Is the modern conservative movement a cult, following lockstep one individual, no matter what qualifications or viewpoints this individual has?
I have subscribed to the NR for years, I have enjoyed it. I do not believe everything that is in it. Reasonable people can disagree. For example, I do not believe everything Andrew Sullivan says, but sometimes I think he hits the nail on the head with his analysis. And Freepers have no problem posting his comments, no matter how offensive his viewpoint on other matters may be.
The NRO was well within its rights to refuse to carry Ann Coulter's column, just as she was well within her rights to say what she wanted to.
However, what good are ad hominum attacks, like the "girly men" comment? Should the NRO respond with anorexic comments about Ann? Her intemperate rhetoric does nothing to further the cause, it only paints us as wild eyed reactionaries.
To exclude the National Review because of an editorial decision is quite simply, cutting off your nose to spite your face. On more issues than not, the NRO is online with most Freepers. They have been the staunchest critics of the Clintons, Colin Powell, the pro-life movement, pro-second amendment,...any conservative cause you can think of. Rich Lowry has written some harsh words about the administration's coalition building in this war.
This is not a pc, moderate magazine. I will continue to post and comment on it, if the forum doesn't like the source, that is its perogative, and unfortunatly its loss
As the saying goes, we either hang together, or hang separately...
148 Posted on 10/01/2001 23:01:11 PDT by JohnHuang2
EITHER YOU ARE WITH US OR AGAINST US...........WE ALL HANG AS ONE.........