National Review’s Derbyshire Says Women’s Suffrage Is ‘Bad For Conservatism’ And Therefore ‘Bad For Society’
National Review’s Derbyshire Says Women’s Suffrage Is ‘Bad For Conservatism’ And Therefore ‘Bad For Society’
Last month, radio host Alan Colmes asked National Review columnist John Derbyshire about a chapter in his new book, called “The Case Against Women’s Suffrage.” After Colmes repeatedly pressed him about his views on womens’ suffrage, Derbyshire admitted that while he thinks women should be allowed to vote, we’d “probably” be a “better country” if they didn’t
Yesterday, radio host Thom Hartmann probed Derbyshire about the suffrage issue, and Derbyshire re-affirmed his view that “of course” he believes women should have the right to vote. But, he explained, they shouldn’t exercise that right because it is “bad for conservatism” and therefore “bad for society”:
HARTMANN: Do you believe that women should be allowed to vote?
DERBYSHIRE: Yeah, of course I do.
HARTMANN: Why then is the title called “The Case Against Female Suffrage”?
DERBYSHIRE: Because it is a case against female suffrage. [...]
HARTMANN: Did you not say to, for example, my colleague Alan Colmes that women should not be allowed to vote, that it would be a better country anyway if women were not allowed to vote?
DERBYSHIRE: Well, you know, my mentor Paul Buckley used to say, he who say a must say b. And the logic of that chapter, that chapter five in my book, rests on the proposition that women voting is bad for conservatism, and as a conservative, of course, I think that’s bad for society.
HARTMANN: So therefore if women were not allowed to vote it would be a better country in your opinion?
DERBYSHIRE: I think as a hypothetical I think that’s arguable, yeah. Yeah, I think so. Yeah.
Listen here:
While Derbyshire may think that gender equity is “bad for society,” the fact is that the countries that rank the highest in the World Economic Forum’s gender gap index — meaning they have the most gender equality — tend to also rank the highest on the U.N.’s Human Development Index. While it’s possible that women’s suffrage is “bad for conservatism,” maybe it’s conservatism — not women’s suffrage — that is “bad for society.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
This is a winning formula for conservatives in the years to come! Go Derbyshire, go! Sing it from the rooftops! It’s a real winner for repubs.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:13 pmSee, this is what happens when conservatives stick to their convictions when challenges on them in public discourse.
It also explains why almost no conservatives ever do this.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pm“challenged” not ‘challenges”. Sorry.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pmNational Review’s Derbyshire Says Women’s Suffrage Is ‘Bad For Conservatism’ And Therefore ‘Bad For Society’
Can someone please ask this mental furball when exactly conservatism was ever good for society …………..
October 7th, 2009 at 2:17 pmHow come it’s the guys that look like Derbyshire who are the ones that come up with stuff like this?
October 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmHmmmm…
October 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmWow — even when he’s challenged on his logic and twists himself into a pretzel trying to reconcile these two very disparate viewpoints, only to end up disagreeing with himself, Derbyshire still doesn’t get it, does he?
Then again, this is quite akin to Vitter and Ensign being “family values” senators, ain’t it???
October 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmI’m thinking Derbyshire’s issues with women are not rooted in politics.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:19 pmGeez, maybe they could repeal that silly little 19th amendment after they “take back” the government and we could all party like it’s 1899! Personally, though, I would prefer a DNA test requirement to ensure those voting are homo sapiens and not neanderthals like this chimp. Er…chump.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:20 pmIf conservatives stuck to their convictions David Duke would be the president right now.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:20 pmGood on ya, Derbyshire! Double down and tell your friends… I really hope this becomes a conservative ‘meme’ going forward…
In related news, Derbyshire admits to giving up all hope of ever receiving another blow-job…
October 7th, 2009 at 2:20 pmSo if something is bad for conservatism, it would be bad for society?
Maybe…in a 100% conservative society, yes.
But such a society does not exist in today’s standards. Such a society probably wouldn’t allow anyone to vote, let alone women.
So…if something is bad for society, is it bad for conservatism? Because I believe Derbyshire is bad for society.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:22 pm“women voting is bad for conservatism”
Well thank goodness for the little darlin’s, in that case.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:22 pm@11 – I think maybe the problem here is that he never got ONE, let alone having hopes for a 2nd one….
October 7th, 2009 at 2:23 pmIs this moron allowed out by himself? Conservatives have a real hard time functioning now that we’re past the 19th century
October 7th, 2009 at 2:23 pmConservatives don’t really like women. They only have sexual relations with women so that they can prove that they aren’t gay.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:27 pm.
The G(no)P has no place for…
… Women
… Gays
… Ethnic Minorities
… Poor
… Uninsured
.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:30 pmFourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism
#5. Rampant sexism.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:31 pmBeyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
.
Let me guess…
… It’s not sexism when John Derbyshire does it, NO?
OR is it:
… I’m the sexist for calling John Derbyshire out for being one.
.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:32 pm#5. Rampant sexism
October 7th, 2009 at 2:34 pmMy point so eloquently put.
Let’s assume for a moment that women being allowed to vote was a good thing for society (total bs, but let’s make that assumption).
What other groups voting would be bad for conservatism and therefore society as a whole?
1) What about racial minorities? They are always wanting to do things a different way, therefore no voting.
2) What about sexual minorities? Homosexuality doesn’t produce offspring(so they say) therefore there is no continuity for future generations, therefore no voting.
3) What about people that don’t own land? If you don’t have property to pass on to future generations, there is no stability for future generations, therefore no voting.
4) What about people that despite owning property, don’t have a lot of “capital”? Without the ability to control capital, you don’t have anyway of shaping future generations, therefore no voting.
5) What about people that may be able to generate capital and then buy property, but they are first generation. They have not proven that they can control their new found wealth properly for the future generations, therefore no voting.
So if conservatives could achieve all of the above, and I think that is exactly what they truly want, it seems to me that it is feudalism at it’s core.
Without the ability to change and adapt to new ideas, and new ways of doing things, how does society as a whole benefit, and not just a very small minority that maintains power?
October 7th, 2009 at 2:36 pmZaid,
This is the best line I’ve read in a long time: “While it’s possible that women’s suffrage is “bad for conservatism,” maybe it’s conservatism — not women’s suffrage — that is “bad for society.”
GREAT JOB!
October 7th, 2009 at 2:36 pm21. Lefty Liberal,
One group that I think is genuinely bad for having the vote -
Stupid People. And here I don’t mean innate IQ but folks who are deliberately ignorant.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:39 pmIf any group of people should be denied the right to vote it’s the stupid people.
Sometimes I think that one should qualify for being able to vote by taking a very basic exam about government.
Asking people which branch of government has the most power should about do it.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:39 pmMapleStreet – that’s not the first time that’s happened to you and I, and I don’t post very much!
Btw – my husband calls me Maple Spice. :)
October 7th, 2009 at 2:41 pmHmmmmm gotta love a party that believes everyone is second class,(minorities,gays,women,nonchristians), but themselves…middle aged white men with power issues and fear of anyone different than them. Yup, as a woman, I’d be all over that philosophy…. NOT
October 7th, 2009 at 2:43 pmUK, we’ll cut you some slack for giving us Derbyshire.
Only ‘cuz you gave us Monthy Python, too.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:46 pmThis Brit twit has dug such a deep hole for himself I don’t know whether someone should tell him to put down the shovel or if it would be better to just pour his own dirt back over him and plant a lilly. Leaning towards the latter course. . .
October 7th, 2009 at 2:46 pmCheck this guy’s picture- Now he NEEDS a woman . :)
October 7th, 2009 at 2:46 pmThere will be a chapter in my next book entitled, “The Case Against Conservative Suffrage.”
Because, in my opinion and based on Derbyshire’s logic, of course I think that conservatives should be allowed to vote, it’s just that conservatives being allowed to vote is bad for the country and bad for society.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:47 pmholy cow. what a neanderthal.
I thought this issue was settled, once and for all–what?–100 years ago?
I agree w/ amish edison, above: “conservatives being allowed to vote is bad for the country and bad for society.”
What other conclusion can you come to?
What’s insane is that they don’t see the outrageous hypocrisy in this. Oh, that and the fact that they don’t think women should vote.
Oh, maybe I should spell that ‘wimmin”, for the conservatives.
Mo Rage
October 7th, 2009 at 2:50 pmThe blog
Hmmm. Does anyone else think that TP’s photo of Debbyshire makes him look like he should be in an episode of Lockup: In Prison for Life? He looks like a natural for incarceration.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pmAmerican Tailban? Yes…
…he hates the fact that women have rights, it means he can’t control them.
…he hates the fact that women think of him as a pig who doesn’t have the capacity for an adult relationship.
…he is a bore, a pig, a hateful moron….like most repukes.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pmThere need to be more conservatives like Andrew Sullivan, who, coincidentally, created the John Derbyshire Award for “egregious and outlandish comments on gays, women, and minorities.”
Sounds about right.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pmI am pretty sure conservatives would love for the right to vote to only go to white land owning men.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:55 pmThis on the day after this idiot said that, the RNCC came out with that very tellimg statement about Nancy Pelosi being ‘Put in her place.’ LOL! The Repugs will lose the women’s vote for years to come!
October 7th, 2009 at 2:56 pmI’m not the first to make this point, but using Derb’s reasoning here, it’s not illogical to apply it to other minority groups that tend to vote more liberal.
I wonder if Derb would agree that ‘one could make the hypothetical argument” that if African Americans were not allowed to vote it would be a better country. Or city dwellers.
Or college students. Or performing artists. Or teachers.
I mean… if you’re gonna be consistent in your thinking. And if Derbyshire is willing to follow his convictions this far, why not go the extra mile?
October 7th, 2009 at 2:57 pmI suspect this is at the core of their “originalist/Founding Fathers” fetish.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:58 pmAll of us could rail about how much of a tool he is and he is but i vote ignore dumbness and stop giving it air time.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:59 pmSince this obvious repuke can’t get attention any other way.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:59 pmfaulknercindy2003 says:
All of us could rail about how much of a tool he is and he is but i vote ignore dumbness and stop giving it air time.
Ooh, gonna have to disagree here… I think that ‘dumbness’ of this sort should be given all the air-time we can manage… It’s important that Conservative ‘principles’ are really laid out for the people as much as possible.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:03 pmDid Thom make sure he took his animal pelt coat and woman subdoer club with him as he waddled out of the studio?
October 7th, 2009 at 3:04 pmI think Mr. Derbyshire, aside from his rather keen similarity to John Cleese, could very well qualify as a “city idiot“, which is in itself a vital role in society.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:05 pmralph the wonder llama says:
I wonder if Derb would agree that ‘one could make the hypothetical argument” that if African Americans were not allowed to vote it would be a better country. Or city dwellers.
Or college students. Or performing artists. Or teachers.
Or poor people.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:05 pmHARTMANN: So therefore if women were not allowed to vote it would be a better country in your opinion?
DERBYSHIRE: I think as a hypothetical I think that’s arguable, yeah. Yeah, I think so. Yeah.
What empirical evidence is this dipshit basing this statement upon ?
I can categorically state that this country would be MUCH BETTER if Republicans/Conservatives were hereafter outlawed from any and all forms of local , state and federal government positions…………
October 7th, 2009 at 3:14 pmDerbyshire strikes me as that most vile kind of agitator who will stick to his guns until he gets some heat then tries to pass off his crap as a “joke” or hides behind some technicality of semantics.
“I didn’t say women shouldn’t vote, I said a case could be made for it.” “I didn’t make the case, I said someone could.”
They really make me ill.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:15 pmMapleStreet says:
21. Lefty Liberal,
One group that I think is genuinely bad for having the vote -
Stupid People. And here I don’t mean innate IQ but folks who are deliberately ignorant.
I totally agree. We have talked about “fascism” on this site many times, I would like to see a society based on “intellectualism”, where only people that are well educated has say in society.
That does require that good educational opportunities are readily accessible. Otherwise you end up with a situation that we have today with someone that is an intellectual midget (W comes to mind) that has degrees from some of the top schools in the country, and other people that run circles around him that can’t even afford to go to a local community college.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:20 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
Good on ya, Derbyshire! Double down and tell your friends… I really hope this becomes a conservative ‘meme’ going forward…
In related news, Derbyshire admits to giving up all hope of ever receiving another blow-job…
There’s always Larry Craig.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:24 pmunless the women are barefoot, knocked up and have an eigth grade education and the dark skinned people are in bondage, it’s bad for cancervatives.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:35 pmWhat if some talking head proposed not allowing men to vote?
October 7th, 2009 at 3:36 pmThe fact that woman can vote is bad for the Republican Party. Woman that are aware of this sort of sexism will never vote Republican again. Republicans just lost 52% of the vote. They are doomed.
Anything that is bad for Republicans is good for America.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pmYou don’t have to do anything more than look at this guy’s face to see what an unhappy and angry soul lives within. Keep this man away from firearms and library towers.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:51 pmderbyshire looks like the type of dude who’d lure kids in the back of his white econoline van with the promise of a puppy’s in the back in that picture.
October 7th, 2009 at 3:53 pmIn the picture of this guy he looks like he is wearing a orange prison jump suit.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:08 pmBozo ~ Derbyshire also looks like he’s ready to kill the next person he sees that pisses him off. Kinda like that movie with Michael Douglas as the guy having the worst day of his life as he drives home…
October 7th, 2009 at 4:23 pmmarlow: “You don’t have to do anything more than look at this guy’s face to see what an unhappy and angry soul lives within.”
I’m guessing women see that coming a block away and don’t like it. Hence, the man’s problem with women.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:24 pmWomen tend to vote for the more liberal candidates. They vote more often with Dems. That is why Derbyshire would like for women not to vote.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:26 pmDerbyshire is more tangible proof that the GOP have nothing for America. The “conservative” response is likely to be something along the line of, “There are extremists on both sides of the political spectrum.”
October 7th, 2009 at 4:29 pmI generally avoid making reference to the pictures which accompany these posts, but my god: that pic of John Derbyshire reminds of Michael Douglas in “Falling Down.”
October 7th, 2009 at 4:36 pmLets see, in the past few days conservatives have insulted women, Hispanics, Democrats, people not born is the US . . . who am I missing?
Way to build a party, guys. Of course using Derbyshire’s logic, all this is okay with me because it’s bad for conservatism and conservatism is bad for society.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:37 pmJ.F.Smug, thanks for naming that picture! re: my post #56…
October 7th, 2009 at 4:46 pmPowkat.
I have to quibble just a little bit. The people who have seized the title “conservative” are nothing of the sort. They are reckless radicals who have perverted a lot of conservative qualities that make some sense.
When I was growing up, conservative meant cautious and deliberate with an unwillingness to mess with things that work. It didn’t entail a delusional denial of reality. It’s only, relatively, recently that the real wackos have taken over. Real, old fashioned, conservatives like myself despise the radical Reichwhiners as much as the “leftiest” of liberals.
I didn’t intend to single you out and I agree with your premise. I just cringe, a bit, when someone labels today’s GOoOpers as “conservative” or the GOP platform as “conservatism”. I say let’s call them what they are. Right-wing extremists.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:48 pmTo RUCerious re #56, #60 and #62:
Wow. Great minds think alike, eh? #55 was the last comment posted at the time I created mine – seriously!
Cheers, J. Fred
October 7th, 2009 at 4:56 pm“…maybe it’s conservatism — not women’s suffrage — that is “bad for society.”
Conservatism is sure bad for women…
October 7th, 2009 at 5:03 pmI liked Thom’s tale about the Iroquois Indians only giving the right to vote to those who would take into consideration the seventh generation instead of the immediate community as a whole. The Iroquois only gave women the right to vote.
This guy even said as much in the interview, that as more and more women become involved in politics and voting, that those societies move more toward socialism.
Thom then asked: What’s wrong with {democratic} socialism? Indeed.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:18 pmpete, that’s a fair point. I’m pretty sure my dad, who was a solid Republican, wouldn’t recognize these guys today.
I think what has happened is that the conservative tendency toward authoritarianism has taken over the other, more admirable traits of the breed, and I trace its rise to Richard Nixon. It didn’t happen all at once, but Reagan certainly gave it a good boost. But in the last decade and a half, what happened is the Republicans tasted power, they liked it, and then the conservative tendency toward conformity shifted into high gear and the inevitable result was the Party moving further and further to the right, alienating anyone who used to be a moderate Republican (Reagan pretty much took care of any liberal Republicans back in the day.)
They didn’t realize what this meant: as the strain became more and more “purified” it also becomes smaller and smaller and its electoral prospects bleaker and bleaker.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:22 pmIs this dude allowed to live withing 500 ft of a school, playground, or daycare center? Something doesn’t look quite right here…
October 7th, 2009 at 5:33 pmralph.
My Dad was a lifelong Moderate republican. He got mad enough at Nixon to vote for Carter (He said that, “now the whole world knows we can elect a crook”.) but he really thought that Clinton’s indiscretions were unforgivable as well. And he wanted to believe that the rot in the GOP was just a few nuts.
He became housebound just before the 2000 election and his wife “forgot” to get his absentee ballot in time. His comment on Bush was that, “he’s a moron but I really hate Gore”. But? Just before his death in April of ‘01 he had another break with the crazies who hijacked the GOP. And Bill O’Reilly was the catalyst. Bill0 said, “there’s no such thing as a moderate; only liberals who don’t have the courage to admit it.” Dad’s response to that included the second “F-bomb” I ever heard from him.
I have to say that I’m glad Dad didn’t live to see what Bushco did in the wake of 9/11. As a patriot, a veteran, a pillar of the community, and a guy who was universally liked and respected; it would have killed him to see what happened to this country and the GOP’s role in it.
October 7th, 2009 at 5:51 pmWhat gives men the right to even consider denying the vote to women?
For that thought to be taken seriously requires one to believe it’s men who let women vote. That’s so 19th century ;-)
October 7th, 2009 at 5:59 pmIslam says: “women voting is bad”
October 7th, 2009 at 6:12 pmMr. Duke:
October 7th, 2009 at 6:15 pmHow is this related to the discussion? Are you just reaching out for a response? As a fisherman, I would suggest that the quality of the bait is an important consideration. Good luck all the same…
Derbyshire is a creep but I don’t think he’s a Muslim.
October 7th, 2009 at 6:17 pmYoung people remember this—as antiquated and bizarre as this sounds, forty years ago most people thought the ERA was radical and threatening. It still hasn’t been ratified. Equality isn’t a straight line moving in one direction. There have been feminist slogans found on ancient walls. Feminist ideas were cultivated in the Middle Ages in Europe.
Now I’m glad this looks utterly insane to young people now, but beware—crazy stuff happens all the time. Thank heavens the Republicans are a shrinking minority. It’s simple and mindless to make one or two identifiable groups do most of the suffering, or do without when scarcity and insecurity becomes or seems to be epic. And simple and mindless authoritarianism is what die-hard neo-conservatives want.
October 7th, 2009 at 6:44 pmIn the Conservative view, it is bad that society doesn’t work for their own exclusive betterment.
October 7th, 2009 at 6:54 pmLet me get this straight, this asshat wrote an entire book on a hypothetical that will absolutely NEVER happen, even in his wildest dreams.
And someone paid him to do it.
October 7th, 2009 at 7:31 pmmaybe it’s conservatism — not women’s suffrage — that is “bad for society.”
I certainly agree with that!
The sooner we bury this wretched philosophy called conservatism, the better for society. Period.
October 7th, 2009 at 7:48 pmWe women give birth and we can also take you out.
October 7th, 2009 at 7:59 pmMaybe Ann-thrax Coulter can finally get a husband; she’s against voting rights for women, too.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:00 pmPete and Ralph,
My dad was also a Republican and my mom was a Democrat. My mom died in 1970 and my dad in 1995 and neither of them would recognize the deterioration in political discourse in their beloved country. My dad was an educator and very involved in our community; at one time he was in charge of a Head Start pilot project in my home town – I was 4 years old and got to go to “Play School” a couple times. He was also involved in local politics.
My dad was raised by Democrats; my mom was raised by Republicans.
The Republican party of our parents’ generation is dead. And that is sad to me.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:03 pmAll you have to do is take a look at that guy’s face to know the entire story. He looks like an old crank who would wander around his front yard in his bath robe, yelling at kids who came near.
He’s never been laid in his life, probably doesn’t like women even if he COULD get lucky.
October 7th, 2009 at 9:26 pmThis is movement–not principled–conservatism.
His argument is ‘women don’t vote for us.’ and so should have the vote taken away from them.
The fascinating thing is that conservatism is ‘us.’ Not a set of ideas and principles that could be argued for, not a world view they could impart to others–just ‘us.’ A power bloc that owns the trademark.
And of course that’s the way it’s been at least since Reagan. Conservatism is whoever the Republican leadership says it is, and the purpose of conservatism is to get that person elected.
It doesn’t matter that that person is the boss’s idiot son–that the person preys on Congressional pages–that that person lives in a townhouse with his male chief of staff while his wife stays back in the district. It doesn’t matter that the people in power don’t keep their promises (Overturn Roe v. Wade? Can’t hear you? Balance the budget? What?)–the purpose of conservatism is to get Them in power
That’s Derbyshire’s conservatism. Us in Power.
John, let me tell you something.
There are plenty of women who will support conservative principles.
Remember Tipper Gore? Remember Action for Children’s Television?
They’ll vote for lower taxes. They’ll vote for law and order. They’ll vote for censorship.
But they won’t vote for you.
October 7th, 2009 at 10:59 pmI retract a previous remark I made about Darbshir. I said he looked like a Nick Nolte mub shot without benefit of Hawaiian shirt. That’s obviously wide of the mark.
He looks like a geezer-in-training, waiting for the day when he too can shuffle onto his front porch and yell to the world, “You kids get off my lawn”.
Having attained geezer status myself, not having to practice or train anymore, I would advise John to quit looking so peevish and do the sensible thing; buy a house without front porch or lawn or both. Makes life significantly easier.
And stop with the sexist rant. It’s just fracking stupid and doesn’t win friends or influence the kind of people you want to influence.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:29 am@ 83, correction, that’s mug shot, not mub shot. damn, will the senility never stop…
October 8th, 2009 at 1:30 am@ 81. EmTee, didn’t mean to step on your comment about John looking like that angry guy that yells at the kids around his house and neighborhood. I just dropped in and hadn’t looked at the thread.
You’re probably right about his sexual success rate; zip. He’s certain to be too daft to understand that his attitude isn’t going to get him any free lap dances.
That may not matter though. He may be one of those closeted gay masochists that English public schools are well known for producing. He says mean nasty shit because he wants to be beat up for saying mean nasty shit.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:43 amTo EmTree,
He’s probably been laid but not for free….
EmTee says:
October 8th, 2009 at 5:02 amAll you have to do is take a look at that guy’s face to know the entire story. He looks like an old crank……
He’s never been laid in his life.
Duke
You are a liar. You are a fool. You are a punkass troll. You are disgusting and stupid and compartively those are your good qualities.
October 8th, 2009 at 8:05 amSay what you will he’s a dead ringer for Brookings’ Strobe Talbott
October 8th, 2009 at 10:36 am@ 88. Sachem, there’s a vague similarity, but really, Strobe Talbot doesn’t appear to be diddling around with a combover and doesn’t look like he has anger management issues.
Darbshir is just a reactionary doofus. As well as being a masochist, he may be a believer in the notion that there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
October 8th, 2009 at 11:39 amIronically, Amazon has this book bundled with Sarah Palin’s Biography.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:43 pmThe taliban approves his opinion.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:44 pmWhat’s even more disturbing about Mr. Derbyshire’s views is how many women probably agree with him. kol germe estetigi
October 13th, 2009 at 6:54 am