Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Quick, call Glenn Beck, Mitt’s going to praise Teddy Roosevelt

Quick, call Glenn Beck, Mitt’s going to praise Teddy Roosevelt

…  and claim that the Republican Party of 2012, not Obama, is the true heir to Roosevelt.

Via Politico, You, sir, are no Teddy Roosevelt:

In a speech to be delivered in Bedford, N.H., this evening, Mitt Romney will push back explicitly on Barack Obama’s recent invocation of Teddy Roosevelt in a speech the president used to frame the 2012 campaign in terms of “fairness.” Here’s what Romney will say:

Just a couple of weeks ago in Kansas, President Obama lectured us about Teddy Roosevelt’s philosophy of government. But he failed to mention the important difference between Teddy Roosevelt and Barack Obama. Roosevelt believed that government should level the playing field to create equal opportunities. President Obama believes that government should create equal outcomes.

So now Beck, in order to be intellectually consistent with his position on Newt, will declare that he would prefer a Ron Paul third party candidacy over Romney and that any Tea Party supporter who chooses Romney over Obama does no on the basis of race, right?

And Beck will join Ann Coulter in crashing a plane into the conservative aircraft carrier.

The rest of us will simply bang our heads against the wall.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Bully!

Mittens McRomneyCare knows that TR was a progressive, and he knows that TR did NOT believe in “equal opportunity” (as opposed to “equal outcomes” per Politico preview of speech). He knows it, and he’s lying about it. Why? Well, gee, let’s think.

Romney knows that TR’s Second Bill of Rights was designed to ensure, encase in our Constitution, equal outcomes. Romney knows about TR’s “square deal” (another attempt to ensure equal outcomes). Romney knows about TR’s views on preventing “undesirables” from reproducing (eugenics, anyone?). Romney knows that TR was big on the government ensuring “the greatest good for the greatest number.” Romney knows that TR approved of “desirable” businesses who did what the government wanted but sought to destroy those he deemed “undesirable.” Romney knows, in other words, that TR was a big government (the biggest government conceivable) progressive loon.

I’m more interested in why he’s lying about it than what Glenn Beck may or may not say about it.

Intellectual consistency, much like honesty, is only for the little people.

Better watch what you say professor, or they’ll start calling you unhelpful.

Beck’s comments on Gingrich typify his idealistic absolutism. One thing that Glenn doesn’t seem to get at all, is when you have a limited set of choices (none ideal) you must make the best alternative available. You cannot just suck your thumb and stand in the corner. Not making a choice, is in fact, making a choice. Making a choice that ensures that the worse alternative emerges victorious is irresponsible.

I’m a long time listener of Glenn Beck, but I’ve been on a complete hiatus of his shows since he made these comments. This is real life Glenn. Get a grip.

huskers-for-palin | December 21, 2011 at 12:36 pm

If Mittens wins the primaries, I’m just gonna laugh my ass off as these pompus clowns try to convince me to get on the Mit-train.

Sorry, ain’t buying that ticket. I’ll work on local senate and house campaigns as a “plan B” to keep the POTUS winner in check.

    Or when they stand with that deer-in-the-headlights look as the Axelrod machine unleashes their stockpile of opposition research upon him. All the stuff they’ve been saving, not using now in order to ensure that he is the one they face in the general.

    Then the media two minute hates, followed the inevitable defeat for being a Democrat lite…

Once again, Republican party = Stupid Party.

But he failed to mention the important difference between Teddy Roosevelt and Barack Obama.

Teddy didn’t stage a dramatic retreat from San Juan Hill.

BannedbytheGuardian | December 21, 2011 at 3:30 pm

I enjoy these arguments over former Presidents. Nowhere else in the world do countrymen debate former leaders – they accept it happened – ask a Ugandan about Idi Amin. Americans have this notion that somehow had X president done this that or been another -things would be different.

Then there is the layer effect of what the world thinks . In the case of This Rooseveldt his actions during WW2 make him a HERO. He is seen as being smarter than the American people (it happens ). We are extremely grateful to this President .

Plus he did wel for the USA for by entering the war he laid the base for American superiority in many areas.

You won’t find many critics out here.

BannedbytheGuardian | December 21, 2011 at 11:58 pm

Yep I did not see the Teddy . But what on earth is the problem with Teddy R. He started Yellowstone & introduced Teddy Bears to the world.

If the guy did any society /financial engineering surely you have had about 100 years to right the ship ?

By this measure I am going off to complain about Queen Victoria. Actually the guy after her was pissweak & only cared about his tamp collection but we have survived that.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend