The usefulness of Glenn Beck

David Frum, the very thoughtful, centrist-leaning conservative thinker, had a bit of a happy hour after CPAC, and he said to me: The thing I respect about Glenn Beck is that he managed to take hard-money crankery away from anti-Semitism.

That's from Dave Weigel of the Washington Independent on a recent episode of the NPR program Fresh Air.

If Frum is correct in his analysis of Beck, I think it's hard to overestimate the value of such a contribution.

Separating a healthy skepticism about the limits and proper role of government from anti-Semitic or racist notions that people of good will rightly find distasteful, is an important function. A function critical to the revitalization of the Republican party and the nation as a whole.

Even Sarah Palin is getting in on this act. In this National Journal article, the author is equating Palin's anti-intellectualism with that of George Wallace, but takes great pains to point out that she in no way shares the racism that figured so prominently in Wallace's life. Beyond pains really. If nothing else, we know by the end of the article that Sarah Palin is no racist.

While I personally would prefer that the current conservative movement was characterized more by Russel Kirk book clubs than Glenn Beck's chalk board, I'll take what I can get. It is important that suburban Minneapolis soccer-moms realize that skepticism about the federal government's ability to remake healthcare in this nation does not make you some sort of raving tinfoil hat wearing anti-Semite.

If Beck and Palin really can separate these two competing strands of thought, then perhaps all the Levi Johnston drama, crying, and misspelling will have been worth it.

Tea Party Foreign Policy

Fox News Sunday featured and interview with Sarah Palin in the wake of her appearance at the Tea Party convention in Nashville.

In one of the clips they featured, Palin had this to say:

"Treating this like a mere law enforcement matter places our country at great risk," she said. "To win that war, we need a commander-in-chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern."

Palin, in a pre-taped interview with "Fox News Sunday" earlier in Nashville, said the way Obama is approaching national security is causing an "uneasiness" among many Americans.

"We are in war," Palin said.

I am wholeheartedly in agreement with the Tea Party principles of smaller and smarter federal government. One that taxes less and, more importantly, spends less. By and large, these have the been the issues at the forefront of the Tea Party movement. If the Tea Party becomes nothing more than the next platform for the disastrous neoconservative foreign policy of the Bush years then they'll have to count me out.

I have also argued against civilian trials for terror suspects, but Palin seems to be arguing a larger point and hinting that Palin '12 could mean no end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I know there are some that see the contradiction in simultaneously arguing for smaller government and enormous military expenditures, but judging by the reaction to Palin's speech those folks hadn't made it to Nashville.

Palin, Clinton, and the Voyages of Sinbad

Illusory Tenant directs our attention to Andrew Sullivan's blog wherein he exposes Sarah Palin's sinister deception about her days playing Scrabble. Yes, Scrabble.

Apparently she claims in her book that her family games included the hoarding of K's and Q's. Which, of course, is impossible since there is only one of each of these letters in a Scrabble game.

What a great piece of hard-hitting investigative journalism.

This reminds me of the time that Hillary Clinton misspoke about coming under sniper fire in Bosnia. Of course, that means Andrew Sullivan is now Sarah Palin's Sinbad.

*Update - Marginal Revolution explains why Palin's Scrabble strategy is no good.

Death Panels (Yes, Again)

With the political blogosphere going practically all Sarah Palin all the time I think it is worthwhile to revisit the "death panel" debate. Particularly since I see it repeatedly mentioned as being ridiculous, beyond belief, and proof that somehow Palin is unfit for office. She may well be unfit for office, but her death panel claim isn't the reason why.

As I wrote back in August, are rumors of death panels greatly exaggerated? Here's an excerpt of an interview of President Obama (h/t Slate's Kausfiles):

THE PRESIDENT: So that's where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that's also a huge driver of cost, right?

I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.

LEONHARDT: So how do you - how do we deal with it?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that's part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It's not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that's part of what I suspect you'll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now. [E.A]

The President is talking about a panel to make medical treatment decisions in order to reduce costs.

You may not want to believe the U.S. government would ever do such a thing, but listen to the words. Palin's fitness for high office has no relevance in this debate. She has in rather stark terms made clear what is at the heart of Obama's consideration of what he concedes are "difficult moral choices."