NRO: Palin Is Hysterical

I suppose the boy Editor will eventually argue, "Well, it was only her words, you see". As if the childish looking dupe could ever pull off a decent Buckley imitation. 

What is it going to take for conservatives to finally accept that William F. is dead, the heirs to the throne, with too few exceptions, are a bunch of 2nd and 3rd generation elitist brats who belong to the Inside the Beltway set? They are not a part of the conservative movement that must re-define American politics, just as Reagan did, if there is to be anything like conservatism going forward in the nation's political discourse.

To conclude from these possibilities to the accusation that President Obama’s favored legislation will lead to “death panels” deciding whose life has sufficient value to be saved — let alone that Obama desires this outcome — is to leap across a logical canyon. It may well be that in a society as litigious as ours, government will err on the side of spending more rather than treating less. But that does not mean that there is nothing to worry about. Our response to Sarah Palin’s fans and her critics is to paraphrase Peter Viereck: We should be against hysteria — including hysteria about hysteria.

The state remains a dangerous servant and a terrible master, all the more so when it is also our HMO.

A combination of American heroes, including the late William F. Buckley and, even more importantly, Ronald Reagan brought new voices and ideas to Washington over two decades ago. Unfortunately, as happens, the seedlings of failure always come hidden within the fruits of great success.

The sprouts of Buckley and Reagan took root, flourished for a time and now seem tired-old and dying on thick-ish vines. If we can't root these weeds up and out, we should at least smother them in dung and fertilizer so as to prepare a bedding for what must come next.

Their continued feeding and nurturing through donations by conservatives is, not just a mistake, but an utter waste of resources we can ill afford to squander by supporting oily-leaved, slippery eyesores such as NRO.

If you insist on staking them, at least have the decency to stake them through the heart and rid conservatism of their undeserved overgrowth and underlying composted rot.

Comments

[Anita]

Except VDH, Mark Levin & Andrew McCarthy, National Review has become a joke.

[Mal]

I couldn't agree more about those nerdy eggheads like Lowry and Ponnuru.But it should be noted that Andy McCarthy strongly disagreed with the editors elitist snobbery in a Corner post this morning.There are a few good guys over at NRO.

[rrpjr]

Completely agree. It was Sarah Palin, the elites' hated embodiment of the stupid and unwashed, who recalled our best conservative traditions and reached into our literary subconscious to channel not only Reagan but Orwell in her devastating coinage of "death panels." In Animal Farm, Orwell allegorized how the Left sees the value of life: as an integer of productive value. Palin understood, something her elitist betters with all their degrees and pedigrees could not and apparently can not.

[Brad Schwartze]

This is one of those editorials which makes one wonder what "book value" National Review actually has right now. I mean, there is nothing that NR puts out today that isn't already replicated by outlets such as Human Events, Commentary, and The Weekly Standard. And thus, there is no real book value, other than the obvious historical value of Bill Buckley's writings.

It would be very interesting to see how marked-down NR actually is in the marketplace.

[Americannodash]

Dan,

Names, I want the names of these people who have abandoned the core principles of conservatism @ NRO. Did not NRO dump Parker & Frum? Who else is trying to create a new majority at NRO?

I just started following NRO today on twitter & will unfollow them if they've decided to wander off the reservation of Reagan & Buckley.

[mark l.]

"We should be against hysteria — including hysteria about hysteria."

I would love to see a compliation/tally of nro's articles about the following from 02-06:

abortion/religion, legal matters, iraq war, fiscal conservatism.

Robert Samuelson of Newsweek, has probably done more to address fiscal conservatism, in any given year, than the enitre nro staff has done over the past 6-8 years.

one writer from a liberal mag has produced more quality material in defining fiscal conservatism, that an entire blog that is allegedly is the watchtower of conservatism.

hysteria?
they had no concern when bush AND CONGRESS doubled our deficit, so they're concerned when it is doubled again under obama should be taken seriously? to be quite honest, it might make mention in 1 out of 100 running comments on the corner's thread, while in the "real world" it is increasingly becoming the backbone of judgement of this administration.

look at their topical banners:

The Agenda Bench Memos Rick Brookhiser Campaign Spot The Corner Critical Condition Kudlow's Money Politic$ Liberal Fascism Media Blog
Phi Beta Cons Planet Gore David Pryce-Jones

with the exception of a larry kudlow piece, once a month, which I can see on cnbc any night of the week, the national review is no longer concerned about fiscal conservatism.

there is the opposite condition of hysterical, which would incline one to shovel 6 feet of earth upon a body, to keep its corpse from stinking up the place.

national review is actually polite enough to bury themselves.

[narciso]

Well it does seem Hood, and Ponnuru, & Wesley Smith, (yes the Culture of Death guy)and Jerry Taylor, are all get along to go along. That's just IMO.

[Ran]

Anira,
Add Mark Steyn and Michael Ledeen to the list of "keepers."

[edward cropper]

First of all National Review has never been the spokesperson for conservatives. It has for years represented certain conservative snobs and some non snobs, but not conservatism as a whole.
I have read NR almost from it's beginning and for all the respect I have for Bill Buckley, he never did represent me in anything. His conservatism was an intellectual philosophical approach. By his very background he could never really understand any conservative who made under $20,000 a year.
NRO has gone even further off the reservation, and can't grasp the fact that there is a whole new breed of right wingers out there who won't take marching orders from any elitist conservative clique regardless of their assumed leadership.

[Scott]

For what it is worth. I sent this email to Andy McCarthy regarding his response to the the NRO editorial on The Corner.

Andy,
Excellent point on your corner post this morning. This "above the fray" stance of conservatives gets us nowhere. If I am not mistaken, you were the NRO writer who correctly noted that Obama's actions on the Iran protests could best be understood if we just acknowledge that Obama wanted A-Jad to win. Just so. This was also treated by the NRO editors as beyond the pale.

I am really tired of conservatives giving Obama the benefit of the doubt so often. This happens frequently even at NRO and other reliably conservative publications. Illustrative examples include the oft-repeated canard that Obama made a "political mistake" by handing over stimulus/health care/waterboarding issues to Congress/Attorney General and let the crazy lefties implement the policy and dominate the debate. Implicit in this is the acceptance of Obama's own lie that he is some kind of centrist who would have implemented more moderate policies if only he had executed these initiatives himself. A thousand times NO! The man is not stupid. The most straightforward interpretation of all of these schemes (and others not listed) is that these proposals are exactly what Obama wants and he is simply outsourcing to his ideological soulmates--most probably so that he can get the policies that he wants without having to reveal himself to the public for the radical leftist that he is. Conservatives need to abandon their inner David Frum, and stop giving this guy the benefit of the doubt that he does not deserve. You can understand everything that this fraud does by just acknowledging that he is a man of the radical left. Likewise, apropos your point on foreign policy, you can understand every decision he makes by understanding that he is and has always been part of the blame America/Israel first crowd. Keep up the truth-telling.

[mark l.]

i went to the corner, did a word search for "debt".

from present time to 8/14 4.21pm, almost 3 days of posts. the word is found 3(4 in you count a derivative)...

vdh-
"And what looms over the entire debate? Debt, debt, debt — both the recognition that one cannot expand those covered and save money at the same time without rationing or higher taxes; and the notion that all Obama’s new entitlements essentially involve borrowing money, much of it from Asia, as our indebtedness soars."

the most powerful word in politics today, easily understood by all, and one writer in one post decides to use it, over a three day span?

[mark l.]

other searches, same 3 day span?

"deficit". twice. vdh and in the text of a nyt piece.

"budget". once, in a steyn piece, discussing canada.

"dollar". once, in a fox news link.

[Mal]

Think about it.With a couple of posts on Facebook Sarah Palin completely took over the healthcare debate.Despite Obama's bully pulpit and sycophantic media coverage Sarah's rhetorical sledge hammer,"death panels",won the day.And all Lowry is concerned about is her "hysterical" language.Does he really think all those Americans would have shown up at the townhalls if only they had read one of Ramesh Ponnuru's eggheaded articles.

[Ran]

Hey, Dan,
A plug for Stacy McCain's home at The American Spectator.

http://www.americanprowler.com/

It's an interesting mix there. Of special note is R. Emmett Tyrrell, one of the finest (and most humorous) writers alive.

[Jana]

Oh, brother. There is a wide variety of views that come out of NRO, so quit with the hyperbole, for pete's sake.

I like you and read your blog religiously, but it's days like this when it is really hard to take you seriously. A difference of opinion is not a weed that must be rooted out. It's called changing hearts and minds, and primarily those of an independent/moderate inclination.

The obsession with ideological purity on the right is unlikely to produce a majority.

[mark l.]

"economy".

5 times, 4 occuring in the text of a usatoday link.
jonathan adler gets the nod for actually using the word, once.

[Jana]

Ace's reaction was to argue against the line of reasoning (as did McCarthy), not to presume that we should all rise up against those traitorous hordes over at NRO. This is the kind of thing that has the power to persuade, not your inclination to weed out the infidels.

[tim maguire]

"Death Panels" is, arguably, over the top, but it is a logical outgrowth of provisions of this health bill. And statements Obama has made about his purposes in promoting health care reform also feed the fear that bureaucrats will determine who gets what treatment based on cost/benefit concerns.

Reform supporters made a key tactical mistake in pretending that "death panels" is dishonest manipulation. They would have done better to admit the issue and counter it with arguments about why cost reviews are a good thing.

But why in the world would opponents of this reform take Obama's side and deny what anyone can see is at least partly true? Does NRO WANT to follow the rest of the suicide media?

[Robert Belvedere]

I have been reading NR since the 1970's. It has always had what many call a 'snobby' element to it; after all, it is meant to be more of a philosophical publication, concerned with 'higher' things. In other words, I always expected an elitist air to surround it. But something has seriously gone wrong since Rich Lowry has been running it. I see WFB as the father who, through relentless toil, built up the company, John O'Sullivan as the uncle who took over the day-to-day for a time while Lowry, the son was being groomed. Sadly, Lowry is the kind of son who has run many a company into the ground. Much better, as Stacy McCain suggested, that cousin Jonah Goldberg take the reigns before its too late.

[Anita]

Add Mark Steyn and Michael Ledeen to the list of "keepers."

Posted by: Ran

Forgot, Completely Agree.

[Dan Riehl]

Jana,

First and foremost, I'm not an ideological purist. If you wish to suggest I am mis-branding NRO, it would be best to not mis-brand me. I am almost as much a libertarian, as I am conservative. So, we can put that line of reasoning to rest.

As for NRO, it wasn't me who sought to make them THE hallmark of conservatism. They sought that out for themselves to take advantage of a rising tide as a marketing scheme. So, by their own choosing and design, they now stand as the representative of conservatism and the movement.

All I am saying is, if they don't want to carry the banner, they should lose the marketing shtick. Which, post-Buckley, is a large part of what their conservatism amounts to anyway.

You mention Parker, Frum, even young Buckley himself, who is a total disgrace to his name, now a writer of frivolus books. What makes you so sure that it was they who moved them on? I see Levin rarely if ever writes there anymore. For whatever reason, he chose to write here when taking Frum on, not at NRO. Was it too "real" for them, perhaps?

I have no way of knowing, I've never asked. If NRO wants to cast itself as just another Beltway pub with oodles and oodles of most delicious thought - fine by me. I wish them well with their fundraising drive based on that. But if they want to continue to profess to be the standard bearer of the conservative flag, then they damn sure better be prepared to wave it, or be prepared to be called out.

[Karen]

WTF has happened to NRO? According to SiteMeter, visits to NRO has plunged. They can't blame it on the election being over, since HotAir and other conservative sites have skyrocketed in visitors.

When you keep linking to mental midgets like Kathleen Parker, you cannot call yourself "conservative". The fact that they kept David Frum on their payroll for so long is just incredible.

VDH, Steyn, Goldberg and McCarthy are too good to be associated with NRO in my opinion.

[Evil Red Scandi]

"But if they want to continue to profess to be the standard bearer of the conservative flag, then they damn sure better be prepared to wave it, or be prepared to be called out."

I'd say they are the standard-bearers. Progressives are sprinting towards socialism. Conservatives are just trying to get there at a more comfortable jog. They have been for well over a decade. NRO is just in line with what passes for the current conservative movement.

[Dan Riehl]

"Ace's reaction was to argue against the line of reasoning"

With all due respect to Ace, he actually noted on his blog of his need to begin to see his blog as a viable means of revenue generation, directly suggesting a necessary change in tone. I'm not accusing him of anything, simply mirroring what he wrote and I read.

I don't mind that. But if the implication was that he might have to lose a certain fire because of a need to play along, please don't propose that as a rationale for me to do likewise. I have other means of support.

[mark l.]

[When you keep linking to mental midgets like Kathleen Parker, you cannot call yourself "conservative".]

the whole nexus of parker and buckley junior is sooo wierd.

junior set up this group of female conservatives, parker was just one, and at first glance, one would think it was brilliant. Conservatism needed to make inroads with women.

Instead, junior along with his gaggle, shoot for their own niche of politics which is the equivalent of People magazine for conservative women. empty fluff.

[centralcal]

Karen: I wholeheartedly agree with your comments - except for the inclusion of Goldberg. Jonah is a little like Obama - completely in love with his own reflection.

The Corner doesn't seem to be very topical most days and I think they are losing readers mostly because they are boring.

[mark l.]

{the whole nexus of parker and buckley junior is sooo wierd.}

my apologies to junior, it was reid buckley, william's brother for whom we have to thank for kathleen parker's foray into conservatism.

http://www.buckleyschool.com/faculty.html

[rrpjr]

I never really understood the cult of Buckley. I find him unreadable.

The crux of it all for me is simply this: do you "get" the Left, or do you apologize for them? We should be educating those who don't know and want to know, but shouldn't indulge elitist clueless quislings like Frum et al. This is not a matter of "ideological purity" but national survival.

By the way, David Horowitz, one of our national intellectual treasures, has a fine small piece on his website today, a kind of primer for his appearance on Glenn Beck next week discussing Saul Alinksy.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/readBlog.aspx?BLOGID=1048

[Evil Red Scandi]

"With all due respect to Ace, he actually noted on his blog of his need to begin to see his blog as a viable means of revenue generation, directly suggesting a necessary change in tone. I'm not accusing him of anything, simply mirroring what he wrote and I read."

I think that mainly means he's using the dreaded "f-word" less. I like the guy personally, but he gets squishy on the issues at times (and then has to choke out the appropriate mea culpas later).

[EdFab]

OT: Regarding Jessie Griffen. Remember that photo of him with a pacifier in his mouth? That photo struck me as weird in a sick way, because a pacifier is a baby's implement, and he (at the time) was passing himself off as a kindergarten assistant. However, I read something interesting today from a psychology textbook in the section on psychodelic drugs. To quote:

"Rave culture helped popularize the use of Ecstasy, a synthetic drug. Ecstasy users may suck on baby pacifiers to cope with the drug's side effects, which include jaw clenching and tooth grinding."

In case you haven't heard of them (and this was news to me), Rave parties are all night dance parties, and the participants often juice themselves up with stimulants.

So Griffen may have been subtly communicating that he uses Ecstasy, a name which itself implies sexually related activities. Another double-entrende?

[EdFab]

Actually, a triple-entendre?

[Dan Riehl]

"I think that mainly means"

Could be ERS. But I thought he actually mentioned NRO and others in the post. I could be wrong. But I took it to mean influencing even how he might debate or criticize them. But I don't want to speak for him. I will however note that, it's his banner that speaks of slitting throats, I believe?

So my response was really directed at Jana for invoking Ace in her push back against me. I see it as throat slitting time for NRO as anything like the Conservative pub of record. If some want to disagree, that's their right.

[Dan Riehl]

Could be, EdFab. I sorta like Occam's Razor applied there. Maybe he just likes to suck?

[davis,br]

The Corner doesn't seem to be very topical most days and I think they are losing readers mostly because they are boring.

Precisely. They quit being a daily stop ...hmm, about a year ago: when they were gushing cold over Palin, I just figured I'd had enough. With that, they'd become ...irrelevant ...to my way of thinking.

...also agree with the above regarding VDH (hell, I even buy his books), Ledeen, Steyn (I have TWO!! t-shirts and a cup: big fan, doting wife), Levin (own the last book), and Andy, who almost always has something relevant to say. Oh, and I always admired Mac' (Mackubin Owens) when he regularly wrote there, too.

I get better insight at Ace, DPUD, Neo Neocon and here on any given day then I do there anymores.

[BD57]

The NRO editorial is 'disappointing' to say the least (trying not to be hysterical here). I don't understand why so many conservatives (yes, I still think NR qualifies) believe taking shots at one of their own somehow demonstrates the good faith of their arguments against the left.

Yes, I understand WFB felt it necessary to read the Birchers out of conservatism decades ago; not only that, I believe he was right to do so.

This ain't the same thing.

Mark Steyn is right - rationing won't order people killed, it'll just cut off care so they die more quickly (and cheaply). Some may (and obviously do) object to calling them "death boards", but that's what they'll traffic in.

In this instance, Palin is guilty of afflicting the comfortable utopian left. IMO, that's a good thing.

[centralcal]

I would add Geraghty, who has his own blog Campaign Spot, and the NRO Media Blog as worth reading.

[syn]

"A difference of opinion is not a weed that must be rooted out. It's called changing hearts and minds, and primarily those of an independent/moderate inclination."

Persuaded by Islamic-Jihadists using jet liners to attack WTC, The Pentagon and potentially the US Capital but was thwarted over a field in PA, my heart and mind changed in a multitude of ways; I went from being a brain-dead Liberal(see David Mamet) to converting to Conservatism. Before 2001, I had no idea who WF Buckley or NR plus I entirely missed out on Reagan's Revolution but I sure knew how to party and play-act.

My first two Conservative persuaders were Dr. Thomas Sowell and David Horowitz; I didn't begin reading NR until about a year later. My beef about NR is that they'll champion the Conservative bus yet once you take your seat the bus drivers take turns telling the passengers how hysterical, irritating, rude, obnoxious backward are their passengers while the passengers are yelling "STOP, we're headed over cliff!"

More importantly, since reading NR (about 6 years now) I do not recall a single instance, out of the millions of words written by those at National Review, in which NR has successfully achieved what Sarah Palin was able to achieve with just two well-chosen words, that being, Stand Thwart Statist Liberals and Stop Them.

I think editors @NR are mad at Palin because she did the one job they've been forever promising to do yet never once attempted to deliver on their promise.

[The Monster]

"let alone that Obama desires this outcome"

That really sums up a big part of the problem. Obama, like all other Leftists, gets credit for his good intentions. He need only enunciate a lofty goal, and whatever program he proposes to achieve it MUST be good.

I once ran into this mentality when in retail management in a municipality that was considering an ordinance governing signage. At a meeting between the merchants and the city planning commission staff, I pointed out that the WORDING of the proposed ordinance would require a permit for the stickers on glass doors that say things like "PULL" or "PUSH", "NO SMOKING", "VISA", etc. The response was that it was not the INTENT of the ordinance. I then asked if they would change the WORDING to match the stated INTENT, to which the answer was "no". I didn't know how to respond to that. I must conclude either that the true intent is not the stated intent, or that they simply don't care what the result is.

They live in fantasy land, where good intentions are all that matters. We live in the real world, where good intentions are best known as the paving material for the Road to Hell.

[rrpjr]

"I think editors @NR are mad at Palin because she did the one job they've been forever promising to do..."

Yes, there is much envy, poisoned with snobbery. Of course, they would never say what Palin said; and therefore they doubly despise that it hit the nerves it did and got the traction it got. It is hard to overestimate the threat Palin represents to them. They're populist-phobic, and she's their worst nightmare. "Can you imagine all those people from Alaska coming to Washington if she won. ALASKA!"

[FeFe]

If NRO dropped political correctness, they would have to admit they don't like themselves let alone each other. Not exactly leg tingling conversation over martinis. They can continue playing in sandboxes but don't rain on my picnic if I choose to grow up and bury the cat sh---.

[__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__m_u_r_r_a_y__]

Sarah Palin is a bright colors conservative.

NRO, of late, is trafficking in pastels.

__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__m_u_r_r_a_y__

[tally]

Hysteria - uncontrolled emotional state, such as of panic, anger, or excitement [Greek hustera womb, from the belief that hysteria originated in disorders of the womb]. Perhaps next they can cart the little woman off to a sanatorium, that'll shut her up. Isn't that what they used to do?

[__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__m_u_r_r_a_y__]

syn writes..."...More importantly, since reading NR (about 6 years now) I do not recall a single instance, out of the millions of words written by those at National Review, in which NR has successfully achieved what Sarah Palin was able to achieve with just two well-chosen words"

I can see, WFB, slouched, cross-legged and smiling at your excellent point.

Well done.

__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__m_u_r_r_a_y__

[xax]

Tell me how you really feel?

[Ran]

Syn,
Yeah, 2001 here likewise. Upper West Side Manhattan. It was Larry Elder who flipped my head around towards libertarian thinking.

McCarthy (via Ace) made an interesting observation: ""BusHitler," by contrast, did not catch on with the public because it was so easily refuted."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDMxYjViMTZlNWRmOTg4MmEwNDA1NTk4MjQzYmQyODM=

Heh. Then it struck me why the "Obama as Joker" posters really hit home.

And yeah, I'm with Tim... X-ring shot.

[Jake]

Florence King - the best thing to ever happen to NR. When she left, I cancelled my subscription. Reading unoriginal thinkers trying to emulate WFB, one of the most tiresome, tedious writers ever, was too much effort. I drop by NRO if I'm in the mood for a circus.

[Ran]

Dan
Thanks for posting this. I had thought I was very alone in my disregard for NR as of late, especially my distaste for Lowry.

[Sapwolf]

NRO is a complete joke now.

If I see even one of them or a booth at CPAC, there will be a confrontation. I mean it.

And you don't want to be nearby if I see that s**t Frum there.

And I will relish the Cuda easily winning the CPAC straw poll on the road at Romney's home field.

[PCP Smoker]

The guy wrote a good book about Clinton, but I do wonder what the f*(k happened to him. I'm not sure he should be slammed for his boyish looks, but his open support for boutique conservatives (Frum, the carftsman-style homes guy, the wallmart conservatives guy, the old hag at the WJS, and brooks) and his almost homoerotic support for Obama is the reason I skip that site these days. There are good conservatives out there toiling in obscurity, and I don't have the time to waste with the weaklings at NRO.

[JSF]

Dan,

I think it is time to treat the Corner like Andrew Sullivan in 2003. Should we on the Right start de-linking the Corner?