Super Shareware Collection/Super Shareware Collection.iso/info/sun9311.zip/BOO2

Text File | 1994-02-01 | 7KB | 103 lines

Book Review
Copyright (c) 1993, Robert McKay
All rights reserved


                    *Almost Always Right - 97% of the Time*
                                     * * *
                         *The Way Things Ought to Be*
                           Reviewed by Robert McKay

    Everyone knows who Rush Limbaugh is.  This "harmless little fuzzball" is a
household word even among those who neither watch his television show, listen
to his radio program, nor care for his views.  The words "dittohead" and
"megadittoes" have entered the language of our day; they may not last any
longer than "groovy" or "boss" did, but for now they're familiar to many.  In
other words, Rush Limbaugh is a phenomenon.
    His first book "was" released in paperback, according to the copyright
page, in October of 1993 (I'm writing this on September 23).  The title
reflects Rush's view that he knows *The Way Things Ought to Be*.  I'm not
certain, however, that the title is a completely accurate reflection of the
content of the book.
    It'll come out before I'm through, so I'll say it now - I agree with Rush
Limbaugh.  I am not, however, a convert.  Nor am I a mindless sheep.  I heard
the same things he's saying from the time I was old enough to listen to the
political discussions that went on in my family (and almost everyone I've
talked to since has espoused the same views I heard then).  When I began to
think seriously about political matters for myself, I found that I came to the
same conclusions my father so vociferously espoused.  When I first heard Rush,
therefore, I was already a dittohead - I'd been saying the same things for
years.
    The book contains this kind of thinking - conservative thinking, stated
well.  Rush is certainly no William F. Buckley when it comes to command of the
English language (even if you loathe Buckley's political views, you should
listen to him speak just to learn how a well-constructed English sentence is
put together), but he does have an admirable talent for stating matters in
such a way that anyone can understand them.  Not since Will Rogers has a
popular commentator been able to so effectively convey, in easily-understood
language, his views on what's going on around him.  Rush is, even though he
lacks a full college education, well-equipped to utilize our language in
stating his positions.
    A book is not, obviously, a spoken monologue.  And Rush is, above all
else, a speaker.  He began in radio, became famous on radio, and only when
radio propelled him into television and speaking engagements did he enter
those forums.  He is not - and he admits this - a writer by trade.  The book
at times has the flavor of a wannabe monologue.  However, it is apparent that
Rush is aware of his weaknesses, and there is strong evidence throughout the
book that he tried hard to make it less of a "spout-off" and more of an
adaptation of his speaking style to the printed page.  He deserves an A for
effort as far as his writing goes; even with the flaw mentioned in this
paragraph, it is well done, and with practice he could become a really good
writer.
    I have already mentioned another flaw in the book - it does not quite
match the title.  Now, Rush does tell us in the book how he thinks things
ought to be.  Indeed, he could no more stop doing that than Congress could
stop spending money tomorrow.  However, at least as much space is devoted to
denouncing (one plus - Rush does not bemoan) the way things are and describing
how Rush got to where he is.  There's nothing wrong with this, of course, but
it does render the book at most only half about the way things ought to be.
    Rush admits in the book that he is, primarily, an entertainer.  I have
believed since I first heard him that much of his apparent abrasiveness,
silliness, and pomposity is a shtick.  While he clearly does have an ego, the
well-honed ability to play the clown, and a style that is sometimes
potentially if not actually offensive, the book makes it clear that much of
this is for effect.  Rush does not alter *what* he says, but in order to be
heard he'll put on a show and thereby get attention from people who at first
are merely "looking at the funny man."  William F. Buckley is admirably suited
to reach the calm, controlled intellectuals in our country; for the proverbial
man in the street, sated with extremes in writing, television, and movies,
Rush is just the attention-getter that is needed.
    Rush is, though an admitted entertainer having fun at what he does, also a
purveyor of political commentary.  And here many will no doubt diverge from my
opinion.  I think he is indeed "almost always right 97.9 percent of the time."
It is my sincere conviction that he is indeed on the cutting edge of
commentary in this country.  I am persuaded that Rush is no more than telling
the truth when he claims to know *The Way Things Ought to Be*.  But then, as
I've said, I've agreed with his views since I was young.  Those who disagree
with his views will find no solace in the book; they probably will not be
entertained as much as I was.
    Rush is no diplomat.  Tact is seldom found in his vocabulary.  He does
indeed use such terms "feminazi" and "Slick Willie."  He'll never be Miss
Congeniality, though he is not vicious in his name-calling.  His weapon is not
abuse, but ridicule.  He seeks not to injure feelings, but to provide a loud
and visual *reductio ad absurdum*.  Thus, when he states his position, he is
not only setting himself against liberalism ideologically, but
terminologically as well.  He blasts, he mocks, he prods, he ridicules.
    However, if those who disagree with him can see past the rhetoric and the
shtick, they will find much to think about in *The Way Things Ought to Be*.  I
do not say they'll agree.  I do not say they'll be converted to the
conservative position.  But they *will* find food for thought.  They may find
Rush's egotistical claims to near-infallibility galling, but the facts and
figures in the book will take study and thought to refute, if indeed they can
be refuted.  Even if liberals manage to show that the book is a tissue of
fabrications and distortions, they'll have to put serious thought into their
own positions and how those positions are presented, for Rush very accurately
diagnoses why many average Americans simply don't find liberalism credible.
    Perhaps you who are reading *Sunlight Through the Shadows* don't care to
read *The Way Things Ought to Be*.  That is of course your privilege.
However, whatever your political views, whatever your opinions of Rush
Limbaugh either as a person or as a political commentator, I think it's safe
to say that if you don't read the book, you'll be missing much food for
thought and much entertainment.