Would some one shut up National Review before I die of embarassment?
Way back in the day, National Review used to be a thoughtful collection of conservatives taking careful aim at a mostly liberal political surrounding. Success has not been kind to this bastion of the conservative movement. Their standard of 'argument' has sunk so low that not only is my subscription lapsing, but I'm wondering if they're working for the other side. Take Andrew Stuttaford, who spends Halloween making fun of Wiccan beliefs because of such books as How to Turn Your Ex-Boyfriend Into A Toad.
And, make no mistake; broomstick surfers take themselves very, very seriously these days. The age of lovely Samantha Stephens, sparkling and funny, more martini glass than cauldron, has faded away, replaced in our duller, more earnest era by the likes of Buffy's dour Willow, self-involved, self-important and, although this might be expected in sorceresses who like to chant, drum, and howl at the moon, utterly lacking any sense of the ridiculous.
Shock! Horror! A movement into which some serious people put their hearts and minds is exploited by popular culture to make it seem trivial, petty, and spiteful? 'Lacking any sense of the ridiculous?'
This is pretty rich from an author on a website whose 'conservative' bookstore doesn't list Hayek's The Road to Serfdom but waits feverishly to sell you the Ann Coulter Action Figure.
Yes, it's the "America's Real Action Heroes" doll who at the touch of a button spills forth such ludicrous bile as, "Swing voters are more appropriately known as the 'idiot voters' because they have no set of philosophical principles. By the age of fourteen, you're either a Conservative or a Liberal if you have an IQ above a toaster." 'Don't forget to order replacement batteries' indeed!
This is simply embarassing.
Comments
Posted by: Bateleur | November 2, 2003 5:32 AM
Posted by: Anon Again | November 2, 2003 8:30 AM