Biographer: Buckley Would Approve of Palin, Tea Party

NewsMax ^ | June 2, 2010 | Dan Weil

[2ndDivisionVet]

Conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr. would approve of the tea party movement, says conservative historian Lee Edwards, who just finished a book about Buckley.

“Bill Buckley embodied the idea of blending the main streams of conservatism – traditional conservatives, libertarian conservatives, social conservatives, neo-conservatives, national security conservatives and so forth,” Edwards told Newsmax.TV.

“He always said politics is a matter of addition not subtraction. I think he would reach out with open arms to the tea party movement.”

(VIDEO AT LINK)

Edwards sees many similarities between the tea partyers and Buckley. They both are/were anti-establishment; they both support(ed) limited government, for example.

And just as not all tea partyers are Republicans, “Bill Buckley was very careful about choosing Republicans as the main political vehicle, but maintaining good relationships with Democrats like Joe Lieberman,” Edwards said.

His book is “William F. Buckley Jr.: The Maker of a Movement.” Edwards is a distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

And how would Buckley unite conservatives to victory in today’s political climate?

First, “He would make sure there are no extremists,” as when he said there was no room for the John Birch Society in the conservative movement of the 1950s-60s, Edwards said. That group’s founder Robert Welch said communists made up 50-70 percent of the U.S. government.

In addition, Buckley would counsel against engaging in ad hominem personal attacks, Edward said.

“Stick to ideas. Bring people together around the basic ideas of conservatism – limited government, individual responsibility, free enterprise.”

President Obama, who is trying to turn us into a European democratic-socialist society, presents the conservative movement with the biggest challenge of its 50-60 year existence, Edwards says.(continued)

[Lakeshark]

He may have been talking about those of you in the Clown Posse.........that has a nice ring to it..........

[Darksheare]

];-)

[Lakeshark]

Defending the indefensible.......

[mkjessup]

And you keep dancing around what was asked.
Just answer the question and stop behaving like a troll.

a.) I don't have to answer a damn thing to the likes of you, nobody died and left you with any more pull than any other FReeper.

b.) If anyone is engaging in trollish behavior, just take a look in the mirror, as you came into this thread itching for a fight, attempting to hound a poster to comply with your demands, and on that basis alone, I wouldn't p*ss on you if you were running down the street on fire.

Get a bloody life.

[mkjessup]

What, you don’t like that data either?

That 'data' has nothing to do with me. I have never had one kind word to say about Ron Paul, and you and your lame associates can scour FR from here to doomsday and you'll never find a post from me regarding Ron Paul that was anything less than mockery, ridicule and revulsion.

You don't know half as much as you think you know.

[Darksheare]

I asked a simple question of you, and you responded with profanity that was UNCALLED FOR.
THAT’S why.

And no, your behavior in this entire thread has been trollish, childish, infantile, and wholly lacking in any merits for debate OR social worth.
As evidenced by your resorting to profanity.

[Darksheare]

Yes, Ron Paul is a troofer.
And his associations are extremely troubling at the least.
You evidently don’t like it when it is mentioned.

[mkjessup]

Well tell the Sunday School teacher tomorrow how terrible your experience has been in this thread.

I’m not obligated to answer any of your questions, I respond as I see fit.

If you don’t like that, it’s just too damn bad. Go stamp your feet some more, ya whinin’ crybaby.

[mkjessup]

Yes, Ron Paul is a troofer.
And his associations are extremely troubling at the least. You evidently don’t like it when it is mentioned.

Now you're displaying your total ignorance, as you have no evidence thaqt I "don't like it" when Paul's nutso theories are mentioned.

You're just trying to stir things up, and better souls than you have tried to get me banned from FR, and come away empty handed. You'll be no different, so go suck eggs.

[Darksheare]

” I respond as I see fit.”

Really?
So, in your view, I could pile heaps of profanity on you and that would be perfectly okay?
Despite the FORUM RULES saying not to do so?
Tell me, why should you be allowed to remain here when you cannot and indeed state outright that you will not abide by the forum rules?

[Darksheare]

“as you have no evidence thaqt I “don’t like it” “
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2526618/posts?page=158#158

*cough* post 158 in response to Socal’s posts.. *cough*

[mkjessup]

Tell me, why should you be allowed to remain here when you cannot and indeed state outright that you will not abide by the forum rules?

I abide by forum rules all the time. And for someone who has been on FR since 2000, you ought to know that in each and every thread, there is seldom going to be an instance where every single post is made according to Emily Post's rules of etiquette, and I'm really sorry that you are so horribly offended by that. You must be a really sensitive soul to start slinging the official FR forum rules around in order to make some sort of 'point' (which is on the top of your head).

Once again, I respond to those I deem worthy of a response, and you are definitely at the bottom of the dog pile, so get a clue Magoo.

You don't like what I've got to say?

Let's take it up with JimRob.

[mkjessup]

I responded with “whatever” in my post #158 because the anti-Paul graphics have nothing to do with me. My record on FR is crystal clear to anyone who cares to take a look, I am as rabidly anti-Ron Paul as our Founder is, and I defy you or anyone else to prove otherwise.

[Darksheare]

“I abide by forum rules all the time.”
Funny, post 120 says otherwise.
Too bad it’s been removed.
As was your post 123 and 124.
Because you did not abide by the forum rules.
Got any more tall tales for us?

[mkjessup]

Looks like someone has been slamming that abuse button, funny that nobody had a problem until you showed up.

[Darksheare]

Funny, your posts were in violation of forum rules.
Wait, you just claiimed that you always abide by the forum rules!

[mkjessup]

Anyone can hit the abuse button, and depending on how the mod(s) on duty view the post, anything can happen, yea or nay.

You just got lucky.

[Darksheare]

Your post 168, in light of your posts 120, 123, 124, 128, clearly states that you will NOT abide by forum rules.

[mkjessup]

Don’t apply for any jobs as an interpreter or translator, you’re too creative for your own good.

[Darksheare]

No, that interpretation is entirely correct.