Posted on 12/17/2011 7:36:56 AM PST by JSDude1
Brent Bozell, a nephew of conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr., who founded National Review magazine in 1955, and whose father, Leo Brent Bozell, collaborated with Buckley for many years at NR, today dismissed the magazine as having lost the identity forged for it by its founder.
“National Review's endorsement of Romney & Huntsman proves only that this is no longer the magazine of William F. Buckley Jr. My uncle would be appalled,” said Bozell in postings on Facebook and on Twitter.
In its Dec. 14 “The Editors" page, National Review published an editorial entitled “Winnowing the Field,” which flippantly dismissed many of the strong conservatives running in the race for the GOP
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Andrew McCarthy ROASTED NR and pointed out that the same Congresscritters that ousted Newt are the ones that have SPENT US INTO OBLIVION with BUSH and OBAMA!!!
Mark Steyn disassociated himself with National Review’s editorial too. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/285873/include-me-out-mark-steyn
Coulter, National Review, Noonan, etc all demolished Reagan’s 11th Commandment!
Brent, time to start “New Review.”
To paraphrase a famous man, “I didn’t leave National Review, National Review left me.”
National Review was never a real hard core conservative magazine tho they were strong on anti-communism.
I recall back around 1960 or maybe a bit later, they caught Radio Free Europe supporting the Communist lies about the Russian murders of the Polish officers in the Katyn Forest.
Even back then, the government agencies were full of commies, probably even worse than McCarthy claimed.
They flippantly dismissed candidates who deserve to be flippantly dismissed. And on the question of Newt, Mitt, or Huntsman, Newt is the worst choice of the three.
Correct. There was no "conservative rebellion" against Newt Gingrich. And the argument that the man somehow "can't win," against a very vulnerable opponent, is transparent.
You are right, it probably was worse than McC claimed, and remains so today.
NR is in crisis mode at the moment. They’ve never been very sound financially, relying on donations from subscribers and benefactors to keep the presses running. Sadly, like the GOP establishment in the last election cycle, they seem tone deaf to the legitimate concerns of those who have found common cause with the Tea Party. They fail to recognize that the recent uptick in support for Gingrich is not because of some deep seated affection for a flawed candidate, but because of a deep seated aversion to the establishment choice - Mitt Romney. NR would have been better served to say “a pox on all their houses”, than to create the impression that it is attacking Gingrich in order to boost Romney. If NR feels that Romney is the answer, then it doesn’t understand the question. And it risks being left in the dustbin of history as a once proud, but now sadly irrelevant publication.
Excellent post IMO. Right on the mark.
APPLAUSE!
bump!
Meh..!
I always liked American Spectator much more, anyway.
Good post.
Thats what happens when you put girly men in charge of something...
I did not know however that Brent Bozell was Buckley's nephew. That's interesting.
Buckley made conservatism a respectable intellectual gambit, if not a dominant force, and NR was his mouthpiece.
We expect more today and should have more. The magazine has failed to find a mission and so is rightfully disdained.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.