This guy
Posted on 02/23/2009 2:47:57 PM PST by pissant
You can’t help but admire Rush Limbaugh’s talent for publicity. His radio talk show is probably—reliable figures only go back to 1991—in its third decade as the number-one rated radio show in the country. And here he is in the news again, trading verbal punches with the president of the United States.
Limbaugh remarked on Jan. 16 that to the degree that Obama’s program is one of state socialism, he hopes it will fail. (If only he had said the same about George W. Bush.) The president riposted at a session with congressional leaders a week later, telling them, “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” Outsiders weighed in: Limbaugh should not have wished failure on a president trying to cope with a national crisis; Obama should not have stooped to insult a mere media artiste, the kind of task traditionally delegated to presidential subordinates while the chief stands loftily mute. Citizens picked sides and sat back to enjoy the circus.
(snip)
In place of the permanent things, we get Happy Meal conservatism: cheap, childish, familiar. Gone are the internal tensions, the thought-provoking paradoxes, the ideological uneasiness that marked the early Right. But however much this dumbing down has damaged the conservative brand, it appeals to millions of Americans. McDonald’s profits rose 80 percent last year.
(Excerpt) Read more at amconmag.com ...
Want some cheese with that whine? Rush was all over Bush when Bush strayed from conservative values, especially on spending.
I think the question is “what the hell is this “derbyshire?”
My thoughts exactly.
Leave the crappy mag on the shelf or read it at a library if you can't help yourself. Don't put money in their pocket.
Obviously, John Derbyshire is an idiot.
Completely distorts the facts like your typical liberal turdbrain. Rush did not say he hoped Obama failed and this has been played out ad nauseum for the past month.
You can always tell when Rush is being diss-ed by a neo-Rockefeller....they have no clue what they are talking about because they never listen to Rush. You are correct Dirtboy. There was plenty of Bush bashing going on in conservative talk radio when Bush strayed from conservative principles.
I’ve never heard of him.
He can’t be important in any form.
.....watsamatter there Scooter,slow day AC mag? not enough porkulus to talk about?.why do you read the bill?..or were you naughty and just happen to get this assign to you?
Derbyshire has differed from his fellow writers at National Review on important subjects. For example, Derbyshire supported Michael Schiavo's position in the Terri Schiavo case, showed sympathy for class-warfare themes in movies such as Titanic, argued that Pope John Paul II was totally unable to stop the secularization of the West, ridiculed George W. Bush's "itty-bitty tax cut, paid for by dumping a slew of federal debt on your children and grandchildren",[7] has derided Bush in general for being too sure of his religious convictions and for his "rich-kid-ness",[8] dismisses small-government conservatism as unlikely to ever take hold (although is not unsympathetic to it), has called for immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq (but favored the invasion), opposes market reforms or any other changes in Social Security, defended Michael Jackson as harmless, is pro-choice on abortion, supports euthanasia in a fairly wide range of circumstances, and has suggested that he might (in a time of international crisis) vote for Hillary Clinton as president.[9] Derbyshire's views on the Schiavo case attracted harsh condemnation from fellow writers at National Review Online. NRO writer and frequent blogger, Ramesh Ponnuru, attacked Derbyshire in language far more forceful than customary in National Review's internal debates.[10] The Derbyshire-Ponnuru dispute arose again over Ponnuru's recently published book, Party of Death. Derbyshire reviewed the book harshly in the New English Review,[11] and Ponnuru replied on NRO with another strongly worded attack on Derbyshire as "wrong," "florid," "anti-intellectual," "gaseous" and "preposterous" among other terms.[12]
See also: RINO
I added the last part...
How radio makes me irrelevant...err I mean...ruins the right
I never heard of this guy. I wonder if Rush has.
And he has a major case of Rush envy. Have some Derbyshire cheese with your whine, Mr. Derbyshire.
Thanks for posting the wiki. Now this idiot’s rant makes sense (as far as a liberal makes sense).
Reagan was president when Rush started. I wonder how long Rush was able to delay the state we find ourselves in today.
I believe the GOP tried a version of Derb’s “middle brow conservatism’ when they ran McInsane in 2008. How did that work out, Derb?
I actually get a lot of chores done while I listen to Rush. He also makes my 20 minute workout go by rather quickly. I, however, generally save my errands for another time.
Good point. I guess he’s good friends with Christopher Buckley and Kathleen Parker.
And now he's famous.
John Cleese’s uglier brother?
LOL!
National Review has turned into a trash heap of “Rockefeller Republicans”.
Derbyshire wants to return to Queen of Marquesberry rules. There’s a reason why Republicans were out of power from FDR to LBJ, and losing two consecutive elections. It’s time conservatives start jerking their knees too. We have the facts on our side, we could use a little passion and bluster rather than resorting to George Will talking points.
I have found two small stores with great AM reception and I save these errands for high noon :-)
At night, fold all the laundry while podcasting 24/7.
The republicans forgot this and tried to do to much thinking and strayed from the truth. That is they are out of power. Rush is just telling the truth. I read in most conservative publications of how conservatives need to "change" to be more like democrats to win people over. No thanks.
I was about to ask if this wasn't Nigel Incubator-Jones...
Thanks for all you're doing to promote Republican and conservative principles. Now that I've retired from active politics, I don't mind that you have become the Number One voice for conservatism in our Country.
I know the liberals call you "the most dangerous man in America," but don't worry about it, they used to say the same thing about me. Keep up the good work. America needs to hear the way things ought to be."
Sincerely, Ron (Reagan)
He’s one of the few who will take on political correctness. For that alone, he’s a good read.
Derb has been around a long time and is a very interesting guy.
He makes some very good points on a lot of subjects, although I disagree with him frequently.
Those calling him a RINO or Rockefeller Republican are quite off-base. He’s pretty much in a class by himself, but a Ron Paul and Sarah Palin fan is not your standard RINO.
He was perhaps the originator of whack-a-mole war theory for fighting terrorists. Don’t invade, conquer and rebuild them when they piss you off. Just destroy their society and leave. Destroyed societies are no threat to anybody. Think what you will of this theory, it’s hardly Bushian neo-conservatism.
Am I a rube for having no clue what "cloth-eared, moon-booted" is supposed to mean?
OK Mr. Derbyshire, you go on for paragraph after endless paragraph about the obviously lowbrow antics of Limbaugh and others. You mention Levin explicitly. You dredge up "feminazi", a twenty year old term. You've heard nothing "lowbrow" from Limbaugh for 20 years? And Levin actually said "Washington Compost"? On the air? Really? Shocking. This totally negates his learned take on all matters legal, doesn't it? In a culture with Kieth Olbermann and "Family Guy" on prime time, you look ridiculous.
If you want to argue that if conservative talk radio was so great and so effective we wouldn't be in this mess, who's to argue? But the fact that you consider commentary laced with a bit of humor and irony intellectually inferior to what drones on PBS produce, just reveals you as the snob a lot of people already seem to think you are. You aren't nearly as highbrow and sophisiticated as you fancy yourself to be. You have no preference for intellect and reason. What kind of intellect cites an Obama supporter as an authority on the leadership of the conservative movement simply because he's the twerp son of somebody? That's just...well, stupid It's lowbrow, if you ask me. What's next Ron Reagan? No your preference isn't for intellect. Your preference is for the PBS tone of voice. Rush is smarter than you. Levin more so. While deeply insane, even Michael Savage is smarter than you. Deep down you know it, and it eats you up.
Sounds like he thinks of himself as elite among a group of "Highbrow Conservatives" who covet the powerful voice and position Rush enjoys - "the ruling classes" donchaknow.
This appears to be a slick attempt to redefine and marginalize Rush by lumping him into a group of what he considers 'lowbrow carny barkers' - just one of the pack.
I had to laugh at the quote cited from Wm. F. Buckley's son about Rush being no Wm. F. Buckley. As much as I respected Mr. Buckley, I say thank goodness for that in a number of ways. From what little I know about Mr. Buckley's biological son, bloodline is as close as he comes to being another Wm. F. Buckley. He appears to fall quite short of the ideological mark.
I don't know for certain, but I'd bet this guy is one of the "higbrows" who says Reaganism is dead, but they know that isn't true as long as Rush Limbaugh has a voice. That isn't lowbrow, Mr. Derbyshire.
National Review’s circulation is only 155,000.
How many more people listen to Rush every day?
Maybe Derbyshire should start his own radio talk show and quit whining.
They could do a round robin of girly men. Fresh effeminate voice of conservatism each day of the week.
BTW, “American Conservative” is MSNBC commentator's Pat Buchanan's magazine. A glance at it will show how strongly anti-conservative it is.
Agreed. I wish all these people slamming him would read a dozen of his columns in NR first. He is a paleo-conservative of the first water. I cannot think of another public intellectual at a respectable journal that is less politically correct.
He was perhaps the originator of whack-a-mole war theory for fighting terrorists. Don’t invade, conquer and rebuild them when they piss you off. Just destroy their society and leave. Destroyed societies are no threat to anybody.
I believe the short motto is "more rubble, less trouble."
Derb comes from the British equivalent of poor white trash and is quite proud of it. I do not place him in the same category as some of the other country club Republicans at NR.
Also, you have no idea just how sophisticated the guy actually is. He has written two best-selling books about graduate-level mathematics. I have a physics degree and could barely follow them.
-ccm
Who is John Galt?
This is really rich, coming from a guy who used to work for William F. Buckley. WFB virtually ANNOINTED Rush Limbaugh as his successor as leader of the conservative movement.
Limbaugh spent a lot of time with WFB, and when WFB would come on the air with Rush, he would adulate Rush to the point where it was almost out of character.
So, now that WFB has gone on to his eternal reward, Derbyshire decides to take potshots at Rush? WFB is probably rolling in his grave.
Now is the time to cancel your subscription to National Review, if you were gullible enough to have ever subscribed.
That last line, How did we allow Carny Barkers to run away with the Right (I’m paraphrasing) is the equivalent of Kathleen Parker’s snide comment about Christians once being relegated to standing on crates and screaming at crowds - neither analogy works but both are all puffed up on arrogance.
As for elitism, it does need to go. But not the concept of an elite, which Rush Limbaugh belongs to and John Derbyshire does not, after all, Mr. Limbaugh never makes his point by looking down on people. Mr. Limbaugh is the big thinker, Mr. Derbyshire (great name - I think from a town in England famous for shoe making in the middle ages) is the big poser.
For all of the extolling of William F. Buckley, remember that Mr. Buckley never won an election for the Republicans and please don’t credit Reagan’s victory to NR.
Please cancel your subscription to National Review, it makes no sense at all to give your ever shrinking discretionary spending budget to people who, in their heart of hearts, hate you.
Just like Mr. Derbyshire, Jonah Goldberg hates us and only uses us, SO PLEASE cancel your subscription.
Any magazine that mocks your core beliefs is not a magazine that you should spend one single dime on.
I don’t subscribe. Nat. Review is not completely worthless. Levin hangs out there, as does Steyn.
You’re absolutely right, we ran John McCain - isn’t he middlebrow enough for that pantywaist Derbyshire?
Yes, it’s not completely worthless, which really is what makes it such poison.
Please cancel your subscription to National Review.
NO! In fact I may renew my subscription.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.