August 30, 2004

William Buckley Leaving National Review William Buckley is leaving the National Review. He said the main reason is coming grips with his own mortality. He also had this to say about the Iraq war.
"With the benefit of minute hindsight, Saddam Hussein wasn't the kind of extra-territorial menace that was assumed by the administration one year ago," Mr. Buckley said. "If I knew then what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I would have opposed the war."

I also find this unsurprising.

National Review has never made a profit, Mr. Buckley said. It makes up any shortfalls each year with contributions from about 1,000 to 1,500 donors, and every other year it sends a solicitation to its subscribers in an effort to add names to the "A list" of regular donors. Mr. Buckley will continue to write the fund-raising letters, he said
The Washington Times and New York Post also loose money. I truly believe that the majority of conservatives make their political views based on emotions. It sure as hell doesn't seem to be from reading newspapers.
posted by Sullivan 19 years ago
  • The parade continues of right wingers now saying that in hindsight the Iraq war was not such a good idea. ... not that any of these guys will likely vote for Kerry.
  • Ha! I believe that Mr. Buckley had much to do with my family being staunch Republicans in the '70's. I will reluctantly confess to having had a small, naive crush on Mr. Buckley for awhile as well. He just seemed to know so much and carried an air of supreme confidence and humour.
  • You can hear more in this Talk of the Nation audio from NPR, which, incidentally, doesn't make money either.
  • Buckley is the giant of late 20th century political commentators. He founded National Review while still in his 20s, at a time when the conservative movement was dominated by John Birchers and other loonies, and simultaneously gave the movement an intellectual foundation while weeding out the bigots and crackpots. It is impossible to imagine the conservative surge of the 1980s without Buckley and National Review. He brought civility as well as erudition into his debates, never demonized his opponents, and maintained notable friendships with people who were his ideological foes. Sadly, Buckley and the conservative movement he founded became victims of their own success. Buckley's status as the premiere conservative commentator was usurped by crude ranting gas bags who use ideologies they do not understand to justify their hatreds. And the Republicans have abandoned any principle in the pursuit of power. Good night, Mr. Buckley, we will not see your like again.
  • The Washington Times and New York Post also lose money. To be fair, so does The Nation.
  • The Washington Times is owned by the Rev. Moon. Quick reference for the easily confused: NY Times and Wash. Post = real newspapers Wash. Times and NY Post = not real newspapers
  • Darshon: I don't think there's anything wrong having had a high opinion of Buckley. He's smart, and excellent writer, and well educated, which is better than most of what circulates at the moment.
  • Quick reference for the easily confused: NY Times and Wash. Post = real newspapers Wash. Times and NY Post = not real newspapers Thanks. I'll have to write that down somewhere. Really get confused sometimes. /no sarcasm
  • i think i'm going to start a web page on the evolution of the words "lose" and "loose," which have apparently become interchangable. it's amazing how many times i've seen that!
  • what rogerd said. I've rarely agreed with a single opinion of Buckley's and find his vocabulary-builder style a touch outré; a fugilin cloak over elitism, if you will. But he offers much that is instructive to writers and those who care about writing. Buckley's farewell to his boat in the Atlantic recently was clearly an announcement of his retirement, yet it never once mentioned the magazine or his writing career in that light, only in passing, by way of mileposts in his life.
  • i think i'm going to start a web page on the evolution of the words "lose" and "loose," which have apparently become interchangable. it's amazing how many times i've seen that! I'm waiting for the first time I see a biker with a tattoo that says "Born Too Loose". or better yet, a biker chick...
  • I have no beef with Buckley - he is, in my opinion, a real conservative: someone who, if you prove your point, is willing to come to terms with a new idea. But you really have to work to prove that your idea has merit - which is probably the way it should be.
  • What the hell do you mean "probably"? P.S. ARRRRRRRRRRRRR Wait Forget it
  • Buckley actually admitted he was wrong about Iraq. That's more than what Bush and Kerry are willing to do. I think The National Review has changed from what Buckley originally intended it to be. Don't believe me. Just check out The Corner. Today KJL is obsessed with Ben Affleck (here and here). She may be the only person in America who actually is.