I have long disagreed with what I considered to be Bill Buckley's sanctimonious distancing himself from those Conservatives who were not considered intellectually respectable in some eastern circles, where Buckley was accepted as the Conservative you could invite, to make your gathering more interesting. But it is not fair nor right to suggest that he is a "neo-Conservative." He wrote "God and Man At Yale," half a Century ago, and started his Conservative Magazine shortly thereafter.
While he could have been more helpful to other Conservatives, had he not been so quick to find fault with their approaches, he has basically fought for traditional American values. Since I have not read National Review for some years, I cannot vouch that he has not strayed. But if he has, that would make him a "neo-Liberal," or a "neo-moderate." It would certainly not make him a "neo- Conservative."
Even as Buckley was wrong to apply litmus tests to other Conservatives, so we would be wrong to apply litmus tests to Buckley. Taken all in all, he has helped our cause immensely. Let us not degenerate into a bunch of inquisitors, insisting upon perfection before we will associate with natural allies.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site