What he or she said!

Jane, I really think the world of you, but we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. (Born in the fifties, BTW.)

I watched him lots in my childhood(I’m 68) but turned feminist, liberal and a civil rights worker in the 60’s and never turned back to what I see now as my parents moderate roots. Even they evolved when they moved from Philadelphia to Wisconsin to Arkansas when they retired. They got to know the Clinton’s really well personally in Arkansas and voted for him twice. I have already voted for Obama in Texas. I want REAL change, although it is hard to turn away from Hillary.

Public heath officials are considering measures which, 20 years ago, would have been though fascistic interventions in human rights. There is thought of infiltrating gay sites, particularly those on the Internet. What, having identified such sites, will they then do? Interpose a message about the danger of unprotected sex? Collect names and email addresses, and send individual warnings to prospective victims? Such measures are not easily composed: “Dear Sir: You have recently kept company with Tony Venenum. Tony has a new and dangerous strain of AIDS and you may have contracted it. You should report to a doctor and you must not engage in unprotected sex because in doing so you may be committing murder.” The boundaries of the new campaign, let alone the niceties, haven’t been resolved upon, but not much thought is being given to concerns of privacy. Murderers need to be stopped, and if this means opening their mail, well — such things happen and you can take comfort that you may be saving a life.

The objective is to identify the carrier, and to warn his victim. Someone, 20 years ago, suggested a discreet tattoo the site of which would alert the prospective partner to the danger of proceeding as had been planned. But the author of the idea was treated as though he had been schooled in Buchenwald, and the idea was not widely considered, but maybe it is up now for reconsideration.

A well-educated proto-fascist with a great vocabulary -

But a proto-fascist to the end.

(h/t Roger Ailes: JoeMcCarthy and Bull Connor, Meet Your New Roommate)

And Buckley’s entire interview/talk with Chomsky has him repeatedly lobbing one dishonest argument after another, false dichotomies, grand prounouncements of facts and certainties – all of which are false and uncertain-at-best — yes, all of this dishonesty and badgering is so honest, it makes me want to weep a tear of nostalgia for that saint, William Buckley.

listen, if you want to kiss the dude’s ass – do it, but don’t try to invent some new world where where FDL readers are supposed to buy into some re-invention of Buckley as someone who was ever honest about anything. it really is weird to come here and read this shit. i’ve watched that interview 10 times – Buckley’s performance as apologist for u.s. government terror is as morally reprehensible as it is dishonest.

the guy talked pretty. he was an ivy league asshole that you wanted to be like. he was witty, chewed on his pencil, raised his eyebrows like that comedian – whatever – fine – but don’t bring that ‘qualitatively different’ and ‘honest’ bullshit up in here. gd.

p.s. firefox commenting seems broken again.

Right on yellowdogD, BUCKLEY STILL goes to whatever HELL is for his writing/action/politics AND PARTICULARLY the National Review, (Gore Vidal does not).
NOT approving of a pre-emptive war YOU created just gives you a BIGGER rock to roll up and down the same hill FOREVER…(gnashing of teeth etc. from the “Christianists”)

Sweet dreams “Conservatives, Ex-Conservatives and junior geezers”.

“well, I didn’t attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying that I approved of it.”

That’s COLD.