William F. Buckley A Neo-Con?

Per David Sanger of the NY Times, National Review founder William Buckley is a neo-conservative.  My goodness - the Times coverage of the Conservative Beat is looking even sillier than usual.

From Mr. Sanger's third paragraph:

But it [President Bush's warnings against isolationism]  accelerated even before the Dubai ports deal was derailed by members of his own party, and before an unexpected uprising began among some neo-conservatives, who are now arguing that Iraq, while a noble effort, has turned into a failed mission that must be abandoned.

And who does Mr. Sanger eventually cite as evidence of this neo-con revolt?

When Mr. Bush gave a set of speeches on Iraq in December, the calls to pull out were mostly from the left. Now, a rising chorus of neo-conservatives, who urged Mr. Bush to topple Mr. Hussein, say that, having liberated Iraq, the rest is up to the Iraqis.

"The administration has, now, to cope with failure," William F. Buckley Jr. wrote in February. "The kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat."

Whoa.  The Buckley a neo-con?  Let me help - On Iraq, Mr. Buckley would normally be put among the paleo-cons, which has nothing to do with being a paler, older guy.  The Captain grappled with Mr. Buckley's recent column on Iraq last February; it is worth noting that in March 2003 Mr. Buckley was quite cautious on the "spreading democracy" scheme and held the view that the success of the venture would ultimately depend on the Iraqis:

What Mr. Bush proposes to do is to unseat Saddam Hussein and to eliminate his investments in aggressive weaponry. We can devoutly hope that internecine tribal antagonisms will be subsumed in the fresh air of a despot removed, and that the restoration of freedom will be productive. But these concomitant developments can't be either foreseen by the United States, or implemented by us. What Mr. Bush can accomplish is the removal of a regime and its infrastructure. The Iraqi people will have to take it from there.

Maybe Mr. Sanger was thinking of Francis Fukayama.

UPDATE:  Once a neo-con, always a neo-con - here is Mr. Sanger writing the next day:

Monday's speech was in the same vein, but Mr. Bush was clearly seeking to manage expectations and answer a new group of critics — neoconservatives who have said that because Iraq is now liberated, it is up to the Iraqis themselves to defend the country and piece together a government acceptable to all factions. Among them have been William F. Buckley Jr. and Francis Fukuyama, who have expressed doubt about the speed with which the Iraqis will embrace democratic change.

Keep it up, and Mr. Buckley will be a neo-con.  After all, if it appears in the tightly edited Paper of Broken Record, it must be true.

Comments

[TD]

What we need to do is stick it to the Habibs doing the bombings in Iraq, its as simple as that. Anything short of that will result in failure of our mission in Iraq... the Iraqi people arent going to do diddly - thats a red herring...

[TD]

I find it hard to understand why exactly it is the administration doesn't understand the concept of "security". How can you build a state when the country (Iraq) is not even freekin secure!!???!! How can we have sent 150,000 American soldiers over there to fight terrorists and now-- they are just sitting idly by!! Do we expect the Iraqi people, living poor and in decripit conditions, to somehow rise up???!! What are they going to beat the terrorists with their children's textbooks??? maybe brooms and spare tires!!!?? Yeah that'll work!! Look if we invaded that country, we have to do it, none of this "Iraqi people have to do it" crap, red herring like I said above. Sorry for the double post, this is a serious matter that needs to be addressed.

[SteveMG]

As TM points out, William F. Buckley was never - whether History ran him over or not - a neoconservative. Any regular or semi-regular reader of his columns understands that.

He was always deeply sceptical if not openly hostile, both domestically and internationally, toward the idea of "nation building" or, at home, "city building."

Although I think he was in favor of, as the arrangement was described by the MSM, selling our ports to the UAE.

Oh, what a terrific press we have folks.

SMG

[TM]

The Corner laughs out loud:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/06_03_12_corner-archive.asp#092164

http://corner.nationalreview.com/06_03_12_corner-archive.asp#092182

http://corner.nationalreview.com/06_03_12_corner-archive.asp#092190

[Jim E.]

vanity fair--according to Drudge--quotes Ben Bradley as saying Armitage was the Plame leaker.

2 questions:
1. Why is Bradlee blowing Woodward's source? Not that any of us should mind, but what the hay?
2. What does this mean?: Bradlee: "I had heard about an e-mail that was sent that had a lot of unprintable language in it."

[topsecretk9]

OT...TM..your righter and righter by the minute

"WASH POST's Ben Bradlee Claims Plame Leaker Was Richard Armitage
Mon Mar 13 2006 10:48:34 ET

THE WASHINGTON POST's famous Watergate editor Ben Bradlee claims that it was former State Department Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage who was the individual who leaked the identity of CIA official Valerie Plame.

In the latest issue of VANITY FAIR: "Woodward was in a tricky position. People close to him believe that he had learned about Plame from his friend Richard Armitage, Colin Powell's former deputy, who has been known to be critical of the administration and who has a blunt way of speaking. 'That Armitage is the likely source is a fair assumption,' former WASHINGTON POST editor Ben Bradlee said."

'I had heard about an e-mail that was sent that had a lot of unprintable language in it.'"

Developing..."

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3.htm

[Dwilkers]

Neocon has no real meaning to a lot of people, it is just a pejorative and therefore its usage in an article like this is redundant. Sort of like calling someone a "stupid idiot".

It is a symptom of a deeper problem on the left though. More and more nowadays they posit that conservatives "don't have a belief system", or opine along the lines illustrated by your 'cult' posts. They don't take the time to seriously consider what conservatives think or believe and respond to and engage on that basis, rather they simply dismiss them.

NEOCON!!

Its easier, see?

[danking70]

Aren't editors supposed to protect their writers sources?

More evidence for the drip drip theory...

[cathyf]

I know I shouldn't encourage the thread-hijacking by responding to it, but I don't think Ben Bradlee has been Bob Woodward's editor for a long time -- he retired as executive editor in September, 1991. It's not at all clear how much of this is newsroom gossip or if he has real evidence.

(Of course we all know it's Armitage cause MJW did the work!)

cathy :-)

[Lew Clark]

We are all pretty sure Armitage is UGO. But the "first to leak" is a really relative term when it comes to Ms. Plame. I think the first leaker was her mom who told all the ladies at church her daughter just landed that job with the CIA. That was followed by many, many more leakers through the years. Armitage, Libby, Rove, etc, are, at best "neoleakers", showing up really late for this party.

[JM Hanes]

Jonah Goldberg's short history of neoconservatism (Part I, Part II), should probably be required reading over at the New York Times. I'd hold off on recommending Part III however, till they've really got the hang of I & II. The third installment rather proves Goldberg's own point that "Some of the confusion over the word neocon has to be laid at the feet of the 'neocons' themselves."

There's a certain sad irony in his 2003 assertion that:

Sure, one explanation for why so many conservatives now buy into a historically neoconservative foreign-policy argument — democracy and freedom should be promoted — is that the neocons won the argument over foreign policy. And to a certain extent that's true. Today, even realists recognize that democracies don't go to war against other democracies. One need not get misty-eyed over universal global suffrage to see that the spread of free-trading liberal democracy would be in America's interests.

Not that one can fault Goldberg for failing to anticipate the resurgence of realpolitik within the Democratic mainstream; it's an intellectual betrayal of liberalism that was all but inconceivable only a few short years ago.

[JM Hanes]

danking

The secrecy surrounding the identity of Deep Throat was central to a whole mythology which has stood Woodward in great stead over the years. In this case, Woodward has clearly indicated that he wants to name his source but is obliged, sans waiver, to protect him. I'd be inclined to wonder if he and Bradlee have discussed the possibility of issuing some pointers of their own. Whether they can get anyone in the MSM to pursue such leads remains, sadly, a real question mark.

[Javani]

"2. What does this mean?: Bradlee: "I had heard about an e-mail that was sent that had a lot of unprintable language in it." "

It means Woodward reads the blogs. WashPost needs to seem to be on top of the game, so Woodward tells Bradlee about an Armitage e-mail calling Wilson a liar, et al. But WashPost can't "report" this, it needs to cautiously guard the architecture of memes and deflections it created in struturing the "outing" of Plame as a leftie call to outrage and collective identity. In balance Bradlee settles on oblique reportage.

Part of the BDS identity enforcement is the belief that the "moderates" were represented by Powell and his chosen aides. The reality is Wilson and his WMD-believeing wife were loathed on a non-partisan basis due to Mr. Wilson's word games and self-promotion. If that is revealed the Bush-hate narrative for the Wilson game falls apart. What else do the "liberals" have these days but oppositional identity?

When the name "Armitage" is common knowledge the righties will succeed in their game that Libby's lies are not a "crime." Not that I think they were big crimes.

[Javani]

"Not that one can fault Goldberg for failing to anticipate the resurgence of realpolitik within the Democratic mainstream"

Oh please. It's identity gaming over one location in the world, Iraq, and not in the mainstream. It's the chattering classes looking for meaning with a smidgen of content. Dems have voted for overthrowing, yes by war, Saddam for years. They have nothing now, hence their over-interest in Republican internal politics. Fukuyama was a nobody for years, now he's resurrected himself on the lucrative lecture circuit by denouncing "neo-cons" without close study of the realities of the Iraqi situation.

If he wants to make a lot more money on the academic lecture circuit he should start leaking his "belief" that "christian fundamentalists" are as dangerous, no, more dangerous, than the Islamic ones. He could be the P.T.Barnum for lefties who need their hates validated.

[Dave Schuler]

An editorial by Madeleine Bunting in The Guardian refers to Mr. Buckley as a neo-con, too. It's spreading! Is there no controlling it?

[TexasToast]

DWilk

It is a symptom of a deeper problem on the left though. More and more nowadays they posit that conservatives "don't have a belief system", or opine along the lines illustrated by your 'cult' posts. They don't take the time to seriously consider what conservatives think or believe and respond to and engage on that basis, rather they simply dismiss them.

Interesting - considering the "thoughtful" consideration many commenters on this blog give to posts that cause a bit of cognitive dissonance. I personally don’t have any problem at all believing that conservatives have a belief system – and that for many this belief system can trump inconsistent and disturbing facts. It sort of an anti-scientific method – massage the facts to fit the message rather than adjusting the message to fit the facts.

Why just the other day we were able to pigeon hole a “former justice dept lawyer” who wrote a brief as a democratic mole in a few short hours, and, apparently, Mr Fitzgerald must have a bad motive for indicting Libby and not Armitage – even though Mr Armitage as the UGO is still in the speculation phase.

So lets not confine this “deeper problem” to the left.

[SteveMG]

Toast:
So lets not confine this “deeper problem” to the left.

Sure, neither side has a monopoly on "reality." Given the increased tribalism of politics (the internet being one cause of this fracturing; informational balkinization and such), excesses abound on all sides.

However, I'd be glad to compare the content of the posts at most conservative sites - let's say this one - versus the content of the messages at DKos.

Granted, some "Twilight Zone" stuff posted here on occasion (or more than occasion; hell, maybe by me). But the quality and quantity, if you will, from the Kossacks cannot be matched by anything posted here.

Okay, I'm not sure what my point is with this other than to pound my chest and yell, "Well, your side does it too!"

SMG

[Rick Ballard]

SMG,

Conservatives shout tu quoque, tu quoque.

Real conservatives, that is, not those others.

[JM Hanes]

Javani

"Oh please. It's identity gaming over one location in the world, Iraq, and not in the mainstream."

Yes it's gaming, which is why I don't fault Goldberg for not predicting it. But the idea that Saddam was sufficiently "contained" and the fear that Bush might upset applecarts in countries like Syria, Iran, North Korea, China etc have become Democratic staples -- not to mention an almost universal lack of "mainstream" interest in the Darfur genocide.

[kim]

Kids, kids, kids; get real. They loved Saddam in Iraq. Kids played cheerfully, food for oil flowed mercifully to those in greatest need from those most able to succor. Kim's world is a dream illustrating the glories of socialism. We should talk to him alone to make him feel validated. He, like Ahmadinejad, wants to empower his people, not create a wasteland.
===============================================

[richard mcenroe]

"Neocon" is Humanities Department-Speak for "WIIIIIIIIIIIITCH!" The accusation is the proof.

[When is KKKarl going to be frog-marched out?]

Crow is a dish best served cold on Texas Toast.

[fiesta online money]

I gain a lot of fiesta online money and harvest in life.

[ghost gen]

When you have ghost gen, you can find your world get longer!