My Own Development (and Some Comments on Rush Limbaugh)

Bulletin on Rachel Booth (the 13-year-old-girl charged with killing her father, who apparently abused her in a sickening way). Today, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette said the following: "A juvenile court judge will decide whether Rachel Booth, 13, was justified in the fatal shooting July 30 of her father in their Elizabeth Township [outside Pittsburgh] home, a Common Pleas judge ruled yesterday. In a rare occurrence, a defense attorney and prosecutor stood together arguing that Rachel and society would be better served by placing her in a judicial system designed to rehabilitate children like her who are charged with adult crimes." Thank goodness!

My Own Development (And Some Comments on Rush Limbaugh)

Larry from Houston wrote about his views, pro- and con, regarding Rush Limbaugh and has talked about some of his spiritual/intellectual development. I responded as follows:

When I was in Vermont from 91-93, during the time my wife had her stroke and was recovering, I listened to Rush Limbaugh on the car radio nearly every day. After that, when we returned to the Pittsburgh area, I heard him fairly often, but then it got harder to find on local radio. I hear him from time-to-time now and am glad he's on.

On the negative side, he suggests he's an expert on the environment and climate change, which he's not and on immigration, where he's extremely short-sighted. He does NOT look at life from a spiritual perspective, and that is a big problem on an issue like immigration.

The entertainer side of him relies too much on slogans and stereotypes, with terms like "environmental whackos" and "Femi-Nazis." In intelligent discussion, we shouldn't pretend those who strongly disagree with us are necessarily extremists. We should point out exactly why we disagree with others on their on ideas and plans of action. Caricatures don't make for good discussions.

In Rush's case, I don't hold the numerous marriages or the pain-killer problems against him. Some people just aren't good at marriage and many people have pain-killer issues (including my hero, William Rehnquist). I'm a "play with pain" type, but I've never been in severe, continuing pain (as happens with back problems).

What Rush offers is some of the REAL diversity the country needs, diversity of opinion. He's very creative when it comes to tackling issues, even if he has a tendency to go overboard.

Occasionally, I get attacked (by Townhall.com types) as "not a conservative" because I don't disparage illegal immigrants and because I tend toward alternate solutions (on abortion and other matters) when problems aren't getting solved. My general question is: "What can we do to make things better?" For example, some Catholic (parochial) schools are filled with non-Catholics (usually Blacks) because they offer a more-disciplined, learning-intensive education to inner-city kids, and that's fine with me.

I believe strongly in faith-based initiatives, as long as the people carrying them out realize what their responsibilities are (and aren't).

I'm more of a spiritual and political traditionalist in the sense that I believe it truly is "easier for a camel to go through the eye of the needle than a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven." I don't believe at all in "get-thee-rich" form of evangelism, which conflicts with basic Christian teachings. I'm not against people making money, as long as they don't lose their immortal souls in the process.

The biggest influence on me was conservative scholar (and my friend) Russell Kirk, who wrote The Conservative Mind. A traditionalist, he was often in conflict with the more libertarian conservatives such as Frank Meyer --- who, like Kirk, was a fixture at the National Review in the old days.

The greatest enduring influences on me were the Sisters of Mercy (Catholic nuns) who taught me and others so well and lovingly at St. Salome's School in suburban Rochester. I'm also influenced by my friends in elementary and high school, MANY of whom served in the military and a number of whom died in Viet Nam.

I was affected later by my education at the University of Rochester, which emphasized the significance of ideas (liberal ones and conservative ones) in the development of Western society.

The professors who influenced me didn't fit into categories. One famous professor from the old days, Eugene Genovese, authored Roll Jordan, Roll and other important books. He was condemned by Nixon as a Marxist, but later he became, along with his wife Kitty, an ardent Catholic. That was not regarded as odd at the University of Rochester (unlike some other schools) because "ideas at the margin" were regarded as more likely to be true.

After my time at the University, what later became known as "political correctness" (one of several terms I almost never use) became more influential there, unfortunately.

In my college days and after, I was touched (long ago, but the influence continues) by the writings of Sigmund Freud, C. G. Jung, and Franz Kafka. I was never a systematic follower of any of them, but I thought they had some great insights into life, and I was comfortable with their "literary" approach to reality, as in Freud's use of Sophocles' concepts about Oedipus and Jung's identification of "archetypes" that have existed throughout history.


Politically, growing up in western New York, especially my time in Rochester, had an effect on me. It was one of the more "conservative" areas in the country in terms of its emphasis on families, religious faith (mostly Catholic), low taxes, and limited government. Mary Grabar, who writes for Townhall, is also from Rochester and reflects themes in her writing that resemble some of mine. That's also true of Fred Eckert, who writes occasionally in the Washington Times and was an influential political figure in western New York.

A modern figure whom I look to for guidance is Niall Ferguson, a Scot and economic historian at Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford's Hoover Institution. He's authored Colossus (about the American Empire), Empire (about Britain), The Cash Nexus (about the money in history), and recently The World of War. His view of Iraq -- a very uncommon one at Harvard -- is that we should be there but we should have learned more from the British experience in Egypt and elsewhere. For about 70 years, the British occupiers of Egypt kept promising that they would be leaving soon, but they had their fingers crossed and never did.

Intellectually, Ferguson is an overpowering figure. He reminds me of Eugene Genovese (plus), although I don't think Niall is considering Catholicism (however, you never know). Amazingly, I e-mailed him some material about Sarah Palin -- it might have been by accicent -- and he was very interested. Apparently, he's intrigued by almost everything that happens! He's "conservative" in the sense that he's fascinated with the way the world really works, as opposed to the way people wish it did.

I'm almost militantly pro-military. Two of my St. Salome's classmates in the 101st Airborne (Sandy Petromalo and Beaver Becker) were killed in Viet Nam and my best friend, Ronnie Gartz, was in the 82d Airborne -- he returned home safely. Two friends from high school, Peter Domiano and Tom Cartwright, were Marine officers killed in Viet Nam. I assure you a week doesn't go by when I don't think of these people (and others, sadly, who died or were badly injured). The attitudes these individuals had toward the military and their country would be incomprehensible to a Barack Obama, a John Kerry. or a John Murtha, who are much more self-centered and opportunistic).

I believe self-serving liberals in the U.S. (and elsewhere) have betrayed American soldiers, first in Viet Nam and now in Iraq/Afghanistan. It exasperates me. However, some of the criticism of the CONDUCT of the war is on target.

I have two young friends from this area currently serving with the Marines in Iraq. Both have spent a lot of time in Al Anbar province. I pray they'll both be okay, but in the most profound sense they'll both always be "okay."


Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA