A Word of Caution on Glenn Beck (Oh, And Now The Rest Of The Story)

From one of my favorite blogs, The Commentary Magazine Blog:

Unlike others associated with Time magazine, David von Drehle is a skilled, careful, and perceptive writer. So I was interested in his cover story on FOX News’s Glenn Beck, who is considered to be a red-hot commodity these days.

I don’t pretend to be an expert on Beck. In the past I assumed he was a typical figure in the pundit and cable-media world. Only recently have I watched portions of his television program, as well as interviews with him, and heard parts of his radio program. And what I’ve seen should worry the conservative movement.

I say that because he seems to be more of a populist and libertarian than a conservative, more of a Perotista than a Reaganite. His interest in conspiracy theories is disquieting, as is his admiration for Ron Paul and his charges of American “imperialism.” (He is now talking about pulling troops out of Afghanistan, South Korea, Germany, and elsewhere.) Some of Beck’s statements—for example, that President Obama has a “deep-seated hatred for white people”–are quite unfair and not good for the country. His argument that there is very little difference between the two parties is silly, and his contempt for parties in general is anti-Burkean (Burke himself was a great champion of political parties). And then there is his sometimes bizarre behavior, from tearing up to screamingat his callers. Beck seems to be a roiling mix of fear, resentment, and anger—the antithesis of Ronald Reagan.

I understand that a political movement is a mansion with many rooms; the people who occupy them are involved in intellectual and policy work, in politics, and in polemics. Different people take on different roles. And certainly some of the things Beck has done on his program are fine and appropriate. But the role Glenn Beck is playing is harmful in its totality. My hunch is that he is a comet blazing across the media sky right now—and will soon flame out. Whether he does or not, he isn’t the face or disposition that should represent modern-day conservatism. At a time when we should aim for intellectual depth, for tough-minded and reasoned arguments, for good cheer and calm purpose, rather than erratic behavior, he is not the kind of figure conservatives should embrace or cheer on.

From Ace of Spades:

It's On: Mark Levin Goes After Glenn Beck

Calling him a Paulnut.

He's replying to Glenn Beck's odd statement that McCain would have been worse than Obama.

What makes this odd is that what many people find off-putting about Beck is what comes off as a henny-penny apocalyptic tone. Guy's practically selling his courtside seats to Thunderdome.

But McCain would have been worse?

Worse than the apocalypse?

Really?

AND NOW, THE REST OF THE STORY:

I absolutely agree with Glenn Beck. Not because I think McCain actually would have been a worse President, but because I think McCain would have set back the Conservative Movement with his incessant, and quite useless, "reaching across the aisle".

Instead, what we have with Obama is a Progressive movement power grab which is galvanizing the Conservative movement, and shoring up the middle, and causing people to turn towards a national dialogue on the meaning of Constitutional government.

I never thought I'd see it in my lifetime, but it's happening. So, thank God for the Obama Nation.

Also, I want to point out that Peter Wehner, in the Commentary post, notes:

Some of Beck’s statements—for example, that President Obama has a “deep-seated hatred for white people”–are quite unfair and not good for the country.

I say: Oh yeah? Is that right? That's unfair.

So, let me get this straight, our President appointed a Czar of Green Jobs named Van Jones, who was a self-avowed "rowdy Black Nationalist", and our President spent twenty years sitting in a pew listening to Jeremiah Wright, a Minister who has publicly proclaimed his love for James Cone and "Black Liberation Theology", and it is "unfair" to say Obama has a deep-seated hatred of white people.

First, let's ask ourselves, what would we do if we had a President who was appointing "White Nationalists" to Cabinet positions?

What is the definition of White Nationalism?

White nationalism is a political ideology which advocates a racial definition (or redefinition) of national identity for white people, in opposition to multiculturalism, along with a separate all-white nation-state.

What is the definition of Black Nationalism?

Black nationalism (BN) advocates a racial definition (or redefinition) of black national identity, as opposed to multiculturalism. There are different black nationalist philosophies but the principles of all black nationalist ideologies are 1) Black unity, and 2) black self-determination/political, social and economic independence from White society.

Let me ask, how does a society of black people, within a society of white people, and people of other races, achieve "self-determination/political, social, and economic independence from White society"?

For better or worse, we're all in this together. We have to live with each other. Whether it means giving the other guy the right-of-way on the Freeway, or taking orders from the man above you on the totem poll at work, or waiting in line at McDonald's, we can not have political, social, and economic independence from one another without having separate drinking fountains and bathrooms. In other words, "separate but equal." Remember that hoary old phrase?

Now, let's look at words of James Cone, the Father of Black Liberation Theology:

In Cone’s cosmology, whites are “the devil,” and “all white men are responsible for white oppression.” Cone makes this point without ambiguity: “This country was founded for whites and everything that has happened in it has emerged from the white perspective,” Cone has written. “What we need is the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world.”

If whiteness stands for all that is evil, blackness symbolizes all that is good. “Black theology,” says Cone, “refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”

These are our President's Political and Theological roots.

Do I believe Barack Obama hates all white people? No, I do not. However, I do not think it is "unfair" to say that he has a deep-seated hatred for white people. Certainly, if this whole thing was turned around and we had a white President who was appointing White Nationalists to Cabinet positions, we would have no problem with people asserting that he has a deep-seated hatred for black people. And yes, that would be so even if the theoretical white President had black men in his Cabinet at the same time.

How many times have we heard anti-Semites say things like, "You know what I need is to get me a good Jew Lawyer/Accountant." Racism does not necessarily exclude. It simply compartmentalizes people using ugly stereotypes about what people can and can not, should and should not, be able to do within a society.

We, as a Conservative Movement, need to put a stop to allowing Barack Obama's "Blackness" (quotation marks because he is after all half-white, and he was raised by white people) to act as a shield which deflects him from criticism which we would easily level at a White President who behaved in the same manner.

If we do not put an end to these excuses for Barack Obama then certainly we are being racist, because we are declaring to the world that we believe we can expect no better from Black people, than to be racist haters of White people.

And, that is one obnoxious, ugly stereotype I will not participate in perpetrating.

Peter Wehner needs to apologize for that statement, not only to Glenn Beck, but to white people, to black people, and to society in general.