National Review editor Rich Lowry on the magazine's endorsement today of Mitt Romney

Hugh Hewitt at Townhall.com ^ | 12/11/07 | Hugh Hewitt

[Cicero]

Nicely orchestrated. Rich Lowry appears on Hugh Hewitt, who has been plugging romney (I almost said pimping for Romney, but I will refrain) since the beginning.

Lowry does NOT say that Buckley liked the decision to endorse Romney. He just said that he didn’t object to it, but also that he apparently had no active input into making it.

[OKIEDOC]

I’ll give your two Romney's and raise you a great big Fred Thompson.

Sorry National Review, I usually agree with you but this time I will wait for the end results.

Are these the same people who endorsed George Bush?

However, if Mitt wins the nomination he will get my vote.

[ConservativeDude]

North-eastern conservatives have never been comfortable with Southern evangelicals.”

Rather, I think the truth is that conservatives like to support conservatives (social, fiscal, foreign policy). Huckabee doesn’t qualify except for one of the three. NR would gladly support a preacher-governor, if he was an across the board conservative.

[Spiff]

I think we all need to accept the fact Romney will be the GOP candidate when the dust settles.

Back in the summer I did the geometry on this race and realized that it would either be Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney getting the nomination. Giuliani is the most liberal Republican candidate I've ever had the displeasure of seeing run for the nomination. While Romney is not the most conservative candidatei in the race, he is the most conservative viable candidate and he is conservative enough for me to support him. Under no circumstances will I ever vote for Giuliani. His nomination will bring about the destruction of the Republican Party and guarantee a Democrat win this election and many more as social and fiscal conservatives try to pick up the pieces of what was once the GOP and try to craft something else. We'll spend decades in the wilderness while the Democrats, essentially unopposed, drive the nation headlong into pure, unrestrained socialism and appeasement/surrender to our foreign enemies.

Meanwhile, FReepers are doing Rudy and the Democrats' work in smearing Romney and distorting his record. If and when Romney does win the nomination, he'll be so damaged by all this stupidity seen here and elsewhere amongst conservatives that it will be that much harder for him to win in the general election.

[Last Dakotan]

In reading the magazine lately, it seems its purpose is to recommend wines.

Like I care what Buckley drinks.

[Badeye]

Hmmmm. Its been a small minority here at FR thats using some of the more disgusting lines of attack against Romney in my experience the past few months. I dont think whats posted by them will significantly influence the general election cycle next year.

I do understand your point, however.

[1Old Pro]

This is HUGH!

[Verginius Rufus]

I think Andrew Jackson wanted the Tennessee state constitution to bar ministers from holding public office. This would have been in the 1790s when Tennessee was first admitted to the Union.

I don't know if I would go that far, but I'm not very comfortable with the idea of a Baptist preacher, or other preacher, being the Republican nominee...it would probably guarantee defeat in November anyway so whether he would be a good President would be a moot question.

[sitetest]

“One of the fathers of modern Conservatism finds Romney acceptable.”

That’s nice.

I still won’t vote for the fraud.

And I will let my NR subscription lapse this spring.

[Sudetenland]

Yea, well there’s that too. Huck Finn’s electability is pretty much zilch.

[Verginius Rufus]

The thread could have been entitled: "Rich Lowry on National Review's jumping the shark"

[codercpc]

Yeh but SARAH EVANS endorsed Fred today on the View./sarc

[ari-freedom]

HH: Now tell me, was there division among the senior members of the board who made this decision?

RL: You know, there was some. We have a couple of Rudy supporters
—

oh that reallllllly makes me feel better about NR

[antisocial]

“NR would gladly support a preacher-governor, if he was an across the board conservative.”

BS they only support Rockefeller (country club) republicans. They have forgotten what conservatives are.

[Dante3]

You sound like a liberal. What a nasty comment.

[JCEccles]

Bump.

National Review is anything but kneejerk in endorsing candidates. NR has been tough--often VERY tough--on Romney. But the editorial board has tested Romney and found him to offer the best overall package of conservatism and electability.

[TheLion]

Mitt bump!

[x]

Here's a good-and sincere-question for all of you Huckabites. Have we ever in the history of our nation had an ordained minister or head of any church as President

James Garfield was a church elder and minister -- some say a lay minister (I'm not sure what the distinction is) --in the Disciples of Christ. Benjamin Harrison had been a church elder and Sunday school teacher. Carter was also a deacon and Sunday school teacher.

It looks like there were more Presidents who had no religious affiliation or didn't go to church than were ministers.

[Tim n Texas]

That settles it for me. I’ve been on the fence over 3 of these guys. Let’s ‘make it Mitt’. All aboard!

[tiger-one]

I saw him on TV last summer, just did not have it. Hardly nasty, just a fact.