Hoarding is not collection development
Categories
Taking Your Library Career to the Next Level
PLA Weeding Manual
Making a Collection Count

Best Book Review Blogs” style=

The Book Blogger Awards 2017

Rush Limbaugh, the prophet

Rush Limbaugh and the Bible coverRush Limbaugh and the Bible
Evearitt
1993

Submitter: An entire book that is a treatise on proving that Rush Limbaugh is a “prophet of political conservatism in America.” (page 15) Yet, there is this pesky quote of Rush’s, “The show is devoted exclusively to what I think. I do not attempt to find out what the people of the country are thinking.” This book is filled with with gems that bring people together such as The White Man’s Burden, homosexuals portraying themselves as victims and women not being fit to serve in the military.

The coup de grâce is this quote “So multiculturalism, which portrays American history and even all of Western civilization as nothing but misery and racist, sexist, capitalist oppression, is the tool of revenge of man who have failed to assimilate and fit into the mainstream American Life.”

Holly: Before everyone piles on, and I’m sure Submitter would agree, this book was probably not the worst choice for a public library serving a politically conservative, Christian community in the early 1990s. In fact, any public library building a truly viewpoint-balanced collection in the 90s, no matter what demographics they served, might have had this. That said, Submitter’s examples are definitely eyebrow-raising for many (myself included, although that is honestly beside the point). I’d weed it because it is old and no longer circulating, not because I disagree with its contents.

 

Rush Limbaugh and the Bible contents

The White Man's Burden

Women in Combat

Animal Rights

Rush Limbaugh and the Bible quote

14 Responses to Rush Limbaugh, the prophet

  • Are there any good replacement books in the conservative comment category? I mean besides the ones that are so topical you know they are (a) rushed to print and (b) going to be unreadably out of date in maybe 5 months?

    • “Rediscovering Americanism” by Mark Levin and “Dangerous” by Milo Yiannopoulos are currently in the top five on the New York Times bestseller lists for non-fiction. Going by interest alone, those would be good places to start.

      • “Dangerous” got a marker to indicate bulk buys pushing it into the top ten, so it might be a good idea to wait and see if there’s actual general interest

  • Political books of any stripe age poorly, and old books are probably of interest only to political historians. If a library is looking for conservative literature, there are plenty of other more recent and relevant choices out there — especially now in the Trump era.

  • Holly is right that this book would have been important in having a balanced collection in the 1990’s, just as today’s libraries should carry modern authors whom we might find distasteful.

  • Good ole rush…I remember when he lived in the Sacramento area and pinched the behind of my classmate, who worked in a family ice creamery and waited on him. All-in-all, I may not like him, but I’d weed this because he’s not relevant.

  • Kind of sad that Holly feels the need to explain “before everyone piles on” why this would have been a good choice at the time it was published (although I’d argue that something by Limbaugh himself would have been a better choice). Are people here so committed to only liberal books taking up space in libraries that they don’t understand this?

    • What would have been a worse choice? Mein Kampf?

      • The goal in library buying is to cater to a diversity of viewpoints, not to advocate the beliefs of the buyer.

    • M, why are you assuming that if someone dislikes Rush Limbaugh, they must be liberals (most likely fitting the unfair stereotype tossed out by the most wild-eyed of the far right)? My parents were conservatives, and they disliked Rush Limbaugh immensely.

      • It’s not about whether somebody personally likes or dislikes Limbaugh or anyone else. It’s about recognizing that libraries are supposed to have materials catering to a diversity of opinion and viewpoints. Rush Limbaugh is still popular enough that I’d say he merits maybe one book in a large county-wide system, and back in 1993 he was more popular. Of course a book about somebody with his level of influence was a good choice for library buying in 1993, and it’s sad that Holly feels the need to defend that.

    • Unfortunately there are people, including librarians, who believe only one viewpoint should be shown. I used to have a coworker who said he’d get rid of all the religious books (and by religious I don’t just mean Christianity, but Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Paganism, Wicca, Hinduism, etc) and all conservative political books if he could.

      Of course he also didn’t want any fiction on the shelves and we had to secretly add new paperback romances while he was on vacation just to get that section updated. His habit was to stick anything he didn’t like in the closet and wait until he could dispose of it without being seen.

      I don’t like a lot of the books on our shelves. Hate anything anti-vaccine or anti-GMO, but we have to have it so people can make real informed choices. I might want to punch Trump and Michael Moore both in the mouth but we still have to have their books.

  • Rush Limbaugh is ugly business, we women should leave him alone.

  • Two things that do NOT belong together in the same sentence….