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.

Reconsidering Beck

The question as to whether or not conservatism is dead has been making the rounds lately. Steven Hayward writing in The Washington Post makes clear that this is not the case. The headline of the piece asks if conservatism is brain dead, but in reality Hayward's analysis turns on a question of balance:

During the glory days of the conservative movement, from its ascent in the 1960s and '70s to its success in Ronald Reagan's era, there was a balance between the intellectuals, such as Buckley and Milton Friedman, and the activists, such as Phyllis Schlafly and Paul Weyrich, the leader of the New Right. The conservative political movement, for all its infighting, has always drawn deeply from the conservative intellectual movement, and this mix of populism and elitism troubled neither side.

Hayward argues this traditional balance is now largely lacking. He calls the Tea Party movement "authentic," but, "unfocused." He also discusses the conservative portion of the opinion media and includes a surprising take on Glenn Beck:

Okay, so Beck may lack Buckley's urbanity, and his show will never be confused with "Firing Line." But he's on to something with his interest in serious analysis of liberalism's patrimony. The left is enraged with Beck's scandal-mongering over Van Jones and ACORN, but they have no idea that he poses a much bigger threat than that. If more conservative talkers took up the theme of challenging liberalism's bedrock assumptions the way Beck does from time to time, liberals would have to defend their problematic premises more often.

I don't have cable, so I don't watch Beck, but this is the first time I have seen him discussed as tackling the issue at the heart of the opposing ideology. Lately, it seems many on the right want to focus on the question of whether or not Beck is bad for the movement. Hayward argues convincingly that he is not, and that there is no need to work to minimize or derail his efforts.

What is needed, it seems, is the passion conservatism currently displays combined with ideas resulting from clear thinking, articulated sharply.

A movement whose passionate side is grounded by rigorous thought will be far better suited to withstand the force of the passionate winds, regardless from which direction they blow.

It is also a movement that I, and many others, would find appealing. Even if it included Beck.

Is Glenn Beck really this stupid?

I mean that sincerely. I don't have cable, so I've never seen the show. Mabye there's an inside joke here that I just don't get.



I've also never produced a television show; but don't they have meetings before the shows air where they discuss what they are going to say?

h/t @TAC blog