Glenn Beck the new libertarian says: The U.S. is about to devalue the currency like crazy

Glenn Beck got a show on Fox News, and announced that he's dropping the “conservative” label, and calling himself a “libertarian instead. Given the economic crisis, I'm not surprised by his sudden aversion for all things government, and libertarians are the staunchest defenders of individual liberty against the state out there. Whether it's big government conservatism, or big government liberalism, the common problem is the same: the big government part.

For one thing, I don't think Scheuer was actually stating his desire that America be attacked. It seems to me that he was simply saying that another terrorist attack was only plausible scenario in which he envisioned Democrats and Republicans in congress ending their political squabbling and doing the right thing for the country.

Secondary, this usage of one or two cases to brand an entire portion of the political spectrum is something I find quite concerning.

Consider, for instance, Republican Congressman Ron Paul and Weekly Standard Editor William Kristol. Both consider themselves to be “conservatives” and members of the “political right.” Yet, in terms of foreign policy, the two could not be more ideologically opposed to one another.

Ron Paul is a libertarian (albeit with conservative leanings) who opposes foreign adventurism and nation-building and spoke out more forcefully against the Iraq War than just about anyone in Congress.

William Kristol, on the other hand, is a neoconservative who sees America as a “benevolent hegemon” in the world arena and was one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Iraq War.

There are also Paleoconservatives, such as Patrick Buchanan, who toe the conservative line on numerous domestic issues but who spoke out against neoconservatism and the Iraq War.

Then there are people like Glenn Beck, a “conservative” who doesn't seem to know what he believes in–vociferously supporting Bush and the Iraq War when it was going well and then reluctantly criticizing Bush and the Iraq War only after it became painfully obvious that the war wasn't going that well and not serving America's interests.

Terms like “liberal” and “conservative” have become so confusing and so meaningless in modern discourse that resorting to blanket criticism of “liberals” and/or “conservatives” without any modifiers explaining just who it is that we're criticizing only further sullies our debates.

Fiscal progressives are not the same as social liberals.
Fiscal conservatives are not the same as social conservatives.
Paleoconservatives are not the same as neoconservatives.
The Antiwar Movement is not the same as “the Left.”
Libertarianism is not the same as “the Right.”

I hate to be a stickler for political nuance. Politics would be a lot simpler if it were simply black-white, left-right. But it isn't.

Sounds like Scheuer thinks we need ANOTHER “new Pearl Harbor.” Meshes 100% with the neocon perspective represented by PNAC.

GreenDreams,

If you don't believe my words, then consider Scheuer's own words. Back in 2007, he wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post in which he criticized George Tenet but also had some rather unflattering things to say about neoconservatives:

Tenet's attacks focus instead on the walking dead, politically speaking: the glowering and unpopular Cheney; the hapless Rice; the band of irretrievably discredited bumblers who used to run the Pentagon, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith; their neoconservative acolytes such as Richard Perle; and the die-hard geopolitical fantasists at the Weekly Standard and National Review.

Or consider his September 2007 http://www.antiwar.com article Why Does Norman Podheretz Hate America? in which he wrote:

Podhoretz hates every American who does not support the neoconservatives' views, the foreign policy they have devised, and the military and national security disasters to which they are leading America

Podhoretz is particularly vicious toward Buchanan because he knows that Buchanan sees through the neoconservative fantasy with the most unrelenting acuity.

But Podhoretz does not care about understanding the enemy's real motivation and attributes in order to annihilate him as quickly as possible. By using the term Islamofascist he seeks only to block any debate on the neoconservative agenda by ensuring that its critics are identified as pro-fascist, therefore anti-American, therefore pro-Nazi, and therefore anti-Semitic. Other notable men have described this tactic as the Big Lie, and it is a neocon specialty and trademark.

This smug attitude does capture in a nutshell, however, a good part of the basic un-Americanism of the neoconservatives; they are a foreign and, I think, malign influence in our body politic.

I rest my case.

“PNAC says that what was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world’s resources, was “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. The attacks of September 11, 2001 provided the “new Pearl Harbor”, described as “the opportunity of ages”. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have since merge the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime. Time and again, September 11 is described as an “opportunity”. It provided the necessary catalyst to put the global war plan into effect. Congress quickly allocated $40 billion to fund the “war on terrorism” shortly after September 11. Condoleezze Rice said she had called together senior members of the National Security County and asked them “to think about ‘how do you capitalize on these opportunities, which she compared with those of “1945 to 1947″; the start of the cold war. “

Sounds like Scheuer thinks we need ANOTHER “new Pearl Harbor.” Meshes 100% with the neocon perspective represented by PNAC. Who is PNAC? – Paul Wolfowitz, Bush's Deputy Defense Secretary. John Bolton, Bush's Undersecretary of State. Stephen Cambone, Bush's head of the Pentagon’s Office of Program, Analysis and Evaluation. Eliot Cohen a member of the Defense Policy Board, which advised Rumsfeld. Devon Cross a member of the Defense Policy Board, which advised Rumsfeld. I. Lewis Libby Chief of Staff to Bush's Vice President Dick Cheney. Dov Zakheim, Bush's Comptroller for the Defense Department. Vice-President Dick Cheney , Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, William J. Bennett (Reagan’s former Education Secretary), and Zalmay Khalilzad (Bush’s Ambassador to Afghanistan).

“But what’s clear is that conservatives like Scheuer — and there are many of them (neocons, mostly, but not only), — promote a Cheney-esque national security agenda that is, at its core, violent.”

In fact, Michael Scheuer has actually been rather antagonistic towards neoconservatives. He was extremely critical of the Iraq War (going to far as to write columns for http://www.antiwar.com). He was also very critical of what he perceives as the “Israel Lobby”, exactly the OPPOSITE of what one would expect of a neoconservative.

I don't know what his exact politics are, but he strikes me as a paleoconservative.

I'm saying I agree with views he expressed on Glenn Beck's show. I'm just pointing out the silliness of those on the Left who, in knee-jerk fashion, criticize anyone on the Right as being “neoconservative.”

Words have meanings. We ought to understand what the terms “liberal” and “conservative” and “neoconservative” actually mean before assigning these labels to people.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/289253.php

Yep. Keep reminding America what you are about. I totally love it.

And the other is now in control. The early word is not good on them either, unless you like econimic depressions and socialization/nationalization.

Never mind you call me inhuman, God Forbid you call me anti-American!

Actually, you're describing those on the Left and notably on the farther Left, if you honestly omit “love for their country.” In fact, we're seeing exactly what you describe, about the Left, with the current extremism related to the environment and “global warming,” and the development of a similar syndrome with health care, as we're already seeing and hearing (not only with the Dems' remarks in Washington but with hype and misleading advertising about the health care “crisis” [sic] and necessary government solution NOW!).

TIC — The Immoderate Couple

(Kathy is the saner member.)

Dick Cheney and I both know that there are things that need to be done for the sake of world peace.

“I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops, uh, depending on the breaks.”

Hey, sometimes you got to break a few eggs to make an omelet.