... but no one here mentioned it.

So long, William Buckley, you foul piece of human shit. I almost forgot you were even still alive, you old bigot. See you in hell.

3/4/2008 11:55:26 PM

real mature

3/5/2008 12:00:51 AM

suspend this dumb fuck.

3/5/2008 12:07:25 AM

I honestly didn't have the foggiest who this guy was until Brad & Britt mentioned his passing and said how he had a nack for vocabulary. I am now curious to hear his philosophy since he seems to have been drowned out by the howling wingnuts on the right.

3/5/2008 12:19:33 AM

I don't know who this guy is, but they made him seem like a decent person on The Daily Show, as far as conservatives go.

3/5/2008 12:23:41 AM

thats because he was a damn decent person and conservative.

3/5/2008 12:49:44 AM

Quote :

"nack for vocabulary"

3/5/2008 1:15:33 AM

Quote :

"So long, William Buckley, you foul piece of human shit. I almost forgot you were even still alive, you old bigot. See you in hell."

ALL THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH MY POLITICAL VIEWPOINTS DESERVE TO BURN IN HELL!!!

3/5/2008 1:17:28 AM

If he were not dead, Buckley would sock you in the goddamned face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYymnxoQnf8

BTW, I find it astounding that some of you didn't even know who Buckley was. While I appreciate your honesty in admitting it, your lack of curiosity confirms much for me.

A brief bio:

Quote :

"William Buckley, with his winningly capricious personality, his use of ten-dollar words and a darting tongue writers loved to compare to an anteater's, was the popular host of one of television's longest-running programs, 'Firing Line,' and founded and shepherded the influential conservative magazine 'National Review.' He also found time to write more than 50 books, ranging from sailing odysseys to spy novels to dissertations on harpsichord fingering to celebrations of his own dashing daily life. He edited at least five more. In 2007, he published a history of the magazine called 'Cancel Your Own Goddam Subscription' and a political novel, 'The Rake.' His personal memoir of Senator Barry M. Goldwater is scheduled to be published this spring, and at his death was working on a similar work on President Ronald Reagan. The more than 4.5 million words of his 5,600 twice-weekly newspaper columns, 'On the Right,' would fill 45 more medium-sized books. His collected papers, which were donated to Yale University, weigh seven tons. Mr. Buckley's greatest achievement was making conservatism — not just electoral Republicanism but conservatism as a system of ideas — respectable in liberal post-World War II America. He mobilized the young enthusiasts who helped nominate Barry Goldwater in 1964 and saw his dreams fulfilled when Reagan and the Bushes captured the Oval Office. President George W. Bush said Wednesday that Mr. Buckley 'brought conservative thought into the political mainstream, and helped lay the intellectual foundation for America's victory in the Cold War.' To Mr. Buckley's enormous delight, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., the historian, termed him 'the scourge of liberalism.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/business/media/27cnd-buckley.html?ex=1219726800&en=d5816ae143a999ec&ei=5087&excamp=GGBUwilliamfbuckley&WT.srch=1&WT.mc_ev=click&WT.mc_id=BI-S-E-GG-NA-S-william_f_buckley



RIP

[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 1:40 AM. Reason : .]

3/5/2008 1:24:15 AM

wat?

3/5/2008 1:33:34 AM

Quote :

"Mr. Buckley's greatest achievement was making conservatism — not just electoral Republicanism but conservatism as a system of ideas — respectable in liberal post-World War II America. He mobilized the young enthusiasts who helped nominate Barry Goldwater in 1964 and saw his dreams fulfilled when Reagan and the Bushes captured the Oval Office."

i respect him and he was definitely a respectful and nice guy nice it seems. but goddamn, fuck his legacy.

3/5/2008 1:59:27 AM

Quote :

"your lack of curiosity confirms much for me."

wtf is that supposed to mean? How do we find that which we do not know exist? I have tried to find other conservative voices outside the howl chamber of Boortz, Rush, Savage and Hannity but about as far as I got was Mark Levin and his nasal tones drove me crazy.

Heh. I just watched that YouTube clip. I like his moxy.

Quote :

"nack for vocabulary"

Yeah, I guess it is "knack". But notice how I said for vocabulary and not for spelling. I am well aware of my foible to which Webster (hooksaw) has seen fit to constantly berate me.

[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 2:16 AM. Reason : .]

3/5/2008 1:59:36 AM

Quote :

"i respect him and he was definitely a respectful and nice guy nice it seems. but goddamn, fuck his legacy."

Like many ideological conservatives who were part of the Reagan Revolution, he wasn't too enamored with either Bush and has been a critic of the Iraq war.

3/5/2008 2:27:30 AM

When I want to honor someones memory the last thing I think is gee I better as TSB for sage advice and noble bits of wisdom about the recently departed. Anyway, Buckley could rip anybody here apart limb from ideological limb, and to rub it in he'd have done it politely. An art form long lost in these circles.

3/5/2008 2:56:29 AM

^ I couldn't have said it better.

^^^ Other "conservative voices"? There have been and are many--how about getting away from talk radio, for starters? I recommend the writings, speeches, and interviews of Thomas Sowell for your edification. This would be an excellent read for anyone:



And at least you displayed a good sense of humor about the misspelling in question. I give you points for that--and I give you this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7U1LykeJi9E&feature=related

3/5/2008 4:12:56 AM

William Buckley

conservative icon
intellectual giant
southern gentleman
polite debater
apologist for Joe McCarthy
crusader against Yale admitting women students
defender of segregation
warrior against the Civil Rights Movement
White Supremacist
steadfast proponent of the debunked theory of the genetic superiority of whites
opponent of AIDS education and treatment
public advocate for the permanent branding of homosexuals


... but hey. he criticised Bush's bungling of the Iraq occupation.
I don't think he stomped on puppies either.

I guess he's okay in my book.







[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 12:21 PM. Reason : ]

3/5/2008 12:12:51 PM

And far greater man than you could ever dream to be.

3/5/2008 12:29:49 PM

So was Hitler or Walt Fucking Disney.

HOO-RAY

3/5/2008 12:40:24 PM

Quote :

"White Supremacist steadfast proponent of the debunked theory of the genetic superiority of whites opponent of AIDS education and treatment public advocate for the permanent branding of homosexuals "

None of these are true.

He wrote some controversial editorials (most many decades ago and his positions evolved with the changing of the times), but these are all blatant mischaracterizations of his opinions.

3/5/2008 2:42:37 PM

Quote :

"apologist for Joe McCarthy"

McCarthy might have been overzealous, but he wasn't completely wrong about Communist influence in the United States.

3/5/2008 4:30:05 PM

overzealous?

good lord man.

3/5/2008 4:32:00 PM

Seriously, he's become a caricature of himself, partly through his own actions but partly because he is the 'boogey-man' of the left. "McCarthyism" and "fascism" are the two catchphrases hard-leftists trot out when they come up against someone actually willing to debate them.

(Mind you, I'm not saying all leftists, just those so intellectually inbred that they can't conceive of anyone disagreeing with them.)


I recommend Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator by Arthur Herman. It makes use of a lot of documentation that came out in the 90s and presents a pretty even-handed review of the Senator.

http://tinyurl.com/ytear6 is the link on Amazon.

3/5/2008 4:41:32 PM

^ That's absolutely true about McCarthyism and fascism. These things and more happened to the author of the following book--coming from his "friends"--when his politics began to change.



BTW, have some of you ever heard of Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV)--former KKK member?



[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 4:58 PM. Reason : .]

3/5/2008 4:58:18 PM

He and Ronald Reagan are chillin in Hell smoking and drinking whiskey with Adolf Hitler

3/5/2008 5:05:37 PM

goddammit godwins law motherfuck.

i despise doddering old bigoted conservatives as much as the next guy, but damned if they aren't anything remotely like hitler.

3/5/2008 6:57:15 PM

LOL, good call-out.

Buckley was a product of his time and upbringings, and his movement an inevitable backlash against the social and ideological revolutions seen over the last half-century.

No need to piss on his grave.

3/5/2008 7:15:41 PM

i wont piss on it, but i'll dance an irish jig.

3/5/2008 7:34:30 PM

Wow, you really are a piece of shit.

3/5/2008 8:17:37 PM

but your jesus still loves me

3/5/2008 8:23:28 PM

You finally said something that's correct.

3/5/2008 8:24:43 PM

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0FIBJt-c2o0

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SNWbMGzT20c&feature=related

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 12:05 PM. Reason : .]

3/6/2008 12:01:26 PM

Quote :

"McCarthy might have been overzealous, but he wasn't completely wrong about Communist influence in the United States."

No, actually, he WASN'T WRONG. When Alger Hiss, a soviet spy, lands a top job in the state department under FDR, there's a huge problem.

And... wiki the Venona Cables... he was largely proved RIGHT in the folks he was accusing of being Soviet Spy's.

3/6/2008 12:52:48 PM

Unfortunately he accused a lot of people of being soviet spies on mere suggestion instead of reviewed fact.

The fact that he may have been right a couple of times isn't relevant when you consider the situation and realize that so many people were accused that he'd statistically have scored just as well.

Don't play devil's advocate if you don't know your history. You'll end up like nutsmakr.

3/6/2008 1:18:55 PM

Quote :

"WASHINGTON -- Although Joseph McCarthy was one of the most demonized American politicians of the last century, new information -- including half-century-old FBI recordings of Soviet embassy conversations -- are showing that McCarthy was right in nearly all his accusations. "With Joe McCarthy it was the losers who've written the history which condemns him," said Dan Flynn, director of Accuracy in Academia's recent national conference on McCarthy, broadcast by C-SPAN. Using new information obtained from studies of old Soviet files in Moscow and now the famous Venona Intercepts -- FBI recordings of Soviet embassy communications between 1944-48 -- the record is showing that McCarthy was essentially right. He had many weaknesses, but almost every case he charged has now been proven correct. Whether it was stealing atomic secrets or influencing U.S. foreign policy, communist victories in the 1940s were fed by an incredibly vast spy and influence network. The conference, a gathering of old McCarthyites and younger scholars, commemorated the senator's first speech, in Wheeling, West Virginia 50 years ago, when he first held up a list of names of employees of the State Department whom, he said, were major security risks. McCarthy questioned how, in six short years after America's winning of World War II, the communist world was triumphant and had expanded to include 800 million people. Of the lists, a key one consisted of 108 names from a House Appropriations Committee report, of persons declared as "security risks" in the State Department -- the Lee List. The House committee chairman had complained that State wasn't bothering to do anything about the suspects. Details of the list and its accusations were presented at the conference. Speakers detailed many of the cover-ups used to smear McCarthy. Veteran journalist and teacher Stan Evans, director of National Journalism Center, told of the Tydings Committee, which had investigated McCarthy's charges of communists in government. Its report had exonerated everybody. Among the accused it stated categorically that there was no evidence against Owen Lattimore, a man McCarthy said was a major figure in the communist conspiracy. Lattimore had been Roosevelt's key advisor on China policy. Yet Evans showed evidence from 5,000 pages of FBI files on him -- files released only a few years ago to the public, although the White House had access to them. However, evidence before the committee showed that Lattimore had supported Soviet policy at every turn, even declaring that the Stalin purge trials in Russia, "sound like democracy to me." With then-Vice President Henry Wallace in Russia, Lattimore compared concentration camps to the Tennessee Valley Authority, and later urged Washington to abandon China to communism and to withdraw from Japan and Korea. FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover, who had fed information to McCarthy, broke with him afterwards, fearing McCarthy would prejudice FBI sources of information for its criminal prosecutions. Although most of McCarthy's cases involved actual spies and "security risks," the really important issue was that of communist influence over American foreign policy, argued Evans. Harry Hopkins, Roosevelt's closest advisor who lived in the White House, had regular contacts with Soviet intelligence. He helped bring about the disastrous Yalta and Pottsdam agreements. The Morganthau Plan, to prevent German reconstruction and starve the Germans to make them desperate enough to go communist, was the product of Laughlin Currie and Harry Dexter White at the Treasury Department. The abandonment of Chiang Kai-shek by denying military support was the product of "China Hands" led by John Stewart Service, John Patton Davies, and Lattimore. Evans described other major spy networks -- in England, the Burgess Maclean group which infiltrated Washington as well as London. Reed Irvine, chairman of Accuracy in Media, told how he himself had been a leftist in his early career. He had been against McCarthy, but McCarthy's speeches had made him think and start to read "evidence that I had avoided." He described how all during his military career as a Marine officer and later in Japan with the U.S. occupation he had never hidden his leftist views and later had even been offered a job at the CIA. Irvine argued that real communists were only in the hundreds, but that thousands of leftists, such as he, all feared McCarthy and had wanted him discredited. Pulling all the latest evidence together was luncheon speaker Professor Arthur Herman. His new book, "Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator," and featured in the Sunday New York Times Magazine, shows the vindication of most of McCarthy's charges. Herman, who is also coordinator of the Smithsonian's Western Heritage Program, said that the accuracy of McCarthy's charges "was no longer a matter of debate," that they are "now accepted as fact." However, the term "McCarthyism" still remains in the language. Asked whether McCarthy had understood all the forces arrayed against him, Herman said no, that McCarthy hadn't realized he'd be fighting against much of the Washington establishment. President Truman was fearful that exposures would reflect on key Democrat officials, he said, and big media and the academic world were very leftist, a heritage of the Depression and World War II. High government officials also feared investigations of their past appointments and associations with people who turned out to be communists or sympathizers. That was the reason McCarthy was so demonized, he said. Joe McCarthy had been a Marine air gunner, an amateur boxer, a county judge and towards his end, under constant attack, he began to drink heavily. Herman said he certainly was over his head and his fall came about after sweeping attacks on General Marshall and the Army. Senator Taft and other key supporters began to draw away from him. If Robert Kennedy, his competent and well-connected co-counsel, had stayed on, McCarthy might have behaved more carefully, said Herman. An argument with other co-counsel Roy Cohn left Cohn in charge, but Cohn and staffer David Schine were disastrous for McCarthy. Still, McCarthy's original charges helped bring about Eisenhower's electoral victory and the defeat of the Democrats and key leftist Democratic senators such as Tydings of Maryland. Four years after his original charges, Joe McCarthy was censured by the Senate and died shortly thereafter. There is more evidence to come. Herb Romerstein, another speaker, who started out with the old House Un-American Activities Committee, is writing a book about the Venona FBI intercepts and their links to other evidence from his comprehensive study in Russia of Soviet archives, made available to Westerners since the fall of communism. His book, The Venona Secrets, will be released by Regnery Gateway this fall. "

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 1:27 PM. Reason : http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17401]

3/6/2008 1:26:51 PM

You're quoting the world net daily.

3/6/2008 1:30:46 PM

you didn't refute the point.

3/6/2008 1:31:00 PM

And you clearly, TWW style, didn't do any background research:

http://www.academia.org/

This link isn't for you by the way, its for the intelligent people curious as to who would make such a retarded claim.

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 1:33 PM. Reason : >yawn<]

3/6/2008 1:32:56 PM

you quoted academia.org... they have a fucking paypal donate button.... yes, respectable as they come.

And at least I gave you something instead of saying "you're wrong." You've yet to backup anything you've said.

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 1:35 PM. Reason : .]

3/6/2008 1:34:29 PM

No retard, its the basis for your article.

Quote :

""With Joe McCarthy it was the losers who've written the history which condemns him," said Dan Flynn, director of Accuracy in Academia's recent national conference on McCarthy, broadcast by C-SPAN."

3/6/2008 1:36:01 PM

oh ahhaha, lol.


Still... you've yet to show me anything yet besides "conventional wisdom says mccarthy was a fearmonger."

3/6/2008 1:37:17 PM

And I don't bother refuting points made by organizations that might be slightly more then a little biased.

Quote :

" Accuracy in Academia (AIA) is a non-profit organization that seeks to combat liberal/leftist bias on campus, which it characterizes as liberal or communist "indoctrination", and to stand up for the rights of conservative students. It is run by executive director Daniel J. Flynn, the author of the book Why the Left Hates America.[1]. The academic watchdog group was created by Accuracy in Media (AIM) founder Reed Irvine, a former Federal Reserve economist. It is characterized by People for the American Way as a right-wing organization[2]. The AIA is opposed to multicultural education and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which was enacted to eliminate sex discrimination|discrimination against women in higher education. The group also is opposed to abortion. The group initially was criticized by prominent conservatives, such as the first Secretary of Education William Bennett, who said at the time of its founding in 1986 that the AIA “a bad idea.” However, it has attracted support among many conservatives in the past 20 years. Conservative writer Dinesh D'Souza has stated, “Accuracy in Academia plays an indispensable role in fighting the political distortions and biases that pass for knowledge on today’s college campuses.” "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_in_Academia

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 1:39 PM. Reason : >.<]

3/6/2008 1:38:05 PM

why? I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem quoting the ACLU.

Just because someone may be biased doesn't mean they're wrong.

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 1:42 PM. Reason : .]

3/6/2008 1:42:24 PM

Quote :

"In the view of some modern conservative authors, McCarthy's place in history should be re-evaluated. Ann Coulter's book Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism is a notable example of this. Coulter, a controversial right-wing author, devotes a chapter to her defense of McCarthy, and much of the book to a defense of McCarthyism. She states, for example, "Everything you think you know about McCarthy is a hegemonic lie. Liberals denounced McCarthy because they were afraid of getting caught, so they fought back like animals to hide their own collaboration with a regime as evil as the Nazis."[94] Other authors who have voiced similar opinions include William Norman Grigg of the John Birch Society,[95] and M. Stanton Evans.[96] These authors frequently cite new evidence, in the form of Venona decrypted Soviet messages, Soviet espionage data now opened to the West, and newly released transcripts of closed hearings before McCarthy's subcommittee, asserting that these have vindicated McCarthy, showing that many of his identifications of Communists were correct. It has also been said that Venona and the Soviet archives have revealed that the scale of Soviet espionage activity in the United States during the 1940s and 1950s was larger than many scholars suspected,[97][98] and that this too stands as a vindication of McCarthy. These viewpoints have been challenged by Kevin Drum[99] and Johann Hari.[100] Historian John Earl Haynes has also argued against this "rehabilitation" of McCarthy, saying that McCarthy's attempts to "make anti-communism a partisan weapon" actually "threatened [the post-War] anti-Communist consensus," thereby ultimately harming anti-Communist efforts more than helping.[101] With regard to Coulter's views in particular, the response among scholars has been all but universally negative, even among authors generally regarded as conservative or right wing.[102] Among the individuals that figured in McCarthy's investigations or speeches, many were already suspected of being Communists or at least of having leftist politics. There are several cases where Venona or other recent data has confirmed or increased the weight of evidence that a person named by McCarthy was a Soviet agent. However, there are few, if any, cases where McCarthy was responsible for identifying a person, or removing a person from a sensitive government position, where later evidence has increased the likelihood that that person was a Communist or a Soviet agent.[103] "

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy#_note-98

Before you go LOLWIKIPEDIA, note that this is a very thoroughly referenced article. As for quoting the ACLU, not only am I missing the relevance of that in relation to the credibility of your sources but I would also like to point out that I haven't every directly pointed to the ACLU as a source. For anything. Ever.

3/6/2008 2:33:10 PM

I see that as perfectly legitimate... but the last sentence stands to be read again...


So he didn't "out" or remove from service people that he said were spies that were later confirmed by the Venona Cables. However, what of the people he accused but didn't remove from service? That quoted paragraph is silent on that.

Just seems to me that the last sentence was "cleverly worded" so as to reaffirm the author's stance.

[Edited on March 6, 2008 at 2:44 PM. Reason : .]

3/6/2008 2:38:18 PM

Welp, there's something for you to look into then.

Peacing out.

3/6/2008 2:44:27 PM

leave it to the TDub Young Republicans to launch into into a rant about how "Joe McCarthy was right"

you guys are so funny.

3/6/2008 2:48:49 PM

what amazes me about TDub College Democrats is that you assume that Joe McCarthy was never right whereas I assume he wasn't always wrong

I can tell you where the law of probability would point to "who is the most correct."

3/6/2008 3:16:49 PM

LAW OF "PROBABILITY"

3/6/2008 3:21:46 PM

I think Mike Moynihan of Reason slashs and burns most of Stan Evans views on McCarthy in this book review:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/124398.html

Moynihan points a very important distinction lost on most McCarthy appologists. McCarthy did not just claim that there were communists and new-deal liberals in government, but that there was a vast organized network of communist spies out to undermind US foreign and domestic interests.

While new information has come to light revealing that some of the people McCarthy persecuted were in fact communists, but there is still glaring little evidence that any of them were spies let alone part of a vast conspiracy.

For example, as Moynihan notes, the cast of Owen Lattimore is the best example McCarthy apologists have. Lattimore was indeed a communist in a relatively important government position. However, Moynihan contends that there is no actual evidence that he was a spy.

The WND article mentions Evans' comments on Lattimore's FBI file.

Quote :

"Among the accused it stated categorically that there was no evidence against Owen Lattimore, a man McCarthy said was a major figure in the communist conspiracy. Lattimore had been Roosevelt's key advisor on China policy. Yet Evans showed evidence from 5,000 pages of FBI files on him -- files released only a few years ago to the public, although the White House had access to them. "

However, Moynihan notes that these FBI files only make assertions and allegations without cooberating proof.

Quote :

"Evans does demonstrate that Lattimore was an “indefatigable shill for Moscow.” There is little new here, though it is still a much needed corrective to the widely held view, successfully advanced by Lattimore himself, that he was in fact a generic New Deal liberal and an anti-communist. McCarthy grilled Lattimore on his previous writings, such as his view that Soviet forced collectivization “represent[ed] a kind of ownership more valuable to them than the old private ownership under which they were unable to own or even hire machines.” But was he a spy? To Evans, the existence of speculative FBI documents (his “FBI file contains numerous allegations that Lattimore was both a Communist…and an espionage agent”), none of which offers proof that he was engaged in spying for the Soviets, is enough to vindicate McCarthy’s charges. "

Sloppy journalism pure and simple.

----

In summary, if you want to argue that McCarthy identified a few communists fine. But what of it? Your political beliefs should not cost you your job. What McCarthy set out to demonstrate was that not only were there people that were sympathetic to communism in the State Department. He wanted to prove that there was a vast conspiracy out to destroy America. One that went all the way up to Sec. of State George Marshall. And he didn't care whose careers he would have to ruin to prove that conspiracy existed in a very real, very dangerous form.

McCarthy failed. For all his bullying and accusations, not a single shred of proof was ever found of that conspiracy. And his failure eventually cost him his career and ruined his life. And That's how he should be remembered. Ruined.

3/6/2008 3:43:50 PM

theres the socks`` i know and love

3/6/2008 5:32:17 PM