You don't often find such a combination as Buckley's life in today's intellectuals.
Posted on 02/21/2014 9:08:20 PM PST by Sideshow Bob
Still, here
HAHAHA
What’s this talk of homework? I don’t have any homework! I swear! ;d
I hate this change on discuss, I LOVE thumbs downing people’s replies. I wish I could do it here!
It sounds like my minutes are numbered here now/.
And yes it’s every website that uses disqus for comments so the “editors of NRO” are not doing it in a nefarious plot to “shield the establishment” or whatever nonsense the OP suggests.
Conservative comments attacking “Commentary” bloggers Jonathan Tobin and Peter Wehner became so numerous, and so vicious, that “Commentary” has completely blocked ALL comments.
maybe we can call them up twinkles and down twinkles
And trust me, they don’t care. You are baggage.
As you see with every form of print and most forms of TV/online media, readership is expendable. Government and wealthy libs will find the cash to replace advertizing. When that runs out, they will simply shuffle deck chairs and find new suckers to fund them Carlos Slim, Soros, Barack Obama...
Agenda is everything. The average non lib is an impediment. Most people hear that and might even believe it. But they don’t really “Believe it”. In the back of their sensical mind they thing that no, A media outlet needs readers and advertizers.
Wrong. If that was the case, Newsweek, sold for a dollar, would have been out of biz LONG before the dollar changed hands. But it went on for over a year...thanks to lib funding.
Personally I think the whole newsroom monitor plan is just another way to launder cash to failing media outlets. Among the obvious other things. I would bet the govt would pay for their placement before all was said and done in order to ‘ensure a smooth transition’.
Several of their writers - Jonathan Tobin and Peter Wehner specifically - are so far Left on so many political issues that Conservative readers attacked them relentlessly.
Their editor, John Podhoretz, is actually a refugee from National Review.
Podhoretz, who avidly supported the Bush-McCain Amnesty in 2005-2006, quit NRO in a rage when dozens of traditional Conservative readers (like me) attacked him.
Little did we know that NRO editor Rich Lowry would support Amnesty just a few years later and fire John Derbyshire for stating the obvious.
You don't often find such a combination as Buckley's life in today's intellectuals.
I agree with you, and think your post captures it.
He isn’t displaying anything flaky or strange, or any flaws that I have seen, he is playing his hand well and building strength, and expanding the base.
He seems to be a sincere man who knows what he is doing, and has the mind that can handle the challenges facing a “genetic” conservative, which is what I think of as a ‘natural born’ conservative, it is who they really are.
bookmark for later
This is an excellent, very well written article, Bob. Thanks. It demonstrates the difference between NRO and FR, and again highlights the wisdom of Jim Robinson in refusing to accept outside and/or advertising money to fund this site.
Whoever funds you influences you, and in some case, they own you.
I've always had somewhat mixed feelings about Buckley's Conservatism.
However, he discovered and employed some of the greatest unelected Conservatives in the world.
William Rusher, NR publisher for 30 years, is one of the greatest untold stories ever in Conservative history.
John O’Sullivan was unquestionably the best NR editor ever.
During O’Sullivan’s years in the 90’s, my heart rate would actually go up when I opened a new copy of NR.
But, O’Sullivan was purged in 1997, when Buckley decided to throw the dice with Rich Lowry.
The Wall Street Journal editorial page began falling apart, too, around ‘94-'95, when David Brooks and Paul Gigot got editorial positions.
In fact, they think you (readers) are a moron.
Who, What, Where, When and Why. Nothing more....just the news as it actually happened.
By the way, there are no 0’s (Opinions) in those W’s. However, their reporting only consists of O’s.
I pretty much agree with you and admire your memory and what I think is your accuracy.
I think I came from a different type childhood than you, yet William F Buckley reached many of us, as long as we could see him on Firing Line, or go to the library to find out who this guy was.
Even in the late 1960s, I could sit around with my hippie friends and we could express wonder at WMB and his knowledge and how he was always right, and of course Ayn Rand who’s books gave me much of the power of philosophy that I needed during that era.
They've been showing up on FR as well.
Thanks zeestephen!
I can understand that managing comments can be a pain. Heck, I’m a member (or whatever you call it) of a facebook page “Black Cats are Good Luck” (I think that’s it) which is dedicated to refuting the myth that black cats are bad luck.
Obviously it has a lot of cute pictures of black cats, but they are not “racists”, they have lots of cute pictures of other color cats too.
The page is set up so anyone can post to it. And several times the administrator has warned people not to post pictures of injured or suffering kitties. She says: we support all efforts to end animal suffering, but that is not the purpose of this page and our members find these pictures disturbing.
So, that is just a silly facebook page about cats and they have problems.
But I never have too much respect for a publication that won’t take, or reveal, criticism of itself.
There was a men’s mag hubby used to get (I can’t remember if it was Esquire or GQ) and every letter to the editor they printed was about how *wonderful* they were. It was pretty girly-girlish for a magazine aimed at men.
Thanks to Rush I discovered American Thinker. I haven’t looked back since.
In these trying days of seeming disintegration, patriots need to keep firmly in mind that in 1776 only ~25% of our fledgling nation were vocal supporters of the cause of Liberty.
Of the rest, ~25% were active collaborators in support of the King and his 'royal' hubris, while the remaining 50% were merely fence-sitters, hoping for a 'safe' indication of wind direction,
while being fully prepared, in their milquetoast souls, to remain subjects of an increasingly dictatorial regime should it seem to have the unbeatable hand.
The problem with fence-sitting, both instantly and historically, is that while one's carcass may in fact 'survive' the conflict, it's most often at the cost of the castration of one's integrity.
Yet 'life' as a eunuch seems to be what many of the right's squishy middle are choosing, to the eternal shame of any honor they may have once possessed.
On the eve of Trenton, Washington's command had been reduced to a mere 1,500 tattered and exhausted men, leaving bloody frostbitten footprints in the snow.
And yet, from the momentum change wrought by George's plan and his mens' courage, our nascent Republic had a fighting chance.
Appeasement of today's evil bøstards will win the collaborators nothing but chains and dishonor.
For our Founders' legacy to survive, only unyielding defiance and resolve will suffice.
This is our Trenton moment.
Free men don't kneel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.