The Silliness of the National Review

Friday, March 03, 2006
I still can’t believe I read this:

“Although many of our friends have sincere doubts about the deal, we have yet to hear a compelling argument against it. So it is with regret that we say the deal should be jettisoned.”

Article here.

The editors of the National Review are essentially saying that the hell with doing the right thing---President Bush must worry more about the poll numbers. This is utter idiocy. First of all, I’m confident that the Dubai Port World agreement will be approved. But I also realize that the nonsense would not stop there! Raising the white flag of surrender on this issue will only embolden the hysterical paranoids, isolationists, and yes, the subconscious (I’m trying to be nice) bigots. They will ceaselessly raise the bar. Nothing will satisfy them and an unbelievable amount of damage will be the result. Republicans and moderate Democrats will constantly be on the defensive. Our relationships with our allies throughout the world will endure a serious pounding. George W. Bush must not even begin to listen to the NR’s horrible advice. It could become one of the greatest mistakes of his presidency. Last week, it was the weirdness of William F. Buckley regarding Iraq. This week the well known conservative publication wants us to give in to the Daily Kos and its allies. With friends like this, do we really need any enemies?

12 comments:

Eric Blair said...

It is pretty insane. The media (left and right) have managed to really whip up the bigotry and idiocy on this one.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

This issue would give a really good politician like Slick Willy an unbelievable opportunity to take the high road. He could come out as Mr. Internationalists, Mr. Non-racist and really make the opponents look like the small-minded churls they are. Unfortunately, Bush is not that politician.

Fresh Air said...

The logic is also backwards. Government should only intervene in a private matter if it can find a good reason to do so, not if it can't.

flenser said...

The Cornerfication of NR continues. It used to be a serious publication, believe it or not. It used to take the long view. Now everything revolves around the latest polls.

terrye said...

And why are those poll numbers where they are? Because publications like the NR can not be honest about this issue.

I know people are nervous about the whole deal, but at the same time if they did a poll and ask the public if they wanted Singapore "taking over our ports" I doubt if the numbers would be much different.

Idiots.

Fresh Air said...

Ramesh and his inscrutable reasoning and the completely dopey Kathryn Lopez can be thanked for this.

Lowry and Goldberg seem to have their heads screwed on straight. The rest of them are hooked up to a Gallup poll machine awaiting further instructions.

Sad thing is, there really isn't a good solid magazine for conservatives now, except for the New Criterion and Claremont Review of Books, of course.

terrye said...

Dennis the peasant has a copy from the Chairman of Zim, the largest Israeli shipping company, giving their blessings to the deal. Even the Israelis are not worried about it and they make a point of saying they have dealt with DPW extensivlely.

Skookumchuk said...

terrye:

DPW, despite the well-publicized anti-Israel boycott, has been doing business with Zim for many years. It doesn't excuse the noxiousness of it, but I think most of these Islamic anti-Israel boycotts are as porous as a pasta colander.

Knucklehead said...

Flenser,

I remember, quite a long time ago, when I discovered that there was such a thing as National Review. What a pleasure it was to read intelligently crafted articles about real issues.

What a shame it's headed in the wrong direction. The American Spectator tore itself apart in the Clinton years with its lunatic CDS. Now NR is headed down the tubes with electioneer fretting.

Oh well. That's the way the cookie crumbles I suppose. It isn't as if a whole lot of Presse Ancienne has managed to survive these difficult times (anybody have an example?)

MeaninglessHotAir said...

My favorite remains Commentary. Anybody read it? I don't know if it's still any good.

JB said...

Amen. Pure amateur hour.

Skookumchuk said...

The faux inside chattiness and the hysteria surrouding every issue of the moment (a very Washingtonian trait) all make it more than I can take. I still check it out once a day or so, but don't quite know why.

The New Criterion it ain't.