Thread: National Review Slams GOP Front-Runner in New Issue Titled

Jan 22 2016, 12:56 am ET

National Review Slams GOP Front-Runner in New Issue Titled 'Against Trump'

by Phil Helsel

The conservative National Review launched a broadside against Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Thursday, publishing a scathing editorial that called the billionaire "a menace to conservatism."

The magazine also published accompanying essays by 22 conservative thinkers opposing Trump's candidacy. Its cover carries the name of the National Review and the words "Against Trump."

"Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones," the editors say in the beginning of the piece.

Trump immediately dismissed the attack on Twitter, calling the magazine a "failing publication" that had lost its way. The Republican National Committee disinvited the magazine from a Feb. 25 GOP debate in Houston in response.
The Battle for the GOP 'Establishment': Donald Trump or Ted Cruz? 1:40

The magazine blasted Trump as clueless on foreign policy — inconsistent on how he would fight the terror group ISIS and too accepting of praise from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He is fixated on stealing Iraq's oil and casually suggested a few weeks ago a war crime — killing terrorists' families — as a tactic in the war on terror," the editors wrote.

It called Trump's plan to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants as beyond the capacity of the government.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-issue-n501686

National Review Pens Letter to Conservatives: Don’t Vote for Trump

by Michelle Fields 21 Jan 2016

National Review is publishing a special edition of the magazine that argues against Republican frontrunner Donald Trump, saying he is “not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries.”

The new issue of the long-established conservative magazine is headlined “Against Trump” and includes essays from conservative pundits and writers explaining their opposition to Trump’s candidacy.

But the overall theme is very clear: “Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones,” says the editorial that leads the issue.

The authors argue that Trump isn’t consistent in his views:

Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot. The real-estate mogul and reality-TV star has supported abortion, gun control, single-payer health care à la Canada, and punitive taxes on the wealthy. (He and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have shared more than funky outer-borough accents.) Since declaring his candidacy he has taken a more conservative line, yet there are great gaping holes in it.

The editorial also goes after his immigration plan for not being practical.

As for illegal immigration, Trump pledges to deport the 11 million illegals here in the United States, a herculean administrative and logistical task beyond the capacity of the federal government. Trump piles on the absurdity by saying he would re-import many of the illegal immigrants once they had been deported, which makes his policy a poorly disguised amnesty (and a version of a similarly idiotic idea that appeared in one of Washington’s periodic ‘comprehensive immigration’ reforms). This plan wouldn’t survive its first contact with reality.

They also took aim at his business record:

Trump’s primary work long ago became less about building anything than about branding himself and tending to his celebrity through a variety of entertainment ventures, from WWE to his reality-TV show, The Apprentice. His business record reflects the often dubious norms of the milieu: using eminent domain to condemn the property of others; buying the good graces of politicians—including many Democrats—with donations.

The editorial finishes by saying that “Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...tional-review/

National Review Editor Rich Lowry Explains Why 20 Conservative Leaders Are AGAINST TRUMP GOP Nomination

Published January 21, 2016

Fox Nation:

Over 20 conservative leaders published a piece in the National Review urging other conservatives to speak out against Trump, an effort led by National Review editor Rich Lowry who spoke out on "The Kelly File" Thursday night.

"If you are truly are a conservative, you believe in ideas and principles...they are basically afterthoughts to Donald Trump," Lowry said.

Here are the names of the conservative leaders trying to stop Trump:

Thomas Sowell, economist.
Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center.
Glenn Beck, founder of The Blaze.
Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, former U.S. attorney generals.
Dana Loesch and Michael Medved, syndicated radio hosts.
Cal Thomas and Mona Charen, syndicated columnists.
William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard.
R. R. Reno, editor of First Things.
John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary.
Yuval Levin, editor of National Affairs.
Mark Helprin, novelist.
Andrew C. McCarthy, contributing editor, National Review.
Erick Erickson, founder of The Resurgent.
David McIntosh, president of the Club for Growth.
Steven F. Hayward, author and presidential scholar.
Ben Domenech, publisher of The Federalist.
David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute.
Katie Pavlich, editor of Townhall.com editor.
Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Donald Trump immediately responded with a presser in Las Vegas and on Twitter:

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

National Review is a failing publication that has lost it's way. It's circulation is way down w its influence being at an all time low. Sad!
10:56 PM - 21 Jan 2016

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

Very few people read the National Review because it only knows how to criticize, but not how to lead.
10:56 PM - 21 Jan 2016

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

The late, great, William F. Buckley would be ashamed of what had happened to his prize, the dying National Review!
10:57 PM - 21 Jan 2016

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/01/21...-against-trump

I am so ashamed to see Russell Moore's name on this hit piece. As a Southern Baptist I am completely saddened to see someone in his position with the Southern Baptist Convention exploiting that position with a 501 C 3 Tax Exempt organization engaging in political activity with the sole purpose of influencing the outcome of elections, a clear violation of the laws that regulate 501 C 3 "charities" and "religious" organizations. He needs to be prosecuted and housed in a jail cell next to Hillary's.

Club for Growth of course is one of the largest contributors to Ted Cruz campaign, which is pro-free trade treason, pro-open borders.

Sad.

National Review loses GOP debate sponsorship over anti-Trump issue

By David Weigel January 22 at 1:12 AM

The Republican National Committee has ended a debate partnership with National Review after the venerable conservative magazine devoted its new issue to a "symposium" of reasons why voters should reject Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

"We expected this was coming," the magazine's publisher Jack Fowler wrote in a blog post late Thursday night, just 90 minutes after the symposium went live. "Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald."

RNC spokesman Sean Spicer Fowler's account of events, and added in a comment to Buzzfeed's Rosie Gray that "a debate moderator can't have a predisposition." That leaves CNN, Salem Radio, and Telemundo as the co-sponsors of the planned February 25 forum in Houston.

The idea of bringing conservative media into the debates had actually come from RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, who has repeatedly blamed a loose, easily-exploited approach to the media for a "circus" that hurt eventual 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

"I mean, there's a lot of good people out there that can actually understand the base of the Republican Party, the primary voters," Priebus told Fox News in an August 2013 interview. "There are some people in our party that think that — you know, on immigration, have different views. On the issue of tactics, on the funding of Obamacare — I mean you can very easily parse that out in a way that actually provides some substance to the Republican primary voters and what they actually want to talk about and understand."

Yet a clash of egos and interest has now stymied several attempts to bring conservative media into the debates. While Salem Radio's Hugh Hewitt, considered one of the best interviewers on the right, has made two appearances as a CNN debate co-panelist, a forum co-hosted by the Washington Times and Liberty University never got past the planning stage.

In an interview early Friday morning, National Review's editor-in-chief Rich Lowry said that the magazine knew it was risking a debate snub when work on the Trump package began. "We priced it in," he said, describing an editorial process that began shortly after the Christmas holiday. "We wanted to push back against this notion that it was just the establishment that was opposed to Trump, so we assembled this group of people who nobody can accuse of being the establishment. We actually wanted this to be the first issue of the year, but we held it. That timing just turned out to be fortuitous, with the establishment parts of the party suddenly bending his way."

In a tweet, symposium contributor and Commentary editor-in-chief John Podhoretz confirmed Lowry's account.

John Podhoretz
✔
@jpodhoretz

Noteworthy: @NRO knew it was jeopardizing debate participation, which was, I'm sure, something that ate up months of time to set up
12:03 AM - 22 Jan 2016

National Review, founded in 1955 by William F. Buckley, has frequently policed the conservative movement and warned against the influence of populist movements. In 1962, Buckley devoted 5000 words to the John Birch Society, attempting to write it out of the movement and calling its founder Robert Welch "far removed from common sense." Twenty-nine years later, Buckley wrote 40,000 words — an entire issue of the magazine — to condemn what he saw as anti-Semitism festering on the right, personified in Pat Buchanan, who was then mounting the first of three unsuccessful presidential bids.

Those essays, if not often read again in full, are often viewed with nostalgia. In 2012, after Romney's defeat, the former RNC research director David Welch bemoaned the lack of strong conservative voices who could police the movement.

"We need 'the Establishment,'" he wrote in a piece for the New York Times. "We need officials like former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida and Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey."

Trump, who now leads both of those men in primary polls, had praised Buckley as recently as last week. "Conservatives actually do come out of Manhattan — including William F. Buckley," said Trump at the Republican presidential debate in Charleston, after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) derided the "New York values" of liberalism.

On Thursday night, in a series of characteristically impassioned tweets, Trump suggested that Lowry's National Review had lost the spirit of Buckley.

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

National Review is a failing publication that has lost it's way. It's circulation is way down w its influence being at an all time low. Sad!
10:56 PM - 21 Jan 2016

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

The late, great, William F. Buckley would be ashamed of what had happened to his prize, the dying National Review!
10:57 PM - 21 Jan 2016

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...i-trump-issue/

Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot. The real-estate mogul and reality-TV star has supported abortion, gun control, single-payer health care à la Canada, and punitive taxes on the wealthy. (He and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have shared more than funky outer-borough accents.) Since declaring his candidacy he has taken a more conservative line, yet there are great gaping holes in it.

The editorial also goes after his immigration plan for not being practical.

As for illegal immigration, Trump pledges to deport the 11 million illegals here in the United States, a herculean administrative and logistical task beyond the capacity of the federal government. Trump piles on the absurdity by saying he would re-import many of the illegal immigrants once they had been deported, which makes his policy a poorly disguised amnesty (and a version of a similarly idiotic idea that appeared in one of Washington’s periodic ‘comprehensive immigration’ reforms). This plan wouldn’t survive its first contact with reality.

Trump's many inconsistencies have been a well noted concern of mine from the beginning. I still support him (and Cruz) but I do believe he needs closer scrutiny than he seems to be receiving on this forum. Cruz has been scrutinized beyond belief around here, but Trump seems to receive a free pass on so many issues. Why is that?

Originally Posted by Judy

Club for Growth of course is one of the largest contributors to Ted Cruz campaign, which is pro-free trade treason, pro-open borders.

Sad.

The Chamber of Commerce and Club for Growth are the talking sock puppets for our Global Governance Crowd

And now we find the National Review is another sock puppet for this notorious gang which works day and night to circumvent our written Constitution and its documented legislative intent when it suites their particular agenda.


JWK




Why won’t the Republican controlled Congress impeach Obama who has engaged in a Long train of tyranny, the latest act is giving aid and comfort to ten enemies of the United States by FREEING them from GITMO? The answer is, because our Republican Controlled Congress is complicit in the ongoing rebellion against our constitutionally limited system of government and the defined and limited powers granted to our federal government.

Nicolle Wallace: National Review Anti-Trump Issue ‘Disdain and Arrogance,’ ‘Desperate’ — ‘Stupid Move and a Stupid Piece’

VIDEO AT LINK

by JEFF POOR
22 Jan 2016

Friday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” former Bush aide and McCain campaign adviser Nicolle Wallace dismissed a National Review issue making a case against Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s candidacy.

Wallace called the effort too late and said it sends the wrong signal about Trump’s critics.

“Back to the National Review — I think the establishment, and particularly the conservative media, is in a real dangerous spot right now,” she said. “There was a moment to make the anti-Trump case. It was about six-and-a-half months ago.”

“It has passed,” she added. “And now it looks like disdain and arrogance when — the voters have now spoken. They’re about to vote. We’re 10 days out from voting. This move looks to me so desperate it really risks cleaving the conservative media apart in an almost irreparable manner from not just the base of our party, but the opportunity the party has to expand its numbers. I think it’s a stupid move and a stupid piece.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/...-stupid-piece/

Here is Nicole Wallace in July 2015 on the View which is in my opinion is a waste of time. Vicious...

Nicolle Wallace Calls Donald Trump "An Embarrassment to The World"
The View
Subscribe
Published on Jul 20, 2015



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mVuFcWVNx4

My Response to NRO #Gangof22, Glenn Beck hatred toward GOP candidate Donald Trump

Wayne Dupree
2 hours ago
Election 2016

Yes, it’s been a while since I created a video. I just couldn’t get back into the hang of things after I lost my cars to accidents.
I watched a snippet of the Megyn Kelly show last night after my radio show, and I didn’t have to watch the entire segment know where that group was going. I call them the #GangOf22. Their attempt to tell Republican voters and those who would vote Republican in this election are lame and inexcusable. Donald Trump has done what he knows to do and how he knows to do it to lead after six months of campaigning.

The candidates didn’t want to learn from him because they thought they knew better. Well, guess what, they didn’t. They don’t have a broad message to speak to Americans, or their numbers would be up and not the single digits.

I also know The Blaze’s Glenn Beck is the ring leader here. He hates Donald Trump and would do anything and bring anyone on board to create a coalition to stop this candidate who in all actuality has done play by the tune of the GOP the entire time.
I am not as well known as these TV names in that group, but I am an American and I know I can vote for whoever I wish and whenever I wish. In time, they will understand this was a mistake in it’s highest form!

Check out my video:



Some of you will agree and some of you won’t. I am not looking for yes men; I am looking for dialogue in a respectful way. Let me know your feelings below in the comment section.

http://newsninja2012.com/my-response...-donald-trump/

The National Review and Megyn Kelly attack reminds me of this great old song...
The O'Jays - Back Stabbers




Uploaded on Jan 14, 2009
Back Stabbers ©1972 Philadelphia International


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzTeLePbB08