The Post In Which I Agree With A Conservative Radio Guy

Posted on February 23, 2010 by Matt Osborne

Unbelievably, every word:

I was invited to be the opening speaker at Saturday’s CPAC session. I had accepted but then, to my amazement, I learned that the John Birch Society would be one of many co-sponsors. This takes the big-tent idea many steps too far for me. So, I withdrew. Apparently, others were not so moved. That’s fine. But it wasn’t for me. Bill Buckley and Barry Goldwater, among others, chased the Birchers from the movement decades ago. And they’re not a part of the movement. So, to give them a booth at CPAC was boneheaded.

[...]

I have no idea what philosophy Glenn Beck is promoting. And neither does he. It’s incoherent. One day it’s populist, the next it’s libertarian bordering on anarchy, next it’s conservative but not really, etc. And to what end? I believe he has announced that he is no longer going to endorse candidates because our problems are bigger than politics. Well, of course, our problems are not easily dissected into categories, but to reject politics is to reject the manner in which we try to organize ourselves. This is as old as Plato and Aristotle.”

Damn skippy. Who is this Levin guy? Reading the whole post, it seems that he’s a conservative theorist of the William Bennett school. Guess he hasn’t gotten the memo that his side has already lost, and the insane clown posse is all they have left.

About Matt Osborne

Veteran blogging the culture wars from Alabama. Video journalist, mash-up artist, aspiring novelist, and metalhead. Expect bunnies, geekery, dark humor, and snarky empirical analysis to annoy idealists of all stripes. You can follow me on Twitter, but be ready 'cause it might get loud.
This entry was posted in Glenn Beck. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://twitter.com/Zirgar ZIRGAR

    Matt, two things: 1) if you spew enough shit, like Levin, you're bound to eventually toss something out of your mouth that makes sense; the laws of probability guarantee it, and 2) even wingnuts can have moments of clarity. Birchers have long been a thorn in the side of the neocons and movement conservatives, like the drunk uncle at a wedding, so this isn't surprising. It's also bullshit since the mainstream of conservatism is now almost entirely indistinguishable from Bircherism, but since everyone knows that everyone else sees Birchers as insane, people like Levin disigenuously try to distance themselves from them, though there's no real ideological distance at all -”That drunk guy's not part of my family.”

  • http://twitter.com/Zirgar ZIRGAR

    Sorry, I hit send before I was done. lol.

    As with the Birchers, same thing with Beck, although with Beck, Levin has more of a genuine point; Beck is scattershot and all over the place ideologically, which can happen when the ol' neurons and synapses only fire sporadically, so trying to get him to be focused and on point is a real issue upon which I agree with Levin, but like with the Birchers I suspect that much of what Beck espouses, in private Levin agrees with, but can't openly endorse because, let's face it, many of these old school neocon partisans don't like Beck because he's in ascendancy and his methods are erratic and clunky, and, yes, clownish. They see him as less a threat to conservatism itself than a threat to their egos, but they hide it in terms of politics. He's a hugely popular goof, so it eats at them, as it should.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    Well put. BTW, send me an email so's I can hook you up.