Mark Levin Gets It Wrong Again
Written by David Frum on Saturday April 24, 2010
This episode began with Jim Manzi noting that Mark Levin's writing on global warming is unreliable and irresponsible. If Levin wants to rebut the charge of unreliability, he shouldn't defend himself by inventing stories.
Mark Levin's latest Facebook entry replies to me:
Two thoughts in reply.
1) This episode began with Jim Manzi noting that Mark Levin's chapter on global warming is unreliable and irresponsible. If you want to rebut the charge of unreliability, you shouldn't defend yourself by inventing stories. I was indeed fired from AEI, just as Mark says, although rather obviously not for the reasons Mark says. But NR? Where'd that come from? I think he has me mixed up with Chris Buckley, whose column was terminated after he announced that he would vote for Barack Obama. That story constitutes a black spot on the reputation of NR, not Chris Buckley, whose presence distinguished the magazine much more than the other way around. These facts are easily checked, e.g. in this New York Times report.
Sloppy work.
2) But Mark does raise one valid point. That post of mine that said Levin's previous book, Men in Black "should not be dismissed"? Yes, I concede that is embarrassing. The praise was faint, but still excessive, and I regret it. I was trying to find something nice to say about a then-colleague. If Mark is saying I should have spoken as forthrightly in 2005 as Jim Manzi did in 2010, I have to admit: yes he's right.
2 thoughts in reply.
1) This episode began with Jim Manzi noting that Mark Levin's chapter on global warming is unreliable and irresponsible. If you want to rebut the charge of unreliability, you shouldn't defend yourself by inventing stories. I was indeed fired from AEI, just as Mark says, although rather obviously not for the reasons Mark says. But NR? Where'd that come from? I think he has me mixed up with Chris Buckley, whose column was terminated after he announced that he would vote for Barack Obama. THAT story constitutes a black spot on the reputation of NR, not Chris Buckley, whose presence distinguished the magazine much more than the other way around. These facts are easily checked, eg in this NY Times report:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/media/17review.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1227070800&en=0fd3c2f76367617a&ei=5087%0A
Sloppy work.
2) But Mark does raise one valid point. That post of mine that said Levin's previous book, Men in Black "should not be dismissed"? Yes I concede that is embarrassing. The praise was faint, but still excessive, and I regret it. I was trying to find something nice to say about a then-colleague. If Mark is saying I should have spoken as forthrightly in 2005 as Jim Manzi did in 2010, I have to admit: yes he's right.
