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)

[2ndDivisionVet]

Please explain to me what Governor Sarah Palin has done that makes you oppose her so vehemently? Standing up to Mr. Obama when almost no one else will? Endorsing and fundraising for candidates so that the center-right party (the Republicans) can take control over the far-left Democrats in Congress?

[Allegra]

The only dolts who don’t approve of Sara Palin are purists and those with another dog in the hunt.

Yeah...self-centered lunatics like Mitt Romney or Ron Paul.

[rabscuttle385]

Rabs is a Ron Paul supporter who voted for Chuck Baldwin (Ron Paul supported Chuck Baldwin in 2008).

Still reliving the 2008 elections, eh, sharkface?

[mkjessup]

Well guess what?
Rabs is a Ron Paul supporter who voted for Chuck Baldwin (Ron Paul supported Chuck Baldwin in 2008).

[rest of irrelevant nonsense *SNIPPED*]

Guess what Sharky?

Ron Paul and/or Chuck Baldwin isn't a factor in the Arizona primary, and Rabs is on record as supporting J.D. Hayworth. And McCain is a dirty scumbag and needs to be put out to pasture.

You need to quit the Alinsky tactics in attacking Rabs, liberals do that.

These guys are loonier than McCain ever will be.

So you're coming out in support of McCain are you?

If so, that makes you a stinkin' RINO. Kindly confirm or deny.

[MaggieCarta]

Please explain to me what Governor Sarah Palin has done that makes you oppose her so vehemently?

One of these days, I swear, I'm going to post a huge vanity detailing my life with NI'CK (Never Imbibed the 'Cuda Koolaid) I'll ping you.

The short answer is that, in all candor, I think she is nothing more than John McCain in a skirt.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Provide examples of Conservative Politicians you support who have not done simliar things, that is, have some black-marks of their own. “

Bet you can’t! “

Soooooooo... if others are tainted, that absolves Palin of her sins, is that it?

Of course the 2012 election is next month, so I must be too late to the coronation.

Keep trying.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Ping to post 46.

[mkjessup]

That crap from the Palin groupies is as predictable as the sunrise, "ohhhh OTHERS have done what Sarah does, so it's OK, you just hate Sarah!"

If other politicians were snorting cocaine and injecting heroin, would that make it ok for Sarah to poke the needle in her vein, and inhale a line of coke off a mirrored table?

Short answer?

HELL NO!

But for the truly deluded Sarah worshipers, "we just don't understand", and if we say one critical word about her behavior, that makes us all a bunch of hateful, sexist pigs.

Just like the 0bamunists who sling that 'racist' label around at anyone who doesn't bow down to 'The One'.

[stephenjohnbanker]

No difference whatsoever.

[mkjessup]

So far as Sarah Palin's qualifications and credentials as a 'consistent
conservative' are concerned, Clara Peller said it all way back in '84:

[stephenjohnbanker]

LOL!

One of the most clever ad stunts of all time ;-)

[stephenjohnbanker]

Tagline!

ROTFLMFAO!!

[mkjessup]

One of the most clever ad stunts of all time

Yes it was, and ironically it not only worked for Wendy's but it also worked for Walter Mondale who was getting plastered by then front runner Gary Hart for the 'Rat nomination in '84, noneother than Bob Beckel pushed the idea that Mondale should counter Hart's "new ideas-new ideas-new ideas" mantra with that simple slogan Where's The Beef?!?! and once Mondale lobbed that at Hart in their next debate, Hart began his descent in the polls, Mondale seized the nomination, and in a strange way, it is Bob Beckel that Americans have to thank for Ronald Reagan's 49 State landslide that year, with Mondale carrying only his home state of Minnesota.

So let me be the first to say (belatedly) *thanks Bob!*, LOL

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Yes it was, and ironically it not only worked for Wendy’s but it also worked for Walter Mondale”

I remember that all too well.

Thanks Bob Beckel ;-)

[Lakeshark]

Well, Sir Rabadash Rabs, it goes to the heart of your judgement. That you picked these two loons, and yes, they are loons, to support tells us all we need to know about you and how you think. They are ridiculous choices, way off the chart of sane.

It's why the title "ridiculous" fits.

So are you going to come and defend your choices? Do you still support Ron Paul? Or are you going to man up and admit you were way off the mark in picking them..........

[SoConPubbie]

Soooooooo... if others are tainted, that absolves Palin of her sins, is that it?

Like I knew, your attempt to tar and feather Sarah Palin because of two questionable endorsements is running on empty.

Every politician, including our beloved President Reagan and his Pro-Abortion bill he signed as Governor and his Amnesty bill he signed as President either makes mistakes or makes compromises or is wrong on an issue.

Your attempt to smear Palin is lacking in honesty because you boil her down to two bad endorsements, ignoring the long list of endorsements that were honorable and good conservatives.

Furthermore, you totally ignore her conservative policy positions.

And finally, you're ignoring the fact that of all politicians out there today, she is the only one out front-and-center, fighting vocally and on every issue for conservatism.

Here are her endorsements in case you forgot:

1. Nikki Haley
2. Michelle Bachmann
3. Scott Brown
4. Doug Hoffman
5. Rand Paul
6. Marco Rubio
7. Chris Christie
8. Bob McDonnell
9. Sean Duffy
10, Susana Martinez
11. Tom Emmer – MN Governor
12. Tim Burns - PA 12th Congressional District
13. Lt Colonel Allen West – FL Congressional District 22
14. Major Vaughn Ward - Idaho’s 1st Congressional District
15. Captain Adam Kinzinge - Illinois’ 11th Congressional District 16. Clint Didier – WA U.S. Senate
17. Cecil Bledsoe
18. Joe Miller
19. Terry Branstad
20. Carly Fiorina
21. John McCain

[mkjessup]

Once again, this has nothing to do whatsoever with the topic of the thread, which is the assumption by some writer that a dead man (Buckley) who is no longer able to speak for himself would support this cause, or that cause, or approve of any candidate, be it Sarah Palin or anyone else.

You question Rabs 'judgment' regarding two public figures (Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin), but that has nothing to do with anything in this thread.

You need to stay on topic and stop bringing up meaningless bullsh*t.
Rabs original comment was:

You gotta watch the Palinista propaganda machine
Is that the same thing as the Palinista smear machine, in which Palinbots attack staunch conservatives in order to eliminate the competition for their beauty queen candidate?

Note that Rabs comment had nothing to do with either Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin, it had everything to do with the Palinista attack/propaganda/smear machine, and not a few of the cogs of that machine reside right here on FR, and anytime a less than adulatory comment is made about Saint Sarah, they come out of the woodwork, and there is no pretending otherwise.

Try engaging in meaningful debate and discussion instead of yabbering away about 'Ron Paul/Chuck Baldwin' which have nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

[Lakeshark]

Now Mk, you know I'm not a McCain supporter.

So why the hyperbole?

Step back from the keyboard and take a deep breathe.

My point is that these guys are actually worse as people to vote for than McCain, and that's going pretty far to the dark side.

That you think it's okay to vote for and support someone who is worse than McCain tells me you need to rethink your philosophical base.

[mkjessup]

Every politician, including our beloved President Reagan and his Pro-Abortion bill he signed as Governor and his Amnesty bill he signed as President either makes mistakes or makes compromises or is wrong on an issue.

Watch your bloody step. That crap is the same sort of tactic used by the now departed RudyBots during the BugZapper thread (c), when they tried smearing Reagan in order to make Rudy look good.

Your simplistic characterization of Reagan's actions regarding that abortion legislation in California AND the immigration legislation of '86 is either made in ignorance, or with deliberate maliciousness, and you ought to know better.

There are more than a few FReepers who will be happy to educate you on those two pieces of legislation that Reagan signed as Governor and later as President, all you have to do is ask. But I suspect you already know the truth, and have chosen instead to distort the historical record.

Which comes as no surprise to me at all.

[Lakeshark]

I asked you to post all your examples of "the Palinista attack machine".....*snickering*.......

And you know what I got?

*Crickets*