Jonah Goldberg, in a blog post defending the idea of NRO already disqualifying a Republican candidate, writes, countering charges that since the death of William F. Buckley the magazine has become less reliably conservative, that even under Buckley, NR made many questionable endorsements. But to point out, as Andy McCarthy does in his great piece that admonishes the editors for this move, NR did that in the general election, not before the primaries when the field was still relatively large. McCarthy goes further:
The Editors believe, unwisely in my view, that before the first caucuses and primaries begin in early January, it is important to make known their insights — not merely views about the relative merits of the candidates but conclusions that some candidates are no longer worthy of having their merits considered. Like many other voters, I haven’t settled on a candidate. What I want at this very early stage is information about the candidates so I can consider them, not a presumptuous and premature pronouncement that good conservatives do not even rate consideration.You really should take some time to read the editorial, Jonah's take on it, and McCarthy's repsonse to it.
I, like McCarthy, have not yet fully decided on which candidate would be the best, but I think it would be wise to stand back and let the primary season begin. This is not an edorsement of Newt while who has some virtues also has some serious drawbacks, e.g., his world-historical language about himself, his past marriages, his strange combination of the latest technology and feel-good talking points found in leadership manuals, his Huntsman-like statements tearing down fellow Republicans, etc.
The focus should be on the current president, not on intra-party fighting. With the exception of two candidates, every other candidate at this stage would be better than the current president.
No comments:
Post a Comment