happy with his use of the word libertarian because he makes people understand and accept the concept.

Comment by Brock Lorber
Entered on:

Don, I'm curious about your math.  This "80% libertarian" you speak of has been applied to so many people I wonder how it is calculated.  What factors are measured, and what weighting are the individual factors given?

You mentioned also a "10% libertarian" with a countenance of pointing a metaphorical (I assume) weapon at that person.  Where is the dividing line between "OK to target" and "off limits"?  45% libertarian, the midpoint of your range?  Or is the scale logarithmic?

Just this week you identified anarchists as disastrous to the libertarian cause (whatever that is) and urged an anarchist purge.  Without benefit of your "% libertarian" formula it is tough to understand how Beck could be 80% libertarian and untouchable while anarchists are fair game.

Unless, the "target worthy" index is exponential with both ends of the scale flying off the chart and Glenn Beck defined as the center of the universe.  But if, as you say, Beck has been educating himself and transforming, then the center of the universe would be moving also.  Does the apex move with Glenn Beck, or is it independent?  If independent, then will Beck become fair game for criticism again once he has moved sufficiently towards full-blown libertarian?

Last, you identify Beck as the perfect sort of person for "our ranks" and "our cause".  Since all your remarks were addressed to Ernie, that is strange phraseology.  Ernie is one of those people you fantasize about purging from "our ranks" with the strong implication that you do not, in fact, share a cause.

This is all so confusing.  Perhaps, Don, you could publish an index of what "% libertarian" different people are (or, at least provide a "% libertarian" calculator).  I would think quarterly updates to the index would be appropriate, but you could probably make some money selling a monthly premium subscription.

Comment by Found Zero
Entered on:

It's inevitable. I'd recommend the "grin and bear it" approach. Glenn isn't just taking heat for being a lout, this is also a judgement on FoxNews. To not see this little cabal between them, Glenn and Palin is to miss the pointedly obvious: neocons are attempting to co-opt the language of liberty. To not make these distinctions and have these disputes seems sure to get us more like Brown in Mass: certainly no libertarian, not even a conservative, not really different from his opposition atall. It'll get us McCain back in AZ, a tenure that should have ended long ago.

When can we set our sights on clear libertarian candidates? When they are guaranteed victory? It seems to me the practical path is first we have to get in and start loosing. Hands down. And so far we're doing that pretty well.

Then with growth we might hope to divide the conservative ticket and start loosing to dems. I think then your argument will reach full fury. If we can effectively nullify the GOP by doing so, we'll be having a heck of an effect.

Ultimately, I only see us winning with hardcore libertarians, the nice chunk of GOP voters we can swing but the bulk from independents, principled non-voters coming back in and bringing apathetic non-voters to the polling booths.

This doesn't de-legitimatize the "change the GOP from within" approach, but it won't stop the battle between GOP and purists who seek other parties (LPUS, Constitution Party, etc.). That was a given from the get-go. A LOT of us made the concession to go with Dr. Paul to get the message out but I doubt you'll see that level of unity for a few cycles.

Comment by Powell Gammill
Entered on:

Glenn Beck strikes me as an opportunist.  I may b wrong.  Maybe he had a real conversion two years ago.  But prior to that he was a 100% Neocon. Pro-war, Pro-Bush, Anti-civil liberties, Pro-spending.

He definitely has mad a verbal 160 degree reversal and he did it on a dime.  Did he have an epiphany?  And was it freedom is the answer or that there was a market for libertarian ideas that he was in a position to milk?  I hope you are correct Don, and that he has genuinely changed.  But I am in the same situation as I was with Bob Barr --- with the damage he has done he has along way to go before I trust him.  Bob Barr didn't let me down.  He showed his neocon beliefs and actions the moment he had to make a overt decision, and he never looked back.  Some day Glenn Beck will be in a position where he will have to put up or shut up.  I hope he makes the liberty decision even though it may cost him.

Comment by Steve Freedom
Entered on:

Don,

 

Very good points you made.


Comment by Don Wills
Entered on:

Ernie Ernie Ernie - The video, produced in April 2009, is untimely and moderately dishonest. Your attack on Glenn Beck is just another fine example of libertarians denigrating those who are 80% libertarian instead of the focusing their sights on those who are 10% libertarian.

First, Glenn Beck did support TARP - BUT ONLY FOR THREE DAYS. He changed his position three days after the video clip in this youtube. Why didn't the youtube author include his recanting of support? Glenn Beck has apologized on several occasions for his initial agreement with Paulsen/Bush.

Second, yes Glenn Beck truly is a clown/alcoholic/entertainer. He's really good at the entertainer thing. So what? No, he's no Rothbard or Jefferson; he's just a common man. But importantly, he has been educating himself about politics for the last several years and the transformation toward distrust of government has been steady. (I've been a big fan since his radio/CNNHN days.)

Glenn Beck may not be the perfect libertarian like you Ernie, but he is no neocon. He distrusts government and reveres the founding fathers - philosophies that I doubt the Kristols and Dick Cheney share.

Ernie, it's time to stop the purity testing for use of the word libertarian. We need more folks like Glenn Beck, those who are more libertarian than not, to join our ranks. And attacks like yours do more damage than good in getting more to join our cause.


Join us on our Social Networks:

 

Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:


GoldMoney