My problem with Glenn Beck
On the one hand, we’re supposed to believe that anyone can read and understand the Constitution — meaning, we don’t need a special priesthood to interpret the thing (and of course, this is true, assuming a base level of reading comprehension and intelligence, and assuming one can get past the fact that the document itself is like, over a hundred years old!); and yet at the same time, the Federalist Papers, we’re to understand today, are so arcane and abstruse and unintelligible that they aren’t even being taught anymore — a problem happily solved by Beck’s latest offering, a book that rewrites the Federalist Papers using modern language, which can be yours for only however many dollars (through the website, blah blah blah).
Listen: I understand and appreciate the impulse to get people to read and understand the foundational documents of this country. The goal is laudable, and the rewards of a more engaged and informed citizenry are invaluable.
But for Chrissakes, think through the pitches you make to sell your audience — and understand that, to a certain segment of your potential listeners, it is clear that should people take your arguments at face value (rather than contextualize them as the sales pitches they are), you are laying the groundwork for more harm than good, when it comes to the argument of Constitutional interpretation and judicial hermeneutics.
Good. Fine, then.