Glenn Beck discusses Rand Paul endorsement

[Rocco]

You hate some of his votes? Do me a favor, name two.

So now everyone who opposes Rand is one thing. Collectivism?

He deserves to be disliked. No one should be nasty about it, but he deserves the heat. I don't hate him personally, I hate some of his votes. This endorsement stuff is just a the cherry on top.

I'll pat myself on the back for not supporting someone who votes for unconstitutional acts of war like sanctions when no declaration of war has occured to make it a constitutional act.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

I disagree with Rand's vote in favor of sanctions on Iran, but if you have to agree with a politician on every single issue in order to support him or her, you'll never be able to vote for anyone. There isn't anyone who's a perfect candidate, including Ron.

Also truth.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Are you sure? He will if he wants to become president. And I'm sure someone can show the video where Cruz was up in arms and craving Iranian blood.

If that's true then Rand will never be president.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It's not demonizing, it's right.

It was collectivist, as he lumped all "libertarians" together when he was discussing them. There are extreme supporters of all kinds of things.

Beck referred to "some Ron Paul supporters" in this segment. He made the point that not all Ron Paul supporters are calling Rand a "traitor," "sellout," "neo-con," etc.

True, when he talked about "Ron Paul supporters" and their rants about the endorsement, he specified he was just talking about some of them. When he shifted into his "libertarian" shtick later on, it was more of a generalization.

 

[anonymous billionaire]

“ I don’t understand it from libertarians. They are they’re in lockstep. Even if Ron Paul violates his own principles and the biggest one is the earmarks in the 14th district. More earmarks than you can possibly imagine, and he puts them in. If he was against earmarks, he wouldn’t put them in. But he puts them in all of the bills and then he votes against that bill. When he knows it’s going to pass, he puts the earmark in and then his district gets all of that earmark money. Where is the outrage?”


He is correct on this aspect. Ron even compromises on earmarks to help get re-elected. He understand bringing money back to his district helps his chances of being re-elected.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It's not demonizing, it's right.

I noticed that the text you quoted (from Beck's website) is edited and does not match all the audio of the actual video. The actual video is more inflammatory than that text.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

“ I don’t understand it from libertarians. They are they’re in lockstep. Even if Ron Paul violates his own principles and the biggest one is the earmarks in the 14th district. More earmarks than you can possibly imagine, and he puts them in. If he was against earmarks, he wouldn’t put them in. But he puts them in all of the bills and then he votes against that bill. When he knows it’s going to pass, he puts the earmark in and then his district gets all of that earmark money. Where is the outrage?”


He is correct on this aspect. Ron even compromises on earmarks to help get re-elected. He understand bringing money back to his district helps his chances of being re-elected.

Ron has explained his philosophy on earmarks quite a few times. He is not opposed to them, and believes that the Congress should specify how all money is spent, and not leave any of it to the discretion of the Executive Branch.

 

[TheTexan]

It was collectivist, as he lumped all "libertarians" together when he was discussing them. There are extreme supporters of all kinds of things.

They've been calling us extremist for a very long time now... I'm fine with the label

 

[MJU1983]

Glen speaks, we listen.

I don't. LOL

 

[Brian4Liberty]

They've been calling us extremist for a very long time now... I'm fine with the label

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!"

 

[John F Kennedy III]

“ I don’t understand it from libertarians. They are they’re in lockstep. Even if Ron Paul violates his own principles and the biggest one is the earmarks in the 14th district. More earmarks than you can possibly imagine, and he puts them in. If he was against earmarks, he wouldn’t put them in. But he puts them in all of the bills and then he votes against that bill. When he knows it’s going to pass, he puts the earmark in and then his district gets all of that earmark money. Where is the outrage?”


He is correct on this aspect. Ron even compromises on earmarks to help get re-elected. He understand bringing money back to his district helps his chances of being re-elected.

Hi Mitt.

 

[MJU1983]

You guys are a bunch of cry babies...quit being so cult like and get over it. Rand endorsed Romney....so what. Glenn Beck calls some of you turds out, so what.

Quit being so cult like and get over it? Sorry if I don't think we are the cult.

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” - Noam Chomsky

The Mitt Romney to Joe Biden spectrum, to steal a line from Tom Woods.

 

[The Free Hornet]

Ron even compromises on earmarks to help get re-elected. He understand bringing money back to his district helps his chances of being re-elected.

Where is the compromise?

a) Don't take our money!
b) [having ignored a], spend it in the district of the taxpayers I represent

Perhaps it is lost on some, but the US representatives are not supposed to represent the best interests of the US but rather those of their districts.

 

[MJU1983]

“ I don’t understand it from libertarians. They are they’re in lockstep. Even if Ron Paul violates his own principles and the biggest one is the earmarks in the 14th district. More earmarks than you can possibly imagine, and he puts them in. If he was against earmarks, he wouldn’t put them in. But he puts them in all of the bills and then he votes against that bill. When he knows it’s going to pass, he puts the earmark in and then his district gets all of that earmark money. Where is the outrage?”

He is correct on this aspect. Ron even compromises on earmarks to help get re-elected. He understand bringing money back to his district helps his chances of being re-elected.

I AM outraged that an elected official is trying to give back to his constituents what was stolen from them.

Taxation is theft.

In Defense of Ron Paul’s Earmarks by Eric Phillips

 

[anonymous billionaire]

Taxation is theft no matter if Ron thinks it's ok or not. And he's not just bringing money back that his tax payers paid, but he's bringing in significantly more.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Glenn did what everyone does, group people together without calling out the individual properties of their statements. Yes, each of the "Rand Haters" did rag on Rand, but each of them did it according to their individual methods of hate. Intolerant Christians called him satan or said he was going to hell, that's what they do in many cases where they disagree (yep, I'm using categorization/stereotyping there), others used their own personal attack type.

I disagree with what Rand did, but I don't hate him, I am disappointed and don't really understand. I'll wait for an excuse/reason to come out later. Maybe on the DPRadio?

 

[ClydeCoulter]

I thought an "Earmark" just meant tagging how the money is to be spent, whereas "pork barrel" was like money for "Bridge to Nowhere" that went back to the state (return money to a state, maybe sometimes more than paid).

So, anonymouse billionaire, he got more for his district than they paid in federal taxes?

 

[coffeewithchess]

I'm not a fan of earmarks, and I don't like the system, but Glenn "I Endorse Rick Santorum" Beck is supposed to have credibility on anything?
Wooo....

Glenn Beck not only had Risk Santorum on several times, and pimped him to his audience as the Romney alternative, but fails to repeatedly mention all of Risk Santorum's earmarks, the fact Risk Santorum said he LOVES earmarks, voted for No Child Left Behind, voted to fund Planned Parenthood, voted for the war in Iraq...to supposedly fulfill U.N. resolutions (?), endorsed Mitt Romney in 2008, and let's us please forget Arlen Specter right?
But, because Ron Paul voted against every single earmark...he was a bad guy and not worth your vote.

Glenn Beck has no credibility, but Glenn Beck does have $100 million contract. What does that tell us?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I'm not a fan of earmarks, and I don't like the system, but Glenn "I Endorse Rick Santorum" Beck is supposed to have credibility on anything?
Wooo....

Glenn Beck not only had Risk Santorum on several times, and pimped him to his audience as the Romney alternative, but fails to repeatedly mention all of Risk Santorum's earmarks, the fact Risk Santorum said he LOVES earmarks, voted for No Child Left Behind, voted to fund Planned Parenthood, voted for the war in Iraq...to supposedly fulfill U.N. resolutions (?), endorsed Mitt Romney in 2008, and let's us please forget Arlen Specter right?
But, because Ron Paul voted against every single earmark...he was a bad guy and not worth your vote.

Glenn Beck has no credibility, but Glenn Beck does have $100 million contract. What does that tell us?

I thought there was a possibility that Beck might have something different and interesting to say about the endorsement. Instead, it was an opportunity for them to air some dirty laundry, attack Ron, and attack libertarianism.

 

[Tinnuhana]

That would be an interesting way to assess earmarks: total up what the constituents of a district have paid into federal coffers, and then earmark only what that pays for. Of course, this would be a lot better if the money stayed local and the people got together and decided what really needed to be done.We wouldn't have to pay people all this money to go to DC and get back the money that belongs to us in the first place. I agree that there should be a differentiation between earmarks and pork just as there is between non-intervention and isolationism.