IP 2008-10-15 12:56:00|
Kindred spirits. Thanks.
JS 2008-10-14 08:27:00|
I don't know what to say. I feel we are kindred spirits. No comment is necessary, and any will just be copying you. God bless you. I've said that you should be required reading but nobody's reading much anymore. I will say that some of us still get it, but our numbers are dwindling.
IP 2008-10-13 02:16:00|
I could say that we prefer the "wobbly heights," but that would be disingenuous.
Actually, I knew as I wrote it that Edwardian Era was probably wrong. I got careless because most of the UK commenters we've encountered know even less of Brit history than Americans usually do. They just write run-on sentences of indecipherable diagrammatic meaning, fire off a few insults at Americans in general, and then disappear.
If I'd thought more about it, I'd have remembered the flap about the other King Edward, the one who abandoned his country at the verge of its greatest challenge. I don't like tho think about that, even as an American Scot.
But thanks for keeping us honest. You're absolutely right.
Peter Palmer 2008-10-13 12:15:00|
Sorry, but the Edwardian era was pre-WW I, not II, being eponymous of the brief but rather regal reign of Edward VII.
This encompassed most of the first decade of the 20th century, but is sometimes extended past old Bertie's demise, in 1910, up to the start of the defence of the west against the Hunnish hordes by Britain and the Dominions in 1914.
You might make the argument that there was but one Great War, encompassing both WW's, and as the Edwardian era immediately preceded that, it therefore could be construed as directly antecedent to each WW, but that would take pedantry to weally wobbly heights.
Scott 2008-10-12 08:45:00|
Any self-respecting conservative would choose to shovel shit against the tide for 3 cents an hour than write for the NY Times.
I work with conservatives. I know conservatives. Conservatives are my friends. David Brooks, Kathleen Parker and Christopher Buckley are not conservatives.
Amused Observer 2008-10-11 10:18:00|
I am a man of the west, the last of a long line of Americans that have always defined the exceptional of American exceptionalism. Every generation or so my direct relations left the old folks behind and moved west.
I acknowledge the debt owed Buckley for the bold stand he took (with his daddy's money) in defense of American ideals against a relentless tide of weak minded liberalism. Yet this essay gives perfect pitch to my unspoken discontent with William F. As for his boy... shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations. What people like Brooks and Buckley the younger fail to understand is West is not a point of the compass, it is an attitude.
Western will, western spirit, built this country and made it an unparalleled success in the world. Sarah Palin is my direct heir. Her folks ran out of west and turned north. It is not for nothing, that Alaska is known as the last frontier.
The young pup Buckley can enjoy his cocktail parties with the rest of the helpless east coast country club set. I'd rather party with Sarah around the fire. We don't give a damn what the pussies on the east coast do or think. We left them far behind, long ago.
DaveInMaine 2008-10-11 09:33:00|
Really, Iv'e always found Buckley's fiction writing to be the wittiest out there. His employment of literary cameos like Nick Naylor in many of his stories lent itself a certain continous aplomb.
However, he lost me when I discovered his paternal abandonment of his out-of-wedlock child (to the point of disownment).
Great writing aside, I cannot separate who he is from what he's written. Sad really...truly funny stuff he's written that I must now disown, knowing that much of it may have been informed by his own self-destructive (culturaly-destructive?) tendencies.
Sorry old boy. you had so much potential. Really, I loved all your stuff, but we must part ways.
BeckoningChasm 2008-10-11 07:19:00|
Jaytee, I doubt they'll ever attack Obama on anything. Not when there are still Republicans and conservatives to snipe at. Wouldn't want to risk not being invited to the best parties, after all.
Jaytee 2008-10-11 09:01:00|
Sorry I forget to mention one thing: In one of his books, W.F. Buckley Jr. referenced the "suffering" it took to raise a child. After reading Christopher's about-face, WFB's choice of words is no longer a mystery.
jaytee 2008-10-11 08:56:00|
For all their intellectualizing, they're really just a bunch of "materialists" in the broadest sense: Uncomfortable with the poor but GOP-loyal rednecks and hard hats; given the vapors by people who oppose treating fetuses and the dying as expendable waste; terrified that they'll be excluded from elite society, and be forced to sacrifice their personal comfort, if they support such people and positions. Geez, I guess that is a definition of a pussy. But once King Obama is crowned, I predict you'll see a lot of these stories about his ghost written memoirs and shady connections come to light. Remember, journalists need to keep the dirt flying, and even gummi-spined liberals won't be able to resist chipping away at Obama's divinity. They can only keep up the racial condescension for so long.
Buckley's a pussy, pure and simple. Anyone making his choice (fathering a child out of wedlock, then abandoning it) cannot be called conservative. Or much of a man. Effete and tiresome, yes. But, mostly, a pussy.
BeckoningChasm 2008-10-10 07:17:00|
Both Brooks' and Buckley's comments strike me as one thing, and one thing only: self serving.
They see what looks to be the tenor of the times and are betraying principle after principle to be held in the good graces of the Democratic Party and the MSM (pardon my redundancy).
It seems obvious to me that they never stood for anything other than being seen as "smart" by all the right people. "Please, oh wise New York Times, may I please be seen as good enough to have a cabinet position in the Obama regime?"
If Buckley thinks 12,000 hate emails are such a terrible, terrible thing, he has clearly not seen the abuse that Sarah Palin has taken from the left since August, from those people he thinks are so wonderfully wise. 12,000 hate emails is bad, yes, but has he not been paying attention to the relentless assault on Palin?
Buckey can't be considered a traitor though. That requires that one hold to a principle that can actually be betrayed. Self-love doesn't seem to qualify.