Clarification

In this morning's political post it seems I was "waaaay too hard on National Review." as a commenter put it. Let me clarify:

The Nat'l Review has had much to offer over the years. My gripe below was that I believe it was someone who I respected as a good "Catholic" who wrote we could dismiss JP's encyclical. But really the fault lies with me. I didn't read it for myself and form my own opinion right then and there. But when I did, I learned there were a lot of other thoughts out there than just the Democrats and Republicans.

You see, I used to eat it (NR) up when it arrived every month and thought I knew everything. But I learned I needed to read more than one side of any given issue and that sometimes there was a third way. And to be honest, in part, I tossed NR and the others due to my changing circumstances (finances and less time as the children came, etc.)

Sometimes NR seemed to be the voice of conservatives-but at other times, simply a Republican voice-and two are not necessarily the same.

I don't tend to read much political commentary these days (but I suppose I will have to start with my impending run.) As a matter of fact, I will make it a point to get a copy of NR and check out their website more often and see what they are saying these days. So there you go.