What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
62 Comments
- inactive, on 06/01/2009, -5/+38fta: Early in his career he justified obstacles to black suffrage in the South -- "the white community," he wrote in 1959, "is entitled . . . to prevail politically because, for the time being anyway, the leaders of American civilization are white."
This article from American Renaissance contains many more of Buckley's early quotes on race:
The Decline of National Review
http://www.amren.com/ar/2000/09/#cover - lordmike, on 06/02/2009, -9/+30"GOP find a new group of leaders who won't pacify the Democrats and cave in to what they think are the prevailing political winds"
When has the GOP *EVER* pacified the Democrats? from day one it's been obstruct and obstruct some more... Seriously... You people think that this GOP group is accommodating? No wonder you guys keep losing elections... you can't get any moderates to vote for you! - JoeParanoid, on 06/01/2009, -5/+18Byrd long ago took back his membership and has railed against racism ever since. So I guess you don't believe in redemption?
- mrsteveman1, on 06/02/2009, -2/+15That isn't likely to happen any time soon, not without sacrificing their voter base.
Many of the votes the GOP currently gets come from the uneducated base, who respond to ***** issues like gay marriage, calling for FEDERAL AMENDMENTS and legislation at the state level to narrowly define marriage, when in fact the true conservative position should be to completely end government involvement in marriage, but you won't see that happen because conservatism is not the motive, pandering is.
They've spent a lot of time getting masses of people to wave flags around and chant manufactured slogans, and not so much time getting their ACTUAL MESSAGE out, which in my opinion is the correct one, and which is what pisses me off all the more. This party has spent so much time catering to the wishes of the religious nuts and distilling things down to hot phrases that they have no credibility, and now we are in the hands of the party of Pelosi, Reid and Dodd. - inkswamp, on 06/02/2009, -3/+15No idea why your comment is being buried. Even a casual glance at history of the last 100 years reveals a clear liberal trend. We have these occasional spasms where we put conservatives in office, but the overall movement is obviously not a conservative one
- lordmike, on 06/02/2009, -7/+18Conservative intellectualism bought the farm when Sarah Palin became all the rage... actually, way before that, but she was the final nail in the coffin.
- charlietuna, on 06/02/2009, -4/+13I would jump for joy if I saw any hint of the articulate non dogmatic conservatism of Buckley and George Will triumphing over the seeming ascendence of Sam Wurzelbachers and Sarah Palins within the GOP.
Dumb asses should not represent our country. No matter how good it feels a bacon diet is not a diet.
PS: George Will sometimes bends the facts, but overall he is a bright guy who deserves my attention. - inactive, on 06/02/2009, -3/+12Buckley's close friend and fellow National Review writer Revilo Oliver had this to say about conservatism in 1981:
"American Conservatism is finished, and its remaining adherents are, whether they know it or not, merely ghosts wandering, mazed, in the daylight."
Of course, Oliver was no liberal. The above quote is from the book "America's Decline: The Education of a Conservative." The preceding two sentences were:
"Nostalgic aspirations for the past are mere romanticism. They are dangerously antiquarian illusions today, when the only really fundamental question is whether our race still has the will-to-live or is so biologically degenerate that it will choose extinction -- to be absorbed in a pullulant and pestilential mass of mongrels, while the triumphant Jews keep their holy race pure and predatory."
http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Decline-Conservativ ... - Blinker1315, on 06/01/2009, -21/+30A great article about Bill Buckley more than a year after his death, not only for its reminder of what the National Review founder stood for, but the implicit plea that the GOP find a new group of leaders who won't pacify the Democrats and cave in to what they think are the prevailing political winds. As Buckley knew, those winds can change suddenly.
- SethStuck, on 06/01/2009, -19/+27Conservatism and intellectualism are not distinct, as the Left contends. On the contrary, conservatism and intellectualism are inherently and invariably linked. The loss of such lions as Buckley and Friedman is heavy indeed, but their passing does not invalidate the sound philosophies they left behind.
What the Republican Party needs is not a redefinition of conservatism, but rather a return to what conservatism was always intended to be: the intellectually valid and sound conservatism of Buckley and Friedman.
I wrote a full article about this and embedded a couple great videos here:
http://conservativebrawler.blogspot.com/2009/05/bu ... - mrsteveman1, on 06/02/2009, -8/+15What you are advocating is for the GOP to shrink even further, to become the minority of white religious nutcases its positions actually represent. Fine with me, they will rapidly become completely irrelevant, as opposed to the current "oh ***** we lost big didn't we" situation they find themselves in.
- STBAT25, on 06/02/2009, -1/+8This is a classic from the ' 68 Democratic Convention. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYymnxoQnf8
- mrsteveman1, on 06/02/2009, -5/+11I don't see Byrds name anywhere in that article, nor the one this thread is about. So what are you talking about?
- OwenKellogg, on 06/02/2009, -5/+11Good luck with that one... conservatives are outbirthing liberals at better than a 3:1 ratio.
- inactive, on 06/01/2009, -12/+18Great collectiong of Bill Buckley's life, digg for his public intellectual and celebrity!!
- Siegfriedson, on 06/02/2009, -2/+8"That idea - that education is brainwasher and makes one dumber - is exactly the sort of backwards thinking that makes today's conservatives stone-cold stupid."
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0972929207/002-20 ... - Siegfriedson, on 06/03/2009, -1/+6Cellsandbird: "Siegfriedson,what a cynical attitude towards education you have. I take it that if it were up to you, no one in your family would study for a Bachelor's degree, huh? "
You don't have to go to college to get a thorough education. In fact, you don't even need to go to a school to be a high-achieving student - just look at homeschooled kids, for example. They regularly trounce both public and private school students in exams.
All that one needs to become educated is a good measure of raw intelligence, and the will power and self-discipline to read a lot, think critically, and apply what one has learned when the situation arises. - inactive, on 06/02/2009, -4/+8"Now listen, you queer, you stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I'll sock you in the goddamn face and you'll stay plastered."
- Siegfriedson, on 06/02/2009, -2/+6Revilo Oliver's online archive: http://www.revilo-oliver.com/
- soez, on 06/02/2009, -2/+5It would be nice to see the GOP "reinvent" themselves as a libertarian party, but I don't see that happening anytime soon, with the religious base's position on abortion, stem cell research, and gay marriage.
- deathfix, on 06/02/2009, -2/+5"Now listen, you queer. Stop calling me a crypto-Nazi, or I'll sock you in the goddamn face and you'll stay plastered."
American classic. - quirkopatra, on 06/04/2009, -1/+3"When has the GOP *EVER* pacified the Democrats?"
Republicans have for a long time said Arlen Specter might as well go on over to the other team, and he has.
Additionally, Colin Powell endorsed Obama and says people want higher taxes and more government and he's still claiming to be Republican.
--------------------
Now, name me anything Obama has wanted to pass that the GOP has obstructed? Instead of repeating the liberal mantra that the GOP simply obstructs, think before you type. - jayjayjoni, on 06/02/2009, -16/+18Conservatism is dead. Society will always grow more liberal.
- danielttt, on 06/17/2009, -0/+2You wish...
- kerrickter, on 06/02/2009, -15/+17unfortunately the new conservative is more like the guy who shot the abortion doctor.
- jeffbw, on 06/02/2009, -4/+6Buckley was a little more honest that most "conservatives" and that's about it. He was still stupid as hell.
- Insightful, on 06/02/2009, -7/+9Find me a conservative politician that supports creationism, Big Bang, and Global warming and we will talk.
- cellsandbirds, on 06/02/2009, -0/+2charlietuna: "George Will sometimes bends the facts..."
Bends the facts, or makes them up? Have you seen his WashPost op-ed on global warming a while back? Or his creationist lunacy in the National Review a couple years ago? - inactive, on 06/02/2009, -1/+3No, he doesn't get one. As a Democrat, and as someone who does believe in redemption, being a *member of the KKK* is, IMO, kinda past the point of redemption.
- digitalArtform, on 06/02/2009, -6/+8There's no room in today's GOP for fancy talk and all that book learnin'
- cellsandbirds, on 06/02/2009, -4/+6Siegfried: "More powerful, or just simply brainwashed. Or maybe just plain...dumber, right, "Dumbkid"?"
That idea - that education is brainwasher and makes one dumber - is exactly the sort of backwards thinking that makes today's conservatives stone-cold stupid.
And OwenKellog: "Good luck with that one... conservatives are outbirthing liberals at better than a 3:1 ratio." And fewer and fewer people register Republican, especially the not-yet-retired set, and non-whites. The GOP is doing a great job of keeping it old, white, and male, for the most part. - stevelectric, on 06/13/2009, -0/+1floppytoes- The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page is being used by some Americans to justify their economic policies:
http://www.communati.com/steve-lee/think-wall-stre ...
The Chicago Tribune is being used by some Americans to justify their political policies:
http://www.communati.com/steve-lee/think-newspaper - themastersb, on 06/02/2009, -0/+1He has the same last name as me.
- charlietuna, on 06/08/2009, -0/+1Saw his commentary about Obama's mideast speach, yeah he is sometimes irritating. A speech that is not likely to be a phenomenal success is not the same as a failure. Will is starting to bug me.
- Nevarius, on 06/02/2009, -0/+1Would be nice, but the more extremist element within the republican party runs the show. There would have to be an uprising within the party to overthrow them and most of the moderate voices that were there left. And i don't think the religious right or the neo-con's will change their tune easily since its usually the moderate voices within a party that force a change, not the hardliners.
- JoeMondo, on 06/02/2009, -1/+2Byrd denounced the KKK.
If he still embraced it you'd have a point. - nimbleprune, on 06/27/2009, -0/+1we ran the most liberal Republican candidate in years against Obama...essentially trying to out democrat the democrats the republicans became the me too party and basically agreed with everything that the democrats were pushing...that is the reason they lost....conservatives had no one to vote for and republicans have figured it out so they are actually growing backbones and standing for something. Giving the people more then one choice...and yes the GOP was very accommodating till many of them got voted out of office for being so...they needed a little kick in the butt to get them going again but it seems now they have some fight put back in them...look out the next elections should be interesting.
- OwenKellogg, on 06/02/2009, -4/+4That is soooo not true. crikey.
- Misinformant, on 06/02/2009, -7/+7Conservatives can't fade into irrelevance and obscurity fast enough.
Though if there's one thing I can thank the GOP and its base for, it's accelerating the process. - shig, on 06/02/2009, -1/+1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEIrZO069Kg
He'll "smash" Chomsky "in the god damn face", too. It's important for him to put face punching on the table at the immediate onset of every debate. It's more intellectually honest that way. - balthcat, on 06/03/2009, -1/+1I guess *I* have to recant the last part. I got ahead of myself, reading 13 different things at a time. (The disadvantage of tabs?)
- Misinformant, on 06/02/2009, -7/+7The "future of conservatism" is an oxymoron because conservatism ensures that there is no future.
The right-wing is an obstacle to progress of every kind; social, economic, scientific, judicial, diplomatic... You name it, they'll find a way to ruin it. - JoeMondo, on 06/02/2009, -3/+3How dumb do you have to be to think conservatism is genetic?
- Nevarius, on 06/02/2009, -2/+2Oh wow, you do realize that kids of conservative parents don't automatically share the same ideology. I know people that are atheist/liberal and are from very conservative/religious families (and visa versa).
Then considering that, you would also have to brainwash all the kids that your producing like bunny rabbits (republican version of a starcraft zerg??). Wouldn't that make you just as guilty of what your accusing higher education of doing...brainwashing? - inactive, on 06/02/2009, -5/+5Marcus Epstein speaks about Bill Buckley:
FTA:
"If the conservative movement is considered successful, it is not because it has moved the debate to the Right. Instead of standing "athwart history yelling stop", Buckley and National Review were the first to attack those who had not got the memo about history moving on. Even on issues like Social Security, Buckley made it clear that there we must acquiesce,
"What conservatives are going to have to get used to is that certain fights we have waged are, quite simply, lost. It is fine, in our little seminars, to make the case against a federal Social Security program, but it pays to remind ourselves that nobody outside the walls of that classroom is going to pay much attention to our Platonic exercises."[ God Bless Godlessness, NRO, January 30, 2001]
How did this happen? Like many right wingers of his generation, Buckley accepted that the threat posed by the Soviet Union was so great that all other domestic concerns needed to be subordinated to it. In 1952, before he founded National Review, a young Bill Buckley wrote in the Catholic Magazine The Commonweal
We have got to accept Big Government for the duration--for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged, given our present government skills, except through the instrument of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores . . . . And if they deem Soviet power a menace to our freedom (as I happen to), they will have to support large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant centralization of power in Washington--even with Truman at the reins of it all.[PDF]
From the very beginning, Buckley and the conservative movement as a whole were willing to accept Liberalism if Liberalism was willing to support a militaristic defense of Cold War. When the New Left started attacking the "Establishment", conservatives instinctively defended it, and in the process welcomed in the more hawkish Cold War Liberals—the neoconservatives—who eventually took over the movement.
By the time the Cold War had reached its "duration", there was nothing left to conserve.
William F. Buckley does deserve credit for helping create the modern conservative movement. But the conservative movement does not deserve credit for conserving America. "
http://www.vdare.com/epstein/080303_buckley.htm - balthcat, on 06/03/2009, -1/+1The key to "intellectual" conservatism is that therein lies the belief that empathy is emotional, not rational, and as such "what works" (especially "what works for me") is superior to "what works for everyone". At such a point, it makes sense to these people that those who are not in a position of power, or economic superiority (and especially not perceived intellectual superiority) are not particularly entitled to anything.
It doesn't surprise me in the least that a man of this bent would either adapt his tone based purely on an updated power dynamic (or even change his outward appearance to maintain his own station in the new dynamic)
Also was this the reform you're speaking of? "In an April 8, 1969 column called “On Negro Inferiority” Mr. Buckley wrote about the furor caused by Arthur Jensen’s research about race and IQ, calling it “massive, apparently authoritative.” Mr. Buckley even bragged that “Professor Ernest van den Haag, writing in National Review (Dec. 1, 1964) … brilliantly anticipated the findings of Dr. Jensen and brilliantly coped with their implications.” "
I don't really see any recant in that article except the sidebar bit.
ps: He really does seem to be a true conservative :) - floppytoes, on 06/02/2009, -4/+3Wait, I thought only ideologues made the WSJ opinion page.
- Siegfriedson, on 06/01/2009, -20/+19"William F. Buckley was a gutless over-rated blowhard. He was more interested in showing off his vocabulary than doing anything for the common man, and he was far too cowardly to get out of his leather arm chair and do anything about the increasing racial problems facing White America."
http://www.whitecivilrights.com/william-f-buckley- ... -
Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is