This mornings editorial by The National Review says everything you need to know about Beltway Republicans. On the subject of rationing of health care, they write:
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 National Review in all its brilliance chose a time in which ObamaCare is in freefall, due in large part to Sarah Palin, to pick a fight with...Sarah Palin. As C4P points out:
Great. The most anti-conservative White House since, well... ever, is about to nationalize the entire American healthcare system, and Romney's cheerleaders-in-chief think this is a great time to start another round of GOP infighting. It is, to put it mildly, seriously lacking in judgement.
Andy McCarthy takes to The Corner at The National Review to rip the editorial to shreds
I don't see any wisdom in taking a shot at Governor Palin at this moment when, finding themselves unable to defend the plan against her indictment, Democrats have backed down and withdrawn their "end-of-life counseling" boards. Palin did a tremendous service here. Opinion elites didn't like what the editors imply is the "hysteria" of her "death panels" charge. Many of those same elites didn't like Ronald Reagan's jarring "evil empire" rhetoric. But "death panels" caught on with the public just like "evil empire" did because, for all their "heat rather than light" tut-tutting, critics could never quite discredit it.
I think Palin was right to argue her point aggressively. Largely because she did, a horrible provision is now out of this still horrible Obamacare proposal. To the contrary, if the argument had been made the way the editors counsel this morning, "end-of-life counseling" would still be in the bill. We might have impressed the Beltway with the high tone of our discourse and the suppleness of our reasoning, but we'd have lost the public.
He's exactly right. It's like the scene from White Men Cant Jump when Woody Harrelson (Billy Hoyle) says that Wesley Snipes (Sidney Deane) "would rather look pretty and lose, than look ugly and win." That is exactly what the editors at The National Review have become. They are the Sidney Deane of the Republican party. Andy McCarthys point about Reagan using the Evil Empire phrase is valid. How would todays National Review have treated that comment? No doubt they'd have scolded him for his "hysteria." Whether it's true or not does not matter to them. They would like the conversation to remain "civil", take their beating from the left, walk home losers and get ready for their cocktail party that night.
In one week Sarah Palin had a portion of the bill tossed out and along with the help of townhall protesters has put ObamaCare on life support. Can anyone point me to a National Review article that has made headlines to damage this bill? Hell, can anyone show me anything they wrote that made headlines during the campaign? Actually, that's not fair. They did make headlines when Christopher Buckley endorsed Barack Obama. Oh, and when Kathleen Parker called on Palin to resign. Keep up the great work.
As RAM over at C4P notes there are some National Review writers that are worth reading (Steyn, Victor David Hanson, Thomas Sowell) but they can all be read on their own websites.
UPDATE- Check out Dan Riehl, RS McCain, Josh Painter, and Flopping Aces for their takedown of The National Review.
UPDATE II- Mark Steyn also checks in on this subject with a great comeback
2 hours ago
"let alone that Obama desires this outcome"
ReplyDeleteThat 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.
We live in the real world, where good intentions are best known as the paving material for the Road to Hell.
NR is acting like a jealous idiot. Nuff said.
ReplyDeleteChalk one up for the good guys on health care the war isn't over but the first battle seems won. Sarah played a part. I just posted on this today also. Found your blog via twitter. Visit me sometime at TOTUS. If you like leave me a comment there and I will exchange links. Mine is a PR4 site. If you do decide to exchange links please indicate that in comment box---this will help us both. Mine is a very conservative deep south blog from the state of Mississippi.
ReplyDeleteNRO cheerleads for Romney, I'm convinced he would rather blow up the GOP than see someone other than himself receive the nomination in 2012.
ReplyDeleteI finally gave up any interest in the mainstream Republicans when they picked McCain in 2008. (I did take some notice when Sarah Palin came on board, and she was the ONLY reason I voted for the Republican ticket.)
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing. We knock the collectivists back on the heels, and who does the NR attack? Palin. Simply amazing. I gues they need to demonize the tea parties and townhall patriots now.
Th NR has become a pale shadow of its former self.
jjmurphy your first paragraph says it all......
ReplyDelete