Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 24, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size


The Key to 2014




The Divide


Truthdig Bazaar
Havana Nocturne

Havana Nocturne

By T.J. English
$18.45

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

William F. Buckley’s Son Voting for Obama

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 11, 2008
Christopher Buckley
npr.org

To the left, to the left: Christopher Buckley says he’ll “be pulling the Democratic lever in November.”

His famous father is now gone, but Christopher Buckley, son of the late conservative icon William F. Buckley, still apologizes to his “pup” directly for—as Matt Drudge would say, “SHOCK!”—deciding to vote for Barack Obama in this year’s presidential election.


The Daily Beast:

I am—drum roll, please, cue trumpets—making this announcement in the cyberpages of The Daily Beast (what joy to be writing for a publication so named!) rather than in the pages of National Review, where I write the back-page column. For a reason: My colleague, the superb and very dishy Kathleen Parker, recently wrote in National Review Online a column stating what John Cleese as Basil Fawlty would call “the bleeding obvious”: namely, that Sarah Palin is an embarrassment, and a dangerous one at that. She’s not exactly alone. New York Times columnist David Brooks, who began his career at NR, just called Governor Palin “a cancer on the Republican Party.”

[...] As for Senator Obama: He has exhibited throughout a “first-class temperament,” pace Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.’s famous comment about FDR. As for his intellect, well, he’s a Harvard man, though that’s sure as heck no guarantee of anything, these days. Vietnam was brought to you by Harvard and (one or two) Yale men. As for our current adventure in Mesopotamia, consider this lustrous alumni roster. Bush 43: Yale. Rumsfeld: Princeton. Paul Bremer: Yale and Harvard. What do they all have in common? Andover! The best and the brightest.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 14, 2008 at 6:50 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller: ‘If it makes you feel better, I was called a Nazi with jackboots, during the Hillary fiasco. Actually I was very amused. Having jackboots trumps your sandals.’

I don’t feel bad.  Somewhere I have a list of 340 or so epithets I have received on Usenet, forums, blogs and mailing lists, and “Nazi” is one of the most well-worn.  However, Jackpine didn’t call me a Nazi specifically, he just put me in the same bag, which I think is a mistaken categorization, and it’s my tedious duty to try to correct his error.

I do have real, live jackboots, by the way.  So if he proves me wrong I’ll be ready for my visit to the nearest offices of the NSDAP to report in.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 14, 2008 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

Anarcissie,

If it makes you feel better, I was called a Nazi with jackboots, during the Hillary fiasco. Actually I was very amused. Having jackboots trumps your sandals.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 14, 2008 at 12:41 pm Link to this comment

CB:

Your resignation from The National Review due to the hurricane of hate-eMail you received is why the Conservative Movement in America is dead, supplanted by the rabid radical reactionaries.

The idea your father had that Conservatives would ARGUE ideas is dead with it.

I personally, even as a liberal, welcome true intellectual Conservatism as a check and governor on Liberalism—to provide the reality check. A healthy free society NEEDS that point-counterpoint.

But don’t worry—in 3 weeks they will be marginalized again, finally, after 28 years.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 13, 2008 at 8:50 pm Link to this comment

Jackpine—Totalitarian states arise out of totalitarian thought, which finds any deviation from some correct mode of thought not only undesirable but impermissible—something to be fought against, and, if possible, obliterated.  The correct mode of thought need not itself be particularly extreme—liberalism will do.  Let us go with liberalism—from the true-believing totalitarian liberal point of view, all non-liberal political thought is equivalent: Naziism and Stalinism, of course, but also socialism, anarchism, monarchism, apathy, whatever isn’t the one true truth.  That is why, as you put it, the Left-Right spectrum appears to go in a circle.  In fact, that is the only way it can go in a circle.  On one side is liberalism, good; on the other is everything else, bad, bad, very bad.  I tried the image of the hippie communard and the Catholic Worker on you, but you’ve snorted them off with “I have no use for [them]”—a phrase which usually denotes not lack of utility found but strong distaste or outright hostility.  As far as you’re concerned, then, they’re still locked up with Stalin and Hitler.  Now, what would we do with Stalin or Hitler if we saw them coming?

As an shabby hippie anarchist but not a Nazi, I feel an strong desire to engage you a bit on this issue.  I think that people who call me a Nazi are making a mistake.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 13, 2008 at 4:02 pm Link to this comment

cyrena,

I took the political compass test and I came out just where I figured, left-libertarian quadrant, close to Gandhi, just a tad more to the left and a tad more libertarian. I’m not way down in the anarcho-syndicalist corner because I do believe in a strong central government able to regulate the economy and provide social services, but I also believe in a maximum amount of freedom of the individual and recognize a large area of privacy where no government has the right to interfere. Call me a libertarian socialist.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 13, 2008 at 3:32 pm Link to this comment

There are such things as relatively intellectually honest conservatives such as Buckley, George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Peggy Noonan and others who are deserting McCain/Palin, and I respect them for that. 

I have to say, I am sympathetic to WFB saying he spent most of his career fighting kooks on the right. I could almost say the same thing as a left-winger about the amount of time I have spent fighting kooks on the left. Such as a lot of the posters on this web site.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/13/noonan-york-toobin-and-ot_n_134263.html

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 13, 2008 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment

Oh good, semantics…

This is what i said, “I have no more use for radical left than i do for radical right. The adjective consumes the noun.”

Note the use of the pronoun “I”, indicating a personal feeling or opinion. Also note that nowhere did i say that radicalism is “evil”; i said that i have no use for it. Granted, i probably should have amended the second sentence to say “The adjective often consumes the noun.” But i didn’t realize that people here would automatically assume that because i didn’t qualify the verb, i must have meant “always”.

I fail to see how a personal opinion can be “totalitarian”. Perhaps a refresher on the definition of the word is in order:

–adjective
1.  of or pertaining to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life.
2.  exercising control over the freedom, will, or thought of others; authoritarian; autocratic.
–noun
3.  an adherent of totalitarianism.

Please explain, grammatically or otherwise, how my statement would be a “totalitarian proposition”. Have i become a centralized government? Did i attempt or suggest the outlawing of radical thought (or even behavior)? Would anything in my original statement lead a person with a lick of common sense to believe that i am “an adherent of totalitarianism”?

If we’re making up our own definitions for words, then those definitions should be clearly explained before proceeding.

Report this

By John, October 13, 2008 at 9:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WOW, that’s a real headline there.  Millions were anticipating THIS decision

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, October 13, 2008 at 8:47 am Link to this comment

It’s great being a conservative, looking down your nose and talking crap ideology with your lips pursed spewing big words when you haven’t a care in the world.

The last eight years have shown me the uselessness of conservatism in a global world more and more in need of control of the greedy and compassion for the poor.  Small government. HAAAH!!  They just don’t get it.   

Kudos to Buckley for seeing the light his old man couldn’t.  Maybe his mother’s genes were dominant.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 13, 2008 at 7:49 am Link to this comment

I believe the Political Compass has also been known as the Nolan Chart.  I don’t think much of it.  For me, there is no such thing as economic freedom apart from political freedom because freedom is a political concept.  If I can tell you what to do, I can tell you what to buy.  Of course, you can arbitrarily assign different aspects of human life to different dimensions if you like, as many as you want.  This particular conceptualization doesn’t appeal to me much, whereas the old meaning of the Left-Right spectrum, with anarchy on the left and absolute monarchy on the right, was at least clear and logical.

Designating all radicalism as evil is a radical, totalitarian proposition.  It seems just a bit self-contradictory.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 13, 2008 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

troublesum,

You ask?

“When Buckley says that Obama will be a great leader what does that mean?” 

Why did you ask the question, when you feel you know the answer?

You stated your opinion as if you were defining Buckley.  I am not arguing you opinion, just the way you did it.

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 13, 2008 at 5:36 am Link to this comment

I like political compass too, it’s accurate for me. But my point was that radicalizing is radicalizing. And like i said, the details will always be different but radicals are the type who will not compromise; who are often ready to use violence to achieve their ends; etc.

As an aside, my political compass score puts me smack dab on the Y axis and a little bit below the X axis.

Report this

By troublesum, October 13, 2008 at 4:34 am Link to this comment

When Buckley says that Obama will be a great leader what does that mean?  Obviously he believes that Obama will govern in the best interests of the upper class.  How is that any different that what we have now?  Clearly, he believes that Obama will not go in for any of this nonsense about redistribution of wealth.  Obama’s main objective will be to keep things the way they are economically while bloviating about hope and change.

Report this

By Fahrenheit 451, October 13, 2008 at 3:44 am Link to this comment

Being intelligent is one thing; guarantees nothing.  Knowing how to apply that intelligence is another thing altogether.  It appears Christopher Buckley has both qualities.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 13, 2008 at 2:07 am Link to this comment

Welcome aboard, CB.

Report this

By cyrena, October 12, 2008 at 9:57 pm Link to this comment

By spartacus1127,

The following site may help clear up some of the confusion:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/index

It will show you a far better way to look at the political spectrum compared to the old Left/Right paradigm

~~~~~

spartacus…

THANK YOU for sharing this link. It DID provide a far, far, FAR better way to look at the political spectrum compared to the old Left/Right paradigm with I threw out long, long, long ago as being totally useless. Looking at it this way makes it far easier to place in a 21st Century prospective.

I even took the test to get an idea of where this would place me, and I think it’s pretty damn accurate!! That was a surprise to me, since I tend to be skeptical, though not cynical. So I was pleasantly surprised to find myself *almost* completely aligned with Ghandi, though slightly to the left of him even, and closer to the anarchist/libertarian side than I would have placed myself in the old understanding.

I hope more people will take the time to check this out, because so many of these understandings and concepts have been perverted, either intentionally or due to ignorance. This really does remove much of the confusion.

Thanks again.

Report this

By Caryl S. Foster, October 12, 2008 at 8:27 pm Link to this comment

Like Father…..

In response to the historic Brown v. Board of Education school-desegregation ruling, William F. Buckley, the ultimate intellectual hero of so many Republicans, asserted that whites, being superior, were well within their rights to discriminate against blacks.

“The White community is so entitled,” he wrote, “because, for the time being, it is the advanced race…” He would later repudiate that sentiment, but only after it was clear that his racist view was harmful to himself.

Unlike Son…......

“Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.”

Report this

By spartacus1127, October 12, 2008 at 7:39 pm Link to this comment

By Anarcissie, October 12 at 5:56 pm #
jackpine savage: ‘… If you behave like them you become just like them. Political ideology isn’t a spectrum, it’s a circle…the extremes meet and become indistinguishable in action, though the trappings and bunting may change. ...
A pacifistic anarcho-communist, a hippie communard or a Catholic Worker, is the same as a Nazi?  I don’t think so.  Assuming we’ve got to use a one-dimensional spectrum of political belief and practice here.
——————————————————-

The following site may help clear up some of the confusion:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/index

It will show you a far better way to look at the political spectrum compared to the old Left/Right paradigm

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 12, 2008 at 6:56 pm Link to this comment

jackpine savage: ’... If you behave like them you become just like them. Political ideology isn’t a spectrum, it’s a circle…the extremes meet and become indistinguishable in action, though the trappings and bunting may change. ...

A pacifistic anarcho-communist, a hippie communard or a Catholic Worker, is the same as a Nazi?  I don’t think so.  Assuming we’ve got to use a one-dimensional spectrum of political belief and practice here.

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 12, 2008 at 4:46 pm Link to this comment

Consensus means surrender to the right wing.

If you behave like them you become just like them. Political ideology isn’t a spectrum, it’s a circle…the extremes meet and become indistinguishable in action, though the trappings and bunting may change.

I have no more use for radical left than i do for radical right. The adjective consumes the noun.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 12, 2008 at 3:11 pm Link to this comment

Adlai Stevenson said back in 1956 that the Democratic Party was the conservative party.  I think that has been pretty much true through most of the 20th century.  There have been of course exceptional periods, such as Wilson’s strong move into the business of liberal imperialism, hitherto I believe a Republican specialty, and the New Deal (which I think was forced on FDR, rather than his invention or that of his Brain Trust).  The creation of the post-WW2 empire was bipartisan.

Beginning in the 1960s, it was the Republican Party which was “progressive” in the sense of working for change.  Of course this change was rightist change, but in spite of the watered-down Marxism which provides us with usages like “progressive” for “leftist”, there is no reason why a polity cannot progress to the Right as to the Left.  The Republican Program was at first a faux-libertarian program to favor business interests at the expense of labor unions and welfare bureaucrats and recipients, but the party has now apparently been captured by the extreme Fundamentalists and social conservatives it was exploiting and has become overtly radical.  (McCain may have once been a “moderate”, but he picked or at least consented to Palin.)  The Democratic Party, insofar as it has done anything at all, has tried to impede this program in favor of conservatively holding on to what fragments of the New Deal remain.

Report this

By nrobi, October 12, 2008 at 3:08 pm Link to this comment

How anyone can still believe that John McCain is still the person to cast one’s ballot for is beyond me.
He has proven that he is not the person he once was by choosing the inimitable and irascible Sarah Palin, who by the was stands apart from the normal, average citizen of this country, by sheer dint of her stances regarding the social issues of our day.
This coupled with the fact that Sarah Palin, is the darling of the Far Right wing of the Christian GOP, makes me want to puke my guts out, every time I see her. There cannot be a shred of decency in the person of Sarah Palin, for she tells people, to do as I say, not as I do. This is the elitist and fear-mongering person coming out in her, that demands that we as a nation disregard the fundamentals of truth and right, for the fundamentalist truth and wrong regarding every stance she has taken in the past.
John McCain, in elevating her to the position of V.P.
has made the fait accompli of his campaign, for he knew not what he did when she was chosen for this position.  Sarah Palin, is nothing more than an attack dog in lipstick and above all the elitist that John McCain, says he is not but truly is.
Worse than this is the fact, that John McCain, in showing his true colors, has finally let us see the real John McCain. One who is irascible to the point of ignominy, and further the elitist he says that he isn’t.
If there is any shred of decency left in this campaign, John McCain, will step aside for Barack Obama, and state the obvious, that Barack Obama is the better candidate all-around and should be chosen as the next president of the US.

Report this

By troublesum, October 12, 2008 at 2:29 pm Link to this comment

It’s a very unusual election when the republican is a centrist and the democrat is a conservative.

Report this

By troublesum, October 12, 2008 at 2:10 pm Link to this comment

If people like Buckley are supporting Obama, that must mean the McCain is the more moderate of the two candidates, or the lesser of two evils.

Report this

By troublesum, October 12, 2008 at 1:59 pm Link to this comment

Leilah
You are right.  Conservatives feel the tide going against them and they’re afraid of the people they have been trampling on for the past thirty years at least.  Now is not the time for leftists to give up their ideology.  Consensus means surrender to the right wing.

Report this

By leilah, October 12, 2008 at 1:38 pm Link to this comment

Buckley’s the son-of-a-bitch who wrote that macabre novel a few years ago based on Swift’s “Modest Proposal” where American workers commit suicide to solve the Social Security “problem”.  Based on his upbringing, I’d guess that Buckley meant it. 
The Conservatives have no sense balance.  It’s either all or nothing.  They’ve had it all for the past 8 years and now we’re stuck with nothing.
I say bring on the Conservative theories and ideologies now that we have an historical measuring stick that is fresh in people’s minds.

Report this

By troublesum, October 12, 2008 at 1:36 pm Link to this comment

There is nothing in Palin’s politics which the Buckleys have ever objected to.  It’s her social standing that he doesn’t approve of.  Reagan, Bush 41, Quale, that’s the right stuff.  The Buckleys didn’t object to Dan “I know California very well; I lived in Pheonix for several years” Quale because he was from the upper class.

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 12, 2008 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment

“Many intellectual conservatives smart enough to recognize we cant continue on without a major shift in control, made that decision when they voted for Obama in the primaries. Those who still hold out are being turned off by Palin faster than anything we can do.” ~Granny Geese

Indeed, but (and i’m speaking as an independent with some conservative and libertarian leanings) i maintain that this is the best opportunity to reach out. As i said, not to turn these people “liberal” but to approach consensus.

If current predictions hold, the Dems may not need consensus. But they’d be wise to try and find it. And if what we’re told about Obama is true, he’ll be a good facilitator of that consensus. Honest debate never hurt anyone and there’s always room for it, especially if it leads to courses of actions that most, if not all, can agree on.

Our troubles are too big to be fixed by a swing in ideology. We’re going to have to figure out how to work together.

Report this

By troublesum, October 12, 2008 at 1:25 pm Link to this comment

The issue is class.  Notice that he first mentions Palin.  Her husband is a blue collar union member.  They are the kind of people Buckley’s father would not have approved of - not for their politics but for their social standing.  Buckley is more comfortable with Obama/Biden because he knows Obama has abandoned people like the Palins.  The more people like Buckley, Brooks, and Parker trash her, the more I like her.

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 12, 2008 at 12:00 pm Link to this comment

Margaret,

Agreed. The idea of smaller government is not bad in and of itself, but it goes horribly wrong when the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. Effective government is what we should be working towards.

In the Dickens novel Little Dorritt he devotes a chapter to what he calls “the circumlocution office”. Anyone who’s had to deal with the federal government would nod his head in perfect understanding. The bureaucracy perpetuates itself to the point where even the best intentions get undone.

Leefeller,

I agree wholeheartedly concerning adding intellectual conservative pieces to Truthdig. After all, the truth is non-partisan.

Report this

By GrannyGeese, October 12, 2008 at 11:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“One correspondent, if that’s quite the right word, suggested that Kathleen’s mother should have aborted her and tossed the fetus into a Dumpster.”

Ah the wisdom of the extreme right. Abortion is evil, unless the intended aborted threatens to be a dem supporter. Gotta love the inane hypocrisy rampant among the holy-than-thou-ers.

But that has little to do with the position of Christopher Buckley, other than it demonstrates why an intelligent man who writes as well as [perhaps better than] his father can be firmly driven from supporting the republican candidate. One he previously held in high regard.

I cant claim to have ever held McCain in high regard. But there was a time when I respectfully disagreed with him.

No more. McCain has allowed the ugliest of all possible actions to take control of his campaign. And even if one wanted to be kind and say it wasn’t his fault, his allowing this to happen is proving to be his undoing. Resisting a Bush association, he takes a Bush position. Namely demonstrable indifference while looking the other way.

Backpedaling may correct some of the damage done to his personal reputation, but it will not save his campaign.

We all have our reasons for questioning his choice of Sarah Palin. But right and left both agree, it was a major mistake. Perhaps she isn’t entirely responsible for the hate her rhetoric has generated, [just following orders?] but her inability to grasp the full implications of her behavior speaks volumes. She is NOT a leader. She is a follower. A follower of the potentially pernicious defamer. The hate-monger. Those who have money and will buy anybody for sale. Not being to bright, it appears she has been bought!

Faced with the possibility of a president who cant control his Vice. And a Vice who happily takes orders to destroy, from someone beyond the control of said president, leads one to conclude the obvious. We cant afford McCain, no matter what his past value has accorded him. Because we cant afford four more years of Bush/Cheney style government. Not even a choice here - we simply can’t afford it!

jackpine savage;

“An honest rapprochement with intellectual conservatives would go furthest towards marginalizing the fringe right that has gained so much power over the last decade or so. It would also give an option to honest conservatives that allowed them to remain conservative.”

~~~

Many intellectual conservatives smart enough to recognize we cant continue on without a major shift in control, made that decision when they voted for Obama in the primaries. Those who still hold out are being turned off by Palin faster than anything we can do.

Inherit The Wind;

“Buckley was asked what Bush’s legacy would be.  WFB disdainfully replied “George Bush has no legacy.”

~~~

That burning reality underlines thinking conservatives need to distance themselves from Bush. Putting a team in office that sounds frighteningly similar is unacceptable.

McCain had to know when he ran for candidate these realities would be his to deal with. He tried to separate himself from the tag of Bush, and still please the extreme elements that can find no wrong in Bush. That old conundrum about a man who tries to serve two masters.

Still there are voters, basically nice people, who don’t understand current republican policy. I think those are the ones we need to try and reach.

Report this

By Margaret Currey, October 12, 2008 at 10:27 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Smaller goernment is great as long as someone is looking over samlller government as on Wall Street, any intelligent person should know that “greed” is allways on Wall Street and it certainly needs a watchdog.  As for a tax increase on the middleclass why not just take away the tax decrease on those who do not need it.

Christopher Buckley is just using common sense, why do the Democrats need a lable like Liberal, why not realize that there are middle of the road people who are looking at both sides and take the person who will do the job best.  In my opinion that would be called “an Independent voter”.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 12, 2008 at 8:58 am Link to this comment

If you read the Buckly Jr. article it is interesting to read the comments from posters on his article. 

Most refreshing to read a non divisive article from a conservative, it would be nice to see more of them here, on TD to discuss real differences.  Seems some thinking conservatives, do not enjoy wallowing in the vast emptiness of the mindless.

A little ray of hope, I see?

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 12, 2008 at 8:52 am Link to this comment

Here, here, ItW!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 12, 2008 at 8:00 am Link to this comment

“Thinking Conservatives” is NOT an oxymoron.  They have been realizing that George W. Bush is no Conservative.  They’ve held their noses as long as possible but the stink got too bad to tolerate—like LBJ’s war in Viet Nam drove away the Liberals who cherished his domestic policies.

Bush is a radical Reactionary and that’s NOTHING like Conservatism.

I don’t believe WFB would have a problem with CB.  After all, about a year before his passing, Buckley was asked what Bush’s legacy would be.  WFB disdainfully replied “George Bush has no legacy.”

First and foremost Conservatism believes in fiscal responsibility.  It is not possible for them to accept that the HUGE deficit is the responsibility of Democrats.  Unlike the christo-fascists and the neo-cons and the “Joe Sixpacks” who believe Obama is a Commie Arab Moslem and other nonesense, true Conservatives will face facts and base their analysis on that, not RNC talking points.

Don’t forget: Thinking Conservatives and National Review are some of the “East Coast Intellectuals” that Sarah Palin and John McCain are condemning…and they are smart enough to know it.

Report this

By jackpine savage, October 12, 2008 at 7:25 am Link to this comment

Buckley the Lesser is being attacked mercilessly - which he expected - for daring to think something through and reach his own conclusion.

If Buckley the Greater had not come to the same conclusion, the reaction to his son’s thinking would probably have pushed him to it.

For liberals, this should be more than a “woo-hoo” moment. This should indicate that there are thoughtful conservatives; moreover, now would be the time for liberals to reach out to those thoughtful conservatives…not to try and turn them liberal but to say, “We may not agree on how to achieve the goals, but we share many goals. How can we work together towards them?”

An honest rapprochement with intellectual conservatives would go furthest towards marginalizing the fringe right that has gained so much power over the last decade or so. It would also give an option to honest conservatives that allowed them to remain conservative.

As good as the destruction of the Republican Party might feel for some on the left, it wouldn’t be good for all of us in the long run because it may well push the GOP even further to the right.

Obama should buy some national airtime and offer to have a real debate with at least one intellectual conservative. That would draw the distinction between conservatism and Republicanism better than anything else.

Report this

By Catherine, October 12, 2008 at 6:43 am Link to this comment

Buckley’s decision to vote for Obama is an all too rare example of intelligence and a true understanding of what it really means to put the country first.

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, October 12, 2008 at 5:57 am Link to this comment

Let’ sbe honest both these parties were Covertly seized during the Reagan Years..Repubs by the Neo Con religious appeasers and the Dems by the Corp Whoring Group called the DLC!
The two Infiltrators both worked Solely on the Behalf of the Corps- Just working either side of the Street.
I am a life long Dem, And I AM FOR SMALL GOV’T Interference into my daily Life and Into my Pockets. Let’s be honest these Neo Cons have continually Built a Larger more imposing Gov’t- Directly or Thru ‘Private Contractors’ (they are still paid by US- so they must be counted in the Size & cos tof Gov’t)
Oh Dems Were Blinded by Bill, Just as Republicans were Blinded by Reagan- those Bright Shiny diversions while Cheney,Rummy Wolfie, et al were raiding the Nations Coffers. Along with a little Knee cap job by Bill with his NAFTA and His Refusal to anything about Phil Gramm & friends Deregualtion legislation attacks since ‘94
I Try to make a distinciton between the Real Party memebers and these Covert operatives disguised in their Color.
Teddy Kennedy not only Threw down the Gauntlet, He Threw It AT the Clintons. No more of your Kind in OUR Party.Reason Gore, Kerry & HIllary did not get the full force of the Dems…They Reeked ofCorp Whore Stench. We voted in ‘00 & ‘04, holding Our noses, but we Never Threw our all behind them- THEY SUCKED!
Real Reason McCain Pulled out of MI…Not only because the Unions came out FOR Obama, They came Out AGAINST McCain!
I am Hoping someone from the Republican party will finally come out and do what Teddy Did so effectively…Reveal the Shit which has creeped into your Party Starting 40 Yrs ago (DICK,Rummy Wolfie…Nixon Admin, and they ‘ve been Screwing the Republican Party and the rest of US ever since)
I Love Chuck Hagel and actually Hoped Obama would Name him VP ( of course I love Joe Biden More, but what a Coup that would have been!)
This Current Psychosis, sociopathy coming from the McCain campaign is nothing more than a Desparate attempt to not only Hold US hostage, but also the REAL Republican party. Dems have Run the Clintons and the DLC out on a Rail, it’s time the Republicans do th esame with the Neo Cons- both have been complicit in what Ails US NOW!

Report this

By kendall, October 12, 2008 at 3:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Palin represents the natural progression over the past 8+ years, if not back to Reagan-era, of GOP’s pandering to Jesusland, anti-intellectualism & Joe SixPack/Walmart-ites.

The (lowest common denominator) chickens have come home to roost.

Report this

By kath cantarella, October 11, 2008 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ha ha! it takes a jumped-up female to make some conservatives balk at voting for a warmonger. How fucking hilarious.

Report this

By cyrena, October 11, 2008 at 11:06 pm Link to this comment

Wildflower,

His father actually WOULD have agreed with his reasoning. In fact, I have an old reader around here somewhere, where he spells it out.

Report this

By wildflower, October 11, 2008 at 10:09 pm Link to this comment

I suspect his father would agree with Buckley’s reasoning:

“. . . And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking? . . . We are all in this together. Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship.”

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.