Charlie Hurt: Where Was National Review's Outrage Over Candidates Who Supported Amnesty, Bank [tr]

Real Clear Politics ^ | January 22, 2016 | Staff

[C19fan]

Washington Times and Breitbart columnist Charles Hurt reacts to the the cover story of this week's National Review: Conservatives Against Trump.

The story features conservatives of various stripes (including Glenn Beck, Thomas Sowell, and Brent Bozell) explaining why Donald Trump's "shoot-from-the-hip, bombastic showoff" personality is the "last thing we need as president."

[C19fan]

Just a reminder it was National Review who pimped Willard for at least 8 years. Trump at least is willing to go to war against the Cultural Marxists and the Left. Willard had the backbone of an invertebrate, i.e., none.

[donna]

And gay marriage.

[hollyweed]

National Review has never been the same with Lowry. Bring back John O’Sullivan.

[vette6387]

“National Review has never been the same with Lowry.”

Yes, he's a petulant little prick!

[marron]

I’m a Cruz guy... National Review hasn’t had much respect for him either until now. Or “tea party” folk in general for that matter. Or “social” conservatives either.

Its weird to see them worrying about the state of conservatism.

[miss marmelstein]

He refused to talk to Laura Ingraham this morning and apparently got nasty with her on the phone. That’s what she reported!

[JParris]

and omnibus spending bills and funding obama care and funding planned parent hood and NSA and etc, etc, etc.....

[chris37]

Where was National Reviews outrage over anything the backstabbing GOP has ever done to conservatives or America?

I never knew conservatism was so important to them until now, but sadly for them, it’s too late.

[CottonBall]

yup, NR never attacked W for pimping amnesty. Or McConnell, Boehner, or Ryan!

They don’t want a conservative, they want a GOP establishment type.

So their condemnation of Trump is actually a great endorsement.

[LS]

Rush going over this: did they run a similar cover story hit piece on Gingrich in 2012?

[Dante3]

Glenn Beck is no conservative - and he has psychological problems. And NR couldn’t do any better than to include him?

[LS]

Or since Mark Steyn left.

[BigEdLB]

Laura is a good lady. She has ABILITY to detect BS.

[relictele]

...to the point of exiling their best writer who mocked it.

[Defiant]

He’s Frumpish.

[BigEdLB]

What is Steyn’s take on National Review’s descent into irrelevancy?

[Mariner]

The Greatest fear of Conservative Orthodoxy is that an insurgent candidate, a Republican, will win without them.

Relegating them irrelevant.

[LS]

I don’t know-—he hasn’t talked about it on Rush’s show. Was he fired from NRO after he was sued by the Canucks for global warming crap? I seem to remember they didn’t support him.

[jersey117]

Right. The establishment is so conservative they funded planned Parenthood without a fight. I’ll take the front runner. The person who can won. NO ONE WILL BE WORSE THAN HUSSEIN AND HILLARY.

[Colorado Buckeye]

I'm a Cruz guy... National Review hasn't had much respect for him either until now. Or "tea party" folk in general for that matter. Or "social" conservatives either.

It's weird to see them worrying about the state of conservatism.

Perhaps they are actually Globalists masquerading as conservatives.