Join Ricochet or renew and get 1 yearof National Review/Digital as a bonus!
Wouldn't Derbyshire make a great podcast guest? Enlightened conversation? Check? On a topic of tremendous interest? Check? Wouldn't it be neat if there was a place on Ricochet to nominate and vote for possible podcast guests? I'll bet a lot of people, even on the left, who would never speak in front of conservatives would jump at the chance to engage with Peter and Rob and James for their audience.
Western Chauvinist: Hey, prometheus. In case you didn't notice, you're hijacking the thread. If you have a complaint about enforcement of the CoC, take it to the management. · 9 minutes ago
Edited 2 minutes ago
[Ed.: Snarky comment deleted. Obviously, Prometheus, we allow criticism of public figures like Rachel Carson, Nancy Pelosi and Kim Jong Un . We do not allow insults to get flung about within the Ricochet circle of Members and Contributors.]
Mama Toad: She isn't undeservedly harsh on Rachel Carson. Ad hominem attacks are a violation. Calling 'em like ya sees 'em is not.
The Overlords are very loose and free market about their censorship. · 2 hours ago
We agree that Rachel Carson deserved the harshness. So what? Does the Code of Conduct allow personal attacks as long as they are "deserved". Everyone who attracts my wrath surely deserves it. I am a one person source of all that is true and deserved. Do I have carte blanche to engage in personal attacks because I deem them deserved? Really?
I'm reminded of a liberal I sat next to on a train who explained that, as a liberal, she was tolerant and hated the intolerant right. She explained she doesn't tolerate the views of those who disagree with her, because that would be tolerating hatred and ignorance. She further said that it is easy for the right to put up with leftist opinion because to do so is to yield to superior intellect. When I summarized, "You're tolerant of only those who agree with you and others are intolerant for accepting all views" she replied, "Exactly". Cheers.
How objectively, deminstrably wrong you are. First, there is no mention in the code of conduct of the word "ad hominem" meaning "appealing to people's emotions and prejudices instead of their ability to think". You made that up. Rather, the COC prohibits " Personal attacks on an individual, group, or class."
Resting, as your argument does, upon a fabrication, it is unlikely that your conclusion would make sense. And indeed it does not - and would not even if your predicate was accurate (which it is not). Specifically, how does one make the leap to "Calling 'em like ya sees 'em is not (a violation)."? Please try the following: Imagine the most hateful personal attack possible. It is prohibited by the COC? Of course. Now, imagine I wrote that hateful attack (the one you imagined) and that I was calling it as I saw it. Did it just transmogrify into acceptable discourse. Of course not - because your conlusion is simply false. QED. Cheers.
I had tears running down my face. God bless her. I know she is harsh on Rachel Carlson and the editors will probably delete all of the wonderful comments above because of this (personal attacks are a violation of Ricochet code of conduct), but I will enjoy them while I can!
There really is a Timbuktu? Who knew? Does anyone remember what life was like before they discovered Claire's posts? Claire, keep on keepin on!
Editor's Note: Please review the Code of Conduct. Immediately.
Who else got dumped? Please tell me it was Lopez. Great Odin's raven, let it be Lopez.
Richard O'Shea:Am I leaving anyone out?
No one mentions Rob Long? His tweets from North Korea and his Larry King Live parodies are the first thing I read in NR.
Rich Lowry does see things through the lens NR, as he should. To him, and NR, it is about them, and the decision was correct, and necessary. I also suspect if Rich wasn't at NR, he wouldn't be parking cars..... · 23 minutes ago
Richard: Agreed. Who doesn't love Rob? And Peter, etc. I was purposely not mentioning Ricochet writers as such might appear as [expletive]. Again, I probably agree with the decision. That's not the point. The point is that Rich took a gratuitous swipe at Derb by denigrating the reason why people might care about his piece. It was unnecessary and ugly. Period.
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
I'm friends with Rich and he is truly one of the nicest and least assuming people in media. I thought he should have fired Derb for a racist offense against a colleague years ago, but your comments are unfair. If you doubt that the NR affiliation had anything to do with the firestorm, you could simply look at the stories that erupted after the initial publication. ... Your comments that Rich is also related to NR only support his point. · 7 minutes ago
I too have friends. Lots of them. Quite obviously, many who are far more well known and influential than Rich or, probably, any of your friends. When they act like the southern end of a northern wandering horse (sorry editors), being my friend is not a valid argument in their defense. I like NR, generally. I have no take on whether terminating Derb was the right thing to do and your desire to fire him earlier is, sorry, hardly determinative. But the small quote I focus on, and only that, was classless - a point which your arguments via friendship, preexisting personal desire to fire, etc. do nothing to refute. Cheers.
tabula rasa: I've listened to just about every Radio Derb (and enjoyed them), I've communicated privately with Derb via email (a gentlemanly exchange), I boughtWe Are Doomed(good, not great), and I've enjoyed some of his other writing. And I wish him well in his health trials.
But Derb isn't a martyr. He had to have known (or else was criminally lacking in self-awareness) that the article in question was a powder keg. NR did what it had to do to protect the brand that Bill Buckley worked so hard to create. And don't just blame Lowry--Jack Fowler is where the buck stops. I'd have done the same thing; reluctantly, but I would have done it. · 4 hours ago
[edited for Code of Conduct]
You beat me to it! I was going to add Kevin Williamson.
:-) · 3 hours ago
Great minds, Olive. Great minds...
Kevin is brilliant, skilled, and funny.
Btw, in case you (or anyone here) aren't familiar with him, Matt Labash is excellent in a slightly different way. His style is more depth, less breadth, but he is equally superb.
See here and here.
Yeah, both stories are focused on Michigan. But it isn't just parochialism that leads me to pitch him. This guy deserves to be read because he nails the main idea. · 2 minutes ago
Agreed. I enjoy both of them as well. Apparently, I did miss a couple. Cheers.
Albert Arthur: Answer to the question in the subject: No.
That's a pretty insulting premise, by the way. · 4 hours ago
I am assuming that English is not your first language (welcome to the USA!). In English, a "premise" is defined as a proposition that forms the basis of an argument or from which a conclusion is drawn. The "ass" in the subject line is the conclusion about which I am soliciting opinions - not a proposition. English is tricky and logical thought is even more so. As I counsel many, keep working, keep studying and, like the gay iron workers of America, keep reaching for that rainbow!
Shane McGuire: Promotheus:
Lastly, you find Ann Coulter witty? · 4 hours ago
I find Ann Coulter to consistently be the most intelligent conservative writer working today in any medium. She is tremendously witty.
Just to be clear, I have no take on the propriety of Rich pulling the plug on Derb. I simply feel that the comment that he (Derb) is only getting attention on non-NR sites because he is an NR contributor was unnecessarily "catty". Would anyone ask Rich to do anything other than park their car if he wasn't related to NR? Instead, Rich is invited onto shows and presented as though his thoughts merit attention. It's like saying, "The only reason X is pretending to be your friend is because he knows it bothers me." It's not all about you and NR Rich. The Derb is plenty respected in ways that have nothing to do with you.
Second, to answer one commenter, I feel, on the whole, that Derb's article went a bit too far for my taste.
Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:
Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place. Join today!
Already a Member? Sign In