Kathryn, most of what Derb did was defend himself against ad hominem attacks from Wehner. Maybe his "bite" comment pushed the boundaries of what's acceptable on the Corner, and I can understand your desire to see that the site not just devolve into Kossery. But overall Wehner was asking to be smacked down and Derbyshire simply obliged.
In-the-trenches conservative responds to snarky elitist attack in kind, said action is defined as "unfortunate and unnecessary" by on-the-sidelines conservative.
Oh, please. I only wish conservatives like John Derbyshire were in power when we were debating the income tax amendment, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public education, the Fed, the creation of GSEs, and a whole host of other malarkey that has now come on us full circle.
Wehner was *way* over the tonal line, and sorry Klo, but when you posted that as a response, so were you by proxy. It's a bit Rich (as in Frank) to be concerned with the mote in another's eye, and ignore the plank in your own.
I thought the Putze and Wehner snark was a little unfortunate; I'd have left that out. The "Bite Me" comment, too. Otherwise, what's not to like? I have generally supported Bush, PEPFAR and our AIDS policy re: Africa, but Derb's rundown on it has given me something to consider.
(Ahh, heck. Let's leave the "Bite Me" comment in. Wasn't that bad. Kinda funny!)
Unfortunate and unnecessary is exactly what it was. There are many ways that Mr. Derbyshire could have effectively responded to a snarky, elitist liberal attack. The method he chose refuted the attack well, but effectively portrays Mr. Derbyshire as little more than a snarky, elitist conservative... much like his original post on the subject. George Bush should "shut up and go away"?? AIDS relief is merely providing "expensive medications to people in inconsequential countries for the alleviation of a venereal disease"??
I've never seen a conservative political personality who is so often right on substance but so short on decorum, common sense or the ability to strike a chord with those outside his own little fan club. A friend I respect very much often says, "Even if you're right, when you're rude... you're wrong." On this point, Mr. Derbyshire is frequently and spectacularly wrong. As such, he gives National Review and conservatives in general a bad name.
Mrs. Lopez, I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying. Are you suggesting that Derb's response was "unfortunate and unnecessary?" Tonally, it seemed consistent with the piece by Mr. Wehner, which you introduced into the discussion by linking to it on The Corner. If you regret the "tone" the discussion has taken, perhaps it would have been best to not introduce an attack piece written by someone with conflicting interests.
And frankly, if the "tone" of Derb's piece bothers you, what have you to say to some of the commentors on your Dec 3 post who essentially called for the man to be fired for doing his job (i.e writing about politics)?
@es350t -- right on. I respect K-Lo, but if she's going to inject herself in this debate then where has she defended her Corner-compatriot's honor against Wehner's ad hominem?
Derb sends out a rather mild "bite me" to somebody who basically accused him of 'celebrating' others' suffering -- something far from the point of the debate -- and Derb's the one who gets a tsk-tsk from the den mom?
To paraphrase from Goodfells: "K-Lo, we gotta toughen you up. You believe this, wasted eight f'ing aprons on that guy?".
Wehner (not a liberal) gave a fine riposte to Derb's usual grouchy-old-man uber-conservative rant. Now Derb is just digging the hole deeper. Derb, just bow out gracefully and move on. I'm a big fan of Derb's book reviews, but he seems out of place here. I can live with his suing his neighbor, his rudeness to the TV gal who asked him to stay out of the shoot, etc. But his jumping on Bush was uncalled for. Many of us here love Bush. I really do. Yeah Dubya wasn't quite Ronald Reagan, but who is?
Count me as one who agrees with one point made by gdub regarding rudeness. I find that when I'm wanting to cite someone or refer to an argument in order to help make my case, I rarely reach for something written by Mr. Derbyshire even if he's direct and on point, because the tone is so often much ruder than I wish to use.
"Maybe his "bite" comment pushed the boundaries of what's acceptable on the Corner...."
Well, from what I've been able to glean from a few years of reading NRO, it's perfectly fine for NRO authors to launch into screeds against people at other sites, (witness Jonah's endless lambasting of Jon Chait, for instance), but it's not appropriate to insult or ridicule your fellow NRO-niks. Since Wehner isn't here, Derb's response seems to be in accord with general principles.
I think there's a different problem. Derb used logic and facts to criticize *Bush*, whom Lopez considers a virtual saint. You have to remember that some people base their evaluations of a President, and by extension his policies, on visceral factors. It's essentially a black-and-white judgment: they decide, largely based on buzzwords and tone, that this guy "gets it" or "doesn't get it." Then they obediently trot along after the guy, endorsing nearly all of his policies provided that they have at least a veneer of utility.
Such people have difficulty when confronted with facts and logic. They generally don't have the capacity to evaluate the argument or respond with a counterargument in kind, so instead they provide the sort of vague and reflexive condemnation that Lopez wrote above.
"Derb sends out a rather mild "bite me" to somebody who basically accused him of 'celebrating' others' suffering -- something far from the point of the debate -- and Derb's the one who gets a tsk-tsk from the den mom?"
It's worth noting that Derb never bothered to challenge the fact that he celebrates -- or, at best, is indifferent to -- the suffering of others. He only challenged his eagerness to display it in writing.
@gdub
"I've never seen a conservative political personality who is so often right on substance but so short on decorum, common sense or the ability to strike a chord with those outside his (her) own little fan club"
Kathryn, most of what Derb did was defend himself against ad hominem attacks from Wehner. Maybe his "bite" comment pushed the boundaries of what's acceptable on the Corner, and I can understand your desire to see that the site not just devolve into Kossery. But overall Wehner was asking to be smacked down and Derbyshire simply obliged.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIn-the-trenches conservative responds to snarky elitist attack in kind, said action is defined as "unfortunate and unnecessary" by on-the-sidelines conservative.
Same as it ever was....
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh, please. I only wish conservatives like John Derbyshire were in power when we were debating the income tax amendment, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public education, the Fed, the creation of GSEs, and a whole host of other malarkey that has now come on us full circle.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWehner was *way* over the tonal line, and sorry Klo, but when you posted that as a response, so were you by proxy. It's a bit Rich (as in Frank) to be concerned with the mote in another's eye, and ignore the plank in your own.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI thought the Putze and Wehner snark was a little unfortunate; I'd have left that out. The "Bite Me" comment, too. Otherwise, what's not to like? I have generally supported Bush, PEPFAR and our AIDS policy re: Africa, but Derb's rundown on it has given me something to consider.
(Ahh, heck. Let's leave the "Bite Me" comment in. Wasn't that bad. Kinda funny!)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt all looks like snotty elitist tripe to us commoners.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat unfortunate turn was that? Introducing logic and facts to the argument?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUnfortunate and unnecessary is exactly what it was. There are many ways that Mr. Derbyshire could have effectively responded to a snarky, elitist liberal attack. The method he chose refuted the attack well, but effectively portrays Mr. Derbyshire as little more than a snarky, elitist conservative... much like his original post on the subject. George Bush should "shut up and go away"?? AIDS relief is merely providing "expensive medications to people in inconsequential countries for the alleviation of a venereal disease"??
I've never seen a conservative political personality who is so often right on substance but so short on decorum, common sense or the ability to strike a chord with those outside his own little fan club. A friend I respect very much often says, "Even if you're right, when you're rude... you're wrong." On this point, Mr. Derbyshire is frequently and spectacularly wrong. As such, he gives National Review and conservatives in general a bad name.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs there something similar to "Godwin's Law" for the first person in an internet debate to make a weiner insult?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMrs. Lopez, I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying. Are you suggesting that Derb's response was "unfortunate and unnecessary?" Tonally, it seemed consistent with the piece by Mr. Wehner, which you introduced into the discussion by linking to it on The Corner. If you regret the "tone" the discussion has taken, perhaps it would have been best to not introduce an attack piece written by someone with conflicting interests.
And frankly, if the "tone" of Derb's piece bothers you, what have you to say to some of the commentors on your Dec 3 post who essentially called for the man to be fired for doing his job (i.e writing about politics)?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@es350t -- right on. I respect K-Lo, but if she's going to inject herself in this debate then where has she defended her Corner-compatriot's honor against Wehner's ad hominem?
Derb sends out a rather mild "bite me" to somebody who basically accused him of 'celebrating' others' suffering -- something far from the point of the debate -- and Derb's the one who gets a tsk-tsk from the den mom?
To paraphrase from Goodfells: "K-Lo, we gotta toughen you up. You believe this, wasted eight f'ing aprons on that guy?".
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@gdub -- you're calling Derb an "elitist"? You've clearly not read much from him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@gdub -- you're calling Derb an "elitist"? You've clearly not read much from him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm no longer up for arguing about striking the right "tone". Chris Christie has the last word in "tone"...
External Link
Put your big girl pants on and defend your team.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWehner (not a liberal) gave a fine riposte to Derb's usual grouchy-old-man uber-conservative rant. Now Derb is just digging the hole deeper. Derb, just bow out gracefully and move on. I'm a big fan of Derb's book reviews, but he seems out of place here. I can live with his suing his neighbor, his rudeness to the TV gal who asked him to stay out of the shoot, etc. But his jumping on Bush was uncalled for. Many of us here love Bush. I really do. Yeah Dubya wasn't quite Ronald Reagan, but who is?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCount me as one who agrees with one point made by gdub regarding rudeness. I find that when I'm wanting to cite someone or refer to an argument in order to help make my case, I rarely reach for something written by Mr. Derbyshire even if he's direct and on point, because the tone is so often much ruder than I wish to use.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Maybe his "bite" comment pushed the boundaries of what's acceptable on the Corner...."
Well, from what I've been able to glean from a few years of reading NRO, it's perfectly fine for NRO authors to launch into screeds against people at other sites, (witness Jonah's endless lambasting of Jon Chait, for instance), but it's not appropriate to insult or ridicule your fellow NRO-niks. Since Wehner isn't here, Derb's response seems to be in accord with general principles.
I think there's a different problem. Derb used logic and facts to criticize *Bush*, whom Lopez considers a virtual saint. You have to remember that some people base their evaluations of a President, and by extension his policies, on visceral factors. It's essentially a black-and-white judgment: they decide, largely based on buzzwords and tone, that this guy "gets it" or "doesn't get it." Then they obediently trot along after the guy, endorsing nearly all of his policies provided that they have at least a veneer of utility.
Such people have difficulty when confronted with facts and logic. They generally don't have the capacity to evaluate the argument or respond with a counterargument in kind, so instead they provide the sort of vague and reflexive condemnation that Lopez wrote above.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@ Lorraine
Jon Chait gives it to Jonah pretty good over at TNR as well..
As for Mr. Derb, I saw a Christmas Carol over the weekend. One of the characters reminded me a lot of him.....
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Derb sends out a rather mild "bite me" to somebody who basically accused him of 'celebrating' others' suffering -- something far from the point of the debate -- and Derb's the one who gets a tsk-tsk from the den mom?"
It's worth noting that Derb never bothered to challenge the fact that he celebrates -- or, at best, is indifferent to -- the suffering of others. He only challenged his eagerness to display it in writing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@gdub
"I've never seen a conservative political personality who is so often right on substance but so short on decorum, common sense or the ability to strike a chord with those outside his (her) own little fan club"
Re: Palin
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse