Generally, we believe that newspapers should not endorse candidates. Rather, we think they should advocate issues, ideas, and positions. We're not quite sure what to make of it when an outspoken conservative publication endorses a particular candidate.
Drudge called our attention to this development and it appears the Drudge traffic is overloading National Review's servers, so good luck getting at the article here.
Like National Review, we appreciate the totality of Mitt Romney's conservative positions. His current stated positions more closely match ours than any of the other Republican candidates for President. However, we still have reservations about Romney. How sure is his conversion to conservative principles? Was his change of position the result of a change of heart? Or was he just endorsing moderate to liberal positions to get elected in MA? Or, even worse, is he only now adopting conservative ideals to get past the Republican primary?
Point by point, Mitt is our ideal candidate. But if he is not a true conservative believer, we'd rather have a candidate with whom we disagree, but believe is telling the truth.
***Update 11:23PM MST - Transcript of chat between Hugh Hewitt and Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review. This provides great insight into NR's decision making process vis-à-vis their endorsement of Romney.
If you have tips, questions, comments, suggestions, or requests for subscription only articles, email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.