Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
the magazine “invented the modern usage of the term liberalOhhh, so they're to blame for why we have to attach the word "classical" when referring to the better liberalism. Anyway, if they only have to please 100,000 people, I don't see why an overhaul can't work and why they have to please Kos and his Townhouse (who, btw, have a sock-puppeteer of their own in Greenwald, which oddly doesn't concern Salon.com). Not that I care. I've never read the magazine. But I'd say there's gotta be a niche for center-left magazines out there, no matter what Kos says.
The New Republic's decline is another sad reminder that the modern Left has no room for independent thought. Are you a social liberal who believes in a strong defense? Do you attempt to form your own opinion on each issue based on its merits, without deferring to a pre-set party line? Then the Left has no place for you.
Last June, Markos Moulitsas, who writes the blog on DailyKos.com, thrashed The New Republic after the magazine published on its Web site an e-mail message that Mr. Moulitsas had intended to be kept private. The note was part of a conversation among bloggers and others on the left about how to unify their message.A "conversation"? It was a conspiracy!
The New Republic, doing badly,That is a pity. I haven't read them as much since half the links on their website turned into pay links a few years ago (although I still check, and browse through on the rare occasion I see a hardcopy), but they're one of the best partisan periodicals out there.
I let my subscription lapse over that Michael Kelly/Al Gore kerfuffle. About three times over the next year or so I got a phone call from a very nice gentleman explaining that the magazine is better than ever and would I please re-subscribe. I felt kind of sorry for him but I had moved on.I went to the New Republic website constantly during the months after 9/11 but eventually I visited only every once and a while for a Stanley Kauffmann movie recommendation.Now, I hardly go there at all. Maybe I should delete it from my "Review and Opinion" Favorites folder.I shouldn’t feel sad to hear the New Republic is doing badly. But I do. It’s sort of like hearing an old girlfriend’s down on her luck.Oh, well.
I'll second Bissage on everything. I am a bit sad. There was a time when I loved The New Republic.Friends would tease that I started every 4th sentence with "I read in TNR"..." But something happened. There was a shark, and Marty and crew couldn't resist taking out the water skis.The Nation's Eric Alterman critiqued it hard in his The Sound and the Fury, which discussed the rise of the punditry. He hated TNR's slant because he thought that by the 80's it was a basically right(ish) wing magazine masquarading as a liberal one, but even he said "The damn thing thing is fun to read." I didn't always agree with it, but he was right.Though it still has some great writers (like Kaufmann) its kind of descended into knee jerk hate-Bush screeds. (Um..like Chiatt's Why I Hate Bush). I am not crazy about Bush, but I can get that stuff lots of other places. The moderate liberal perspective, not so much. It's a shame.
"The magazine is now cementing what Mr. Foer calls its “center-left” philosophy, although he said its reported articles would “transcend ideology."Thus the alchemist seeks to turn lead into gold.Not sure they'll succeed at this; the best thing they've got going for them, as the article suggests, is Democrat control of Congress. Should the Dems retain control, and even win the White House, TNR will revive; as the Children of the Corn at DailyKos and other like blogs are hardly up to governance standards. Members and staffs relying on policy temperature readings from DailyKos will find themselves in trouble; the more establishment-based think tanks, like Brookings, and journals like TNR will become respectable again.As a Republican TNR's failure suits me; but as an American I have to agree we'd be much better off with Brookings and TNR than the rabid rantings of DailyKos influencing the Dems.
I agree with a previous comment, I used to read TNR when it was free online. However, TNR went from a liberal magazine with some ideological diversity to one that is now rabidly partisan.Almost everyone at TNR except Martin Peretz has renounced their support of the Iraq War albeit in a dishonest, "he lied" fashion. Ryan Lizza amongst others is incredibly partisan and wrote a very nasty hit piece on George Allen (which granted worked). In essence, TNR went from a very respectable political magazine to echoing the Dailykos. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery so despite their rhetoric, as a result of sales they have become quite similar to Kos. Unfortunately for them that neither pleases Kos nor me. Why Democrat politicians and journalists take their orders from someone whose only political experience is blogging, is beyond me.
Does this mean my subscription will be extended to accommodate the change in the number of issues I was expecting when I paid for the product? Oh, wait, double-the-size is maybe supposed to make up for that.Time magazine told me it's all about me, and I'm stickin' with it... .----Don't get the "whining" characterization, by the way. What am I missing?
Troubling, very troubling.Because of the so-called moderates or those who at least attempt to be, are going down the crapper, that means the Far Left predominates the mind-set, in the Democratic Party.And who wants to elect them?BTW, the New Republic has many issues that Franklin Foer may want to revisit before casting around for scapegoats.Does anyone remember Mr. Lee Siegel's Spezzatura sock-puppetry?I hope I spelt that right. Cheers,Victoria
hmph.can anyone link to the "rabid ranting" of kos, or his calls for "ideological purity?"kos is actually not that ideological at all, how else could he simultaneously support jon tester, sherrod brown and PA's new senator Casey? much like most GOP strategists/bloggers, he just wants to win. the reason Kos hates lieberman, TNR, etc, is not because they stray from any "party line" but because they attack fellow democrats, sometimes with ridiculous falsehoods which originated from the right. not disagree with, attack. i remember reagan having some saying about that? was he some blogofascist also?
"An article on Page 50 of The Times Magazine this weekend, about Sam Nunn, head of the Nuclear Threat Initiative and former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, misstates the name of a company on whose board he serves. It is Chevron, not ChevronTexaco. The article also misspells the surname of a former secretary of state with whom Nunn and others wrote a recent op-ed article for The Wall Street Journal. He is George P. Shultz, not Schulz. And the article misspells the surname of the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency in several references. He is Mohamed ElBaradei, not ElBaredei.http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/25/magazine/25Nunn.t.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=magazineThis seems like an incredible number of mistakes for TNR's "rising star" to make in a Sunday Times article. I enjoy Michael Crowley's writing and while I am not a stickler for that kind of stuff, I found it interesting and a bit disconcerning.
Ryan Lizza and Jonathan Chait would fit in just fine at Kos. Those losers and others like them are the reasons why TNR is not able to compete. If there were more people like Peretz, it would be the elegant and challenging read that I am told it once was.FYI, Peretz's blog is great.
can anyone link to the "rabid ranting" of kos, or his calls for "ideological purity?"www.dailykos.com(You're welcome)
So let me get this right Seven Nachos - One takes a political stance and writes opinions and shapes facts accordingly or one lays out a set of facts and summarizes them and then we find a place for the piece on the political spectrum where it fits?Just curious on how the great unwashed thinks about the issue.
Hd -- When you are able to form a coherent question, get back to me.
Post a Comment