I don’t read the National Review, which describes itself as “America’s most widely read and influential magazine and web site for conservative news, commentary, and opinion.” Though not a reader, I often run across citations from it and quotes from its writers in publications I do read, like the New York Times, which unfortunately serve to lend it gravitas, and I am well aware it was founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.
As far as I’m concerned, National Review and its online pages have stayed true to the principles of its founder. He was a racist, and it continues his legacy. Those who have the magazine’s imprimatur and the current editor Rich Lowry can play games by pretending that the recent letting go of John Derbyshire and Robert Weissberg are little more than hypocritical attempts to obfuscate its agenda.
As my grandma was fond of saying, “It’s like trying to close the barn door after the horse gets out.” I doubt that few people are fooled by yet another non-apology apology from racists. Editor Rich Lowry’s turn of phrase, which opened with ‘Unbeknowst to us …” when severing the relationship with Weissberg, and his glib description of Derbyshire as a “deeply literate, funny, and incisive writer,” carries no water with me. Buckley was touted as deeply literate too. One’s ability to read, write and play with words are no hindrance to racist beliefs; in fact they make the wielders more dangerous.
We are supposed to believe that these two bottom-feeders are some type of aberration.
Well. I don’t buy it.
(Continue reading below the fold)