Friday, February 15, 2008
Ann Althouse has been listening to Rush (through some commercial free podcast or something) and has discovered he does not roast babies on a spit or anything. All I can say is, now some of you out there will understand better what it is like to be a law professor. Here are some other discoveries I would like to share:
Evangelical Christians actually enjoy sex as much as anybody.
Many Catholic priests do not molest children.
It's possible to watch somebody else make money and not hate them for it.
There's a lot to be said for getting married and staying married.
Children are cute.
Lots of people in the armed forces are really smart.
If you don't love America, try living abroad for a while.
Don't get me wrong. There's a lot about this country I don't like. I'm at the point where I support the death sentence for possession of a pickup while being an asshole. But at least I live here. Rush has been around, what, 25 years? I can't listen to him anymore, but that's because of the commercials. And because the blogosphere has raised the bar on what intelligent commentary is. But people who think, well, never mind.
PROFESSOR ALTHOUSE comments below, saying I badly misread her post and asks me to "take [my post] back." In the case of my post above, I'm not sure what "taking it back" would consist of. A retraction of some sort, perhaps. Having partially imbibed an adult beverage, as Rush would say, I can see in the cool light of evening that my post is pretty grumpy. It's just one grouchy right-wing flame, and I concede I really shouldn't do that. I do not mean to imply that Professor Althouse does not like America or children or members of the armed forces, or Catholics, or Evangelicals. Rather my point was this. Rush has been an important, and at times extremely influential commentator on political affairs in this country for decades, and has been followed by millions of people. Any of these people could have told you that he enjoys adult beverages, cigars, professional sports, and women, perhaps even in that order. When a law professor blogger announces that she has been listening to him, and allows that, goodness, he obviously relishes these things and so is no cloying social conservative, it is a bit like somebody announcing (at say the faculty club lunch table) that they read an excerpt from Reagan's diaries and that (!!) the man was no idiot. The more psychologically wholesome reaction on my part would be joy and gratitude that yet another person had seen such, instead of exasperation at the cluelessness that its being taken as a revelation implies. My bad. I guess it was also rather rude of me to express this exasperation publicly. But I found her post annoying, because it reminded me of something I find exasperating and annoying about the legal professoriate. I hereby express again my determination to get over this whole conservatives are isolated in the academy thing. It's like complaining about the humidity in Florida. I totally concede I should just get over it. I'm working on it. How's this: Dear Professor Althouse. I found your post annoying, for the reasons explained above. I'm sorry I expressed myself rudely to that effect. In the future, if I find what you say annoying, I will try to say that without being rude about it.
WELCOME ALTHOUSE READERS!!!:-) Here you will find nothing new or interesting, just the same old tired right wing cant, just the thing to confirm all of your preconceptions. Feel free to stay awhile and look around. Do be careful about making any value judgments however. We disapprove of those around here. We put the premium on being open minded. If you see anything you don't like, and would like me to take it back, please let me know what you would like me to say, and whether you will post a disapproving comment on your blog if I don't. As a free market kind of guy, I'm against intimidation (I consider it illiberal), but I like to think I know a bargain when I see one. And be sure to give me an idea on how much traffic your blog gets, so I can take that into account in deciding whether to take it back or not. I need to weigh the cost of the sheer scariness of being disapproved of, against the benefit of the added traffic.