William Buckley, RIP

William Buckley has passed on.  We are pleased to see that in his Times obit he is no longer a neo-con.  [But now Ayn Rand is a conservative?]

Comments

[syn]

No longer a 'neo-con'? well I hope Lowry, Kristol, Podhoretz take note.

Mr Buckley, I thank God talk radio continues to drive your Conservative movement despite the calls to shut up and get in line.

RIP to a fine man

[Porchlight]

I am very sad today. The collection of tributes at NR today has been very moving. What a man.

NR Symposium on WFB

[SteveMG]

During my crankier days, I used to converse regularly with the columnists and pundits, telling them where they were terribly wrong and what they got ridiculously wrong. Yes, I suffered from assholeitis.

Most of the time, I'd get a pro-forma response on a card expressing thanks for the letters. I got a nice letter (two pages) once from Charles Krauthammer.

But Mr. Buckley would always - I mean always (I have a box of about 20-25 cards he sent back) - respond with some kind note written, I like to think, by him in longhand. "Good point" or "Yes, I agree" were the responses. Not much, but I sure appreciated it. For he was, in a small way, encouraging me to continued to be involved in affairs.

He did this every time.

If you search elsewhere on remembrances, everyone says that his graciousness and kidness stood out above everything else.

I can testify to that; albeit in a small way.

What a man.

[narciso]

He will be missed, there isn't anyone who really has that level of intellect, heart, and political ability on the horizon.

No, he wasn't a neocon, he preceded them by nearly a generation. However, he and his
masthead contributors (including Meyer and
Burnham)were supporters of 'rollback' over
'containment' and detente; in Hungary, Cuba,
Vietnam, Nicaragua, et al. In that way, he was not unlike the neocons in their foreign policy aspects. In the last decade or so, on issues like the Cuba problem and drug decriminaliation; he seemed to vear from type; but it was his iconoclastic spirit
that drove him. His loudest dissent was on the Iraq war; which paints him almost like a George Aiken character; against his more
youthful proteges.

[centralcal]

Porchlight, I too suffered from the lump in the throat reading all of the fine tributes to him. And, then I read Chris Matthews' comments on Newsbusters (yes, THAT Chris Matthews!) and I actually had tears in my eyes. Who knew, that the Chrissy we love to hate was a conservative in his youth?

[Appalled Moderate]

Speaking of tributes, this old one is a reminder about what conservatism has lost over the last eight years:

Reagan Tribute to Buckley

[anduril]

OT OT OT

I'm no fan of George Will, but I am a fan of invective--whatever its source. In his article today Will explains why McCain should thank the New York Times for its attempt to smear him with sexual innuendo. Will clearly doesn't like McCain. First Will gives two reasons that McCain should be grateful to the NYT:

First, the Times muddied, with unsubstantiated sexual innuendo about a female lobbyist, a story about McCain's flights on jets owned by corporations with business before the Senate Commerce Committee, and his meeting with a broadcaster (McCain at first denied it happened; the broadcaster insists it did, and McCain now agrees) who sought and received McCain's help in pressuring the Federal Communications Commission. Perhaps McCain did nothing corrupt, but he promiscuously accuses others of corruption, or the "appearance" thereof. And he insists that the appearance of corruption justifies laws criminalizing political behavior -- e.g., broadcasting an electioneering communication that "refers to" a federal candidate during the McCain-Feingold blackout period close to an election.

McCain should thank the Times also because its semi-steamy story distracted attention from an unsavory story about McCain's dexterity in gaming the system for taxpayer financing of campaigns. Last summer, when his mismanagement of his campaign left it destitute, he applied for public funding, which entails spending limits. He seemed to promise to use taxpayer dollars as partial collateral for a bank loan.

After explaining McCain's machinations in some detail, Will concludes:

In 2001, McCain, a situational ethicist regarding "big money" in politics, founded the Reform Institute to lobby for his agenda of campaign restrictions. It accepted large contributions, some of six figures, from corporations with business before the Commerce Committee (e.g., Echosphere, DISH Network, Cablevision Systems Corporation, a charity funded by the head of Univision). The Reform Institute's leadership included Potter and two others who are senior advisers in McCain's campaign, Rick Davis and Carla Eudy.

Although his campaign is run by lobbyists; and although his dealings with lobbyists have generated what he, when judging the behavior of others, calls corrupt appearances; and although he has profited from his manipulation of the taxpayer-funding system that is celebrated by reformers -- still, he probably is innocent of insincerity. Such is his towering moral vanity, he seems sincerely to consider it theoretically impossible for him to commit the offenses of appearances that he incessantly ascribes to others.

Such certitude is, however, not merely an unattractive trait. It is disturbing righteousness in someone grasping for presidential powers.

[windansea]

OT cool exchange between Geldorf and Bush

I gave the president my book. He raised an eyebrow. "Who wrote this for ya, Geldof?" he said without looking up from the cover. Very dry. "Who will you get to read it for you, Mr. President?" I replied. No response.

The Most Powerful Man in the World studied the front cover. Geldof in Africa — " 'The international best seller.' You write that bit yourself?"

"That's right. It's called marketing. Something you obviously have no clue about or else I wouldn't have to be here telling people your Africa story."

[windansea]

OT cool exchange between Geldorf and Bush

I gave the president my book. He raised an eyebrow. "Who wrote this for ya, Geldof?" he said without looking up from the cover. Very dry. "Who will you get to read it for you, Mr. President?" I replied. No response.

The Most Powerful Man in the World studied the front cover. Geldof in Africa — " 'The international best seller.' You write that bit yourself?"

"That's right. It's called marketing. Something you obviously have no clue about or else I wouldn't have to be here telling people your Africa story."

[anduril]

They say Dubya is a cocky kind of a smart ass. This is an unflattering portrait--it makes him look like someone who came to think of himself as clever by being surrounded by sycophants.

[kim]

It is clever to surround yourself with smart people, and trust them. It the mark of the executive to find ones worth trusting.
====================================

[Cecil Turner]

Thanks for the link, AM. Reminded me of the debate between Buckley and Reagan over the Panama Canal. Two main impressions: Buckley was much smarter than Reagan, but with hindsight, Reagan was right one every point, and Buckley was wrong. Still, it was the type of debate that is sorely lacking in American politics today, and we are the poorer for it. (And for the loss of Mr Buckley.)

OT:

That's right. It's called marketing. Something you obviously have no clue about or else I wouldn't have to be here telling people your Africa story.

Hate to admit it, but he's right. To the very great detriment of our war effort.

[kim]

So, John McCain can tell the story.
=====================