Glenn Beck at CPAC

[Belmont31R]

For fans and those interested here is Glenn Beck's keynote speech at CPAC. Its long but very good, and digs at the heart of the road forward for true freedom loving people.



http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/4881432

[Bulldog1967]

Very nice, I don't think I ever heard someone call out RINOs like he just did.

[Belmont31R]

Very nice, I don't think I ever heard someone call out RINOs like he just did.




I liked his "punch" at Dick Cheney who also spoke at CPAC......;)

[Palmguy]

Very passionate and optimistic, and of course it was absolutely not a Democrat bashfest. He spent more time calling out the Republicans. He had said over the past few weeks that he wouldn't be making friends with this speech.

Well done, Glenn.

[Armati]

Heard it on CSPAN radio. I think he hit it out of the park.

Political Establishment, are you listening?...

[tibis3383]

I just finished watching it and am speechless. It is an hour long but I recommend that everybody watches this.

Semper Fi

Tim

[JackOSU]

Very well done. Definately worth an hour of my time.

[lethal dose]

Beautiful. Only problem I see is a weak 3rd party starting consuming useless votes. I hope not. Good speech.

[M4arc]

Beautiful. Only problem I see is a weak 3rd party starting consuming useless votes. I hope not. Good speech.

I don't agree any more. I say that because I almost always want to vote 3rd party but never do for this very reason but right now, with the way our country is heading at the hands of the two parties I will vote 3rd party (if it alines with my views) regardless.

[Gutshot John]

I don't agree any more.

I don't either nor do I agree that any incumbent deserves to hold his/her job.

These interests are too entrenched and their lackeys in congress have lost their fear of us. We either restore it through the electoral process or things will get nasty.

However I don't believe that Beck has anyone's but his own interests at heart. Too much barnum there for me to be a fan.

[M4arc]

I don't either nor do I agree that any incumbent deserves to hold his/her job.

These interests are too entrenched and their lackeys in congress have lost their fear of us. We either restore it through the electoral process or things will get nasty.

Absolutely. In fact, and I've said it several times here, I'm at the point where I believe everyone that is currently serving in Congress should be voted out the next time they're up for re-election.

Except for Brown because he just got in and hasn't been part of the 2007-present downfall.

[ralph]

Absolutely. In fact, and I've said it several times here, I'm at the point where I believe everyone that is currently serving in Congress should be voted out the next time they're up for re-election.

Except for Brown because he just got in and hasn't been part of the 2007-present downfall.

You're right..I'll go one step farther, There should be term limits on ALL offices, None of them were designed to be continuously occupied by the same person.. Of course, the chances of the pigs voting themselves away from the trough, are about zero...

[lethal dose]

You're right..I'll go one step farther, There should be term limits on ALL offices, None of them were designed to be continuously occupied by the same person.. Of course, the chances of the pigs voting themselves away from the trough, are about zero...
Agreed... with the exception of Ron paul. Haha.

[Gutshot John]

You're right..I'll go one step farther, There should be term limits on ALL offices, None of them were designed to be continuously occupied by the same person.. Of course, the chances of the pigs voting themselves away from the trough, are about zero...

I agree in spirit but that needs to be part of electorate's mindset rather than a strict legal limit. Legislating term limits are kind of like the grip safety on a 1911. It's only necessary when the shooter isn't doing what he's supposed to.

Lame ducks can either be weak or dangerous. A politician with "nothing to lose" can do significant damage and is freed from the electorate's wrath. Politicians should always have to answer to their constituents and establishing term limits frees them from that concern.

Case in point Barry O: "I'd rather be a 'really good' one-term President than a 'mediocre' two-term President."

Admittedly he's self-limiting but he can do a lot of damage in the time he has left and that ain't good. I actually wish he was the "slick chicago pol" because at least then self-interest in getting re-elected would trump ideology. Unfortunately he isn't.

[Armati]

Beautiful. Only problem I see is a weak 3rd party starting consuming useless votes. I hope not. Good speech.

The place to fight that battle is in the primary. Vote for the most pro-constitution person on the ticket. This is what happened in NY-23. The RINO had to drop out.

I have no particular love for the Republicans but a third party will be the Perot gambit all over again. Our electoral system is quite simply not structured to support a third party.

[d90king]

Well done. I think he calls it simply as he see's it... I just hope that "they" are listening!

[Gutshot John]

The place to fight that battle is in the primary. Vote for the most pro-constitution person on the ticket. This is what happened in NY-23. The RINO had to drop out.

And who won?

TANSTAAFL. Pick your battles carefully.

RINO or otherwise I can't think of a single Republican that deserves to be re-elected in 2010/2012/2014. None, nada, zip.

[uwe1]

I agree in spirit but that needs to be part of electorate's mindset rather than a strict legal limit. Legislating term limits are kind of like the grip safety on a 1911. It's only necessary when the shooter isn't doing what he's supposed to.

Lame ducks can either be weak or dangerous. A politician with "nothing to lose" can do significant damage and is freed from the electorate's wrath. Politicians should always have to answer to their constituents and establishing term limits frees them from that concern.

Case in point Barry O: "I'd rather be a 'really good' one-term President than a 'mediocre' two-term President."

Admittedly he's self-limiting but he can do a lot of damage in the time he has left and that ain't good. I actually wish he was the "slick chicago pol" because at least then self-interest in getting re-elected would trump ideology. Unfortunately he isn't.

I've been a believer in term limits in congress for quite some time now, but you raise a valid and interesting point. However, your solution requires that the electorate is actually informed or even interested in the process. While more people than ever are getting involved now, I wonder how long this would last. I still believe that term limits may work in congress because you would need many like minded lame ducks to arrive at a majority and do the same damage.

[Gutshot John]

I've been a believer in term limits in congress for quite some time now, but you raise a valid and interesting point. However, your solution requires that the electorate is actually informed or even interested in the process.

Yep.


While more people than ever are getting involved now, I wonder how long this would last. I still believe that term limits may work in congress because you would need many like minded lame ducks to arrive at a majority and do the same damage.

It's a cycle from my perspective and actually such voter "apathy" is a byproduct of competent governance. People SHOULD pay more attention to their own lives, jobs, families what have you.

If people are paying more attention to government every day, as opposed to every four years, than it's a sign that the system is in serious trouble.

Politicians and their interests have become so entrenched that they now rely on that apathy to serve their own interests and vanities instead of the doing the people's business. That they've chosen to blame the "people" rather than accepting responsibility for changing their actions indicates that it's time for them to go.

[d90king]

And who won?

TANSTAAFL. Pick your battles carefully.

RINO or otherwise I can't think of a single Republican that deserves to be re-elected in 2010/2012/2014. None, nada, zip.

Jindall? He has shown some very solid conservative values and his actions have proved that. He respects the constitution and it shows in his actions.

I know he is only a Governor but from what I have read and researched I like him.

[uwe1]

Yep.



It's a cycle from my perspective and actually such voter "apathy" is a byproduct of competent governance. People SHOULD pay more attention to their own lives, jobs, families what have you.

If people are paying more attention to government every day, as opposed to every four years, than it's a sign that the system is in serious trouble.

Politicians and their interests have become so entrenched that they now rely on that apathy to serve their own interests and vanities instead of the doing the people's business. That they've chosen to blame the "people" rather than accepting responsibility for changing their actions indicates that it's time for them to go.

Term limits will help to prevent these career politicians from establishing their entrenched interests. Taking into your point of view on dangerous lame ducks, one has to wonder about the unintended consequences of term limits.

I agree that people should be worrying more about their lives, but without constant vigilance we will end up like (using that analogy) a slowly boiled frog.

[Belmont31R]

Term limits will help to prevent these career politicians from establishing their entrenched interests. Taking into your point of view on dangerous lame ducks, one has to wonder about the unintended consequences of term limits.

I agree that people should be worrying more about their lives, but without constant vigilance we will end up like (using that analogy) a slowly boiled frog.




I think term limits are a better option than career politicians. Look at some of their districts, and they are setup so they can do whatever they want without fear of getting kicked out of office. Its like a dangerous lame duck on steroids for decades.


Our system was not designed to have people in office for 20+ years, and certain politicians have taken advantage of that.


Aside from a few details the same people have been running the show for decades. Lots of people in there have been there for decades. Nothing changes. They were creating the problems 20-30 years ago we are facing today. Everything from huge programs that have expanded beyond our realistic ability to pay for them, the pork, lack of regard for liberty, lack of regard for what the people sent them there to do, etc.

Id rather deal with people who know they are about to leave office than deal with people who know they are NEVER going to leave office unless they die, and keep the structure we have now going until Im an old man (if we even last that long).


Regarding voting 3rd party I really don't care what party someone belongs to. Its their values and convictions that matter to me. Ive posted it before but I want someone who values our rights and the Constitution, is for limited government, national defense (overseas and along our border), fiscally responsible, and is against high taxation. The only way to change things now is to vote for people who are not going to go up there to DC and keep the machine going as its been going. At this point there is little difference to me between a big government RINO and someone like Obama. The same things I am against in Obamacare are some of the same things McCain proposed during the election. Things like taxing health plans and subsidies for poor people to get insurance. They are more or less the same plans just a different route in getting there. McCain is also a big believer in social welfare programs like social security and medicare. He is not the type that would cut those programs even if it means huge debts incurred against our nation. He would do nothing to turn the situation around, and in fact would make things worse. Romney is anti-gun, and big government. He signed MA's assualt weapons ban, and instituted their mass government provided and mandated insurance there, too. Aside from a few details what is the difference between these RINO's and Obama? We would still end up with a huge new government spending burden, more people on the government dole, and more anti-gun laws. They are not conservatives, they are not about cutting spending, they are not respectful of our rights, and they are part of the same machine as the rest of the big government hacks both D and R.


Be careful in voting in the next few elections because a lot of these big government anti liberty RINO's are going to try to play the conservative card because they now that the elephant is on a rampage right now, and are going to try to run with the flow. Romney is out there BS'ing his ass off, Cheney, McCain, etc. There are a lot more of them out there.

[Gutshot John]

At this point there is little difference to me between Republicans and Democrats.

Fixed it for you. ;)

We can no longer pretend that the Republican party, RINO or otherwise, has anything but their own political interests at heart. You can't blame a slut for being a whore (comparing them to politicians is an insult to whores everywhere).

They need to be taught to fear the people who elect them rather than cozying up to the people that ply them with campaign contributions.

This is not exclusive to RINOs. Nor is it exclusive to Democrats or Republicans. They're all perfectly willing to sell out the public interest. The problem isn't RINOs (no such thing as a pure ideology, especially for conservatives), the problem is PSINOs (Public SERVANTS in name only) for lack of a better term.