View Full Version : William F. Buckley Jr. dead at 82
Buckley was a magazine editor, syndicated columnist, television and radio talk show host, novelist and a witty and gifted orator and raconteur. In 1955, at the age of 29, he founded National Review, a magazine whose mission, he declared, would be "to stand athwart history, yelling, 'Stop!' "
In his public persona, Buckley often was described as a "Renaissance man of the right." He had been an operative of the Central Intelligence Agency. He spoke with a patrician accent and a polysyllabic vocabulary. He was urbane, charming and erudite. His wit was trenchant and his sarcasm biting. Lyndon B. Johnson, he once said, was "a man of his most recent word."
William Buckley (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/02/27/ST2008022701894.html?sid=ST2008022701894)
W3MIV
02-28-2008, 11:18 AM
Sad news, indeed. The Right has lost far more than a man or a voice, it has lost a vast store of its legitimacy in debate. None of the current crop of conservative pundits, with the sole exception of George Will, perhaps, has even a tenth of the keen wit, the suave charm or the forceful verbal skill that Buckley takes from that table. Contrast Buckley with Coulter or Limbaugh. Find an old kinescope or videotape of Buckley in action and compare his cultured style and the sheer force of his brain against any of the bozos now prancing and preening on the air. One need not agree with Buckley's arguments to be charmed by his razor-like brain.
I found that I agreed with him far more than I disagreed, though most of our agreement was of shared Catholicism and of the morality we saw passing darkly into something else. Alas, his passing is the reminder that times have changed. We cannot go home again.
Well done Ann.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=57528
N9MOQ
02-28-2008, 02:46 PM
Sad news, indeed. The Right has lost far more than a man or a voice, it has lost a vast store of its legitimacy in debate. None of the current crop of conservative pundits, with the sole exception of George Will, perhaps, has even a tenth of the keen wit, the suave charm or the forceful verbal skill that Buckley takes from that table. Contrast Buckley with Coulter or Limbaugh. Find an old kinescope or videotape of Buckley in action and compare his cultured style and the sheer force of his brain against any of the bozos now prancing and preening on the air. One need not agree with Buckley's arguments to be charmed by his razor-like brain.
I liked to listen to Buckley talk, and also see the obvious contrast to Coulter and Limbaugh. In fact, it sort of feels insulting and dirty to mention those two in the same sentance with Buckley.
Just curious, while on the subject.
What do you think about Patrick J. Buchanan?
William F. Buckley on Ann Coulter:
...even as Ms. Coulter clearly intends to shock, why shouldn't her reader register that shock? By wondering whether she is out of her mind, or has simply lost her grip on language.
Regarding Coulters book: "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism":
But as one reads along, one gets used to exaggerations—not McCarthy's, but Coulter's. She is carried away.
In Bill Curry's collumn:
He saw Viet Nam as a mistake and parted company with Bush over Iraq. He sailed to international waters to try marijuana before calling for legalization. His lovely book Nearer My God reveals a real spirituality, as opposed to the hateful, hypocritical swill peddled as religion by his party. Sam Tanenhaus, author of a much anticipated biography, says Buckley couldn't bear Ann Coulter.
I first met Buckley a decade before our Firing Line encounters at a reception for an ailing Mike Harrington, socialist and author of 'The Other America.' Harrington truly regarded Buckley as a friend. So did John Kenneth Galbraith. So did most liberals Buckley knew.
Buckley loved debate. Unlike today's cowardly conservatives, he debated the best minds he could entice on to a stage. He never used his opponents as props or punch lines for fixed fights. He liked them. Loving his own ideas, not just hating theirs, left room for liking them.
What a long sad fall from Bill Buckley to Bill O' Reilly. I'm not part of the crowd that says if we can just get along everything will be alright. But I am part of the crowd that thinks learning to get along better will help.
W3MIV
02-28-2008, 02:53 PM
What do you think about Patrick J. Buchanan?
There is in the Irish heritage a darkness that equates to a "mean streak," and that dominates Buchanan. He is narrow and the Amerika he envisions is not someplace in which I would want to live.
W3MIV
02-28-2008, 02:58 PM
His lovely book Nearer My God reveals a real spirituality, as opposed to the hateful, hypocritical swill peddled as religion by his party.
This is one of my favorites of all Buckley's books.
N9MOQ
02-28-2008, 03:24 PM
There is in the Irish heritage a darkness that equates to a "mean streak," and that dominates Buchanan. He is narrow and the Amerika he envisions is not someplace in which I would want to live.
I guess it is all relative and who the comparison is to. Buchanan apears on MSNBC just about every day as one of the panelists to discuss the topics of the day. And your description of him is exactly as I saw him when he ran for president years ago. But either he has changed and mellowed down a bit, or it just seems that way. Of course it could just be that the other panelists and "experts" that they put him with are so off the wall, that he appears as an amazing intellectual in comparison.
I would never hold Buchanan on the same level as Buckley, but I find when he comes on, I stop and listen, just to try and figure him out and what he is all about. I still can't quite figure him out. But at least it seems that when he speaks, he is comming up with his statements from his own head, and not just repeating the program and script that the rest of them do, that you know is not their own words from their own minds.
And I don't agree with everything Buchanan says or stands for, but I like that if he is asked a question, he is really going into his head and at least comming up with an answer on his own, (right or wrong) he is not just repeating what Limbaugh and Fox News programs and tells the rest of them to say.
I remember watching the Phil Donahue show many years ago, and don't remember what the particular discussion was, but one of the guests was so aggrivated by the stupidity of statements coming from the audience and other guests on the panel, that he said: "If it wasn't for radio and television, none of you would even HAVE an opinion"
And he was absolutely right, when it comes to the majority of people.
Buckley "We must bring down the thing called Liberalism".
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=MzNmMjM2NGM3ODExYjExYjk4MmQ0ZWQ1M2FiODFmNjk=
N9MOQ
03-03-2008, 03:10 PM
Read my lips:
William F. BUCKLEY was a paid stooge of the gom't.
He was also a snob.
I hate his guts and am glad he died.
He should have stayed in Europe !
For some reason, someone felt instead of posting this comment, they would send it to me in a private message. I have turned private messaging off, and at this time, don't feel the need to post the callsign of the person that sent this to me.
But I have the message saved in case it is needed in the future, or if this forum's administrators want to see it.
I suggest people think twice before sending comments in a private message they are afraid to post in a thread for all to see, thinking that only the intended mark will see it.
k4kyv
03-04-2008, 01:58 AM
Well done Ann.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=57528
Except for the wit, intelligence and charm (http://caglepost.com/cartoon.aspx?id=44B572DC-F56E-4E67-A6B4-9D3B123106F2)...
And his programme Firing Line appeared on PBS!
KB9YCO
03-04-2008, 03:34 AM
Originally Posted by from private message
Read my lips:
William F. BUCKLEY was a paid stooge of the gom't.
He was also a snob.
I hate his guts and am glad he died.
He should have stayed in Europe !
==============================
For some reason, someone felt instead of posting this comment, they would send it to me in a private message. I have turned private messaging off, and at this time, don't feel the need to post the callsign of the person that sent this to me.
But I have the message saved in case it is needed in the future, or if this forum's administrators want to see it.
I suggest people think twice before sending comments in a private message they are afraid to post in a thread for all to see, thinking that only the intended mark will see it.
Wow, I think it's funny that someone felt the need to private message that. If that's what he really thought than just post it, I've certainly seen meaner here before. It's not like he threatened anyone or anything. Certainly not the nicest thing to say but what is there to hide? Is it not aloud to be glad someone you disliked is no longer? Too funny, interesting how some people are the internet equivalent of Radio Rambos but then other times they just can't say what they mean.
Personally, I was no big fan of Buckley, but he at least had the courage of his convictions and was truly conservative in the real meaning of the word as opposed to the fake conservatives that are around these days and that are for some reason fashionable.
That private message thing is funny though, why not just say it out loud? I would, though I'm not one to wish death on others or revel in it, if I really felt that strongly about it I would just say so. Heheheh, what a wacky world or people.
W3MIV
03-04-2008, 11:31 AM
I do not understand how a legitimate PM from someone on the site using the board's software would not be identified as to the sender. To my mind, there is something fishy here.
With this new system, you can opt out of receiving PMs should that be your choice.
N9MOQ
03-04-2008, 02:19 PM
I do not understand how a legitimate Private Message from someone on the site using the board's software would not be identified as to the sender.
It was identified. As I stated, I didn't feel the need to post the callsign of the person who sent it to me. And as long as I didn't, I could say what I want about it, without it being a personal attack or shaming someone in front of everyone else, if no one else knows who it is.
Hopefully this way the person will think twice about doing that again, knowing if he does it to someone else, the next person may choose to post the callsign along with the message sent.
N9MOQ
03-04-2008, 02:25 PM
With this new system, you can opt out of receiving PMs should that be your choice.
And if you go back and read my post again, you will see not only am I aware of this, but that I have done so.
(If by "PM" you mean "Private Message")
W3MIV
03-04-2008, 03:06 PM
And if you go back and read my post again, you will see not only am I aware of this, but that I have done so.
(If by "PM" you mean "Private Message")
By the tenor of your post, you assume a challenge or an attempt to deprecate. None was intended.
Another thing I have discovered about the PM system (and, yes, I do indeed mean "private message") is that you can download an XML file in which the identities of the senders should be revealed. I have not tested to see if a PM without attribution is possible through the board.
N9MOQ
03-04-2008, 03:20 PM
By the tenor of your post, you assume a challenge or an attempt to deprecate. None was intended.
Not at all. I give you more credit than that, having read many of your postings. I just found it odd that the two points you brought up, I had already mentioned. I figured you might just have missed one line by mistake. And if so, would just go back and see that I had indeed.
Another thing I have discovered about the PM system (and, yes, I do indeed mean "private message") is that you can download an XML file in which the identities of the senders should be revealed. I have not tested to see if a PM without attribution is possible through the board
Interesting. However, if the message contains the callsign...
Good Day to you my good man!