Average Rating: 
Rating:  - Truly 'adult entertainment'
Libertines (modern liberals) and conservatives alike should embrace this magazine; it's philosophical consistency helps even conservatives better understand and articulate their own positions - or at least positions consistent with conservative thought - and helps the libertines understand what the other side is thinking, and might even afford them insight on their own illogical but dearly held nostrums. The articles seem to reach at something often missing in other journals: the truth, arrived at by viewing issues from a variety of perspectives and relayed with good humor, not demagoguery or deprecatory sarcasm. Its groundedness provides for thoughtful consideration free of hysteria and reflexive dogmatic response. I consider this as essential a subscription for those who care about American ideals and implement them as medical journals are for practicing physicians.
Rating: - A mag with an agenda and admits it.
This is a great magazine for those who want to hear what the right has to say on many issues. The columnists are first rate, the arguements are clear, and the various book reviews etc are topical and to the point.The National Review is a conservative Catholic publication. It doesn't, unlike Time & Newsweek pretend to be anything other than a conservative Catholic publication. It is as pointless to complain that the magazine is too conservative as it would be to complain that the NATION is too liberal. This is their choosen perspective and it will not change. Now you CAN say that the magazine isn't very slick, there is very little in the way of photo Journalism and the arguments while intelligent can be dry. This is a no frills mag. I actually think their web site is far better, but you can't have one without the other. Worth a read and a subscription.
Rating:  - Bad taste
The National Review, is not what I call the best analytical magazines around. It's the most one-sided magazine I have ever read. It's editors and columnists openly blast and defame entire groups of people. Not even their holy sites are spared. In one particular story, N.R's syndicated columnist Ann Coulter wrote that we[Americans] must invade Muslim countries, kill their leaders and as an icing, convert the populations to Christianity. Then there is the "sarcastic" suggestion by an editor of the National Review Mr. Lowry and Mr. Dreher that "nuking Mecca" would send a "signal" to Muslims. Not realzing that such senseless, inflammatory rhetoric will just enflame passions and hatred even more which already engulfs some of the Muslims of the world. These neo-Conservative statements have gone largely unchallenged by mainstream conservatives which I fear will end up in their camp aswell.
|
