NR vs. UL, and an Out-of-Whack Assessment of Reagan
The editors of National Review take aim at the editors of the New Hampshire Union Leader.
This seems to be another useful time to remind folks that the senior editors endorsed Romney, and that I wasn’t one of those senior editors, I have no particular interest or intent of arguing with the senior editors on behalf of readers who think it is the wrong choice, and that griping to me about it just pretty much makes me cranky.
I see Mitt Romney is getting flak for this statement:
CURRY: Most analysts would say, governor, that the events of yesterday will help your chief opponents Rudy Giuliani and John McCain. Are you concerned, are you worried that your impact, that your campaign will be impacted negatively?
ROMNEY: Oh, I think we have to put the events of the world at a higher level than thinking about local politics. But I do believe as well that people recognize that what we want in a leader is a person who can actually guide America in a very challenging time. You look back to the — one of the great foreign policy leaders of our nation was Ronald Reagan. He was a governor, not a so-called foreign policy expert. He was a person who knew how to make difficult decisions and how to lead in times of crisis. And I think if you look at my life’s experience you’ll recognize that’s what I bring to the table.
Romney deserves the grief he’ll get, as a very strong case can be made that Reagan was indeed a “so-called foreign policy expert” by 1976, never mind 1980.