He's one of the core neocons who wanted the US to go to war with Iraq, doing his bit by terming the 'axis of evil'-phrase and crappy books titled 'an end to evil'. I don't have to tell anyone here about the consequences of that (mass killings, chaos, billions of money lost, ethnic cleansing, torture,...)

But don't be fooled by the support for all of this ruthlessness, deep down there's kind, gentle soul inside who's very concerned about racist comments against people of colour (no matter how privileged they are and how much they use their race for their career.)

"Sometimes, he [Rush] talks that way. I don’t know whether it’s conscious art, but I went through how many times between inauguration day to the present that he’s made a comment about President Obama being invulnerable to criticism because of his race. I found five instances ... one a week. That’s sort of a lot."

Think about that. Frum is morally responsible for a war that's bleeding the US and the Middle East respectively financially and literally, but he's more concerned nowadays with Rush Limbaugh's occasional crimethink. Real crimes go unpunished, thought crimes are on the front cover of Newsweek Magazine. How shameless.

What a complete and utter failure of a human being Frum is.

@24 Why in the world would anybody, remotely on the right, reject tax cuts for any reason? Who cares if they are a panacea? Good heavens, man. Talk about hyperbole. Just to make sure everyone knows you think RL is vulgar?

Because a better way of helping humble working Americanos would be some combination of spending restraint,especially with regard to defense and a faulty foreign policy,an end to immigration and labor arbitrage-falsely known as "free trade"-and some form of debt relief for the long suffering working stiff.And thats just for starters.

Mealy-mouthed "tax-cuts" are for the birds.

Beyond that,addressing non-economic concerns-too numerous to list-would go quite a way towards improving the lot of decent folk;North and South,East and West.Tax cutters tend to neglect so much that doesnt fall within their narrow purview.

RL's vulgarity is integral to his approach both to economics-classicly,"household management"-as well as broader issues.That is,when broader issues are attended to at all.

What is the point of making fun of Limbaugh’s weight or whatever? That just comes off as nastiness and like some kind of personal grudge. We need to make principled rightward criticisms of his policies that are not conservative.

As a public figure,RL's persona is fair game.He reeks and drips vulgarity.As for his girth,I was pointing to its emblematic nature.I would also add that,while looks are not relevant to political disputes,freakishness (Lincoln?) is not without legitimate concern.Certainly we all have some control over our weight.Is Rush "being the best that he can be?"

As for principled criticism,rejecting tax-cuts as a panacea is a start,no?