Will 2014 be the year America says enough is enough?

TheBlaze’s national security editor Buck Sexton opened Monday’s Glenn Beck Program with a simple question: Will 2014 be the year America says enough is enough? As Buck explained, the United States has been teetering on the edge of big government progressivism for quite some time now, and soon the weight of a bloated government and overregulation will prove to be too much for this country to bear. With the midterm elections just around the corner, 2014 provides the opportunity to take a step back and reevaluate the current state of this country. Will Americans finally be ready say enough is enough?

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Full transcript of the monologue below:

Now, Barack Obama promised Dmitry Medvedev that he’d have more flexibility after the 2012 election. You remember that. And they turned out to be truer words than I think even any of us could have imagined.

It was quite a harbinger for 2013. I mean, I thought Mr. Fundamental Transformation couldn’t get much worse after round one which brought us, let’s just take a little joyride through the wreckage, shall we? ObamaCare, we know how that’s been, QE ad infinitum, the QE, the easing that can never stop, Solyndra and the never-ending parade of green investment fails because it’s not their money, so why do they care? It’s your money.

Benghazi, we know that Hillary Clinton says it doesn’t make much difference, right? What difference does it make at this point that Benghazi happened? A lot, Hillary, a lot, we’re going to remind you of that in 2016. That’s what we’ve had to deal with over the past year, these issues, including Fast and Furious and others like them. I mean, this is right here, if you will, this is the pinnacle you would think of the problems this administration could possibly offer for us. But he was actually just getting warmed up.

Tonight, we take a look back at 2013, but more importantly, we’re going to look ahead to 2014 as well. And here’s my question, is this the year? Will 2014 be the year the pendulum finally swings back away from Progressives? Can Conservatives finally retake the high ground? It should be the year. Look, how many more big government failures and scandals does one need before they realize it ain’t working?

I bet you’ve forgotten more Obama scandals and debacles than most administrations ever have. In 2013, we saw tremendous amounts of scandals. Now, of course there was the IRS targeting scandal, right? The Associated phone records scandal, that was the thing that Eric Holder, by the way, said he had no idea, right? But he did have an idea, just like he said he learned about Fast and Furious through press reports, but I thought he knew about it before that – hmm, silly me. Oh, there was the ObamaCare rollout, after the NSA spying. NSA spying of course, there we go, and NSA spying, we know that that’s now something that the administration says they’re going to do something about.

What are they going to do about it though? They’re contesting it in court. They say okay, maybe we went too far. And the ObamaCare rollout, wow, even the staunchest Marxist left wing I-don’t-even-think-America-should-be-pretending-to-be-capitalist kind of guy knows that the ObamaCare rollout was a disaster, the round two of the Obama administration, the round two.

Now, if Conservatives cannot turn this disaster that we’ve talked to you about here into a winning message, if we can’t transform it into some kind of story for the American people that makes them trust Conservatives with government power so that they can limit government power and restore some semblance of liberty, we deserve our fate. We’re toast.

So something needs to change fast, because the other side is relentless. They’re pushing for more bills. They’re pushing for more huge comprehensive bills on immigration, for example, on climate change, also known as amnesty, and yet another redistribution of wealth scheme. There’s tons of those going around.

So 2014 is going to be a fight. It’s going to be a fight against the Marxist administration that we see now increasingly trying to take money from some people and give it to others. But the biggest fight for 2014 isn’t against Obama per se, there is also going to be a fight, because this is a midterm election, between the establishment increasingly progressive GOP with the Ted Cruzes of the world, the conservative members of Congress.

We have a choice that we’re going to have to face on our side, go with the moderate establishment Republican who can win or go with the candidate who stands on Tea Party conservative principles. Will we go with the Ted Cruz type even if the outcome doesn’t look all that great? I remember when Ted Cruz’s outcome didn’t look all that great. He had to win the primary against Dewhurst during Texas.

See, we’ve seen the lesser of these two evils approaches before. We know where it’s gotten us. And not only now are we in a dire fiscal situation, we’re approaching dangerous territory when it comes to centralized power in general. I mean, everybody should be appalled at how the president has been haphazardly ad hoc tinkering with the Affordable Care Act law.

Look, like it or not, it’s a law. As they have said so many times when there was the government shutdown and the fights over it, it’s the law. Well, they know that for Conservatives, for constitutionalists, that has meaning that it’s the law. When we read the words on the page that are supposed to be the law that Congress has passed, we care about those.

We find ourselves increasingly in a place where there is not a moral necessarily issue with what’s going on. We don’t feel like we have to give into this because the government is doing good. We have to give in because the government has force, can make us do these things.

So the president can go in and change a law as he pleases, it seems. Those are the sorts of things that maybe a Hugo Chavez or a Robert Mugabe may do. Now, last week President Obama changed the healthcare law again, this time extending the deadline for people to choose plans and relaxing the rules for those who had their plans canceled.

The press is so hyperfocused on making this stupid law work that they’re overlooking the fact that the administration thinks nothing of just changing laws without Congress or any process whatsoever. Remember all that talk in the first term about being tempted to do it on my own? President Obama said it over and over again, he’s going to do it on his own. I’m going to do it on my own, all this gridlock in Congress.

It looks like Obama has given himself over to his temptations. By the way, he was also tempted to enroll at least as sort of an act of good faith in his own ObamaCare law. By the way, he chose a bronze plan. Oh yeah, I don’t think he’s going to get that level of care. Now to be fair, the White House said that the military is still going to give the commander-in-chief his medical care, but that really tells us a lot, doesn’t it?

The president thinks that it’s an act of solidarity to pretend to sign up under the healthcare law that he’s making millions of Americans sign up for after getting millions of their plans canceled. He thinks that’s solidarity. He thinks that should make us feel better, even though it will never touch him or his family or anybody that he knows. It will never be a problem for them.

Oh, but it’s all about political theatre then. It’s all about the president saying I picked my bronze plan. He picked a bronze plan. Let’s be serious for a second. This is the President of the United States. It was all ridiculous, but it shows you how out of touch they are with your problems, with your healthcare concerns. Because this president can’t resist the flexibility offered to him in his second term. He just can’t.

Now look, Bill Clinton, he was maybe a little powerless against the sexual advances he received from a zoftig intern. This president apparently is tempted whenever a chance to override Congress walks by in something low-cut and lacey. You know Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid would be going all oh, the Constitution, the separation of powers, the prerogative of the legislature, if it was a Republican in the White House.

If the next conservative president announced that he was going to alter income tax rates to 10% or let’s make it 1%, hey, across-the-board 1% to help people in a tough economy…hang on a second. I want to take a moment to reflect on a 1% tax. As Glenn would say, that’s some good old-fashioned conservative red meat right there. It shouldn’t matter if you agree or disagree with the changes made. Everyone should be alarmed when a president goes around Congress.

A 1% flat tax, if President Obama can change the ObamaCare law all the time willy-nilly as he sees fit, why can’t all of a sudden we just have a president declare that the IRS is only going to enforce a 1% tax rate? Well, there’s no good reason, and in fact, this might actually be a really good idea. This could help people. I would love to pay a 1% tax per year.

But you see, changing laws without any accountability, changing laws without even consulting the representatives of the people, changing laws that absolutely blur any sense of separation of power into government, that’s what dictators do. So back to the original question if I can for a moment, is this the year?

Is 2014 the year people drop their allegiance to party? Is this the year even those on the left realize that government has grown too dangerous and unprecedented levels of control? Is this the year people say enough is enough? I sure hope so, because there’s only so much big government Progressivism this country can withstand, and we are teetering close to the edge.

  • Anonymous

    What a lame list of scandals.

    For fuck’s sake

    • Anonymous

      Oh, by the way, no

      • AG Dot Com!

        Facts state otherwise. The media stampeded frothing at the mouth like wildebeests on the Serengeti when Bush was “discovered” to have “partied” during his youth. Eight years of Bush-bashing media + another five years of Obama blaming every last thing on GWB indicate you are pretty full of bovine fecal matter…

        • BlueMN

          There was no “Bush-bashing” until Air America came along. The media were docile as sheep and Fox News proved to be a useful propaganda tool to Dubya’s uninformed loyalists.

        • Anonymous

          “The media” is a myth in itself. There is no such thing; think about it. Media, like any business, needs to sell stuff. Each media outlet is more or less unique. It presents what it thinks its audience will buy. The more dramatic, the better, regardless of whose ox gets gored. Every media outlet will gladly jump on a good scandal if it thinks it will sell.

          Fox and other right-wing outlets are by far the worst in terms of bias. They make no bones about their lack of journalistic rigor. The older media outlets, sometimes (erroneously) called the MSM, have compromised some of their previous standards as well, but many still do the best they can to report objectively. Unfortunately, they suffer from “fairness bias,” while Fox et al have no need to be fair in order to sell their product. Kind of like fast-food for the mind. Real information is much harder to find and digest, but it’s better for you. Beck is the ultimate example of dishonest media, a spin artist par excellence.

          • Anonymous

            Whoa nellie. Can I believe my eyes?

          • Anonymous

            Depends what you see and what you want to see, I guess. I like to toss out food for thought to Beck-o-philes, but most of them apparently prefer GB’s red meat. There is an obesity epidemic, after all.

            What’s on your mind?

          • Guest

            Of course you prefer the “unbiased” (ROTFLMAO) contrivances and propaganda of MSNBC.

    • a disgruntled libertarian

      If these were Bush’s scandals you’d be fit to be tied – a typical apoplectic lib, insulted and outraged by everything under the sun. Hypocrite.

      • BlueMN

        Let’s see, falsifying intel on supposed WMDs to get us into two wars (Downing Street memo), approving the torturing, sodomizing and even murdering of POWs at Gitmo and Abu Ghriab, allowing Saudis to leave the US on 9/11 even though all other civil aircraft were grounded, outing a CIA agent (Valerie Plame), Cheney making millions off of the wars through Halliburton and Blackwater, I could go on and on, versus a few self-proclaimed tax cheaters getting audited, Healthcare.gov getting off to a bad start, and a faked Benghazi “scandal.”

        • Bill Tilghman

          There is nothing fake about the dead at Benghazi being the fault of this administration, so this cuts the credibility of your other old, tired, liberal lies.

          You will have better luck peddling this trash at MSNBC, where they believe in fairy tales.

          • BlueMN

            You might want to find some credibility yourself by getting your “news” from someplace besides the Blaze and Fox.

            “Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”


          • Guest


          • Bill Tilghman

            Now, Killary, the congress didn’t buy those lies a year ago, and we all know that you are behind the whole Benghazi disaster – it was YOUR State Department – the responsibility is all on you!

            Pathological lying will not save your bacon.

  • Anonymous

    When Hillary is voted most admired I’m not optimistic.

    • Anonymous

      Don’t forget Obama is most admired as well. Read ’em and weep.

  • Bonnie Somer


  • Anonymous

    Obama is a human wrecking ball, the people who support him are no different

  • Lorraine E

    Personally I believe the voting process is totally corrupt. The votes of dead people are counted, more people vote than are living within the precincts, the voting machines arrive at the polling places loaded with illegal votes, convicts are voting, the military votes are not counted, voters are intimidated at the polling places, illegal aliens are voting, and Eric Fast and Furious said that voter IDs are not required. The system is totally broken and I don’t remember it ever being honest.
    And what do our elected representatives do about the corruption? Their usual – NOTHING. It is no wonder that many Americans stay home on election day and don’t bother to vote. They have lost confidence in a process which is known to be totally corrupt.

    • Anonymous

      With 20 to 30 million illegals in our borders we must have voterID or lose the republic.

    • Bill Tilghman

      There needs to be a reform of voter registration from the ground up – Congress – which hardly does anything anymore – could make this a priority. The process being left to individual jurisdictions simply will never get the job of purging the invalid registrations done.

      If they started with a national voter ID system and gave everyone eligible six months to get registered, and they made it mandatory like income tax filing, we could see the first clean election in 100 years, but, (yes there is always a but), this government will never put the will of the people ahead of the many agendas that are in sway now.

      Face it, we are stuck with the corrupt system for 2014 and for the foreseeable future. The integrity of the vote simply is not a priority for those in power.

      • ken.

        first we need to switch our paper id system from easy to steal and fake to a system using fingerprints. this would solve identity theft, criminals hiding from justice, credit card and entitlement theft, illegal immigration, voter fraud, etc,…etc,…. our fingerprints are not private, we leave them everywhere we go, we send them everywhere we send anything, it’s the only way we can have a truly secure system of id.

        • Bill Tilghman

          I agree, and it is a concept that is well established. There needs to be movement toward countering the fraud. The question is, will those who benefit from the fraud allow it to be done away with? So far, there has been a lot of resistance to progress, especially in the political realm. It seems those who govern us are slow to allow themselves to be governed by us.

      • Anonymous

        According to our Constitution, voting is left up to the states. That’s why the Supreme Court decision to intervene on behalf of Bush in 2000 was so disgraceful.

        The bigger problem with our voting is that we allow states to gerrymander so freely. In Congressional races in 2012, about a million more votes were cast for Democratic congressional candidates, but Republicans won far more seats, partly because they gerrymandered so successfully after the 2010 election. Is that not a fairness issue?

        And the Supreme Court has allowed unlimited corporate money to influence elections, without requiring disclosure. Why is this is something Republicans prefer?

        • Bill Tilghman

          The election in 2000 was handled according to the Constitution. There was no reason to allow the conflict to continue and the justices made the right choice. Get over it – that was 14 years ago. I seriously doubt that Al Gore would have done the right thing in responding to 09/11/2001, so again the justices made the right choice.

          I deplore the practice of gerrymandering, especially when it is clearly done for partisan purposes. The will of the people is basically ignored when this is done, since they are not consulted.

          I personally don’t think anyone should be allowed to use money to fund any politician, it leaves too much room for graft and corruption. These people are supposed to serve the electorate, not the other way around and it is the money that funds them that influences their work, not the needs of the nation. This is nothing new, and it has been going on since U.S. Grant was president, if not before.

          People with money will always have some influence over the greedy people who tend to be in government. That is something that has been happening since the first civilization.

          Can we expect that to change? Not really. Can we improve the system to curb it as much as possible? Certainly.

          The best means to do that rests with who gets our vote and in making it clear to them that serving the people is not optional in their jobs. There are a number of mechanisms that have been devised over the years to limit the power of politicians and those who will feed them money, but there have been very little of those changes adopted. Things like term limits, and regular meetings with the constituency, and disposing of the practice of lobbies have all been suggested, but until they are implemented by an act of the very body they will govern, you and I can expect no changes.

          • Anonymous

            Bill, thanks, your response is interesting but not well thought out. Bush v. Gore was uniquely consequential. We don’t “get over” events like the 2000 election, we learn from them through analysis and discussion. It’s meaningless to simply pass it off as “constitutional” without further comment. The process was constitutional, of course, so we must accept it, but the decision itself was unusually controversial, pitting fed vs. state in a matter that the Constitution leaves to the states. Your mention of 9/11 is illogical in context, and your conjecture about Gore is foolish and baseless, but your comments indicate you’re somehow unaware of W Bush’s horrifying incompetence, how badly his admin bungled both foreign and domestic policy in the wake of 9/11, seriously compromising U.S. interests in ways that are still costing us dearly. Have you read any of the many outstanding journalistic accounts of our involvement in Iraq and the decision-making process (actually, the lack thereof) W used? Are you one of those who blame W only for spending too much? In fact, his admin is a textbook illustration of why today’s “conservative” ideology is so bankrupt. Unfortunately, Americans don’t like to do their homework. They prefer entertainment, like Beck’s site, to study. It’s human nature.

            Re elections, you deplore how lobbying serves the few at the expense of the many, yet you don’t identify the biggest culprit – the GOP – and you overlook the most obvious ameliorative measure, campaign finance reform with full disclosure, which was favored by Dems and a few moderate Reps but fought against bitterly by the rest of the GOP and made toothless by the conservatives on SCOTUS. Have you read about the K Street Project, where the GOP’s Machiavellian lobbying tactics and unscrupulous use of political power were so clearly exposed? If not, you really should. It might give you cause to think.

            Do you believe term limits have served to improve the situation? They’ve generally made it worse, as realistic people knew was inevitable. “Regular meetings with constituents”? How idyllic! “Making it clear that serving the people is not optional”? What on earth does that mean? Very mushy thinking where hard-headedness is required. What about the GOP’s determined efforts to make it harder for the poor to vote? Does that help our representatives know the will of the people?

            What we can do to improve the situation is to vote out the fantasists and get back to reality. Today, that means getting rid of the crazies in the Tea Party. Moderation and compromise are the American way that we’ve recently lost and where we must return. Unfortunately, the moneyed interests of the Right Wing Noise Machine makes this very difficult to do, so I don’t expect changes any time soon.

          • Bill Tilghman

            Despite your inferred intellectual superiority, I do not find your case very compelling. You presented a lot of liberal views, but I am a pragmatist at heart and the left leaning policies you espouse do not actually work. Don’t mistake my comments as any kind of rebuke, I am merely expressing my opinion of your post.

            I don’t condone many of the GOP hard-line planks, and never have. I tend to find that they are not really conservative, just slightly right of the Democrats. This is evident when you see what Congress has done in the past 20 years, and consider the party leadership. I am not a big government supporter, instead I believe that the government should be just large enough to accomplish the business of the people and not so large that it wields undue amounts of power that intrude into individual’s lives and freedom. As long as people aren’t violating the law, and as long as those laws are simple, clear and few I am fine with that. I do realize that this isn’t the trend, but it should be a goal. People need to be free to have liberty and as long as the exercise of that liberty neither threatens public safety nor impedes another person’s lawful pursuits, then I am in favor of that level of government. The federal government has become too comfortable in regulating people into being felons simply by the creation of such odious regulations and rules they have the power to impose. In most cases that power was not granted by the people, but that power was imposed by Congress and various agencies created by Congress. Most of the federal government largess exists simply to give government power over the people, and that inverts the standard set by the Constitution in government serving the people. This has been the result of two factors, first the Congress taking it upon themselves to create and impose power not granted to it by making proxy organizations that serve as a mechanism to control people, and second, activist judges who think legislating from the bench is acceptable. Instead of a representative republic we now have a recreation of the feudal system that the founders broke away from. We have so many lords and masters now that no one can name them all. We have become the equivalent of serfs in a land where we are held in contempt by those who are in the aristocracy.

            Your ideas of what reality consists of are amusing, however I do not agree with the assessment of the Tea Party as crazies; that comes from people who are ignorant of the actual goings on within Tea Party organizations and meetings. The Tea Party is about reduction in the heavy hand of federal government – especially when it is government by force as in the case of the Affordable Care Act. Since that law got absolutely no consensus from the conservatives we can rightly conclude that it was the liberal majority forcing this train wreck of a law on the American people. The people who passed it are the ones who need to be voted out, and as far as term limits go, there really are none that apply to the worst offenders – Congress.

            Regarding campaign finance reform, Obama agreed to things in his run against McCain that he promptly rejected and did an about face in regard to use of funds. I really don’t think Democrats can exclude themselves from guilt on that. I would be fine with no private contributions from any kind of PAC or large donors, especially those with foreign ties. That is not what generally happens in the real world of politics, and it is a major source of corruption on both sides in my opinion.

          • Anonymous

            Thanks, Bill. I appreciate your civility, which is unusual in my experience. Yes, I imply (not infer) intellectual superiority, because I’ve found that a preference for facts and empiricism over faith and dogma is the key difference between Left and Right. You and I probably have polar opposite opinions about which group prefers which. So, how to discuss?

            I’d like to know: 1) what left-leaning policies you think I espouse (I don’t think I specifically espoused any) and 2) why you claim they don’t work. Also 3) examples of how you see yourself as a pragmatist at heart.

            I think I understand the TP and the Right/GOP pretty well. I’m a former libertarian and read/listen to Right-wing sources consistently, have several TP friends who explain their ideas to me. Bottom line for me is that politics is culture, and the white Christian worldview that sustains the Right has failed to adjust to the complex realities of governance in a rapidly-changing, multicultural democracy like ours. That’s why the Right is so angry (at worst, merely arrogant at best) today (you’re a very welcome exception) and susceptible to quack science or hatemongers like Beck, Limbaugh, Levin et al; they don’t understand what’s happening , and they’re desperate to hold back the inevitable changes and critical adjustments we must make(like Obamacare, a brilliant piece of legislation) to continue to move forward. They want things to be simple, so they’ve created an alternate universe inside their bubble. I find your thoughts about the role of government very noble, idealistic and entirely divorced from reality. They might be practical in small, heterogeneous groups, but they have no relationship to the workings of a country like ours.

            That’s one reason I asked if you’d read about W Bush’s administration’s decision-making. Remarkable in its indifference/hostility to evidence or outside influence; W is the archetypal Bubble Boy. Obama is his opposite in most every way. The 8 years of the W Bush administration is a cautionary tale that, unfortunately, too few have read and understood. The GOP – and especially the TP – have not learned the lessons of his disastrous stewardship. Instead, they’ve become reactionaries, in denial about who they are and how badly their policies failed, about what/whose interests they represent, about how the economy works, about the difference between the individual and the group, about just about everything.

          • Bill Tilghman

            Re read your own post and you tell me what is NOT liberal about your comments. Particularly the passage quoted here; “I’m a former libertarian and read/listen to Right-wing sources consistently, have several TP friends who explain their ideas to me. Bottom line for me is that politics is culture, and the white Christian worldview that sustains the Right has failed to adjust to the complex realities of governance in a rapidly-changing, multicultural democracy like ours. That’s why the Right is so angry (at worst, merely arrogant at best) today (you’re a very welcome exception) and susceptible to quack science or hatemongers like Beck, Limbaugh, Levin et al; they don’t understand what’s happening , and they’re desperate to hold back the inevitable changes and critical adjustments we must make(like Obamacare, a brilliant piece of legislation) to continue to move forward. They want things to be simple, so they’ve created an alternate universe inside their bubble. I find your thoughts about the role of government very noble, idealistic and entirely divorced from reality. They might be practical in small, heterogeneous groups, but they have no relationship to the workings of a country like ours.”. I find that your statements are quite left oriented, and they require assuming a left leaning posture on the reader’s part for the reader to agree with them.

            Regarding pragmatism, I am a realist, and don’t feel the need to compromise my personal character, morals, or beliefs for the sake of the rest of society. I have found in nearly 60 years on this earth that common sense solutions to problems generally work better than radical and more severe changes in attitudes and directions. Focusing on common ground and discouraging fringe or tangential arguments works best in the real world, and by real world I mean the parts of this country between the coasts. The chaotic urges of both the northeast and the far west USA – as well as most major population centers that have been run by democrats for the past 50 years are the places with the most economic and social unrest. There is a reason all the trouble seems to emanate from those areas of the US. I think you can understand this.

            Branding people whose main desire is preserving the liberty that traditional Americans cherish – the freedoms that make ours the most unique nation on earth – with names like reactionary, and marginalizing them in other ways are tactics of the left. I have seen a lot of fear mongering and maligning of the Tea Party from the left, and that smacks of the very things they accuse, (wrongly I might add), the Tea Party of being.

            We have experienced enough of the divisive and derogatory polarization of ordinary people and I find it an ugly business that serves as a red flag to point out the vocal critics who use those tactics as the intolerant, and oppressive group. In their efforts to cast others as being of low character, vile and reprehensible they have brought attention to themselves above and beyond the very people they attack.

            The piling on of Bush with the unearned crediting of Obama with healing the earth and calming the seas – stolen from one of his campaign speeches – is another area where I find liberals depart from reality.

          • Anonymous

            Fascinating response, Bill. I asked you to discuss specific policies and examples, and you answered with another generalizing polemic – exactly what I was trying to steer the conversation away from. You go on to define the real world as America “between the coasts” and then top it off by saying you think that I can understand! Wow!

            Yes, I can understand, sadly, because I’ve interacted with this type of mind-set for so many years. Bill, you may be a terrific human being (my Right-wing friends certainly are), but your ignorance of how things work is dangerous – not necessarily for you personally, but certainly for our country, because there are so many people like you: people committed to a confined and immutable worldview, who don’t understand that admitting the value of other viewpoints doesn’t threaten the value of their own, and who, as a result, see threats where none exist; who don’t know what they don’t know and who, absent an exigency imposed from outside, lack the humility and intellectual urge to confront that fact. That’s what I mean by politics as culture. If you’re a white Christian, it’s more likely that you’ve never been forced to make a critical and existential examination of your worldview. You write about things like liberty, compromise, ordinary people, character, belief etc. with no apparent awareness that, not only are your conceptions as artificial and open to question as anyone else’s, but also that the discussion of such abstractions in the context of pragmatism is among the most far-reaching, contentious and ultimately insoluble debates ever. Do those last sentences makes any sense to you?

            Some focused responses:
            1) Example of a specific public policy issue: taxes! Experience has proven the Right and the TP position on tax policy to be wrong. Beginning in 2001, crackpot Right-wing economic dogma led to tax and economic policies that helped drive our economy into a ditch, and rather than learn from their mistakes, the Right now fights against efforts to help us climb back up. More than anything else, the Right’s and TP’s ignorance and stubbornness on taxes and the economy hampers America’s prosperity.
            2) The coasts and urban areas are America’s centers of innovation, invention, creative energy, education, culture and business. They’re quintessentially American, where our nation of immigrants began and continues to reinvent and renew itself in ways that only we can. If you exclude them, you don’t have America. And no, they don’t cause more than their fair share of problems, although they do provide more solutions. In fact, for what its worth, Red states generally do worse economically than Blue states. Check it out.
            3) W Bush was, by any objective standard, unqualified for the Presidency in intellect, experience and temperament. This was a concern to many of us before his presidency, and sadly, his actions proved us correct. He was unfit to be President, incompetent in office, and we all suffered as a result. Rather than complain about this judgment, why don’t you look into it by reading some of the many, excellent books about his admin? You may be shocked. Or, you may not. As for Obama, he’s a uniquely successful, charismatic Black man who has become the most powerful person in the world. It’s human nature that many folks are in awe of him. But no matter how much you disagree with someone else’s views on Bush and Obama, it still amounts to nothing more than a matter of differing opinions. If you believe it constitutes a “departure from reality”, you’re once again mistaking the confines of your own worldview for the limits of the real world. Think about it.

            Lastly, both sides engage in divisive behavior, as you’ll probably agree, since it’s part of human nature. But I also think an examination of our human nature provides clues and evidence to show that the Right does so much more – and much more effectively – than the Left. It’s part of the DNA of the Right.

          • Bill Tilghman

            You apparently have much more time on your hands that is healthy. No matter what you say I am not your errand boy, nor am I motivated or compelled to act at your direction. I don’t really care what you think of that or me for that matter. I have enough things to deal with besides catering to some anonymous person on the internet and his/her whims of fancy.

            You and I will never – ever agree on this issue, so farewell. I am, have been and always will be conservative and your well rehearsed propaganda isn’t going to convert me to your political heresy.

            Sorry, you picked the wrong guy to troll.

          • Bill Tilghman

            Your hypocrisy is evident in this little selection of your comment:

            “If you’re a white Christian, it’s more likely that you’ve never been forced to make a critical and existential examination of your worldview. You write about things like liberty, compromise, ordinary people, character, belief etc. with no apparent awareness that, not only are your conceptions as artificial and open to question as anyone else’s, but also that the discussion of such abstractions in the context of pragmatism is among the most far-reaching, contentious and ultimately insoluble debates ever. Do those last sentences makes any sense to you?”

            Not only is it racist of you to assume I am a white man, (which doesn’t matter – and I am not), but you consider Christian beliefs as some sort of negative that would impede an individual in some way.

            To assume that you are correct in your ignorant and unwarranted appraisals is, to put it bluntly, offensive to the maximum degree. You think you are quite the intellect, however it is apparent that the only person you are impressing here is you.

            I also find fault with your declarative and uninformed projections of the character of not only George W. Bush, but Barack Obama as well. It comes off as quite pedestrian, pedantic and ignorant for you to pronounce judgments that you are not qualified to perform, or informed enough about to make a even a close approximation of the truth. You simply repeated the same things I have heard less eloquent people say, mostly ideologues who are merely repeaters of partisan spin and propaganda.

          • Anonymous

            Bill, I don’t post in hopes of making the other person change his mind; that would be foolish and frustrating. I post in order to test and improve my knowledge & understanding through intellectual debate. You didn’t offer much of a test, but your interesting responses provided good evidence about why folks like you come to such bizarre and unfounded conclusions. I didn’t pick the wrong guy. You helped me improve my game, even if you really weren’t up to playing.

            Why do you post? I think you do it to feel good about your opinions, rather than to test them. You don’t seem to want to debate the issues. You posture, make sweeping, unsupported statements, take offense and judge – but you don’t debate. Rather than respond substantively to my challenges to educate yourself on specific issues, e.g. by reading in critical depth about the Bush presidency, you seem to view them as a threat! “Errand boy”? “Compelled to act at (my) direction”? “Catering to (my) whims”? “Well-rehearsed propaganda”? “Convert you to (my) political heresy”? Are you freakin’ kidding? Obviously, sadly, you aren’t. You’re really that confused, and I guess, that weak. You’re threatened by an exhortation to learn. Do you really not understand that liberals are not the enemy, they’re fellow Americans with a different viewpoint?

            Sad, very sad, what has become of the once noble tradition of responsible conservatism in the U.S.

          • Bill Tilghman

            I can sum up my response to your verbose post in this statement;

            What you are doing is what all liberals do. You try to appear intelligent but eventually you turn to insults when you can’t make any headway.

            Go stalk someone else – you are selling a product no one has a need for.

          • Anonymous

            That was a beautiful testament, Bill, a wonderful example of the paranoid and inbred nature of Right-wing thought (i.e. epistemic closure.) Add “stalking” to the list of imaginary threats. If you ever come out of your Fox hole, go through this thread, and you may realize that all you’ve done is avoided a discussion of real issues. Any time you want real debate, come on out into the real world and look me up.

          • Bill Tilghman

            Don’t hold your breath, you condescending self righteous windbag. Your attempts to bait me are not only a failure they are a sign that you are a pathetic troll and nothing more. You have nothing that interests me and slinging your specious assignations in my direction only serves to prove that I have been right about you all along.

            Time for you to move-on.org your rear out of here. Not only are you finished, but you are done as well.

          • Anonymous

            “Here” is a question for you, Bill. Where is the “here” that you’re telling me to move-on my rear out of? Isn’t this a conversation on the public internet? Did you think it was a clubhouse?

            “Bait” you? No, I’m trying to de-bate you. But you refuse cum high dudgeon. Tell me, Bill, what happens if you take the bait (or take debate)? You have to defend your views. Pretty scary, because the TP program doesn’t hold up well when challenged. Apparently you don’t, either.

            I’ve posted because I’m interested in your comments; they expose much about your thinking. So I deconstruct them as an exercise that might yield some understanding – for me, for others who may be following, perhaps even for you. Clarity trumps agreement. I think your ostrich-like intellectual posture and your authoritarian reaction to criticism, are typical of the TP (it relates to misplaced concerns about governmental power), and you’ve bolstered that opinion.

            You may drop out of any thread at any time. But why would you want – or, more to the point, why would you imagine it’s within your power or discretion – to end a public internet discussion?

          • Bill Tilghman

            You have to have the last word, that much is apparent. You’ve had it.

          • Bill Tilghman

            You can have all the fun you like deconstructing my comments, just know that in the process you add your own interpretation and thus you have found yet another creative – or should I say manipulative – way to lie.

            You are neither interested in my comments (since you find it necessary to franken-parse every one with your own liberal spin), nor are you interesting.

            I do find your continued efforts to hide behind your assumed intellectual superiority to be yet another suit of camoflage that you use to hide your innermost feelings of inferiority and you use your so-called analysis, (which is always peppered with insults), as yet another way to put your hypocrisy on display.

            You are a strutting peacock, proud of your plumage, but basically a fowl by another name.

            You don’t know the first thing about debate. You like to imagine you are some great orator but your skills are lacking. Where is the logical presentation of your argument on the issue? You have instead decided to make this about you trying to call me names, and making lame attempts at denigrating me because something about me triggers a fear response in you. That is why you have spent all the time and effort to lock horns with me, but as you have discovered previously I am not going to give you the respect of responding the way you desire. Simply put, I am under no obligation to play your game, and I don’t have enough regard for your opinion to care what you have to say. You should consider this good bye. See, I do have the power to end a public discussion.

          • Anonymous

            Bill, sorry I took so long to respond.

            By all means, please drop the thread. You’re not getting anything out of it, except, perhaps, more bees in your bonnet. You don’t seem to like debate, anyway, so I’m unsure why you respond. In terms of ending the discussion, I think you confuse the individual with the group. (That’s what your side tends to do.) Our thread is not the public discussion. Do you not get that?

            Just a final explanation: In analyzing public policy, we need to think in terms of group phenomena, not individual. So, it’s not useful (except as a political tool) to personalize the discussion. I don’t think you, and others like you, really understand or appreciate that way of thinking. For example, you were insulted by my statement about white Christians because you completely misunderstood it. Try reading it again, and note it’s conditional and deals in likelihoods. You may disagree with it, but you’ll only find it offensive if you personalize it – which is logically absurd. If you can manage to wrap your head around that idea, you’ll have benefited from your investment of time in this thread.

            Cheers. Write any time.

          • Guest

            Have you always been this delusional?

    • Anonymous

      Total nonsense. Get some real information. Voter fraud is close to nil.

      • Anonymous

        Wow! Where’d you come from?

        • Bill Tilghman

          The troll planet – he’s a liberal twit and only worthy of being ignored.

  • Fat Lip

    People in America have to come to grips with the fact this is all on purpose remember who it was that said 25 million may necessarily have to die in 2008 this was said look it up for yourself , everybody thought it was a war coming nope mommy and daddy got shit for health care many will die due to this debacle !
    So see this so called leader doesn’t always lie it’s just a different kind of WAR !
    So had enough or do we all sit on our asses and wait for some momma’s boy to be heart broken and then do some stupid act , that won’t happen either will it.
    Truth has no agenda .

    • Anonymous

      “Truth”, in fact, “does have an agenda”…God is truth, and the way this world is swiftly spiraling out of control, it won’t be long before the Eternal one, will have to save us from ourselves…his agenda is peace on earth at last, it always has been.

      • Fat Lip

        Very true my friend it’s him who keeps people like us on the path of righteousness so you are correct in my eyes ,as things do spiral downwards we must speak only of the truth because there has always been only one truth. Praise God May you have a blessed New Year and thank you for the response .

  • Bill Tilghman

    The irony that a Russian ship full of global warming scientists is at this moment stuck in antarctic ice with no hope of rescue seems to have escaped the media covering this “tragedy”. No one has bothered to notify the audience that these people are the best and brightest the left could find to prove anthropomorphic global warming is a reality.

    Despite their efforts to establish this, “science”, nature it seems has other ideas…

    This is the beginning of the end for liberal lies and the credibility of their liars. How long will it take for the rest of the hoaxes to be exposed like this one?

    • Anonymous

      Great post…one answer may come in a very disturbing and abrupt fashion. Our political elite, of course having far superior minds than mere mortal conservatives, have convinced themselves, that by reducing Americas war capability (including scrapping two-thirds of our atomic weapons arsenal) and allowing nations like Iran, to continue full-speed ahead with its nuclear program…this is a “hoax of the highest order”. Will the answer to the question you pose, come by way of a surprise nuclear attack on one, or several major American metropolitan cities? A better question might be – how long will it take the rest of us, to rid ourselves of the children who claim to lead us?

      • fire lion

        nuclear attack? goddess you are stuck in the cold war aren’t you?

        You do know they have far better weapons to kill alot of people right?

        Direct energy weapons. Controlled viruses. Weather weapons tectonic weapons.

        The only reason Iran wants a nuke is because israel has a nuke. OH but israel is so good. I mean its not like they spied on us ( oh wait they did several times) its not like they go into other countries and assassinate people ( oh wait they did) or kidnap people ( oh dear)

        • Anonymous

          It’s not like Israel is surrounded by unstable, repressive, anti-democratic countries populated largely by people who want to destroy it. Oh, wait…

          When discussing Israel, a little balance, mixed with a little context, goes a long way. This is a country truly between a rock and a hard place, damned if they do, damned if they don’t. They’ve made many sincere attempts to resolve their existential dilemma, including giving up land for peace with Egypt and offering significant concessions to the Palestinians, but the other side seems politically and ideologically – and perhaps, unfortunately, even characterologically – incapable of meeting them halfway. As Abba Eban put it, the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

        • Anonymous

          Why not go to the very source that gives the only answer to the nuclear question.

          The Bible

          In it, is said, that “no man would be saved alive” if not for the intervention of Christs return. O-K then, that certainly does not mean a nuclear war, it could be as you suggest other deadly weapons that are used for mass destruction and being that there’s never been a weapon devised for warfare that hasn’t somehow been implemented in battle, then you have a point.

          Now when coupled with the words from God himself, saying that there would not be left alive, even one blade of grass, now I tend to think nuclear. Conventional warfare would not produce such devastating results. Scripture also depicts – the stars not producing their light, and the moon and the sun only shinning a third of their brightest capacity. This leads me to think that after a major thermonuclear assault, the dust debris of radioactive element would darken the sky, leaving in its wake a scenario void of plant life, including grapes – figs – grass, in which, the bible clearly says will not be found after the greatest war in the history of mankind begins.

          There are no other weapons that would produce such a devastating result – other than nuclear.

          Today, our brightest minds believe in “the big bang theory” when in fact, the marvelous and brilliant mind of a perfect Eternal Being created the universe and all that goes with it, but, on the flip-side, not hardly a soul, believes that we will go out with a big bang –

      • Bill Tilghman

        I don’t think we will have to do too much to get rid of them, but a helluva lot of good people will go with them when the Iranian mushrooms bloom.

        The stupidity will become crystal clear then, and hopefully we will do what is necessary to secure the world from those madmen then. If not, it has been nice knowing you.

  • One Thirsty Bear

    The liberty school realizes that demands for “equality” are little more than slogans conjured up by those attempting to exploit emotions.

    • fire lion

      interesting. I could say the same thing about people who keep talking about “freedom” as if freedom can exist under any type of government.

      Freedom is a word that means TOTAL FREEDOM. Which is anarchy.

      Also if these people complain about ‘” wealth redistribution” then shouldn’t they be against all taxes?

      slogans conjured up to exploit idiots

  • fire lion

    America will say enough to relgious tyranny and the super rich

    Gay marriage will be law.
    Marijuana will stop be classified with heroin
    No more protecting Israel from itself.
    No more non livable wages.
    No more wasting billions on military equipment that just collects dust and is basically welfare to the arms industry.

  • bucketnutz

    Politics aside, this country better start paying attention to the Social decay that has entered our main stream. Progressivism is the new communism and it is a threat to our democracy.

    • Anonymous

      I think millions are taking notice of the liberal cancer that has attached itself to main-stream America. But, like any cancerous growth, removing it might kill the main body – if we resort to civil unrest and battle, we all lose. Our nation will smolder in ruinous ashes. Other, more aggressive nations, not having our interests in mind, would then take full advantage of the carnage from within and add their touch to our demise, making sure we never return to our former or previous dominant position.

      Its either a slow agonizing death – eaten alive from within by a destructive cancerous liberal party – Or, we swiftly kill every living thing in sight, at the cost of loosing our very nation – neither present for us a good outcome – both are a lose lose for everyone.

      There’s only one solution left at the juncture in our history, that would now save us from ourselves…but a growing number among us, no longer tolerate words that mention God above.

  • Anonymous

    Live FREE or DIE. LIBERTY or DEATH. When Pelosi gets grabbed by her ankles and drug out of the capitol building with her head bouncing on the steps on the way to the street. Then shot in the face, I’ll believe, at that point, we are headed in the right direction. coup d’état , I see no other alternative. the Media talking heads will say otherwise, they will placate the masses to stop that from happening at any cost. Beck, Jones, all of them, all part of the plan. To stop the 3 PERCENT of MEN from doing what needs being done, it finally reached a tipping point I think, I pray to God it has. Have a happy new year all, I for one am foaming at the mouth.

  • Montesquieu

    The liberty school recognizes that there are certain basic functions, such as law enforcement, which government can perform effectively.

  • Anonymous

    Question how our will citizens feel when they learn the true ramifications of obama care in destroying our great middle class and bringing down our nation to third world level ? Hidden in obama care is a regulation if your on medii -caid even you hardly use it or never use it your home be seize and bank assets so you cannot pass your hard earn wealth to your family and maybe put lean on house so you cannot sell ?? I heard this on radio program how true ? Now obama and his czars are raising the income level you must pass to not be force on medi-caid to include more citizens and bigger chunk out of the middle class !! Beside union workers and blue collars workers who are retire who might lose their cherish free medical benefits they like,work hard for from their former employer which they gave up pay raiser for !! Now obama with his new executive actions and his czars new regulations going around congress and citizens discussing and debating if they want these new regulations that was not voted by congress or citizens !! I ‘m afraid for retire people on medi-care obama might raise the threshold of income level so you be force out of medi-care on to medi-caid by revaluation with it hidden regulations to bring down the middle class and seize their assets!! Don’t forget to thank your union leaders ,your U.S senators and Reps when they went along with obama bait and switch scam or whopper of a lie to you !!!!

    • Anonymous

      Now obama and his minions of union leaders,senators,reps promise you utopia obama care and gave you snake oil care instead (bait and switch) for 2012 elections in mean time they were stealing your cherish medical insurance from your employer !!! What obama is doing is stealing from our veteran medicare and our hard working retire workers to buy vote at their expense !! To give free medical care to the low information voters of the don’t care to work crowd and illegals to add onto obama freebies , free obama phones,housing,heat,electric,money ,food etc and maybe car now at our expense to obama leeches !!!!!!!!!!!! P.S I’m not against the severely handicapped or age , I work with them they’re are great people need a little helping hand they try pay some for themselves to not to be a leech !! I’m not for able body people to laid on the couch and party at our expense !!!!!!!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    As always, it’s always the 24/7 apocalypse now scam. It’s the end of the world. Buy gold, seeds, my books. The world is coming to end any day now. I promise. I’m not kidding this time.

  • Plow Comms

    Since liberty impels a free country’s citizens to unleash their talents, skills, and knowledge, free citizens are able to learn more, know more, and achieve more than those subjected to collectivism’s ever-shifting mirage of illusions.

The 411 From Glenn

Sign up for Glenn’s newsletter

In five minutes or less, keep track of the most important news of the day.