I like listening to Mark Levin, and do so whenever I can. But there’s something he does that diminishes him in my estimation. He resorts to petty name calling and derisive comments about his colleagues in talk radio. He’s done it to Michael Savage, and now his latest target is Glenn Beck. Especially Beck’s style and manner of delivery.
So what, Mark? What has Levin done to uncover the corruption and lies of the Obama administration and his enablers in Congress on BOTH sides of the aisle?
Yes, Beck’s style is off the beaten path. It’s a breath of fresh air. And if it shakes up the way vital information is presented, rah rah! We’re learning American and World history in a way that every student should be taught. It’s marvelous. And the “clownish” way Beck is getting it across is obviously getting under Levin’s thin skin. I noticed that even Sean Hannity (who’s got to be looking over his shoulder at Beck’s ascending ratings) is changing some of his TV show format, using studio audiences a la Beck. And while I’m thinking of it, I’ve never heard Hannity make a disparaging remark about Beck or any other colleague. Again, the measure of the man. I know from personal experience during my days at WDBO-AM 580 (Orlando) that Hannity’s a prince, a genuine good guy. Success has not gone to his head.
Beck is the only “name” out there who’s digging, educating his listeners/viewers about history and putting into context the lies, actions, policies and people that are destroying our Republic. Beck’s team of some 20+ researchers and attorneys have lifted more rocks and uncovered more corruption in one year than Levin has done in his career. Why knock it? Why disparage Beck for his style, which admittedly is unusual, but clever and highly effective? Checked his ratings lately?
I don’t agree with Beck on everything (the Constitutional eligibility issue being a big one), but I value what he is bringing to the table. And I thank God he’s doing it. Lord knows, there isn’t a mainstream news department that is (Fox included), with the exception of new media Andrew Breitbart’s BIGs (Hollywood, Government, Journalism), and we citizen journalist/bloggers.
It says something about the measure of Mark Levin, a brilliant man and a patriot, that he consistently lowers himself to insults and arrogant commentary about Beck or anyone else he deems beneath him. Aren’t we all for limited government? Aren’t we all defending the Consitution and founding principles enshrined therein?
Levin’s constant derogatory, petty remarks and insults diminish his stature. They reveal a small man threatened by the success of others, especially when they don’t fit his template. His attitude is distasteful and leave me disinclined to tune him in anymore.
RS McCain — “Stacy” to those of you who read him (and if you’re not, you’re missing top shelf writing by an observant wit, by the way) — is commenting about it at his site today, wondering aloud at the apparent animosity on display toward Beck by fellow conservatives:
My 17-year-old son Bob was driving home Monday evening after we’d picked up his twin brother James from work and we were listening to the Mark Levin’s opening monologue on 1490 AM here in Hagerstown when I said, “Uh-oh, he’s going after Glenn Beck.” I grabbed pen and a piece of paper and jotted down a few notes, but Mark Maloney at the Radio Equalizer has pretty much the whole thing.
[ snip ]
If you compare either Levin or Malkin to Glenn Beck in terms of their years of service to the conservative cause, then, Beck is certainly much their junior. And since we’re making such comparisons, what about Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter?
Granted, Beck has had an amazing impact since switching from CNN to Fox. He is a dynamic personality and his innovative show is now arguably the most fascinating hour on television.
Despite all that, however, he hasn’t paid his dues to the conservative cause to the extent that Levin, Malkin, Hannity and Coulter have paid their dues. The choice of Beck for the final night’s slot, then, could be perceived as a slight to those others. If that prime spot had gone to any of those four, well, OK. But . . . a Johnny-come-lately? And a somewhat erratic Johnny-come lately, at that?
I’m not saying that’s the explanation, I’m just pointing out that Beck’s lack of seniority in the conservative movement could be a factor here, above and beyond whatever specific criticisms Levin or anyone else makes.
What do you think?
***
I think conservatives are doing what they always do: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by getting distracted with in–fighting and purity tests.
Thanks for the linkage, Andrea. I certainly don’t mean to ascribe Levin’s criticism of Beck to envy. His criticism is specific and substantive and must be judged on its own merits, without regard to motive.
My point is that CPAC’s choice of Beck for the prime Saturday evening spot can be read as a snub of Levin (and other conservatives of comparable status) and, from a perspective of seniority within the movement, you can argue that Beck “jumped ranks.” As I noted in talking about my own situation, it makes me feel like a putz when I’ve never been invited to speak at CPAC, but they give a main-stage spot to a 14-year-old kid for the second consecutive year.
Am I “envious” of Jonathan Krohn? Of course not, and it’s an insult to me even to suggest such a thing. But there are only so many speaking spots on the main CPAC stage, and when the organizers choose one speaker, they effectively unchoose another. If I were a Reagan administration alumnus, a best-selling author and a top talk-radio personality — as is Levin — certainly I would feel umbrage at being excluded from the CPAC agenda in favor of Glenn Beck.
Nothing against Beck and certainly nothing against Levin — I enjoy them both — but I’m just trying to explain why the CPAC decision-making process has to be carefully managed. I love CPAC and am personal friends with many involved as sponors and organizers of the conference. It is in therefore in the spirit of friendship that I suggest they were wrong to deliver this implicit snub to Mark Levin.
Stacy, Your point is well taken. Keying off your post, I approached it from a different perspective, writing something I’ve been noticing for a while. Your post today spurred me to finally put on paper (so to speak) something that I’ve been intending to write about. Thanks for the inspiration!
As the only registered candidate with the FEC for President in 2012 and a Republican, I was totally snubbed from the CPAC event. While I am disappointed I was not invited, I understand that it far to early for the big wigs at the national level to pay a lot of attention of some grass roots want to be. There hosting a teenager, is more of a novelty than reality and it does bring exposure to the upstarts of the party. All this aside, Beck’s performance was right on target. Until the Republican Party establishment begins to understand who really is their party base, they have little hope in winning the 2010 and 2012 elections. Scott Brown is already beginning to show his liberal roots with his cloture vote with the Democrats. He is another Democrat wearing RED when it is convenient for his own purpose. As of the CPAC conference they still do not get it. Beck was merely putting them on notice of who they really are and who they really better become. The grassroots people I represent don’t have allegiance to a particular party simply because they were betrayed in the past. I have attended two county Republican events in the last two weeks. The base is live and well. The root of the disease is at the top. It is time for Steele and company to get their inoculation shots or face another disaster
Rita makes an excellent point.
Dems have the same kind of in-fighting but they’ve learned to keep it quiet. Of course they have media co-operation that the Republicans will never get.
I’m neither a Beck nor a Levin fan. This isn’t personal animus, it’s just my preference for commentary more staid and polished. I’d really like to like them, but it would take serious drug consumption on my part to be able to sustain listening to their levels of rhetoric.
Mr. McCain’s point is crucial, especially about the 14 year-old.
I watched a video interview with him and wondered what the point was. Do you know how many home-schooled kids can rattle off the information he has?? Thousands. It’s not remarkable at all. And many can do that in a Far less pompous manner, too.
When the boy actually spoke in admiration of the current EdSec, Arne Duncan, I was appalled. Krohn is no conservative if he likes Duncan. Duncan is a big-time pusher of Big Govt centrally controlled schooling. That kid is a plant.
Mr. McCain’s point — that featuring him robbed more deserving folks of their fifteen minutes — is spot on. We need leaders, not 14 year-old poseurs who can pull the wool over the eyes of less informed interviewers.
The whole thing was creepy.
Mark Levin is not being petty; this election year is vital to our country and our children’s future will not wait for 2012, 2014, or 2016.
Beck has earned this “in-fighting” by nearly always painting Republicans with a ‘no difference’ brush, flirting with third-parties as the solution to grossly excessive government spending without specifics candidates stated, and not supporting conservative Republicans against liberals (Rebulican and Democrats) who need replaced.
I applaud the Tea Party movement and am a member. That said, to immediately flock to a candidate running under that mantle (see Senate race in Nevada) or falsely claiming adherance to the common values of the movement (see 3rd district race NM and Senate race Kentucky) without deeply researching those candidates is not due deligence by those voters. While viable third-party candidates may selectively assist in fixing what is broke at the federal level, a stealth liberal running to bleed off support from a conservative to assist the liberal candidate in holding onto office, a phony libertarian-conservative who is actually and anarchist and vehemently anti-war (with an arrest record to match), and Ron Paul II will not fix our problems in Washington.
Last point, Mark Levin has a day job and is not looking for a TV show; he is not envious of Glenn Beck’s success.
It seems evident to me that you haven’t listened to Beck’s radio programs or watched many of his TV shows. Otherwise you would know that he does not paint all Republicans with the same brush. Beck played a major role in getting people to come together in their communities with the 9-12 “We Surround Them” Project. He’s doesn’t take any candidate or politician at face value and warns his viewers/listeners against doing the same. He’s always urging them to research the candidates thoroughly. I’m amazed that you would make the claim that he doesn’t. Again, you are obviously not a regular listener/viewer. But I’m glad to know that you are so well acquainted with Mr. Levin that you can categorically state he is not envious of Beck. What a relief!
I have been a loooong time listener to Glenn Beck and he has always been the person who could make me laugh during my darkest hour. I have always felt that Glenn is a modern day prophet because he didn’t just start saying these things. Of course now everything has to be vetted to the max, but he has predicted most of these things and I thank God that Glenn is being allowed to say these things, in spite of the fact that his very life has been threatened. I think Mark Levin has his own audience, but he always sounds so angry and grouchy to me. Beck has that self-deprecating sense of humor that makes everyone able to relate and identify and that is a gift. Also, Glenn is not afraid to speak of God and Jesus and when we do that, we are always under attack. Jesus told us in the Bible we would be. Glenn Beck is trying to bring light to a nation that has been asleep in the dark for a long time. God bless him and his family and Andrea, thanks for bringing this to our attention.
I think the saying is “Divide and Conquer”. We are all for the same thing, I believe our founders argued over certain points but all had the same Principles defeat the left wing radicals they are our enemies.
We know the left is looking for a fissure let’s not give it to them Mmmm Mmmm Mmmmm
Mesa, Az
Though Beck has brought up and exposed some very important history, he is a loon. Didn’t he admit that he converted to Mormonism because of his “hot” wife? Sounds more like his ideology is “Vitamin P”, approval and acceptance than it is concrete. His morning radio talk show (when I can catch it on my way to New Orleans) is mostly like one of those wacky morning radio show sans the music.
Levin is absolutely correct about Beck splintering conservatives.
This is why I don’t got to the BTR show hardly any longer, that and the plethora of Truthers in the chat room.
I know I’m a little late to this, but:
I saw that interview with Beck on 20/20. His wife was sitting next to him when he made that remark. IT WAS A JOKE.
Beck is no backbencher. He and his team are digging up the dirt on the dems in some astounding ways. The beauty of it all is that I don’t have to chose one host to listen to over all others. I love Levin’s grasp of the constitution and history. I love Rush’s grasp of the politic. I delight in Coulter’s scathing wit because I need a breather from totally sober debate. Any of the flaws I see in any of these individuals are dwarfed by my own.