Login HereI hate to sound like a geezer but after having listened to a bunch of people born in the 70s and 80s lecture me about what an asshole William F. Buckley was, I want to say one thing.
There is a qualitative difference between Bill Buckley and the conservatives of today. I know he had shitty political opinions and the reason I do is because he told me so. Buckley openly embraced racist, McCarthyesque views that he not only acknowledged but defended. Which made it possible to have meaningful, substantive debate between the left and the right.
That isn't possible with today's conservative leading lights, the Straussians who philosophically believe it's their obligation to determine what you should think and then tell you whatever they need to in order to get you to believe it. Do they really think the surge is working? Fuck if I know, but it doesn't matter -- they think you should. If it keeps the fundies in line, big ups for intelligent design.
You can't argue with them about what they really believe because they won't acknowledge it. It's all coded in a bunch of focus-grouped language about "school vouchers" and "no child left behind" and they never admit that what they're really trying to achieve are orchestrated corporate raids on the public sphere. You're stuck trying to pin down a moving target whose specialty is hypocrisy and bad faith as a matter of principle. It becomes impossible to have a dialog that doesn't simply devolve into utter gibberish.
Buckley's honesty, even in the defense of an ideology you might not embrace, was a whole lot easier to deal with than the intellectual hairballs being coughed up by the right today.
Share This 
Spotlight
Jane!
Honesty is what is missing from pundits nowadays. They just say what whomever pays them tells them to say.
Buckley was an honest man.
Fuckin’ A!
He did have a rather daunting command of vocabulary.
ill say it again,i cant understand the conservative mentality…no can do,and good eve Jane
Late Nite FDL: More Buckley
And definitely more cowbell
So true Jane. You cannot argue with someone selling snake oil. You can’t get a hold of em. They slip away every time.
more cowbell is always good.
eggzactly…..Glenn Beck makes 10,000,000.00$ a year,the train is off the trax
no such thang as too much cowbell
cowbell=$…?
You BTO fans make me nuts.
Evening Suz!
Digg it
Someone should stuff a sock in his mouf. Not that I would advocate violence or anything.
Welcome to Geezer City, Jane.
I too remember when conservatives actually had scruples.
P.S. You’re a junior geezer.
just taking care of business newton. i figured you would be all sad today since in 1998 Apple discontinued developing Newton computer
Thank you Jane. This is possibly one of the more important posts I have read on FDL since its nascent days. Although I agreed with nothing that WFB espoused politically, there was an intellectual integrity to him that is completely lacking in today’s RW movement.
America can be effectively governed by the principle of the “common good” when there is integrity ( a la Mr. Buckley) on both sides of the aisle.
* sniff sniff *
Evening all. Have to agree with Jane. Buckley was on many levels totally loathsome, but he was intelligent, coherent, and honest (none of which makes him any less loathsome). This stands in marked contrast to any and all of today’s conservatives, who have descended to the level of slime mold.
I believe in the law of the excluded middle. Either Buckly believed it, or he didn’t. Either way, he was an asshole. YMMV
The take home point of this post for me is that McCain has joined the new breed of reactionary over the last eight years. So the McCain old dog does not have enough integrity to resist new low tricks and is the worse and more dangerous influence because of that.
I have not read up on details of McCain’s history, and I am late to the political scoop (as usual). Some of the first comments in following post indicate how slimey McCain’s public funding stunt is, and how it another example of looting public till by the new conservatives. I also read that McCain discovered his reformer side after the Keating 5 scandal. That could either be a genuine conversion, or a cover. Last 8 years indicate it is the latter.
Ah, Reform
27 Feb 2008 08:55 pm
http://matthewyglesias.theatla.....p#comments
somebody actually mails him a check every week for what 200 grand
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHahahahahaahahahahaa
a jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeebus
Dugg.
He also had a sense of humor which no neocon has.
Hiya Dr. Pause.
What made Buckley human, or even endearing, if you wish, back in the Dick Cavett years was that he was in the deservedly despised minority. Holding an unpopular position can be close to being a virtue in itself.
But let’s not go too far. He was a fucking scumbag, or, if you prefer, a reptile — almost literally, if you look at those goggle eyes, baggy neck and that constantly, furtively darting tongue. We should all breathe a little easier, and happier, knowing he’s dead, requiescat in pace.
im sorry i shall not cry for WBjr….he made hating look polished
That is exactly right. I remember watching some Firing Line shows when I was younger, including some with Michael Kinsley when I was a bit older. There was an *intellectual curiosity* there that is wholly absent in today’s conservative movement.
Buckley very often came up with the wrong answers, but he was honest about how he had reached his conclusions. That made debate possible.
Today’s conservatives have *merged* politics and religion. Policies are now a matter of faith. Policies are not something to be discussed or debated. They are to be asserted (ex: “global warming is a hoax!”). And rewards are handed out in the party based on loyalty, not results.
Some day I do want to see the clip, or at least read the transcript, of the duke out between Buckley and Vidal. Or was it Chomsky? Or was it an almost duke out?
Was that the 1968 Democratic convention? Then it couldn’t have been Chomsky -has he ever been allowed on US TV?
now Gore Vidal…………..class by himself imo
Hell yeah! Great post. I was born in the 70s and literally almost cried when I heard about Buckley’s death. He has been virtually ignored by even the Conservative wing of the punditocracy for many years. I believe so strongly in checks and balances in my own life, let alone politics, that we need people who can defend their positions making sure Liberals and Repubs alike are kept in line. Buckley was quite critical of the Neocons as well.
I long for a day of good, healthy debate within BigMedia again. America needs it.
His death signals an end of an era. It’s up to us to build the type of society we want, and I really do want a bunch of future William F. Buckleys leading the pushback against our soon-to-be DemocratIC-led society, rather than a cesspool of Limbaughs and Coulters. R.I.P. William.
Hey Wangdang. Watch out for that cowbell, I hear it can cause you to vote Rethug.
it was Vidal
As a young teenager, I used to like to watch Buckley on Firing Line. I did not have a clue about matters of ideology at that point, but I enjoyed his skill at argumentation.
Were I the same age today, I don’t think I would find much to admire in the current crop of clowns that speak for the right.
Hope they stopped payment, he won’t be needing it anymore.
Dude didn’t have it all wrong.
Buckley: Bush Not A True Conservative
ding. exactly what i was thinking but you said it so much better. thank you
It was Chomsky.
Chomsky, by the way, was on tv immediately once after 9-11 on a major network, where he argued with Bill Bennett. It was clearly before the MSM’s party line had been completely hammered out.
I have been wondering what cowbell is, too embarassed to ask. But NOHTING will make me vote pug.
wow, he couldn’t have been all asshole if he reaped bush’s scorn.
thanks newton
There is absolutely nothing to admire, or even marginally respect, about any of today’s so-called conservatives. I respected Buckley, even though I loathed him and do not mourn his passing.
cowbell per wiki
Not sure what I can say, or should say about WF Buckley today. But I have watched old clips of his debates/commentary during 60s and 70s with old liberals and progressive. Much more open debate on TV back then.
ON THE BEACH was on TCM tonite
i guess im just sick of the stupidity of war,and conservatives,and the whole damn establishment
I used to watch his show on Sunday nights on PBS. It was part of my regular routine…Buckley, then Nova, then Masterpiece Theatre. I didn’t agree with his positions but I liked to listen to him talk (wierd, huh?)
Which made him much more influential and dangerous. A nice face and disposition makes evil even worse. I have to agree with tristero, (disclosure, I am a geezer..64):
link
Did any one but me and snowbird watch the Pete Seeger special on PBS tonight?
It was forking amazing!
Christopher Walken!!
Chomsky on TV right after 9/11? Really.
Where can I find some clips, or a transcript? Do they exist?
Would love to see what they said.
Any clip or transcript of Buckley going toe to toe with Vidal/Chomsky?
Going to bed before I say something nobody will like, least of all Jane, regarding Tweety’s sendoff of Buckley on Hardball tonight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6oxOS-thE
Christopher Walken at his best.
Any clip or transcript of Buckley going toe to toe with Vidal/Chomsky?
Now that would be worth popping corn for!
Vidal,called him a fascist(snicker)
I missed that, so it was controversial? (spelling be damned!)
Which is not far off the mark. Difference is, he was open about it and did not attempt to label the left as the true fascists.
No Shit? that doofus viral toad?
WFB-for a kid who knew the weekend was over when this guy positioned himself in his chair, he was unremittingly boring. I am sure that he was a man of character but what he stood for was not so nice, and his spawn are the ultimate evil fools, bound and determined to subject us to fear and control so they can be safe and distanced, and protected from the massive hordes with all their ill gotten gains.
It was a long time ago, but as I remember:
— It was much later than 1968, because I didn’t have a TV in that year.
— It was a duke out.
— Vidal kicked his snivveling ass, but that was my opinion as a hawkish liberal, in those days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRjZR8j4-z4
here
I hate to admit it but I saw that show. It was crypto-fascist. IIRC.
Anyone have the Robin Williams as William F Buckley clip?
You’ve got it exactly right, I think.
I always want to ask someone who’s parroting the party line where their Little Red Book is.
Here is the latest from Noam: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174899
oh thank you!
Oh, that is fucking golden.
whenevah I feel low i play it.
I remember watching a few old reruns of Buckleys show. One in particular I remember is John Kenneth Galbraith comeing on and immediately start chewing out Buckley. Apparently Galbraith and Buckley were buddies. So Galbraith starts off something like:
“I saw your show last week and you should be ashamed. He didn’t know any economics and you duped the guy. Do you really think that that… I know you got at least a C- in economics, but… “
And Galbraith rips Buckley a new one.
And Buckely is all “You insouciant venom is indubidably most irrelevant to any trenchant critque of the forensic tactics I emply in my interlocuuuushhunnns, but charming nevertheless….” which Buckley then spun into Galbraith being an authoritarian. Or something along that line. Buckley seemed to rattle along like that using as high a syllable to word ratio as possible.
thanks, yes, saved for later viewing…
It’s pretty clear, though, that he reviled the “Conservatives” of today, and would wretch at the suggestion that they are true to Conservative doctrine.
Can’t fault a guy who steps into the ring and allows his point of view to be examined closely, no matter how whack. Find me a “Conservative” today who would allow that.
Just saying.
Yep.
Buckley passed from this earth looking at the conservative movement that he spawned in the same way Tiberius looked at Little Boots Caligula.
Heckuva job Bill.
-G
Today’s conservatives have adopted the Vince Lombardi notion of politics: “Winning isn’t everything, winning is the only thing.”
To combat people with that philosophy, regretably, we have to take a no-prisoners approach to combatting them.
attack! Attack! ATTACK!
Chomsky duke-out is in the Youtube above. Much of the Vidal/Buckley 68 stuff is also on YouTube.
He may have been articulate, and willing to argue, but … he spawned Dinesh D’Souza and Laura Ingraham and for that blech on him.
And no, I am not a child of the 70s or 80s. I was at school with Laura (though obviously we didn’t run in the same circles).
I found Tweety’s sendoff of Buckley rather revealing about Tweety. Apparently in his youth he was a genuine, starry-eyed drinker of the Republican koolaid that Buckley was selling.
Even though he poses as someone a little more “balanced” today, at times it is hard to see how much of that has changed
Racketeers all
Today’s conservatives are anything but. Have to agree with kudos for Bill on that front.
Thanks for the clips. I’ve already checked out the Buckley/Vidal tussle.
Also, it is that instance where Vidal called Buckley a crypto-Nazi that has boomerranged into the Goldbergian efforts at rewriting history in order to place the genesis of Nazism and Fascism on the shoulders of leftists and liberals.
Poor Doughy Pantload, all brownshirted up and no place to go.
-G
yes he brought hating into the parlor and out of the saloon
That is it, I guess. Buckley could neither falsify himself systematically before the world as the present crowd can, nor pretend that we all just lacked the capacity either to know the contrary truth or to call him on it if he tried. In this he was much more of a true gentleman than those unworthies who are going to be cloying our ears with their praise over the next few days. (And frankly, I have the feeling that they appalled him in the end.)
In a world that needs good sounding boards, he will be missed.
maybe there is still hope that he will get an invite to that redstater dood’s marriage to monica goodling.
brilliant
Tons of Buckley here.
Well, I agree with Jane Hamsher that it was always clear where Buckley stood. So, I guess that tells where Matthews stood as a youth.
But Matthews was an aid to some old liberal Congressman right? Tip O’Neill?
And the Matthews admits he voted for Bush in 2000?
Matthews obviously unstable in many ways.
another intense waste of air,and water
Inquiring minds want to know.
You just noticed this???
My image of Buckley is of him smugly thoowing his head back, batting his eyes, smirking, and pressing his finger tips together; and cluelessly announcing the defeat of his adversary, when he had no clue as to what was being discussed. That man was not an intellectual. He simply used 50-cent words to express two-bit ideas. And, that seemed to impress people. “Immanentizing the eschaton” my ass.
the malaria made him permanently DELERIOUS imo
i agree…greasy sob
The malaria made him liberal for about 2 seconds. Then he figured he was going to live anyway, and went for the paycheck instead.
yup,ya know that is one horrible disease,he should HELP Bill Gates foundation,rid the world of it
Thanks but that’s a little too much WFB for right now.
I do agree that Buckley was more honest. I’ve read enough to convince me that Bill Bennett wants to eliminate public education in the US. He is reported to have said as much in private when discussing legislation (I think when he was working for some GOP administration). But I don’t think he would ever place himself in a position to actually forthrightly state his position and debate it on open fair ground. (If anyone knows that he has, please correct me.)
But I have watched WFB very forthrightly state debate and defenc nonsense that extreme. I remember him on TV (I think it was the Galbraith show) asser that the marginal utility of wealth increases, so the rich should be taxed at a lower rate than the poor to maximize utility. He did with oodles of syllables too.
That may be a reason why the reactionaries are losing. They are getting weaslely. Think if Bennett just came out and said US needs to get rid of public education. That would nail it. Who would people believe, Bennett, or Adams-Hamilton-Jefferson-Madison? No contest.
I don’t think that is accurate. I’ve met many intellectuals in my life who, despite their great curiosity and their ability to think, can never quite come up with a conclusion that is different than what they wanted to believe in the first place. It’s not dishonesty or fakery. I believe it is self-delusion.
Tweetie is pragmatic in his insanity. He goes with who is in power and who shows him attention.
Sadly Dough.
-G
OK, bedtime for me. Anyone who missed Pete Seeger tonight, try to find the rePETE. It was, in fact, fucking awesome. Politics and music, my favorite mix! Love it even more when a banjo is involved.
Was he in infantry or airborne?
Buckley that is.
g’nite wangdang
i can no longer listen or watch him,visceral reaction
Well, I’m a little tipsy, and having deep thoughts tonight. I will syllable them up a bit, might be more impressive.
ya kill me
Actually the real Godfather of the Neocons, and the antecedent of modern conservatives everywhere, was Barry Goldwater. Now there was a slimy, psychotic fanatic. Buckley was an enabler and gave intellectual heft (such as it was) to many of their ideas, but Goldwater was the standard bearer.
Gambling pusbag Bennett was more than willing to collect federal dole while working for as the Sec. of Education though.
Scumbag deluxe.
-G
Vidal called Buckley a “crypto nazi”, then corrected himself and called him a “crypto-fascist”. Buckley called Vidal a “queer” and threatened to beat him up. ’twas in ‘68 around the time of the Democratic Convention. i remembered it as having been on Dick Cavett but I wouldn’t trust my memory. facts checked w. Wiki (for whatever that’s worth).
Buckley had manners (aside from the use of queer as an expletive) generally. I didn’t like many of his ideas but he was obviously intelligent and witty. he was a superior mind to most, if not all, on the right today. i will refrain from crude descriptions of him. i’ll reserve those for the neocons and fuckwad’s minions
I was just reading about some of the things Buckley was so very, very wrong about in the 50’s and 60’s and beyond, maybe. But I’ve never been fond of conservatives who rehash the errors of leftists from 50 years ago to the exclusion of anything else, so I don’t see the need to do that now.
I felt smarter for listening to Buckley. He had a royal feud going with Vidal and Mailer - that was riveting stuff - grand, high-brow gossip.
I disagreed with him a good bit but he didn’t stoop to the cheap tricks of today’s National Review writers - who sneer about liberals being like fascists and the day’s work was done. He had a fascinating series of pieces on the decriminalization of drugs a few years back. That’s not a popular subject even now, with anyone. As he became more critical of Bush and Iraq, the magazine he founded buried his columns deeper and deeper and made him harder and harder to find.
I never deluded myself that he found liberalism to be more attractive as he aged but I always thought he would be a fascinating guy to meet. And I’ve found it increasingly sad to see what his magazine has become. He never faked what he was - he never pandered down to people and pretended to be a fake “common man”. He celebrated elitism happily, which could be a little irritating, But it was far better than pretending to be something he wasn’t.
So I feel a loss, I feel for his family and friends. I wish there more like him, where we could have conflicts but at least feel smarter after the argument was done.
The grave-dancing needs a rest tonight. Remember that every man has a family and friends that grieve when he passes. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong.
Thank you.
I was born, raised, and educated in the tradition of Irish Catholicism, of which a certain flavor of conservatives are a part. In my experience, Irish Catholic conservatives are congenetal royalists. They cling to the hierarchical nature of the Catholic church and they need a top-down sturcuture to reassure then need for order. They are misfits in a democratic society.
ever read the Little Foxes?
I only regret the loss of any kind of intellectual content or pretense of honesty in the conservative movement. I loathed Buckley in the 60s and 70s and loathe him now, but at least he was light years better than anybody among the modern conservatives.
Deftly put.
Thanks.
In my experience, Irish Catholic conservatives are congenetal royalists.
That explains Chris Matthews, then. :) Lots and lots of Republican voters today are royalists. They LOVE the idea of Bush doing anything he damn well pleases. They believe the Constitution reads in its entirety: “White male wealthy Christians control everything.”