Many conservatives weren’t happy with the release of the Senate CIA torture report. They described its release as reckless endangerment at worst, an attempt to distract from the House’s Jonathan Gruber hearings at best.
But it was fitting to question Gruber and publicize some of the uglier interrogation practices the same day. Both events illustrated the role deceit has played in two of the federal government’s biggest undertakings of the past few years—the remaking of our healthcare system at home and the War on Terror abroad. Both congressional inquiries were attempts, however partisan and imperfect, to arrive at some level of transparency and accountability........................
Defending this kind of government behavior may be a habit many conservatives have fallen into, but it does not reflect an authentically conservative habit of mind. Imagine a liberal defense of Gruber on the grounds that health care is, like fighting terrorism, a life-and-death matter. Indeed, if history is any guide, cancer and heart disease are far likelier killers than even the most ruthless terrorist cells.
You don’t have to imagine such defenses, in fact. They’re made routinely. Republican opposition to Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion has been equated to killing, since health coverage saves lives.
The conservative response would be that the morality, legality, and efficacy of policies aimed at increasing health coverage matter, and the benefits must be weighed against the costs, even if all our allies have single payer.
That same reasoning should apply to dealing with terrorism, even if all our enemies torture.................
But the case for limited government is weakened when those making it ignore or defend torture,
testicle-crushing, and waterboarding, complaining only about big government when someone proposes spending taxpayer dollars to help people. And I say that as someone who has
written a book arguing that seemingly benign and compassionate government spending can curtail individual freedom.