Lots of discussion today about a new poll showing Harry Reid with a seven point lead over Sharron Angle. Angle isn’t a run-of-the-mill winger; her old website sounds like it was written by a third-grade teajihadist, e.g. “pay back the deficit”, “Sharron Angle will work toward making a basket of commodities (metals, oils, etc.) as a basis for maintaing the value of the U.S. currency”. Current intelligence suggests that Angle writes many of the comments on Ben Smith’s blog.
So I have to disagree with Daniel Larison when he writes that Michael Gerson is wrong and hypocritical to be frightened by Angle:
What is remarkable here is that Gerson is pretending that he is some latter-day Burke expressing revulsion at violent revolution when he happily served in an administration whose practical policy and stated goal was to try to export revolution all over the world. Perhaps the most important point to be made here is that Gerson worked alongside the people who ushered in violent political change that devastated an entire country, and they also trampled on the rights of American citizens and subjected suspects to indefinite detention and abuse. For her part, Sharron Angle has indulged in some careless and probably ultimately meaningless rhetoric about resisting tyranny at home. Angle’s rhetoric may be reckless or it may be empty, but so far she has not used her rhetoric in the service of an administration given to starting wars and violating the Constitution.
It is true that Gerson served and continues to defend the worst president in modern history, but the only thing that makes Angle’s rhetoric “probably ultimately meaningless” is that she is unlikely to become president. When Angle talks about “Second Amendment remedies” and moving the United States to some strange commodity-based currency, we should take her at her word. Even disgraced ex-Bushies have the right to object to her positions.