The Limbaugh Code

[struggle4progress]

The New York Times best seller no one is talking about.

By Dahlia Lithwick
Posted Friday, April 1, 2005, at 3:21 PM PT

If a book lands on the best-seller list and nobody hears it, did it really happen? Mark R. Levin's Men in Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America was ranked eighth on the New York Times list this week; it's been on that list for six weeks now, and seems to be leaping off the bookshelves, despite the fact that it concerns constitutional law and the U.S. Supreme Court. Yet it has been reviewed virtually no place and written up by almost no one. True, Charles Lane did a piece about it in the Washington Post a few days ago; he noted that absolutely nobody who writes, talks, or thinks about the high court has even read it. It's selling, it seems, almost entirely due to endorsements by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Fox News.

Men in Black was published by Regnery Publishing—the outfit that brought us Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry last summer. Serious journalists spent serious time debunking the claims set forth in the Swift Boat book, but absolutely no one seems to be taking on Levin. This isn't too surprising: For one thing, there's no election on the line. And for another, no serious scholar of the court or the Constitution, on the ideological left or right, is going to waste their time engaging Levin's arguments once they've read this book.

I use the word "book" with some hesitation: Certainly it possesses chapters and words and other book-like accoutrements. But Men in Black is 208 large-print pages of mostly block quotes (from court decisions or other legal thinkers) padded with a forward by the eminent legal scholar Rush Limbaugh, and a blurry 10-page "Appendix" of internal memos to and from congressional Democrats—stolen during Memogate. The reason it may take you only slightly longer to read Men in Black than it took Levin to write it is that you'll experience an overwhelming urge to shower between chapters. <snip>

Perhaps my colleague Dan Gross is right and the wing-nuts are simply starved for new subjects. But maybe the far-right really thinks that attacking the independence of the judiciary as a whole is a smart move. Levin pays some lip service to the idea that the federal bench needs to be stacked with right-wing ideologues in his penultimate chapter. But he betrays early on his fear that even the staunchest conservative jurist is all-too-often "seduced by the liberal establishment once they move inside the Beltway." Thus, his real fixes for the problem of judicial overreaching go further than manipulating the appointments process. He wants to cut all judges off at the knees: He'd like to give force to the impeachment rules, put legislative limits on the kinds of constitutional questions courts may review, and institute judicial term limits. He'd also amend the Constitution to give congress a veto over the court's decisions. Each of which imperils the notion of an independent judiciary and of three separate, co-equal branches of government. But the Levins of the world are not interested in a co-equal judiciary. They seem to want to see it burn. <snip>

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116087/

[BlueEyedSon]

1. kick

[Kerrytravelers]

2. I'm glad someone wrote a scathing article.

But what aren't more people taking this on?

I fear our legal system will be destroyed. These people are truly taking our country hostage and unfortunately, because the legal system and the courts aren't exciting or sexy enough, most Americans don't seem too interested.

We are witnessing the end of America as we know it.

[Tux]

5. It already ended

When red state hicks voted for Bush twice.

[izzybeans]

3. Whatever Groupthink-tank this person is attached to will

have bought most of those copies and then distributed at their upcoming events no doubt. Complete with the premise, this "NYtimes best seller explains all you need to know", they'll hand them out or resell them to unsuspecting middle americans who think the NYtimes bestseller list has meaning. Complete with their John Birch society pamphlets and everything.

I once read about, but I'm not sure where, probably in one of the David Brock books, how many books it would take to sell in a week's time in order to make the list. It wasn't that high if this list is one of the speciality lists and when you buy them in bulk from the publisher it wasn't that expensive, especially when purchased with grant money-that would be my hunch. If its on the general non-fiction list then it would take some serious scratch to pull off such a chirade. But if its on, the rightwing-nutjob-fiction list it just takes a coke and a smile to get people to shut the fcuk up.

[gmoney]

4. Does Dahlia realize Regnery fakes their numbers?

These bogus 'books' pop up on the bestseller list because of massive orders by right wing organizations and individuals seeking to give the 'book' some smattering of legitimacy.

I'm guessing Dahlia realizes that, but maybe not.