I gotta agree with Chief Justice John Roberts in regard to the State of the Union Address–how it’s become a political pep rally. The justices sit there surrounded by hooting and hollering Congressmen, and are by tradition expected to remain stone-faced, expressionless–even as the President criticizes them for a recent decision.

Obama was wrong to criticize the Supreme Court in that atmosphere (and wrong in how he characterized their decision, apparently). And Roberts was right to say, “To the extent the State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I’m not sure why we are there.”

Charles Murray of the conservative American Enterprise Institute writes in his column “The Unbearable Paradox of Glenn Beck” that he agrees with Glenn Beck 95% of the time on substantive issues. “The man is a gifted communicator. His style doesn’t happen to be one I like, but many times I’ve sat there on my sofa wishing I could make the same point as effectively.”

But he doesn’t like Beck’s style, and doesn’t find him trustworthy. “I don’t really want to shut him up. I want him to change.”

Murray, a thoughtful guy, wants intellectual honesty. He continues:

Beck uses tactics that include tiny snippets of film as proof of a person’s worldview, guilt by association, insinuation, and occasionally outright goofs….To put it another way, I as a viewer have no way to judge whether Beck is right. I have to trust that the snippets are not taken out of context, that the dubious association between A and B actually has evidence to support it, and that his numbers are accurate. It is impossible to have that trust….

What Beck does is propaganda. Maybe propaganda has its place, but let’s not kid ourselves. Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman are brothers.

In another column, “Is Glenn Beck Our Friend,” Murray writes:

My reader–the one I’m talking to with every sentence–is a bright, reasonable person who doesn’t agree with me but comes to my text ready to give me a shot. My task is to get this reader to stick with me as we work through difficult questions. If I take a cheap shot at his point of view, I’m going to lose him. If I duck an obvious objection to the argument I’m making, I’m going to lose him.

We are indeed engaged in a battle for America’s soul, but the way that battle is conducted makes a big difference….Our job is to engage in a debate on great issues and make converts to our point of view. The key word is converts–referring to people who didn’t start out agreeing with us. We shouldn’t be civil and reasonable just because we want to be nice guys. It is the only option we’ve got if we want to succeed instead of just posture. The Glenn Becks of the world posture, and make our work harder.

CNN deserves a lot of credit for their sustained reporting on Haiti, weeks after the earthquake actually happened. FoxNews has moved on to their political agenda, and I’m not sure MSNBC was ever much interested in Haiti. But CNN is still there, keeping us informed.

I suspect their ratings are suffering as a result. That’s been the experience with disasters in the past. People have ADD when it comes to disasters–they get tired of hearing about it. So rather than lose viewers, TV shows change the subject to appease the fleeting tastes of their consumers. Yesterday’s disaster gets left behind. It’s still a disaster, still news, but it’s not what viewers want anymore.

But CNN has held firm, insisting that Haiti is still an important story.

It’s expensive, too, keeping reporters, camera crews, and producers on location. It’s much cheaper to let Sean Hannity or Keith Olberman pontificate in suit-and-tie from a studio. By comparison, sending reporters into the field costs big bucks. Though you can bet Fox will spend that money to cover, in force, the upcoming National Tea Party Convention. It’s a matter of priorities.

Peggy Noonan critiqued the State of the Union Address in her Wall Street Journal column. Of Obama’s words regarding healthcare, she concluded:

The battle over the president’s health-care plan is over, and the plan
will not be imposed on the country. Waxing boring on the virtues of the
bill was a rhetorical way to obscure the fact that it is dead….The bill will
now get lost in the mists and disappear. It is a collapsed soufflé in
an unused kitchen in the back of an empty house. Now and then the
president will speak of it to rouse his base and remind them of his
efforts.

She ended with some quotes from a man whom she describes as “a friendly acquaintance of the president, a Republican who bears him no animus.” Here’s the final paragraph.

“I hope we have big changes in 2010,” the friend said. Only significant
loss will force the president to focus on spending. “To heal our
country we need to get the arrogance out of the White House and the
elitists out of the Congress. We need tough love. We need a real adult
in the White House because we don’t have adults in the Congress.”

Amy Sullivan, writing on the Swampland blog, addresses the issue of John Edwards’ current trip to Haiti.

I have no doubt that Edwards, with his long and admirable commitment to poverty issues, really wants to do what he can to help in Haiti. It
also seems likely that this sounded to him like an EZ-Pass lane to get to image rehabilitation more quickly.

If I were Jon Stewart, this is where I’d say: “Edwards. Meet me at Camera 3.”Sir, it’s obviously killing you to have fallen so far, even if it was
your fault and you do still have millions and millions of dollars. You
may possibly have a chance at some day rehabilitating your image. But
you’re going to have to follow these steps:

Step 1. Go away and keep your mouth shut.
Step 2. Seriously, you can’t skip Step 1–go back and try again

.