Jack Hunter: "On Glenn Beck and the Liberty Movement"

compromise

Banned
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
5,516
http://www.southernavenger.com/uncategorized/on-glenn-beck-and-the-liberty-movement/
There’s been a lot of talk on Facebook and Twitter today about Glenn Beck hosting The Future of Freedom Foundation’s Jacob Hornberger, Students for Liberty’s Zak Slayback and yours truly, on his The Blaze television show yesterday. Here’s a clip, if you missed it:

First, a few thoughts on Beck in general.

I have been critical of Beck in the past, particularly when he’s said things disagreeable to the liberty movement. Some of them pretty bad. I’ve also been praiseworthy of Beck, when he’s promoted things of interest to the liberty movement, on a platform greater than most of us will ever achieve.

I remember Beck doing back-to-back days of his Fox News show promoting FA Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom.” I remember him promoting Tom Woods and his great book “Meltdown.” I remember him talking about the evils of the Federal Reserve. I remember him allowing Judge Andrew Napolitano to be his primary guest host on his uber-popular television program. I remember him educating his audience about the evils of “progressivism” bashing Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson for their big government visions, in both domestic and foreign policy. I remember him saying America needs to better mind its own business. I remember him being one of the earliest conservative talk hosts to call for troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

During one of the breaks during Wednesday’s show, Beck actually reminded all of us that he’d been calling for an end to that war for five years. But that no one had really paid much attention to that.

He’s right.

The liberty movement is probably 99% full of people who had very different views than they do today–before Ron Paul decided to run for president in 2008. I’ve met people who come from more conventionally conservative, or even neoconservative perspectives. I’ve met ex-liberals. I’ve met people who didn’t really care about politics before. I’ve met people who’d said nasty things about Dr. Paul, even vicious things, but have since joined our movement.

But I’ve met very few who were libertarians or constitutionalists before Ron Paul.

Most who came to admire and embrace Ron Paul’s message did so from every position across the political spectrum imaginable. I bet many of them would today be embarrassed about some of things they used to believe, or said, or did. Luckily, they didn’t have a national television or radio program to document these things.

My impression of Beck from Wednesday, was that he is genuinely interested in libertarianism, but does have questions about certain aspects–as do probably most Americans. During the breaks, the banter between Beck, and us as guests, was him just generally reaching out to us, wanting to know if most libertarians would be accepting of him if he joined them in promoting these ideas, or if most libertarians were such purists that there could be no daylight between him and them.

I asked Beck if it was Judge Napolitano or his friend Penn Jillette that had pushed him in a more libertarian direction. He said that he felt had had already generally agreed with the Judge on most things for some time–that it was Jillette that had “opened his mind” more, toward libertarianism.

The cartoon caricature of libertarians is that we are a bunch of hedonists who just want prostitutes and drugs on every corner. Beck addressed this too, but also wanted to move beyond it. He has said repeatedly on the air that he believes it is the libertarian message that might turn this country around. This is certainly what most in the liberty movement believe. Does Glenn Beck agree with all of us on what the liberty message is? Probably not. Do most libertarians themselves completely agree on what the true liberty message is?

Most certainly not.

If someone was trying to pass off big government Bush-style conservatism as libertarianism, I’d be the first to go on the attack. But that’s not what’s going on with Beck. He attacks that era and the Republicans who screwed up the country. He says he was completely wrong in his former support of the Patriot Act (when does a national talk host ever say they are wrong about anything?). He says we can’t police the world. He’s even said that the answer to the same-sex marriage question is to remove the state from the equation altogether.

He says he absolutely loves Rand Paul.

Now, he can possibly say other, less liberty favorable things as well. But if the liberty movement does not have the desire or tolerance to encourage people who are coming our way, who want to come our way, who want to build bridges, we will forever be stunted as a movement. The entire Ron Paul movement was millions of people coming his way. Now that we have this movement, we should hope that millions more come our way. That’s the entire point.

And we should especially want those with a microphone as loud and as far reaching as Glenn Beck’s to come our way.

I think Beck is like many Americans. He’s open to these ideas. He’s learning, and wants to learn more. Perhaps my friend Luke Kenworthy’s Facebook status actually summed it up best:

Glenn Beck is the perfect reflection of the Tea Party. He defines it with, “I’m honestly trying to learn.” Watch him the past 6 years. He has the average American viewpoint, wakes up, discovers some truth and slowly find it in the virtues of preserving liberty. It’s a process in the right direction. Embrace it.

During our appearance, Beck told me, Jacob and Zak that he’d like The Blaze to be a platform to promote libertarian leaders and ideas. He noted, correctly, that none of the other major outlets are covering this stuff adequately, or framing the debate correctly. He’s 100% right.

If Glenn Beck wants to help us, we’d be fools not to let him. If the advancement of liberty is the goal, he could be an important ally. If purity is the litmus test, we will never have any allies–and each of us should resign from this movement effective immediately.
 
Last edited:
Good for him if he truly wants to help, but I think everyone here has seen this before to be ready to turn our backs on him when he tries to Judas us again.

I mean, one can still be a libertarian and a media shill at the same time, it doesn't always matter what he really thinks. He works for mega-media conglomerates with a boatload of conflicts of interests.

Actually, this brings up an interesting question. Do we know the financers of his new projects? Regardless, we have to be aware that he's also an opportunist who is not just a talkshow host for the right reasons, there is profit motive, so I'll remain skeptical the same as I do with all of the MSM.
 
As I've said before, I'm more than happy to have Beck spread libertarian ideas and Rand's name around in such an upscale fashion but it's up to him to prove himself to be trustworthy and not a conman. Hence, I digress from the name calling even tho I'm thoroughly skeptical of him. If he can truly help us build a bigger coalition of liberty supporters I'll be pleasantly surprised.
 
OK, I guess if Jack Hunter thinks Glenn Beck is coming around, then he's coming around.

Here's an example of how Beck is dealing with an issue near and dear to libertarian hearts.

Just yesterday, not long after Rand had been interviewed on Beck's show, Beck said he didn't agree with the drug legalization issue as presented on the previous day's show. Even on medical marijuana, he said he thought that was just an excuse for people to "get high". His idea of common ground on the drug issue would be to relax regulation on prescription drugs so that people with cancer (for example) would have certain drugs made available to them that are being held up in the FDA approval process.
 
The Pattern indicates that we'll be Beckstabbed again next year during the midterms. If we are not, then I will be surprised, pleased and moved.

In the meantime, I'd no sooner tell someone to listen to Beck without reservation than I'd encourage the Chinese to put my city on their First Nuclear Strike list. Now, Mr. Hunter, tell me that my position is unwise, and why.
 
I was a constitutionalist long before I heard of Ron Paul. (Though I was a supporter of him way back before 2008)

I was also a Beck fan back when Beck was calling for an end to the war and criticizing Bush.

I am also, as a religious conservative, part of what should be Beck's fan base.

But I will always have my BS filter on when listening to Beck. I don't want to stay silent about that, because I believe that it is necessary to warn people not to trust him. It would be great if he ends up helping without betraying, but I'm not extremely hopeful about that happening.
 
Last edited:
I was a constitutionalist long before I heard of Ron Paul. (Though I was a supporter of him way back before 2008)

I was also a Beck fan back when Beck was calling for an end to the war and criticizing Bush.

I am also, as a religious conservative, part of what should be Beck's fan base.

But I will always have my BS filter on when listening to Beck. I don't want to stay silent about that, because I beleive that it is necessary to warn people not to trust him. It would be great if he ends up helping without betraying, but I'm not extremely hopeful about that happening.

The way I look at it is, even a dumb as a box of rocks dog will only pee on an electric fence once. So what's that say about those that continually carry water for Beck? "He's really coming around this time, I just know it!"
 
Et Tu, Jack Hunter?

So why did Beck support the likes of McCain, Santorum, and Romney, if he's such a small government advocate? Cognitive dissonance at best.

It's great that he loves Rand Paul.

I wonder, though, how excited he is about the RNC meeting occurring with Jeb Bush, Rubio, Christie, Cruz, and Walker, excluding Rand?

"I'll take any of those guys over Obama any day" would be my prediction. And there is the fail.
 
Last edited:
So why did he support the likes of McCain, Santorum, and Romney, if he's such a small government advocate? Cognitive dissonance at best.

It's great that he loves Rand Paul.

I wonder, though, how excited he is about the RNC meeting occurring with Jeb Bush, Rubio, Christie, Cruz, and Walker, excluding Rand?

"I'll take any of those guys over Obama any day" would be my prediction. And there is the fail.

Yep, it will be like clockwork when he tells us that there's a time to stand for principles, and a time to rally against the Dems with the "lesser of two evils" establishment hack they've declared "electable" (I cannot freaking stand that word anymore).
 
I wonder, though, how excited he is about the RNC meeting occurring with Jeb Bush, Rubio, Christie, Cruz, and Walker, excluding Rand?

"I'll take any of those guys over Obama any day" would be my prediction. And there is the fail.
I hadn't heard of this, got a link?
 
But I’ve met very few who were libertarians or constitutionalists before Ron Paul.

I was a Libertarian before Ron Paul.

Ross Perot got me interested in what else was out there beside the 2 parties. Enter Harry Browne.

If Beck promotes the message and promotes Rand, great. I am just prepared for the flip when the time is critical, as history has shown.
 
I came around to the liberty movement around early 2008 and I was surprised how much hate there was for Beck. I thought we should give him a chance. Since then I have seen how much of a snake he can be and I think it's wise take advantage of him when possible, but no more than Frank Luntz and his phony focus groups.
 
I remember Beck doing back-to-back days of his Fox News show promoting FA Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom.” I remember him promoting Tom Woods and his great book “Meltdown.” I remember him talking about the evils of the Federal Reserve. I remember him allowing Judge Andrew Napolitano to be his primary guest host on his uber-popular television program. I remember him educating his audience about the evils of “progressivism” bashing Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson for their big government visions, in both domestic and foreign policy. I remember him saying America needs to better mind its own business. I remember him being one of the earliest conservative talk hosts to call for troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

During one of the breaks during Wednesday’s show, Beck actually reminded all of us that he’d been calling for an end to that war for five years. But that no one had really paid much attention to that.

He’s right.

Bullshit, imho. I remember all that too, in his 'wooing' stage when he reeled them in, then used his 'stature' with people who were drawn in by the ideas to stab those who really stood for those issues in the back.

AFTER all that he called Santorum 'like George Washington' and pushed him over Ron. AFTER that he killed Debra Medina's surge.

That goes to the argument AGAINST Beck, this isn't someone in a 'new awakening' he knew all this at LEAST when he was trying to pretend he was 'one of us' in 2008/2009. That is what WE have been saying. Yet he acted afterwards as he did, regardless.
 
I came around to the liberty movement around early 2008 and I was surprised how much hate there was for Beck. I thought we should give him a chance. Since then I have seen how much of a snake he can be and I think it's wise take advantage of him when possible, but no more than Frank Luntz and his phony focus groups.

this.
 
OK, I guess if Jack Hunter thinks Glenn Beck is coming around, then he's coming around.

Here's an example of how Beck is dealing with an issue near and dear to libertarian hearts.

Just yesterday, not long after Rand had been interviewed on Beck's show, Beck said he didn't agree with the drug legalization issue as presented on the previous day's show. Even on medical marijuana, he said he thought that was just an excuse for people to "get high". His idea of common ground on the drug issue would be to relax regulation on prescription drugs so that people with cancer (for example) would have certain drugs made available to them that are being held up in the FDA approval process.

Big Pharma loves that idea. People paying the bills, whether taxpayers through limited health care funds or otherwise, not so much.
 
one issue beck will really struggle with if he is actually interested in promoting libertarian ideas is foreign intervention. we know he's a very religious person and will defend any position israel takes-because he ties it to his own beliefs. that's why i think he's so big on rand..rand has made all the right moves to win over the beck/israel first-types. it will be interesting to visit the blaze now and again and see if he really can step away from the neocon horseshit.
 
I think Jack's strategy here is not unlike Rand's endorsement of Romney (which made his voice credible when he criticized his foreign policy a week later), and maybe even similar to what Beck is doing (though I don't think his true motives are that simple, profit and co-option are likely what he's going for).

If you just immediately dismiss Beck's "change of heart", then it makes you look like you're biased and exclusive, but if you reel them and give them the benefit of the doubt, then not only do you prevent painting yourself in a corner, but it gives your voice credibility when you later say "I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he was being honest, and he let me down".

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've noticed that both Rand and Jack seem to be keenly aware of the perceptions that will be used against them and us. Don't give them ammo when you don't have to, as you might actually be able to use them before they stab you in the back and it's time to disavow them.
 
Last edited:
If you just immediately dismiss Beck's "change of heart", then it makes you look like you're biased and exclusive, but if you reel them and give them the benefit of the doubt, then not only do you prevent painting yourself in a corner, but it gives your voice credibility when you later say "I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he was being honest, and he let me down".

Maybe. But I think no small part of our credibility comes from our ability to see through things. A lot of people came around to Ron Paul because he demonstrably predicted the 2008 crash while all the talking heads and all the Congressional tools were saying the whole notion was ridiculous.

Yes, we seem more populist when we get suckered same as everyone else. But the worse things get, the more Americans stop looking for someone who reminds them of themselves, and the more they look for someone who has more of a clue than they do. I think we're better off erring in the latter direction.
 
Back
Top