National Review: Principles Negotiable?
By Rense Johnson, Chairman, Citizens for Term Limits

We are all impressed with the job Mayor Rudy Giuliani is doing as mayor of New York City. That performance is attracting more attention since our recent Day of Infamy than before, but he was doing an excellent job before as well.

Nevertheless it was startling and appalling last Saturday night, four days after the Infamous Tuesday, on the television show "Capital Hill Gang," that participant Kate O'Beirne offered as her outrage of the week… "term limits," because the New York term limitation law will prevent Rudy from continuing to serve after his current term expires. It was the kind of comment we might have expected from Margaret Carlson or Al Hunt, but hardly from Ms. O'Beirne. One wonders if this good lady has taken leave of her senses entirely.

Certainly her recent mental recall has been impaired. Only a year and a half ago, give or take a few months, the Mayor was running for U. S. Senator against Hillary Clinton with obvious intention of leaving the mayoral job if elected. Did Ms. O'Beirne think the term limit law was outrageous then? Was she so outraged then that she supported the lady carpetbagger because Rudy didn't plan to stay where she apparently thought he belonged — in the Mayor's office? The same term limits law was on the books then as now. Where was her outrage then? Giuliani was forced to withdraw from the senatorial race for reasons of health. It must have been a great relief to Ms. O'Beirne.

What is outrageous is Ms. O'Beirne's outrage.

It is interesting to note that New York City has a history of producing above-average and popular mayors. Fiorello LaGuardia and Ed Koch come to mind. You can bet neither LaGuardia nor Koch — nor even in fact Giuliani — began their jobs with the dexterity and sureness of foot they later acquired.

The principle behind term limitation is that no one is indispensable. Why? Because anyone can be replaced. That is why George Washington never served more than two terms as president. Does Ms. O'Beirne really believe that in a city of eight million people there would be no one to take Rudy's place? Well possibly not. See the second paragraph below.

I had known that Ms. O'Beirne is employed by the well-known conservative magazine National Review. To ascertain her precise title I visited NR's website. She is Washington Editor, an impressive and no doubt influential position.

At that website I also discovered that two of her cohorts, John J. Miller and Ramesh Ponnuru, had previously written an article advocating elimination of the term limiting law affecting the mayor, so he could continue in office indefinitely if reelected. This judgment was reached three days after Infamy Day, apparently because Miller and Ponnuru dislike present candidates to replace Giuliani when his present term expires.

Is this the pattern? That Ms. O'Beirne's opinion was formed after reading Miller and Ponnuru? It would seem so. Since three of NR's finest have congealed on the desirability of doing away with term limits, one wonders if this is the beginning of a groundswell at NR. Perhaps it is the result of unfavorable opinions formed regarding certain of the original moving forces behind term limitation. To let one's personal prejudices affect one's judgement is perhaps understandable for ordinary folks, but it is fatal when it affects policy of the country's once-premier conservative magazine.

The surest way to mediocrity is for National Review to let it be known that its principles are negotiable, particularly according to prejudice.

back to articles index

After referring us to your friends, then visit our other website by clicking below to go to www.citizencongress.org to send your lawmakers your message.